Most of the criticism of Purism that I see on this forum is a textbook
example of bikeshedding; rather than focusing efforts on criticizing the
people who explicitly, knowingly, and unapologetically make and endorse
proprietary software, those efforts are used to criticize a company about
whom I can find no clear example of intentional fraud. Fraud is not saying
something false; fraud is when you know that a statement is false, but
proclaim it to be true anyway. If someone can point out a clear example of
Purism doing that, please show me some documentation thereof.
And I don't mean an example of them promising something that they later
determined they would be unable to deliver; only those who have been involved
in the fabrication of any kind of computing device would be able to fully
understand the complexities of funding, designing, sourcing, delivery, and
distribution of such items, to the point where they would be able to
understand how unforeseen obstacles can derail months of progress.
Quite frankly, they've accomplished more since Purism's inception than the
Trisquel project has (in that same amount of time), as far as furthering the
cause of free software goes, and this FSF distribution endorsement is further
proof of that. More proof comes in the form of the TPM/heads, disabling (not
merely "cleaning") the Intel ME, that they have official Debian developers
working on PureOS, as well as their own Coreboot port (for which they are
working to reverse-engineer the Intel FSP, as well as the VBIOS). There are
probably other things that I either forgot, or else don't have the room to
mention here (due to space constraints).
No, their laptops are not perfect now, but please show me a place where they
state/imply that they are. They are doing the best they can with modern
technology, and all of their efforts supporting free software, as well as
their progress (not to mention the money and time invested), prove that they
aren't just taking everyone for a ride.
