Short list of laptops/desktops that work well with Qubes OS

No, it doesn’t. We said that 16GB need to be possible. It clearly is as you demonstrate.

thanks @Sven

I see 3 Laptop that disable and neutralize Me and Qubes compatible:

  • privacy beast x230
  • nitrokey
  • purism

Actually, there are 2 more, that disable and neutralize Me, if not mistaken, also Qubes compatible:

  • system 76
  • star laptop
1 Like

I will check if there are sufficient reports and let you know. Currently I am a few days behind processing new HCLs. Will catch up next week.

1 Like

Ok, I went all in and transitioned to the “one thread per machine” model all linked from the master list. Each “page” now contains the details of the respective machine and the HCL reports that have been submitted in the forum have been merged in too.

Next steps:

  • link to (qubes-users) HCL report from these threads
  • add more machines to the list (there are several candidates tagged that I have to evaluate)

@fsflover, @adw, @unman: if you have a moment, please review what was done and provide feedback in case I messed something up … or if you have ideas how to further improve.

@adw wrote:

Qubes subreddit … I’d let you know

Thank you for the pointer!

I don’t think I will be actively monitoring this … the L420 has no HCL reports and the X1 Carbon Gen 5 is already on both the developer testing and the community-recommended list.

Restored the T450s to the list. Many thanks @unman & @adw!

A post was split to a new topic: Nouveau.modeset=0 option in R4.1 installer?

Thank you @newbie!

  • system 76
  • star laptop

… in both cases we are close. We just need the second HCL using the same CPU for any of the already reported configurations to be able to add it to the list. Will definitely have a special eye on any submission in this context.

Honestly, this is the worst design of all three in my humble opinion. The list just contains unknown names/numbers for a non-sophisticated user, forcing them to click tens of times and read every link. The table was much, much better. It could help to decide at least to a good approximation.

The Qubes team is so much biased against Purism, this is not even funny. I am greatly disappointed. This discussion is not about this company at all, it’s about a fair representation of the community choice. It should not have anything to do with the opinion of the Qubes team. Which is why, to me, it’s important to separate the certified list and community-recommended list (and maybe dev-tested list).

Purism names their products by their screen size, and IMHO has good reasons for that. And they always keep the compatibility with Qubes.

I don’t see any problem here. We can easily drop 14v1, and replace with 14v2, when we have the HCL reports. Also, since the list of ordered by the vendor now, we also can put two lines with a comment for v1 saying that it’s discontinued.

Every machine from Purism has been working with Qubes flawlessly. They specifically mentioned their intentional support of Qubes OS. Except maybe temporary problems with the support of newer hardware by Xen. Also, I said above, we can drop the old version from the list, it’s fair enough with the lack of the reports.

This is not what happened at all. Qubes never stopped working. Only certification process was misunderstood, which has nothing to do with the current topic.

My suggestion:
yes → by default
Others are good indeed, especially with explanatory links.

Every new machine becomes old and probably well-supported at some point. We expect that users want to buy a machine that lasts, don’t we? But I see your point.

Very much depends on the threat model and how much time users are willing to spend to achieve a higher compartmentalization/security. My guess is that for most users, performance is more important, but I see your point.

I never suggested to exclude them and decrease their visibility. I do love them. Quite the opposite: I suggested to put (link) them on top of all others. Was it really that unclear? But never mind.

I suggest to list these words in the comments/additional column, whenever the corresponding thing is supported, with links if possible. For Librem 14 it would be like this: Coreboot, Heads, HW key, ME disabled, anti-interdiction.

But sometimes I guess Heads is not supported, but other things are.


“vendor tested”

It’s a claim not verified by the community or the project.

community choice. It should not have anything to do with the opinion of the Qubes team.

The team is part of the community.

Except maybe temporary problems with the support of newer hardware by Xen. […] Qubes never stopped working.

It’s a “just works” list.

Purism names their products by their screen size

Once a computer is listed NOTHING should change. This is an obvious issue.

We have listed the Purism Librem 14v1 without any caveat and equal to all the other machines. I think it is more than reasonable to leave it at that and move on.

yes → by default
Others are good indeed, especially with explanatory links.

I just changed to format (again) and moved the machine details on dedicated pages. I’ll see about working in more improvements on those machine specific pages over the next few days.

I suggest to list these words in the comments/additional column



contains unknown names/numbers for a non-sophisticated user

I doubt the memory, “usb” and heads/comments meant much to the non-sophisticated user either. With this new way of doing it we have several advantages:

  • more space to list details for each machine
  • having a standard table (same fields for every machine) plus machine specific comments
  • HCL reports in the same thread
  • community maintainers stepping up for a specific machine
  • easy to read and navigate on mobile

I hear you feedback, but wish more community members would voice their opinion. Until now this was mostly a conversation between you and me with @adw chiming in occasionally.

…just trying to find the best possible flow / format within the forum (where the community lives)

I’ll chime in on the conversation :slight_smile:
For me, the single list works less well than the “detailed” table. A
user will have to click through each name to find what that model can
do, whereas with the table, this was immediately evident.

1 Like

To be clear, I never presume to speak for the Qubes team.
When I comment here or in the mailing list I speak for myself.
I believe that I am identified as a “Team member” in some way - I wasn’t
asked about this, and did not request it.

@fslover -
I don’t believe the “Qubes team” is biased against Purism. There was a
bad experience in the past, which has been discussed elsewhere. But you
are right - this is not the place for that discussion - as I said

As to whether Purism should be included, the issue is where you say:
“Every machine has been working with Qubes flawlessly…Except maybe
temporary problems with the support of newer hardware…”
That’s a real issue for someone who uses the list to buy a laptop, and
then has to wait for new releases to get their machine working well with
Qubes, don’t you think?

Let’s promote the people who actively support Qubes, and treat the rest
the same.

If the Qubes team is a part of the community, then Purism is as well.

I specifically said opinion, because this list is not about the opinions at all. It’s about facts: hardware works, or not.

Fair enough. As I said, it’s absolutely right to remove (next) Librem 14 from the list if we have no HCL reports for it.

By giving the links, you educate the users. By forcing tens of clicks you increase the threshold to learn.

We still can have the pages dedicated to specific machines, even if the list is a table.

Yes, the forum says “unman Qubes Team”.

Thank you. I will let this sit for ~48 hours before taking further action and hope to get some more feedback until then. If the consensus is that the table worked better, I will roll back and restore the table / update the links to point to the new machine pages.

In that case I’d remove the “Heads” column and extend the “USB” to “USB Ctrls”. The machine pages have the detailed Coreboot, Heads, ME break down.

I’d like to keep those as dedicated “super threads” for each machine with pointers into the HCL and respective support threads as well as more detail and spec links for each machine. That way the HCL entries link to the threads and the threads to the HCL table.

HCL <-> Machine Threads <-> Community List


This sounds good, but I would advocate for including a “Coreboot” column
in the table (not “Heads”).

I agree that some middle ground is probably best. A list of links required too much clicking, but putting everything into the table was also too much.



Thank you @Sven, it looks nice!

Wouldn’t it be useful to show the screen size and/or resolution somewhere? I added it for Librem 14 at its page (with some more improvements).

1 Like