[RussianCow]

Fair enough. Allow me to elaborate.

Being the best in an extremely niche market with little competition doesn't really mean very much. Purism is currently appealing to the overlap of people who specifically want a GNU/Linux (not Android) device and those for whom poor performance (compared to other flagship devices) is not a deal-breaker. Each of those segments of the market is already very small, and the overlap between them is minuscule.

The only way that a Linux phone could be economically viable is if it's rock solid and performs well, and based on the first-hand accounts that I've heard/read, Purism hasn't cracked that yet, which makes me pessimistic about them ever getting there.

[fsflover]

> The only way that a Linux phone could be economically viable is if it's rock solid and performs well

This is where we disagree. Generally, this is not true, as proven by Pine64 business model. Of course the Librem 5's price is much higher, but it offers more features that could be useful to many: https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Freque...

[RussianCow]

> Generally, this is not true, as proven by Pine64 business model.

Pine64 hasn't proven anything. I bought a PinePhone in excitement when it first came out, and after the first two weeks, it's been on my shelf collecting dust. I imagine that most buyers are in the same boat. Yes, they built up some hype and got some sales early on, but I think it's unlikely that this will continue into the future.

To be clear, "useful" and "economically viable" are not the same thing. It's great that these options exist, and as long as they're around, they will continue to be useful to some subset of people, but I think there is little chance of any of these Linux phones replacing my Android phone for daily use over the next 5 years—and I say that as someone who's pretty tolerant when it comes to bugs, poor performance, and lack of features.