Not a good news for the original PP. I personally don’t use Mobian and I just use megi’s kernel, but I understand their concerns.

  • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
    1·
    1 year ago

    The PPP still costs nearly double of the PP, even when comparing the prices like that, which was my original point.

    Are there maybe reasons for it? Sure, licensing expensive but pointless Gorrilla glass and other such non-sense does rise the price, but it doesn’t change the fact that the PPP is vastly overpriced, while the PP was originally not (these days it is, but that’s just because it still has the same price as half a decade ago).

    • Shatur@lemmy.ml
      OP
      1·
      1 year ago

      Are there maybe reasons for it? Sure, licensing expensive but pointless Gorrilla glass and other such non-sense does rise the price

      I think the biggest reason is more powerful hardware. More expensive glass sure contributes to the price, but I don’t think it’s much.

      but it doesn’t change the fact that the PPP is vastly overpriced, while the PP was originally not (these days it is, but that’s just because it still has the same price as half a decade ago).

      Braveheart edition was released in 2020. In this year you could buy Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 for $140.00. It’s so much better deal the PinePhone. GNU/Linux phones are always overpriced due to the reasons I mentioned above.

      • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
        1·
        1 year ago

        The modem is the same and the SoC is the same as in the Pinebook Pro, which costs much less. The only actually better part in the PPP that justifies a slightly higher price is the back camera.

        I think Pine64 tried to get in some imagined premium market with the PPP and the PineNote, and at least for the Note they admitted it was a total failure.

        • A-wai :debian:@fosstodon.org
          1·
          1 year ago

          @poVoq @Shatur The PBP doesn’t include a modem (so no LTE antennas), has only 1 (cheap) camera, bigger display/form factor, no touchscreen, smaller eMMC, cheaper audio codec…

          Also, the PPP’s display is way better (and therefore costly) in both contrast and color-correctness to the OG PP one.

          Comparing the PPP & PBP prices based only on the fact they use the same SoC really doesn’t make any sense unless you look at *all* the differences, and even then, it’s dubious…

          • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
            1·
            1 year ago

            Obviously I am comparing both the PP and the PBP with the PPP. The two cheaper devices show that it would have been perfectly possible to make a sub 300$ device that is a functional equivalent of the PPP.

            More colors on a tiny low resolution mobile screen is another one of these useless premium features they added to justify the massive price hike.