It's also wild, and worth revisiting, that you're OK with installing an OS being more involved than buying a new phone. I can see what an app looks like and install it on my phone all in about 30 seconds. Obviously an OS is different, but that's the download/install experience the average customer is used to, and it would benefit Graphene to get closer to that user experience if they want more users (which was what I was calling into question).
I'm really struggling to understand what your point is here (ironic considering you're saying my criticism is pointless). Are you suggesting that adding screenshots or videos to the website would somehow be a bad thing?
Because the way I see it there's two options here. Either adding more visuals to show off the software would:
1) help or be neutral, in which case my criticism is not pointless, or it would
2 somehow be a negative (I fail to see how) and that's why you're chirping back
Can you help me understand what your point is?
I want a similar thing for GrapheneOS. I think the current project and website is not just fine, it's more than enough the way it is. Where it needs more energy is reaching users via b2b agreements - like having phone manufacturer support for GrapheneOS, and even better, Graphene preinstall offerings, preferably in a wide price level. Murena, for example, is one that's on the right track with their similar thing. I want this for GrapheneOS as well.
I guess the TL;DR is: they don't need to target the end user better, they need to find businesses as partners.
I would say it's still a bit more of a slower growth approach, but that can be fine. To be clear, I don't really have a dog in the fight, I was just questioning if faster growth is what Graphene wants versus an approach like you're describing. Both can be viable for growing, but even with your linux/Steam example, it's not like linux has taken the world by storm - it's still at ~4% "market share" (and that's even among Steam users). It's still very niche, really only used by gamers and coders.
But I think we're talking past each other, or at least with different assumed goals. My suggestion of showing features and having a more broadly appealing website assumes GrapheneOS wants to some day be on 30%+ of phones in the US (potentially supplanting Android). And I just don't see how you get there with the website as it currently is.