I used mason's numbering:
(1) hardware that respects the equivalent of the 4 freedoms of software
(2) hardware that can be used without any proprietary software
(3) hardware that is compatible with free sofware (but may require additional
proprietary software)
He wrote that "https://h-node.org is a good resource for (3)", that "Minifree
only sells (1) or (2)", etc. IMHO, they all aim at (2), understood as "(2)
hardware that can be used with a 100% free operating system" (but that is not
all software that runs on a computer, more on that later).
(1) is common-place: it is unusual to be forbidden
use/study/copy/redistribute hardware. Well, except that we do not have
copying machines for hardware. But, by (1), I imagine mason was actually
thinking of free designs for hardware, documented hardware. Anyway, none of
the projects he lists are about that either.
I also believe that mason actually means "(2) hardware that only runs free
software on the CPU (BIOS *included*)" and "(3) hardware that only runs free
software on the CPU (BIOS *excluded*)". It is indeed an interesting
distinction that sets apart RYF hardware from, say, ThinkPenguin hardware.
Unfortunately, there is still proprietary software running. For example in
the HDD or SSD firmware.
That said, I do not want to put words in mason's mouth. And there is no real
disagreement. Just a definition issue: what software are we talking about
when we write "without any proprietary software"?
https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/criteria (in my previous post,
the reference for the quote that misses a reference) is a good read to
understand those issues.
