> IMHO, before spending Replicsnt funds on buying
this device, someone should first ask the vendor
if they are willing to sponsor a phone to a
Replicant dev willing to take this task.

Not if pine64's financial records show that pine64
has little to give. Then we should not strong
arm them.

If you are knowledgeable about free software
compatible hardware, you are well advised to be
if a company says it will manufacture a phone
emphasizing on privacy. Maybe that is
the reason why replicant people seems to be
reticent about the pinephone.

Pine64 say they are about free software. Likely
not like replicant who says free
software or nothing. Unlike purism I am not aware
pine64 is deceptive when
they say they want to forward a free software agenda.

Apart from selecting hardware which can boot on
free software and supports modem isolation
pine64 wants to build a phone which can be
disassembled with a
screwdriver. And has modem, wifi, microphone
switches. These features
probably does not make designing the phone easier
and I see no other reason to
make them other than have people getting control
over their phone.

Replicant is a languishing piece of software.
If a person agrees, that android and iphones in
principle are unacceptable due to non
free software, the moment you suggest to them,
they should get a used phone,
being a replicant phone, they are gone.

To me the pinephone is replicant's option to
become relevant for more people. I do
not understand why replicant is not communicating
with pine64? Why
hasn't replicant declared the pinephone a top
priority? Which phone would be better? Why
is replicant not preparing a crowd funding such
that both phone and
programmers can get paid?

If it is because of lack of resources then do a
high value crowd funding. If the
goal is not reached, then we have proven to
ourselves that a new
replicant phone is not important.

Replicant mailing list

Reply via email to