
Purism – Privacy-Respecting Laptops - monort
https://puri.sm/
======
Foxboron
I'm pointing out that these laptops are no more free then any other laptop out
there. It's just an average laptop shipping a Linux distro.

These guys won't be able to get the binary blobs from neither Intel nor Nvidia
released, this have been pointed out many times before from several places.

They are even kind enough to mention it themself:
[https://puri.sm/posts/purism-software-freedom-
deconstructed/](https://puri.sm/posts/purism-software-freedom-deconstructed/)

[http://blogs.coreboot.org/blog/2015/02/23/the-truth-about-
pu...](http://blogs.coreboot.org/blog/2015/02/23/the-truth-about-purism-why-
librem-is-not-the-same-as-libre/)

[https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/3anjgm/on_the_librem...](https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/3anjgm/on_the_librem_laptop_purism_doesnt_believe_in)

~~~
weinzierl
The money quote from the linked coreboot blog post is:

    
    
       Laptops with libre operating systems have existed for  
       decades. The only real innovators in this area have been 
       Google and GluGlug. Google ships partially free  
       firmware, although insufficiently libre to be able to 
       provide the “respect your privacy” guarantee. GluGlug 
       can make this claim, and it ships laptops with fully 
       libre firmware. The downside of GluGlug is that it’s an  
       aftermarket add-on. GluGlug and Google have been in 
       business far longer than Purism. So, what has Purism    
       brought in that’s new and exciting and libre? Nothing.
    

The content of the post is disputed in the comments by someone who claims to
be a "volunteer of Purism project":

    
    
       Purism is actively working on porting coreboot to Librem15 with 
       some coreboot developer(s). @mrnuke is more than welcome to join 
       the effort :) There, that's the truth about Purism.

~~~
ploxiln
I think the money quote from a comment is

    
    
      Purism’s Librem 15 will ship with an Intel CPU fused to **run unsigned BIOS** code
    

This is apparently the first time a laptop is (almost) available with a recent
Intel cpu where this is the case. This is needed for an attempt to port
coreboot to be _possible_.

Original claim here: [https://puri.sm/posts/pioneering-cpu-efforts-to-
liberate-lap...](https://puri.sm/posts/pioneering-cpu-efforts-to-liberate-
laptop-hardware/)

~~~
pgeorgi
That claim only deals with Haswell since before that, there was no fuse to
prevent running unsigned BIOS code (also known as Intel Boot Guard).

Since there are Haswell Chromebooks, there are devices on the market that also
provide this feature.

The limitation for libreboot devices using recent Intel chips is the ME
firmware which is always signed, but not on the CPU and not BIOS code. So the
statement is technically correct - through some _very_ careful choice of
words.

------
robotkilla
Not to discredit this product, but I'm having a harder and harder time
trusting products that feature high security. They seem like trojan horses. I
think I'm probably just being paranoid - is there a trustworthy independent
third-party of some sort that verifies just how private these types of
products are?

Edit: to be clear this is most likely an awesome product put out by people who
care about security and privacy. I'm not trying to call this product out
specifically. Privacy / security are really bold claims and without any
specific regulations in the area that I'm aware of I feel extra cautious
around anything claiming to provide those things. Like I said, I'm probably
just being paranoid, but I like to think strategically, and if i were to be a
spy agency of any sort and thought I could get away with it, selling a not-so-
private privacy product would definitely be a move of mine.

~~~
walterbell
_> without any specific regulations in the area_

What regulations, issued by which authority, would you trust?

The Purism claims are relevatively small (e.g. camera/microphone hardware
switch can be verified by a motherboard inspection) and are an incremental
move in a positive direction.

What we need are more competitors to Purism.

~~~
dandelion_lover
For example, Free Software Foundation:

[https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/respects-
your-f...](https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/respects-your-freedom)

~~~
em3rgent0rdr
I'd recommend getting an old thinkpad or macbook compatible with libreboot
([http://www.libreboot.org/](http://www.libreboot.org/)) which is apporved by
FSF and only runs free software in the bootloader/BIOS. Purism, on the other
hand, uses a proprietary bootloader, as well as proprietary BIOS, as well as
proprietary code for Intel FSP, Intel ME, Intel VBIOS, and Intel CPU microcode
updates.

~~~
walterbell
At user request, the Intel i7 CPU in the Purism 15 was chosen to include VT-d
support (needed for Qubes security, which isolates the GPU to a single driver
VM) and to _exclude_ support for the black box Intel ME hardware (vPro).

In contrast, on virtually every mainstream laptop with VT-d, you are forced to
use a CPU which includes Intel ME/vPro support.

[http://ark.intel.com/products/84993/Intel-
Core-i7-5557U-Proc...](http://ark.intel.com/products/84993/Intel-
Core-i7-5557U-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-3_40-GHz)

~~~
userbinator
ME is in the chipset and not the CPU[1][2]. Chances are the silicon for it is
there and working, but Intel doesn't officially "support" ME with that
chipset+CPU combination and supplies firmware that doesn't use it. It doesn't
necessarily mean there is no ME capability that could be exploited.

IMHO "support" has become a bit of a weasel-word today, meaning everything
from "it's physically _impossible_ because the hardware doesn't even have the
circuitry" to "it's all there and functional, but we just don't want you to
use it". In between are things like disabled via undocumented hardware jumpers
or software settings (remember how certain AMD CPUs could have extra cores
"unlocked"? Same principle.) The older models without ME are the former, but
I'm almost willing to bet that the latter is the case of the newer CPUs and
chipsets.

[1] [https://ruxconbreakpoint.com/assets/2014/slides/bpx-
Breakpoi...](https://ruxconbreakpoint.com/assets/2014/slides/bpx-
Breakpoint%202014%20Skochinsky.pdf)

[2]
[http://recon.cx/2014/slides/Recon%202014%20Skochinsky.pdf](http://recon.cx/2014/slides/Recon%202014%20Skochinsky.pdf)

~~~
walterbell
Thanks for the links.

It will be good to run some tests against the Purism 15 motherboard, at least
to evaluate the dormancy/presence of the Intel ME via publicly known
interfaces.

It's still a step in the right direction to be able to buy a laptop with a CPU
that "does not support" the Intel ME, because it will permit some testing of
the Intel claim. It also helps that Purism is using non-Intel components for
wired and wifi networks, since Intel ME/AMT/vPro requires Intel networking.

~~~
pgeorgi
> It will be good to run some tests against the Purism 15 motherboard, at
> least to evaluate the dormancy/presence of the Intel ME via publicly known
> interfaces.

The ME is required to be able to boot contemporary Intel devices. It's
required to do power management for years. There is no way they ship a device
with Intel CPUs and no ME.

What they can do is ship a system without the AMT/vPro features that are
implemented in ME firmware. The difference being if the firmware for that part
of the chipset is 2MB or 6MB. If you want to know what Intel requires 2MB of
firmware for a chip that isn't supposed to be very active, I have no idea
either.

But given that the 6MB firmware supports intercepting USB (for keyboard and
mouse) and the GPU to route them over the network interface for the soft-KVM
feature, be aware that the chip has these capabilities in hardware, no matter
the firmware. It just doesn't use them (or so Intel claims).

~~~
walterbell
An interesting distributed project would be Intel ME honeypots connected to
the Internet by transparent hardware firewalls with full packet capture.

------
0xffffabcd
Am I the only who thinks that it's way too expensive for what it offers? I
mean a U i7 processor, 4GB of ram and a 500GB HDD for $1800+. It sounds insane
to me (I'm still a college student so my perspective might be skewed a bit)

EDIT: Can anyone explain how they manage to max the memory to 32GB when the
intel ark page[1] for that processor says that the maximum it supports is
16GB?

[1]: [http://ark.intel.com/products/84993/Intel-
Core-i7-5557U-Proc...](http://ark.intel.com/products/84993/Intel-
Core-i7-5557U-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-3_40-GHz)

~~~
joesmo
I totally agree. I like all the specs except for the price. Cut in in half and
maybe you might have something decent. Otherwise, I can just turn off the
wifi, tape a sticky note to my camera, and install Linux myself, thank you.

~~~
walterbell
Hopefully mainstream manufacturers will adopt some specs, e.g. Thinkpad Retro,
[http://blog.lenovo.com/en/blog/retro-thinkpad-
survey-2-displ...](http://blog.lenovo.com/en/blog/retro-thinkpad-
survey-2-displays-keyboard/)

~~~
MichaelGG
Interesting to see how people overwhelmingly chose 7-row and other traditional
ThinkPad designs. Despite having implemented their new design changes for a
few generations, few people are really loving their changes.

Somewhere on their blog, they noted that the new layouts "didn't take too long
to get used to". In other words, they were changing things purely to satisfy
some poor design sense, not to benefit customers.

I spent over 2 grand on the X201, yet a new X250 is about $1000 with a
reasonable config. I wonder if they're leaving money on the table by not
offering better options, or if people like me are just a strange anomaly
that's worth ignoring.

~~~
walterbell
It sounds like the Retro is aiming squarely at that classic, premium segment
who know what they want.

------
colinbartlett
The irony of promoting a "Privacy-Respecting Laptop" with a website that uses
Google Analytics...

------
madez
I like the marketed focus of these laptops. However, because I dislike
deceptive marketing I don't like Purism. They present their laptops as
extraordinaly open when they are in fact _no_ different than a lot of other
laptops on the market regarding openness. All I see in them is the addition of
a hardware switch and the installation and configuration of trisquel.

The only company I know of which sells considerably more open laptops than the
competition is Minifree Ltd[1]. They have the RYF certification from the FSF.
Still, there is non-free code running in the devices as a system — think hdd
firmware — but the advances they’ve made are substantial.

[1] [http://shop.gluglug.org.uk/](http://shop.gluglug.org.uk/)

~~~
mschuster91
> All I see in them is the addition of a hardware switch and the installation
> and configuration of trisquel.

I'm not aware of any major commercial computer with a FOSS BIOS or a hardware
RF killer for the wireless parts.

~~~
madez
First, the purism laptops have no foss bios.

    
    
        The Librem PCH X99 uses [the Intel Management Engine blob]
        and the board will not boot without the blob.[1]
    

Second, the laptops sold by Minifree Ltd have a foss bios.

Fun fact: Purism even links to me.bios.io[1], which contains this little gem

    
    
        there is a little man inside your pc... and his thing is bigger
        than yours. Your wife knows this.[2]
    

about the Management Engine.

[1] [https://puri.sm/posts/bios-freedom-status/](https://puri.sm/posts/bios-
freedom-status/)

[2] [http://me.bios.io/ME:Introduction](http://me.bios.io/ME:Introduction)

~~~
trengrj
Any modern Intel computer needs the Intel ME. It is a harmful opaque binary
but the only ways to get around it is to a) use an ancient chipset (i.e.
GlugGlugs x60s) or b) use a different processor like ARM.

I dislike Purism in that they say things like "Purism OS" rather than Linux /
Trisequel, but if they do ship a coreboot bios laptop running Trisequel
(Trisequel is just Ubuntu stripped of non free kernel components) then I
believe it will be the most free Intel laptop with a modern chipset available.

~~~
madez

        it will be the most free Intel laptop with a modern chipset available.
    

How will it be any more free than the laptops listed here[1]?

    
    
        Any modern Intel computer needs the Intel ME.
    

My reaction to that is to evade modern Intel like the pest. I wonder if I’ve
enough company in this reaction to be noticeable for the people at Intel who
listen to money.

[1]
[http://www.coreboot.org/Supported_Motherboards#Laptops](http://www.coreboot.org/Supported_Motherboards#Laptops)

~~~
yuhong
For one thing, Intel Boot Guard is disabled unlike many other modern Intel
laptops, allowing you to modify the firmware in the first place. I think this
is more important than being "100% FOSS" or the like.

~~~
madez
All the laptops that can run coreboot also have no Intel Boot Guard or
equivalent function, which couldn’t be disabled by the user.

I remain with the conclusion that Purisms marketing is deceptive, borderline
lying.

~~~
yuhong
Yes, my point is that the only modern Intel alternative I know of without Boot
Guard is Chromebooks.

------
Silhouette
It's an intriguing idea, and I'm glad someone is doing it. However, I suspect
they would do better to separate the hardware products from the software.

I would happily buy a laptop with a good hardware spec that came with Windows
without the junkware and with physical switches to disable all the sensors and
transmitters. That would be a significant improvement on the things available
to me today, and I would be willing to pay a modest premium for it. (These
devices do already look quite expensive given their specs.)

However, by taking this pure stance on the software side as well, it runs
headlong into the same thing that keeps most people out of FSF world: you buy
a computer for the software you can run on it, and the software you get that
way simply isn't as good in many cases as what you can get on Windows or OS X.

Here's an obvious example. I can buy a new Windows PC and probably watch the
Blu-Ray I bought while I was out by (a) inserting the disc, and (b) pressing
play. In contrast, the site here explains in great detail how installing
software on Linux to watch a DVD is likely to be illegal in many places and
they aren't going to supply the software themselves for that reason. Which of
these is going to give a better user experience?

I wish them luck, because their goal is a noble one even if I'm not personally
willing to give up the useful capabilities of mainstream software to go as far
as they do. I hope they at least inspire more hardware companies to install
physical switches to prevent abuse of the ever-increasing numbers of sensors
and transmitters on these mobile devices, and inspire the likes of Microsoft
to provide better controls over what software running on their platform can
do.

~~~
wtbob
> However, by taking this pure stance on the software side as well, it runs
> headlong into the same thing that keeps most people out of FSF world: you
> buy a computer for the software you can run on it, and the software you get
> that way simply isn't as good in many cases as what you can get on Windows
> or OS X.

I've been running Linux for over fifteen years, and I beg to differ: free
software is almost always preferable.

> In contrast, the site here explains in great detail how installing software
> on Linux to watch a DVD is likely to be illegal in many places

That's simply an unfortunate fact of living under repressive regimes which try
to forbid one from playing the DVDs one has bought; it's certainly not their
fault.

~~~
Silhouette
_I 've been running Linux for over fifteen years, and I beg to differ: free
software is almost always preferable._

It depends what you're doing, but if it involves anything to do with gaming,
professional/business software, or the creative/multimedia industries, I stand
by my previous comment.

For example, arguing that LibreOffice is an acceptable professional substitute
for MS Office is fine until your accountant can't open the spreadsheet you
sent over because of some incompatibility in the macros, at which point the
amount of money it's going to cost for the lost time on that one occasion will
instantly cover the cost of buying the real thing.

For another example, despite the recent push by the likes of Valve, gaming on
Linux is still a far cry from gaming on Windows or any recent console.

 _That 's simply an unfortunate fact of living under repressive regimes which
try to forbid one from playing the DVDs one has bought; it's certainly not
their fault._

But most people aren't going to care, because they want to watch their movie,
and this laptop won't let them unless they jump through hoops and, in many
places, break the law along the way.

~~~
TD-Linux
>gaming on Linux is still a far cry from gaming on Windows or any recent
console.

You mean, like the Steamboxes?

~~~
Silhouette
_You mean, like the Steamboxes?_

Those are due to be released later this year, but no-one really knows yet how
they will work out in terms of performance or cost-effectiveness, or what
range of games will be available for them. Even if Valve port all of their own
big titles over, the major titles from others in the industry may or may not
follow, and it will probably take time if they do.

So yes, Steam machines are what I was referring to, but yes, gaming on Linux
is still a far cry from gaming on Windows or any recent console.

------
ploxiln
An important-to-note additional detail:

> Purism’s Librem 15 will ship with an Intel CPU fused to __run unsigned BIOS
> __code, allowing a future where free software can replace the proprietary,
> digitally signed, BIOS binaries.

[https://puri.sm/posts/pioneering-cpu-efforts-to-liberate-
lap...](https://puri.sm/posts/pioneering-cpu-efforts-to-liberate-laptop-
hardware/)

~~~
asuffield
So they haven't solved the problem of getting a free implementation, they've
just disabled the security feature that stops rootkits from replacing your
bios?

Now I don't have the freedom to modify the code _or_ improved security. How is
this making me better off?

~~~
yuhong
Coreboot is mostly open source. I think being able to modify the firmware at
all in the first place is more important.

~~~
geofft
_Me_ being able to modify the firmware of my laptop is somewhat important.
_Other people_ being unable to modify the firmware of my laptop is very
important.

If there's no way to get one without sacrificing the other, the better option
for my privacy, security, and freedom is to take a static but non-free BIOS.

~~~
pgeorgi
Signed firmware isn't static. They don't fuse a hash into the CPU, but a key
(to a key to a key, see
[http://www.apress.com/9781430265719](http://www.apress.com/9781430265719)) to
verify signatures.

So the result is that you can't update your computer's firmware, but somebody
else (although probably not the average criminal).

The standard solution is to lock down the write access to the flash chip.
While current era firmware requires writable flash for memory init (or you
lose suspend to RAM capabilities), it can be locked down directly afterwards
and before code from somewhere else is executed. That works nicely without
Boot Guard, but not so good with UEFI (which stores its persistent variables
in the same flash memory part).

------
dandelion_lover
The first? How about LibreBoot [0]?

[0]
[https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/gluglug](https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/gluglug)

------
brillenfux
Seriously, couldn't they have gone a lot further with the Pure* rebranding? I
have: PurePlayer, PureTerminal, PureNotepad, PureMenu, PurePurePure, PureShit
and so on and so forth ...

Or, of course, they could have been honest with the OS and browser they are
using ...

------
ipsin
Isn't this also one of the goals of bunnie's novena?
[http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?tag=novena](http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?tag=novena)

Something built from the ground up, where you can build and (with inspection)
trust every part of it.

------
ekr
I don't know about this Purism ideology thing. Having watched the video, they
keep saying things about people losing privacy through the use of various
websites, that's the main point of the video. You can't solve that with better
hardware, if you provide data about yourself to a third party.

And the hardware they do provide is not significantly more secure/libre than
any run-of-the-mill laptop. I mean Intel, with Intel Management Engine?
Surely, you're joking.

Providing a linux distro-spin-off as an OS?

To me, these guys sound like crooks, because they make a lot of claims, and
they are nowhere near delivering on those promises. And they use a bullshit
language with terms like ideology, but again with no real substance to back
this up.

I'd much rather buy a Novena, if I was really concerned about this kind of
things. Just my 2 cents.

------
teekert
They're beautiful, certainly. But who do they target? Me? I love Linux so all
I want to know is: what is the default OS based on? It seems like the desktop
environment is Gnome and they pre-install Libre Office, gimp and inkscape.
Nice but what happens if I install Arch or Ubuntu? Does everything work out of
the box? Does the SSD work perfectly with the current kernel?

Or do they target privacy curious Mac and Windows users? In which case: What
happens when these users want to design and order a photo book? (Here in the
Netherlands, nobody offers that on Linux and it is a big thing keeping me from
switching my "please remove my browser toolbars once a month" mother in law to
Linux.) Even more knowledgeable computer users don't simply switch to Linux,
and this page does not even mention its OS, so what can you expect? I think
the difference is way to big to just glance over it and say you have
mac/windows compatible software. As a Windows user going to a Mac is a big
step, many people I know hated it and move back. Imagine them moving to
Linux...

I'd buy one, if it would mean I'd get a System76 like machine that just works
with in-kernel stuff for sure. The hardware switches, the lack of a windows
key and the nice looks are very attractive extra's.

~~~
robotkilla
from the crowdsourced page:

> Bundled with the fully free/libre, no mystery software Trisquel GNU/Linux
> operating system, with free/libre professional quality web browser, email,
> graphics, drawing, word processing, presentation, spreadsheet, and media
> software, users can easily replace their existing computer. Since it is a
> GNU-based distribution, users can add hundreds of thousands of free/libre
> and open source applications easily.

~~~
teekert
Hmm, feels a bit disingenuous that they don't mention Trisquel and call their
Firefox/TOR combination "Pure browser". I don't like that. Question remains,
who likes the software? Who do they target? I love the hardware... Perhaps
they should have partnered with Elementary so we'd know what we'd get.

~~~
fit2rule
Apropros your Mother who needs printed photobooks, are there not services in
the .nl where you can just send them a set of digital photo's and they'll
print the books for you, or is your Mother used to a Windows-only app for
'preparing and uploading' the prints to a local shop? It is an interesting
problem that you have no Linux solution - but I think indeed there are
probably ways to move to Linux and yet overcome this issue, if it is one ..

------
hasenj
Am I the only one who can't understand what this product offers exactly?

~~~
7erb
I think their messaging is pretty clear. These are laptops built with a focus
towards keeping your information private.

~~~
hasenj
But that doesn't really say much!

How does their hardware tackle privacy issues? What do they do exactly?

~~~
duskwuff
They put some power switches on the webcam/microphone and wireless modules.
That's about it.

They also disabled signature verification on the chipset firmware, but it's
not clear that solves any privacy issues, given that the only extant firmware
is the closed-source one from Intel. (If anything, disabling signatures is a
net _negative_ for privacy, as the authors of a malicious replacement wouldn't
even need access to Intel's signing key to create one.)

~~~
yuhong
Intel Boot Guard is about the BIOS, not the "chipset firmware".

------
edwintorok
If the situation with blobs and proprietary code running alongside your CPU
looks so bad with Intel chips, why doesn't anyone try to use AMD chips? Or are
there equally bad things there as well? (I'm aware of the SMU in recent chips,
is there anything else?)

------
thomasrossi
1.800 USD for a button which toggles microphone and camera, I'm not saying you
could do exactly that with a USB periferic.. but.. yea, you get pretty close
anyway.

------
Happpy
I like the hardware off switches. Wish my Thinkpad had them.

------
veddox
I like the idea, but the site contains way too much FSF ideology and too
little actual technology as far as I'm concerned. And for that price, I'd
rather go with tried-and-tested System76 rather than an unknown company. (Or
rather, since I don't have the money, go with a cheap Lenovo and install my
favourite distro myself ;-) )

------
alexandroid
To provide a truly secure laptop one need to control entire stack of software,
which means OS verifying kernel module signatures, no third party software,
BIOS verifying OS and MBR and TPM verifying BIOS (unless it's made truly read
only which would probably require custom chip these days). Anything else would
be an illusion.

------
buster
Nice idea, but i am sorry: Those prices are ridiculous.

------
gizi
My current Dell Inspiron 3437 came pre-installed with Ubuntu and only cost
250+ USD.

It is true that I do not trust Canonical or Dell, but why would I trust Purism
instead? What proof of trustworthiness do they provide?

My Dell's very low spec is good enough for what most developers typically do:
use a text editor to deal with source files and use the shell to ssh into a
remote machine. The most taxing program that I use is firefox. The browser
consumes more CPU cycles and memory than all other programs taken together.

The short story: I do not need a laptop that costs 1600+ USD, just for its
nebulous, unproven claims of privacy, when I am perfectly happy with one that
costs 250+ USD.

------
dogma1138
Eh, looks like your common unbranded OEM laptop ale PCSpec at about 50%
premium price.

Also a "privacy" oriented laptop with Boot Guard disabled? hah? With how
prevalent UEFI malware appears to be why would any one want to disable pretty
much the only security measure against it?

Boot Guard allows you to perform block level or cryptographic verification of
the BIOS and firmware.

And while a CPU fused to boot unsigned bios sounds nice and nifty virtually
ever motherboard out there supports unlocking the signature validation using a
hard or a soft jumper any how.

Disabling that is like disabling the file system integrity access checks on an
encrypted hard drive it can only lead to a disaster....

------
trent09
Definitely on board with the idea. But as others pointed out a bit on the
expensive side. However, if more companies got into the mix the prices would
come down. Someone has to get the ball rolling (hats off to Purism for doing
that).

------
yeukhon
This sounds more about using free software than actually solving privacy issue
based on "code is free" concept.

------
kayoone
So what Linux distro is the OS based on ?

~~~
detaro
Ubuntu

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trisquel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trisquel)

------
Canada
To me the most compelling feature of the laptop is the hardware switches to
toggle the camera, microphone, bluetooth, and wifi.

Even libre firmware can't guarantee my system won't be compromised and updated
with malicious firmware.

~~~
dreamfactory2
I love hardware switches but it's a bit of an expensive tinfoil hat
(especially when comms are going to be via a compromised network in any case)

~~~
Canada
Is it unreasonable to want to ensure your conversation isn't being recorded
while you're not even using the device? There's hardly anywhere in my house
where a software controlled microphone can't hear and that bothers me.

~~~
dreamfactory2
Not at all unreasonable, just that this solution seems expensive and
ineffective most of the time the device is in use.

------
htor
They are a bit pricy, but the real issue here is the battery life. I believe
most people would like to have more than 4-6 hours on their 15" laptop.

------
tkubacki
I think there's plenty of room for some *NIX laptops below OSX pricepoint -
just not sure it's this one

------
andrey-g
What's the hardware inside these? Is it all custom made from the ground up?

------
RRRA
get the 13" up to spec with the 15" (32GB, USB3+, etc.) + coreboot, and I'll
think really hard about it... :)

------
arthurcolle
They really wrote their own OS for this?

------
Ezhik
Well, that was fast.

------
wtbob
Very interesting hardware; I particularly like the hardware killswitches for
the sensors (microphone and camera) and radios (WiFI & Bluetooth). It looks
attractive, too, which actually matters.

But there's no way I'd ever give money to someone who has hired the execrable
Jacob Applebaum. No way.

~~~
madez
If I may ask, why are you so negative about Jacob Appelbaum?

~~~
wtbob
His association with Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, particularly his
release of purported national security to foreign persons and media.

The company is free to associate itself with him, and I'm free not to purchase
their otherwise-quite-interesting product.

