[arcane23]

Ignoring how strangely against this idea you are, for no justifiable reason, it wouldn't look like a 3310, it would still look like a smart phone, probably OLED so more battery life. It would just miss a lot of modern features which are absolutely irrelevant to anyone who wants a privacy/security focused mobile phone. Probably not the latest CPU, not the latest mobile chip, but still decent for what it has to do.

[aspenmayer]

I have crossed paths with them before. Yellow rock approach.

https://danieldashnawcouplestherapy.com/blog/yellow-rock-met...

[gruez]

>Ignoring how strangely against this idea you are, for no justifiable reason

Ignoring how you assert this, when I outlined plenty of reasons which you've yet to rebut...

>it wouldn't look like a 3310, it would still look like a smart phone, probably OLED so more battery life. It would just miss a lot of modern features which are absolutely irrelevant to anyone who wants a privacy/security focused mobile phone. Probably not the latest CPU, not the latest mobile chip, but still decent for what it has to do.

Sounds like a $200 mid-range phone that's sold in much of Asia. Question is, who's going to make it? How are you going to amortize the development costs? You mentioned that it's going to use custom software/hardware to keep security maintenance burden low, but how would that be funded? Most of the SoC vendors are going to be providing kernels/drivers to you with the expectation that you're going to use it to build an Android phone. Good luck convincing them to provide engineering support for your custom software/hardware stack.

Not to mention the questions about maintenance you haven't addressed aside from some handwaving about it'll be simpler and therefore can be "community maintained".