I would like to see Purism’s communication with the community be like PINE64, which is much more open and direct.
However, we need to recognize that PINE64 has a different development model. It is trying to develop the hardware and it is relying on communities to provide the software, so it needs to talk publicly about every roadblock and setback it encounters, because it has to communicate with its development partners. Another difference is the fact that PINE64 produces products are mostly geared for tinkerers and developers, whereas Purism is aiming more for end users who may not have much technical knowledge. People who buy from PINE64 are more likely to understand what it means when PINE64 says that it has to switch the digitizer and not freak out and cancel their orders.
Purism is facing a very different situation than PINE64. The PinePhone is less of an investment since it only represents 1 year of development and less likely to break the company, since it it just one of many new products. Purism ~20 developers who have been working 2-3 years on the Librem 5, so it needs to be more careful and more reserved about what it says.
Purism has taken a much greater risk, trying to develop a new mobile OS, and investing in components that don’t require proprietary software. Look at the amount of work that Purism has invested in the Linux drivers for the i.MX8MQ vs the amount of work that PINE64 invested in the Linux drivers for the Allwinner A64 and Rockchip RK3399 for its projects.
What you have to think about is whether you support Purism’s goals vs PINE64’s goals, because they are fundamentally different. Purism’s mission is very important to me, which is why I preordered the Librem 5 instead of the PinePhone.