The alternatives are just that - alternatives. Don't want to make compromises needed for them? Then don't and stay in Google / Apple candyland. Or, make a sacrifice yourself and develop the missing support for the phone you fancy. Manufacturers don't have incentives to help out here, with a precious few like Librem and Pine. I for one am happy they exist and will be glad to shell out 8-9x as much money for a promise of better privacy. And when many do so, the prices will come down too. There is no reason for having a load of tracking on your phone, it is there just because its OS was developed by an advertising agency. And the alternative is worse in freedom-to-fix view because Apple.

Hmm, the way i like to think about alternatives is to only consider the feasible ones - for example, if i'm developing a software project and i'd require a RDBMS, then i'd consider PostgreSQL and MariaDB to be alternatives to one another, because both of them would be likely to provide good results.

I'm happy that PinePhone seems viable as a daily driver (as long as certain concessions are made) and to be honest, their SoC offerings also seem extremely affordable even when compared to the likes of Raspberry Pi, for example: https://pine64.com/product/pine-a64-lts/?v=0446c16e2e66

That said, a lot of what was offered (alternative OSes) are not feasible alternatives in many use cases, such as when wanting to escape the dominance of Google with an existing device that has regular consumer hardware, particularly those that are already in the budget segment. Being able to install a new OS on any phone would be awesome, but sadly there hasn't been an effort, legislative or otherwise, to ensure that it's possible - right to repair seems to address some of the hardware aspects, but i've seen nothing like that for software (like mandating the use of open bootloaders and for manufacturers to publish drivers).

> Or, make a sacrifice yourself and develop the missing support for the phone you fancy.

This isn't feasible either, since many people like me simply won't be smart enough to do so, won't have the time to do so due to their current life responsibilities or both. That suggestion is good in spirit, but is not something that can be suggested to the common folk as genuine advice.

> I for one am happy they exist and will be glad to shell out 8-9x as much money for a promise of better privacy.

I am happy that you are able to do that and my hat's off to you, since "voting with your wallet" is indeed a good option. However, short of supporting a few content creators on Patreon, i'm unable to afford to live like that.

Buying expensive hardware like that would mean that i'd have to sacrifice any sorts of savings/investments that i could make that month, and it would cost a significant chunk of my salary (which is around 2000 euros after taxes per month). It's reasonable when you have decent savings or income, but that's not my situation and that's not the situation of many people out there.

> There is no reason for having a load of tracking on your phone, it is there just because its OS was developed by an advertising agency.

Ergo, that reason is the current stranglehold by the dominant powers that be within the industry, lack of interest/motivation for any of them to provide more open solutions and perhaps something to do with the reasons behind why AOSP can't just be a drop in replacement for Google's Android offering that could just be installed in ~15 minutes and would just work (consider migrating PCs from Debian to CentOS, or vice versa, which often works like that).

I applaud the efforts of people like you and others who invest in these technologies, but for the rest of society, we'll just have to wait and see how things play out, perhaps buying the budget devices when they become available. In that regard, ARM architectures overall seem to be promising, maybe some day all of what i'm saying no longer will be relevant in any way.

I see your point, I'm just saying that for many people viable alternatives already exist. But I understand completely that not everyone can (or is willing to) make the tradeoffs needed.

Btw, I hear FairPhone 3+ with e.foundation OS is a good choice too, if you want to avoid Google but still need Android. No first hand experience though, and it's still a few hundred euros.

That just seems like bad luck -- if your phone is even somewhat popular, there's going to be a XDA forum dedicated to it. I used to have a LG L90, a low-end phone bought for ~€120 that was by no means "flagship hardware". The phone shipped with Android 4.2, which was then OTA-updated to Android 5. Thanks to Cyanogenmod and later LineageOS, I managed to install Android 6, 7, and 8 as they came out, and only stopped using the phone after it physically broke down.

Ulefone doesn't seem to be that popular -- it's not even listed among phone brands on the XDA forums (https://forum.xda-developers.com/all-forums-by-manufacturer). If you want to have a €100 phone with LineageOS support, you definitely can (and do note that the LineageOS website lists only the "officially" supported models, not the community ports).

Yay can choose a alternative phone next time… just because you have a poorly supported phone doesn’t mean these options aren’t alternatives for you. Just that they aren’t free (as in beer).

It looks like you can get a used Pixel 3a for ~$100: https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=pixel+3a&_sacat=0&LH_Ti...

(this is US ebay, but I assume prices are similar)

I think Calyx still supports Pixel 2, but you've got to trade off the likely length of continuing support against price, of course.

I specifically bought a Pixel 3 recently because it had LineageOS support. Never again will I buy a phone that's locked into the manufacturer's Android releases.

Ironic a bit.