Why does the Librem 5 cost so much more than the Pinephone?

Sorry I was so mean in my assessment. I’m getting so darn anxious about getting my Librem 5 real soon I hope!

Pine64 understood well what you wrote :hugs:. Link to “Replacing the main PCB in a PinePhone” is here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GbMoZ_zuZs


The reason to buy the PinePhone is the ability to tinker with its hardware and easily fix it, as shown in that video.

I hope that Purism will sell parts for the Librem 5 just like PINE64 does for the PinePhone. SHIFT made upgradeable phones, and I would like to see Purism do the same, by making it possible to put Fir’s PCB into an Evergreen body.

However, I also want Purism to focus on making Fir thinner and lighter, and to do that, Fir can’t be backward compatible. Given that the i.MX 8M Plus isn’t a good chip for convergence and gaming, maybe Purism should split the Librem 5 into two lines in the future. One model would be like Evergreen, but with 4GB RAM and 256GB storage, which focuses on people who want convergence, two M.2 cards, and a better GPU. The other would be a model with the i.MX 8M Plus that has a soldered down cellular baseband and WiFi/BT, so it has the dimensions and weight of a normal smartphone. It wouldn’t provide convergence or smart card, but it would be more energy efficient and only cost $400 in order to aim for the mass market.

Offering a mid-priced phone with better battery life and normal dimensions and weight would answer many of the criticisms that I’m sure that Evergreen is going to receive. Of course, being able to offer two phone models means Purism will need to have a lot more phone orders per year. Oh well, we can dream.


Hi…in my case things were working out in a good way for first use. However, I saw the dated chipset made the CPU maximize with straightforward applications being opened. Kind of irritating to need to delay and trust that the machine will prevent from securing while applications were stacking or some running typically (mail applications, Python contents, and so on) Be that as it may, I just acknowledged the evil execution.

Linux friend just sent me this-


This should not be buried here - it’s too interesting. Definitely is worthy of it’s own thread, as cases and DIY are of interest to many and this might become project for L5 too (and get variations). Re-post this as a new thread!

[edit: that new thread: Pinephone Gets 3D Printed Mechanical Keyboard]

1 Like

I’ve been thinking this for awhile but then I just saw your comment and I completely agree. I will love my Librem 5 and I love the fact you can remove the modem and wifi/bt cards, but honestly, I believe the majority of people would prefer a slimmer phone over removable cards. I don’t think they will get the number of orders they deserve with the current dimensions of the phone.

Also, by the time Fir comes along the software will be in an even better state.

Edit: When I say majority of people, I mean the masses, not people on this forum or enthusiasts like myself.

When I say majority of people, I mean the masses, not people on this forum or enthusiasts like myself.

This phone isn’t for the masses.


Well from my point of view, I want to be able to convince the masses to use the Librem 5. And it’s good for their business obviously. And the bigger they get the more they can have sway to push for more foss friendly components. So maybe it isn’t there yet, but my point is, I hope Fir will be a phone that will appeal to an even greater market.


Good luck convincing “the masses” to stop using Facebook, WhatsApp, Zoom, etc. The main reason to get a Librem phone (or a PinePhone for that matter) is to maximize your privacy, reduce your dependence on proprietary software, and increase your digital security.

99% of people don’t care or don’t know about these issues, and would (do) gladly give up these things to use shiny data harvesting apps that they feel they “need” or enjoy using.

The masses are quite happy with Android and iOS, what does the Librem phone offer them that they don’t already have?


Respectfully, this thought process is flawed in my opinion.

To say a group of people doesn’t know and imply they cannot learn doesn’t offer them the opportunity, thus creating the negative behavior described.

I think there are many people whom don’t fully understand the security issues not because they cannot but because too few people take the time to try and explain it in a way each individual can understand. I think much of the “not caring” is rather not understanding fully combined with the people whom tried to explain the pieces that concerned them not addressing real pragmatic concerns raised. All too often I see security concerns raised without a solution/alternative provided, and no matter how “secure” a “solution”, if it doesn’t provide access to the information the less secure option provides then it isn’t a solution.

In the case of WhatsApp I see mostly conversations around “aaaaa facebook” and “everyone uses it so they aren’t going to change”. The issues I see with this are 1. “Facebook” as an amorphous complaint is too vague. 2. People used something before whatsapp, they’ll use something after. Both sides, as a general statement, are not negotiating in good faith.

To say “just don’t use Facebook” isn’t providing a solution. To say “use this alternative” regardless of the capabilities of the alternative is not providing an actual solution; what’s missing here is actually engaging with the other side to understand their needs before trying to reach a solution, because more features without users is still not a solution. I do see the matrix bridge solution recommended occasionally, and this is met with the least resistance (I’m not saying this is the best or only option just using it as an example) because it allows for a gradual migration, which is how all communication migrations happen; it wasn’t overnight that “everyone” moved to whatsapp so they won’t move away overnight. There will still be some resistance no matter how good the technical piece of the solution is because there is a natural aversion to change, generally as humans age they want less change because it reminds them of their final change from living to not living which can be scary for a large portion of humans.

There are, of course, outlier examples of extremes that can be pointed to to prove me “wrong” but that’s really just trying to have a different conversation than the one I’m having.


Okay will do

If you can get “the masses” to care about these things then that’s great, but I think it’s an uphill losing battle. I’d focus efforts on the other people, those who already know and care about these issues but aren’t sure what to do about it and could do with some guidance - this was where I was just a few years ago.

1 Like

I often use my phone with a desktop UI, and for that 1080p is better for fitting everything. 1080p is also better for VR. So, I am dissapointed, but I can make due.

What about if you only use one eye - then it would get all the pixels and not just half of them, like when using two @1080p. Wouldn’t that compensate it? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: :face_with_monocle:

Folks said that before about building a Linux phone, and see how that turned out.


By “see how that turned out” do you mean the masses are still using Android (or are you calling that a Linux phone?) and iOS?

I mean “uphill losing battle”, and you know exactly what I meant too.

Bringing a phone to market and convincing “the masses” to use the phone are not comparable tasks. Sure bringing the phone to market was difficult but getting the majority of the phone using public on-board is a massively more difficult task that I think is impossible, it’s like trying to convert people from one religion to another, most people do not care enough to give up what they have.

Even Microsoft couldn’t convince people to switch to a mobile OS that many people were already using on their Desktop.

1 Like

Most people are not passionate about Android per se. They are passionate about what Android allows them to do with their phones, but the public polling shows that large majorities of people are concerned about the collecting and monetizing of their personal data.

If another operating system came along that gave them the same functionality as Android, but without the spyware and the monetization of their personal data, I think that you would be surprised how many people would be willing to switch. The phone manufacturers also have an incentive to switch from Android to Linux.

See the arguments here:
8.4. How does mobile Linux have any chance against Android and iOS when other OSes failed?

I think the more important question is whether the mobile Linux ecosystem can gain the functionality of the Android ecosystem. The data in Open Street Map is getting better, but will it ever get good enough to match navigation by Google Maps? Will Linux phones ever be able to match the proprietary photo processing currently on Android phone? Will anyone develop decent text-to-speech for Linux? Will there ever be a good free/open source AI to match Google Assistant or Bixby?

Success is a double edged sword. If Linux phones become popular, Google will port its software and web services to Linux phones just like it currently does for iOS and KaiOS and will offer incentives for manufacturers of Linux phones to preinstall their software. I expect that Microsoft will do the same.

1 Like