https://matrix.org/category/dma/
There is work in progress to address this compelled by EU legislation.
Thanks for the advice, I installed the Debian package "read-edid" and used the get-edid program from it to get the EDID from the monitor. Then I installed the "wxedid" package to display it graphically because the parse-edid program from read-edid didn't work well. According to wxedid there's a seletion of 38402160 modes and some 40962160 modes. So it seems that the EDID is the problem.
DSC is designed to be visually lossless not mathematically lossless - you could say the same about JPEG. There are many reports about text being rendered badly with DSC.
MAXSUN Intel Arc B580 Milestone 12G Graphics Card (MS-ARC-B580-MILESTONE-12G
The above is the cheapest card from my local store that has DisplayPort 2.1 (the rest have 1.4). It's $469 compared to $199 for a RX 6400 or RX 6500. I can probably find somewhere cheaper to buy these things but I'm working on the assumption that the ratios of prices are going to be about the same.
From the Wikipedia page it looks like DSC is needed to do 8K@60Hz on DisplayPort 1.4. I think that is bad for text though.
That card has DisplayPort 1.4 which means that if HDMI doesn't work then it's limited to HBR3 which gives 24bpp@31Hz, which is barely adequate.
Also how do you set the bpp rates? The DisplayPort wikipedia page says that 24bpp and 30bpp are supported, but how do I even know which is in use?
Reprogramming the 1000 other devices won't be as hard as the first one but it won't be trivial as they may be all on different versions of the software and there may be hardware variations too.
Just to triage the devices and determine which ones are good enough is going to be non trivial.
I'm continually mystified as to why companies don't want to release the old technical documentation and software. Is it all so bad that they are THAT embarrassed to show it?
The changes for the company in releasing old software is minor, the vast majority of users don't have the skill to deploy it and people who do have the skill can earn enough money doing a variety of technical work that repairing old phones isn't going to be an attractive option.
What portion of phones capable of running LineageOS etc end up being used in that way? 1%?
The issue is the price of new hardware vs the hourly wages of people who are capable of reprogramming old stuff. If you are going to pay $100/h to get old stuff working and buying new stuff costs $20 then it's cheaper to throw it out and buy new stuff.
It would be good if the EU could make USB-C docking functionality a requirement for all phones the way they made USB-C power a requirement. I doubt that Google could do it even if they wanted to.
As an aside Google REALLY doesn't want companies to follow the example of Huawei with HarmonyOS. If any big player said "we will license HarmonyOS or develop our own thing if Google makes us do something we don't like" then Google would give in.
Phones for desktop use is something I'm working on now. Not for old devices but for ultra portable work. I just paid $215AU for a Note9 with 8G of RAM. Until a couple of months ago my main laptop had 8G of RAM, that's enough to do most non-server things you want to do with a computer.
For people who know as much about technology as most people in this discussion the thing to do if short of cash would be to buy a cheaper phone. I recently got myself a quite decent Note9 for $109AU and I could have got something even cheaper if I needed to. But many people aren't as well informed, the above article is one example of people who are less well off being scammed by a corporation.
For my home workstation running Debian/Bookworm I started running Wayland-Plasma when Xorg mysteriously refused to work after replacing my video card. Wayland just worked and really had no issues for me so while I'm sure I could have solved the X11 problem I didn't have a real need to.
I also changed my laptop to Wayland-Plasma more recently. A problem I had was in setting up the right modes for external monitors on laptops but that seems to work OK now. Generally things just work.
There's no real difference between different brands of laptops that matters to distributions. In most cases there's not even a difference between desktops and laptops that matters to distribution choice.
ThinkPads have always been well supported by Linux and older laptops are even better for support as there's no issue of hardware newer than drivers.