Long ago I worked for a fellow who had gray hair, and told me some stories about the Operating Systems for computers the size of very large rooms.
Usually the first version of an OS barely works. When some basic compilers gave trouble, the reply of the guys working on the OS said it was a problem with the compiler not working well. Complain to the software guys who build the Compiler and how they interface with the Loader.
About the fourth iteration of the OS. The OS would be mostly stable, and even work with some of the Compilers (read Application Software)
Then began the next phase of the OS development. People had all these ideas about some neatzy keen features to go with the OS. Some called this the Bells and Whistles stage.
As nice as some of the features could be envisioned to be with the implementation of these Bells and Whistles. It created ways to slow down the OS, sometimes crash user programs. Even cause unusual problems with OS.
Kind of like M$ sending out updates that crashed. Now it is feature updates, which don’t crash so much, but slows down OS, and to give me a feature I never knew I needed. and don’t use.
After three or so more levels of OS, some of that crashing would go away, and on site system engineers were never keen on installing any more cool Bells and Whistles. not at least until some other sites had implemented that feature and used it, successfully through at least one more upgrade of OS. Some on site System software types would not implement new updates at all. Sound familiar?
By then the Computer Company would announce a new piece of hardware was coming out, with greater speed and fantastic features in the OS. A lot of sites would say, “Uh, not now.” Basically what they had was finally working after years of frustration.
I fear my suggestions for a Qubes for Journalists is like 'Bells and Whistles.". A version of Qubes with essentially a trail guide to guide a journalist, rather than the Journalist trying to make decisions on which path to take -based on reading a lot of documentation.
and for the record. About backing up your computer. In the big room size OS environment. The computer company manufacturer OS experts always claimed the Back Up worked perfectly.
My experience was that ‘Back-Ups’ (then on large reel computer tape) never failed. However "Restores’ failed. Never the fault of those who wrote the Back Up Software.
So called ‘Interval Backups’ - backups based upon each night saving only the parts of the file system has changed -whatever the interval (day-week-Month) and whatever the terminology. Find Unique and creative ways to fail.
With a solid back up program. Save full clones of disks, multiple times., For a laptop that is an external drive. Then hide those discs. If you have friends like mine, they decided I was not using those external discs. so they kleptoed some.
Don’t trust one back up. I prefer to use a program from a disk manufacturer (like Seagate for Seagate,’ Western Digital’ drives) to clone. I don’t like Shrink images, compressed, or zip images of back up. Another great way for a restore to fail if just a few digits get messed up.
I guess none of this is about the Qubes back up system. But if one is going to re-install the OS, at least occasionally. To prepare to go through airports, or to upgrade OS, or, something just feels off. Then having multiple cloned back-ups (keep up with Passwords) works.
Backing up to the same device over and over, usually ends up with the last copy a corrupted copy. Or the device, or tape media just fail.
and put my really important personal information on a Flash drive, which now can hold so much data that the entire OS could be saved onto it as.