
Qubes OS Begins Commercialization and Community Funding Efforts - detaro
https://www.qubes-os.org/news/2016/11/30/qubes-commercialization/
======
kriro
The biggest problem is the lack of a certified laptop. Librem13 was certified
for R3 but as of now there is nothing certified for R4 [0]. Their stance on
Intel ME is clear and good. I hope they don't give it up or water it down with
commercial licensing. So theoretically if I approach them as a company and
tell them I want to get Qubes on company laptops they should tell me no
laptops are secure.

One of the most interesting OS project imo, I hope there will be some changes
on the hardware side eventually but unfortunately I remain skeptical.

[0] [https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/certified-laptops/](https://www.qubes-
os.org/doc/certified-laptops/)

~~~
walterbell
This is a problem for every x86 operating system.

If you are already running an operating system on an Intel vPro (VT-d, TXT)
laptop, you can likely run Qubes on that hardware.

If you are concerned about the Intel ME, you would need an Ivy Bridge vPro
device like the Lenovo x230, plus skillz [0] that improves the security
posture of all operating systems, including Qubes.

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13056997](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13056997)

~~~
halomru
In principle every x86 operating system has this problem. The difference is in
the expectations. If a laptop is certified for Windows 10 I expect it to run
Windows 10 decently. If a laptop is Qubes OS certified, I expect it to run
Qubes OS securely, with decent performance.

~~~
walterbell
What kind of issues have you seen with Qubes on vPro laptops?

Security is only meaningful within the context of a threat model. Qubes, like
every operating system, has many possible configurations, for different threat
models.

------
mtgx
Does this mean Qubes OS 4.0 will be delayed, as the team's efforts focus on
supporting version 3.2 for enterprise? I assume this also means significant UI
improvements will be delayed even further, because companies don't like user
interfaces changing up on them every 2 years. Although I think they would also
benefit from an improved and easier to use interface, which would ultimately
decrease training time and costs.

It would be nice if we could get an updated roadmap soon, perhaps after the
Qubes OS team already gets some enterprise customers and things are more
stable. The other one is already almost 2 years old (and behind).

[https://github.com/rootkovska/qubes-
roadmap](https://github.com/rootkovska/qubes-roadmap)

------
tmikaeld
I really do hope more manufacturers will support the project with approved
hardware, now when there is more of an incentive.

~~~
dingdingdang
Agree, any manufacturer supporting this project would signal that they are
serious on the security front.

------
reidrac
I find annoying when a project identifies itself as an "Operating System" that
I didn't know about... until now, because I suspect that it may be a Linux
distribution and not a new OS, but I can't tell from the main page.

I understand why (tying to avoid the "yet another Linux distro" stigma), but
when you go to "What is Qubes OS?" in [https://www.qubes-
os.org/intro/](https://www.qubes-os.org/intro/) ; they fail to mention that is
Linux based.

Well, to be fair this one has a FAQ entry: [https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/user-
faq/#is-qubes-just-another...](https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/user-faq/#is-
qubes-just-another-linux-distribution) ; although they try to understate that
they use Linux.

If they want me to trust them, they're doing it wrong.

~~~
detaro
It's a bit weird that they don't mention Linux on that page at all, but I
agree with them that labeling it as a "Linux distribution" isn't very useful.
From a user perspective they could swap the Dom0 operating system, where most
of the important bits happen, out with something else and ideally that
wouldn't be an important change.

For the guests that actually run the software you use directly, they provide
templates for multiple Linux distros (and don't have their own brand) and
support Windows as well, so I don't think the application-level is seen as
part of it. Whereas I'd see "provides a more or less curated selection of
applications + configuration" as an important part of a Linux distro.

------
slaymaker1907
Qubes needs to spend more effort on easy of use. The only way that I found
actually worked for using Qubes was to install it as the base OS on an entire
machine. Running it in a VM, even just for demonstration, does not work.
Furthermore, I even tried collaborating with the EmuLab team to get Quebes
installed using bareal metal; however, even that is largely impossible due to
both the no outside VM constraint as well as the networking isolation of
Qubes.

There is a YouTube video where Qubes is installed on VMWARE, but I was not
able to even come close to replicating it.

~~~
dandelion_lover
>Running it in a VM

[https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/user-faq/#can-i-install-
qubes-i...](https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/user-faq/#can-i-install-qubes-in-a-
virtual-machine-eg-on-vmware)

------
nickik
I think this is pretty awesome. In the short term it slows development but if
they find some core costumers it will allow them to continually improve the OS
long term and hopefully more hardware.

------
omouse
Kinda sucks that they have to offer a commercial license, hopefully it doesn't
turn into an Open Core-style development effort.

------
cphoover
tried to load this OS on my macbook but ran into significant issues with
install. installer kept failing...

~~~
datamoshr
I've been trying to install onto a flash drive for a week now. Neither a 2015
MBP or a custom pc with an nvidia card seem appropriate intermediarys for what
I've been assured is a "Simple process"

------
wodencafe
Qubes OS itself is a nice idea. I worry about the commercialization aspect,
though.

Will the Qubes Team be sharing a portion of their commercial profit with
members of the Open Source Community who have previously contributed to Qubes
OS?

~~~
eriknstr
They do not have any obligation to share profit.

~~~
waspleg
There is such a thing as more than one kind of obligation. Are they LEGALLY
obligated to share? Likely no. Are they MORALLY obligated? That's definitely
up for debate.

EDIT: The parent does not deserve down votes because you disagree with their
opinion. Grow up.

~~~
wodencafe
Thanks, there seems to be a lot of downvoting on HN based on disagreement
rather than substance :(

