On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 01:44:24PM +0200, bald...@tutanota.com wrote:
>
> That's easy to say Andy, but have you any proof? Qubes is an Open
> Source project so why not open up the qubes accounts and let the users
> see some factual information. Surely, there can't be anything to hide?
What would
To summarise. Many months after Purism started taking orders
for Version 2 of the Librem 13, Qubes formally withdrew its
certification leaving users in the lurch. In the meantime Qubes
pocketed $100 per order in commission. This is unforgivable,
indefensible behavior.
>>
That's easy to say Andy, but have you any proof? Qubes is an Open Source
project so why not open up the qubes accounts and let the users see some
factual information. Surely, there can't be anything to hide?
--
Securely sent with Tutanota. Claim your encrypted mailbox today!
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 07:36:08PM +,
baldric-q7wo9g+UVklWk0Htik3J/w...@public.gmane.org wrote:
> Chris Laprise:
> > On 07/10/2017 10:56 AM, Unman wrote:
> >> This simply isn't true - it's clear from the Purism statement that Librem
> >> 13v2 has not been entered for certification.
> >>
> >>
On 07/10/2017 10:56 AM, Unman wrote:
This simply isn't true - it's clear from the Purism statement that Librem
13v2 has not been entered for certification.
Since Qubes 4 is still at an early stage of development (not even RC1),
there is little prospect of ANY machine being certified for it at
On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 11:01:27AM +,
qubesos-q7wo9g+UVklWk0Htik3J/w...@public.gmane.org wrote:
> bald...@tutanota.com:
> > For those of us who followed Qubes hardware recommendations and then bought
> > or ordered shiny new Librem 13 laptops, you'll maybe not have noticed that
> > qubes
