As low as the number who buys a flagship or uses one they already have to run an immature OS may be, it’s still going to be higher than the number who buys a budget device with an immature OS, especially if your goal is to stoke developer enthusiasm.
Think about it.
The everyday Joe who might be interested in a cheap phone is going to be looking for bang for buck, which something untrusted doesn’t get them. For this person something like a budget Android phone from a proven company or a used iPhone is more attractive.
Technical people aren’t going to be interested in a budget phone because they know it’s not going to meet their standards just by looking at its specs, before even considering the OS. They wouldn’t have bought the equivalent Android phone either, and the OS just detracts further.
Lots of people buy flagships, on the other hand. It’s too not unusual for mobile developers in particular to have multiple. An OS that targets them can be put on a phone that these people already have laying around. If the OS is intriguing enough, yes, some will buy a flagship to be able to run it, because it’s low risk. Worst case scenario they have a nice Android device, which is vastly better than buying a low end phone that ends up going unused because the hardware+software combo is intolerable.
Linux phones are an experimental devices for enthusiasts where lot of things are not going to work, so it would be less risk to buy a cheaper phone for experimenting. Doesn't make sense to pay iPhone's price for a phone that barely works.
Even with that logic I think there’s a floor to how cheap/low end/old you can go and still expect significant interest. 2-4 year old midrange equivalent is probably the limit factoring in the performance overhead needed to make unfinished OSes run well enough to have a semblance of usability and not be miserable.
The hardware for the Librem 5 is difficult to justify for the price. Googling suggests that its SoC is comparable to a circa-2016 Snapdragon with worse power efficiency. At $800 you’re looking at upper-midrange/lower-flagship pricing for a device that many phones half its price or less would run circles around. Similar problem as the PinePhone Pro.
If it were in the ballpark of a 2-3, maybe 4 year old Pixel, it’d make more sense and probably sell better.
Think about it.
The everyday Joe who might be interested in a cheap phone is going to be looking for bang for buck, which something untrusted doesn’t get them. For this person something like a budget Android phone from a proven company or a used iPhone is more attractive.
Technical people aren’t going to be interested in a budget phone because they know it’s not going to meet their standards just by looking at its specs, before even considering the OS. They wouldn’t have bought the equivalent Android phone either, and the OS just detracts further.
Lots of people buy flagships, on the other hand. It’s too not unusual for mobile developers in particular to have multiple. An OS that targets them can be put on a phone that these people already have laying around. If the OS is intriguing enough, yes, some will buy a flagship to be able to run it, because it’s low risk. Worst case scenario they have a nice Android device, which is vastly better than buying a low end phone that ends up going unused because the hardware+software combo is intolerable.