Okay, big thanks from my side for adding this information. As it seems it's just about having some official certification. It's a pity as this is really not free, libre software. Yes, it is a free decision for usage, of course. But this pragmatism is in fact causing damage more and more.

Always welcome for additions. A little bit more privacy-friendly tryout: https://redirect.invidious.io/watch?v=wrGpTCQNa3Y

The video itself starts a little bit rubbish, just from my point: The author does not have read through the FSDG and therefore not being informed what a distribution should not include being only for free, libre software and packages. Also the talk about the right of installing proprietary software / packages is a little bit off the way. He could always choose other distributions being not strict onto this.

But the following details about PureOS are very interesting: So it is just about marketing and I'd like to question HOW this distribution would have ever get through the approval for being on the listing for FSDG-compliant distributions. It's not about any kind of privacy, there is nothing different about being just a Debian. Also no deblobbed kernel and I would guess, it would be possible to install non-free firmware also in one way or another. Congratulations, Purism: Another marketing-lie. And FSF: Why do you list this distribution? Literally Debian had to be also on that list being therefore compliant when PureOS stays there. I don't have details what was exactly researched and I don't want to draw false conclusions. But seems really strange: Hyperbola is just that strict and it is good having that. Dragora is also very straight towards excluding freedom-issues. I have no details exactly about Trisquel in its current state and the included bloatware is a downside for me (speaking about dbus, pulseaudio and systemd). But as far as I have known Trisquel in the past: Libre kernel included, no firmware-blobs, no proprietary applications within the repositories. The rest is up to the decision of the user. But PureOS?

Besides: After about 20 minutes the author says there are no backdoors? How to know? Is there a view onto zeitgeist? Dbus, systemd and pulseaudio? There are security issues with all those. So how should this distribution not having any backdoors? Kind of strange as Gnome have issues already also including accounts from proprietary services. No tracking besides the browser? Would guess even worse so far.

With a smile: Removing dbus and pulseaudio is one good thing.
Rest is more or less completely optional, when Gnome is out of sight. Just a pity having also most desktop-environments more than enough dependencies towards named packages on the list.

Gnome = everything wrong in the world...

sponsored by g4jc  himself!

he wrote that on a document for which packages would be added... so...

yeah...

as for if I agree?

Nah, theres a much longer list and I hate to say this, but redhat? Actually might not be the worst after all, it is among good company... proprietors are bad in general... redhat, is just better at being sneaky then most... google and microsoft are both improving though...

As for if purism is any good?

I have a few mixed feelings...

PURISM did fund, libre-soc...

probably to get people off their back and make them look good... still better than some hardware vendors... look at this:

https://www.geeky-gadgets.com/orwl-open … 3-10-2016/

Guess where it was hosted once?

Crowdsupply...

and... they were so scummy, even crowdsupply removed them...

lol...

that being said, purism isn't ideal, even then.

But compared to that monster, purism is harmless.

Reason?

that device above had proprietary specs even for the stuff they put in place, not just the hardware of other vendors they used...

so... that being said, they are still the worst disguised that is available, but not the worst fthat has been seen...

My point being, purism did the bare minimum of decency...  sadly, there are scumbags, that are just as bad if not worse...

But yeah, I still wouldn't trust them even if they had a fully libre processor in the future, etc...

Whether they are deceptive or incompetent and deceptive remains to be seen though...

I think the only thing Purism is doing worse, is the scale of their deception, otherwise, I agree completely.

To be honest, its hard to say, if they would make all their hardware open source licensed, even if they could. Which of course, is on a DRM level, even, completely impossible.

Not only would that be expensive,  but, given their ways, its hard to say if even then, it would be worth it.

If I plan to buy an expensive laptop, like that, I want it to be three things at the minimum:

modular
optionally DRM-Free
low electricity usage

Beyond that, I might as well get an old thinkpad from the ivybridge with intel me disabled and coreboot installed.

This is an interesting post for me. Not exactly because of the topic, but for the reactions I read.
Of course this is a forum related to Hyperbola, a software project strongly compromised with computing ethics. Hence, almost any other software initiative/company looks far from the principles of user respect  we enjoy with our distribution.
Unfortunately, I do not enjoy that benefits (in terms of software) all the time. During my working day I deal with software from Microsoft, Apple, Alphabet, Oracle, RedHat, xubuntu and Hypebola. Of course, among the last three systems, it is easy to distinguish Hyperbola, simple, controlable and with strong principles. The other distributions are just in opposite sites in the "linux" spectrum. I do not know much about Librem, but from what I read they are closer to RedHat/Ubuntu than to Hyperbola. But please do not forget that the first four companies I mention are still there, and they develop very agressive practices every day. They even assume they will recieve some legal sanctions and they dont care.
What I am trying to say is that around all these gnu/linux - open - libre software there are many ignoring many of the principles behind the origin of the free software, but if we want to point out where is the "evil" I would not point to them.

You mean like how the linux foundation is being beyond stupid and supporting the idea of UEFI rather than being firm and saying we refuse to accept microsoft has to get approval for us to be able to install on UEFI?

Correcting the above quote, to make sure it makes sense...

As for the idea of no company being evil, let alone no corporation being evil... it depends on your definition of evil.

The moment someone abuses their power to control the user of their hardware or software, evil has already begun. 

Btw, I know your thoughts on mnt reform, so I am curious how you feel about this:

Not sure about all the changes made from i.MX8MQ VS LS1028A

This was the original right?

    CPU: NXP/Freescale i.MX8MQ with 4x ARM Cortex-A53 cores (1.5 GHz), 1x Cortex-M4F core. CPU and RAM are on exchangeable SO-DIMM sized module.
    RAM: 4 GB LPDDR4 memory
    GPU: Vivante GC7000Lite GPU with mainline Linux drivers and OpenGL 2.1, ES 2.0
    Display: Full HD (1920x1080 pixels) 12.5" IPS eDP display driven via MIPI-DSI. Optionally-enabled HDMI port. 128 x 32 pixel system control OLED
    USB: 3x USB 3.0 ports external (Type-A), 2x USB 2.0 internal (for input devices)
    Networking: Gigabit Ethernet port. miniPCIe Wi-Fi card included in Reform Max pledge level.
    Storage: Internal M.2 M-key socket for NVMe SSD. Full size SD card slot.
    PCIe: 1x miniPCIe socket (PCIe 2.0 1x), 1x M.2/NGFF socket M-key (PCIe 2.0 1x)
    Keyboard: Reform mechanical USB keyboard with Kailh Choc Brown Switches, dimmable backlight, open firmware
    Trackball (Option): Reform optical USB trackball with 5 mechanical switches (Kailh Choc Brown), open firmware
    Trackpad (Option): Reform capacitive USB trackpad, open firmware
    Enclosure: Modular case from CNC-milled, bead-blasted, black-anodized 6061 aluminum. Bottom cover milled from semi-transparent acrylic.
    Sound: Wolfson WM8960 ADC/DAC, stereo speakers, 3.5" headset/microphone jack (no internal microphone)
    Camera: No camera. Internal MIPI-CSI connector
    Battery: LiFePO4 battery technology - which is more fire-safe and has more charge-cycles than LiPo battieries. 8x owner-serviceable 18650 cells totalling 12 Ah/3.2 V. 5 h approximate battery life
    System Controller: NXP LPC11U24 ARM Cortex-M0 chip with open firmware and hackable expansion port
    Manual: Operator Manual incl. system schematics and full parts list
    Sources: KiCAD sources for motherboard, keyboard, trackball, trackpad, STEP/STL/FreeCAD files for case parts, C sources for all firmware (input devices and system controller), build scripts for boot & system image
    OS: Preloaded with Debian GNU/Linux 11, Linux 5.x mainline kernel
    Dimensions: 29 x 20.5 x 4 cm
    Weight: ~1.9 kg

Also, look up the differences between LiFePO4 vs Lithium Ion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-i … ery#Safety
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-i … tal_impact
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-i … hts_impact

Then look at LiFePO4:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_i … advantages

Aka, the original mnt reform uses that type.

Hopefully the pocket one will also have that option in the future.

I initially wanted a 24 hour battery, but I am now thinking, that its better to have the same amount of LiFePO4 batteries in the mini as an expansion option instead, even if it only gives 12 hours.

That being said, your concerns are reasonable, provided no better alternative comes around.

Hopefully something better does come though.

Btw, modular can be better, even if people toss the old version of it out, if and only if, the components it uses are less than 1/8th of the toxicity level of the alternatives.

Which more than likely will be the case in the future if not now.

Fair point, I was more just saying, they at least mean well...

Will open a new one right now though!

Sorry bout that lol

Geez... sonds like the OWRL campaign on crowdsupply which I found out, still is there later on.

Basically, OWRL is a physically secure device or so they say. The problem is, the firmware they develop has a huge limitation. Its proprietary!

Anywho, the only thing I think librem has done that is even a little bit palatable is that they gave some money to help develop a libre lightweight openpower processor. Libre-Soc aka...

But yeah, this doesn't make them innocent at all, possilbly that was their way to divert attention just like google has done in the past.

Luke seemed to indicate that even Purism's own OS isn't even libre.  Which I am unsure of, but at best its as bad as another well known one that swallows all the corporate garbage that is thrown to the mainstream distros. At worst, its also a liar on blobs that are obvious too.

This all being said, I give 1 point for the one good thing I mentioned and -99 for everything else.  Difference of -100 and -99, isn't very great...

OWRL is the -100.

Btw, 52 weeks isn't that a year? LOL!

That sounds like eoma68 style waiting, but without any ethical intentions at all!

As a last added note, the pocket mnt reform wait time if you ordered last tuesday is october 17th. I think? That is akin to seven months I think.

But for purism, they are A:

Not pure

B:

not honest

C:

Lying even on their libre os

D:

5 months longer wait, but I don't know how long that was true either.

I know very little about Purism, but as with "green" or "carbon neutral" or "fair trade", "open source" has become a marketing thing for selling products. By it's very nature, hardware is a tangible product which is developed and sold for profit, and it's why I'm convinced that open hardware is a long way off, only a utopian fantasy at this point.  In my view it will only ever be a reality if there is some regulation in place. Right now at this moment in time, that seems like a pipe dream.

Until then, almost everything that makes claims of "privacy", "open source", "free", etc - and which is operated for profit - should be treated with some scepticism.

For example, Raspberry Pi was a wonderful thing for many, it was aimed at education, low cost, designed to work with Linux and most never considered Broadcom's involvement and proprietary firmware. People often see things through a very narrow lens and those marketing such products can exploit that, to focus on a few key aspects of "freedom" while ignoring many other key areas.