Weird, I only see one, even with ublock origin disabled.

Is your computer compromised? I see no banners.

If Microsoft and Nvidia team up work out, you won’t have to.

Lenovo has one (it's a Yoga, not a Thinkpad though).

Thanks. This link has more detail about Linux support. I submitted it separately for discussion.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49824189

I'll never understand why SoC manufactures insist on bespoke kernel/distro pairings

So that if you want to use the next distro release you will be forced to buy their next-gen chip because that's the only supported one on that distro. D'uh.

I'll never understand why SoC manufactures insist on bespoke kernel/distro pairings.

Because getting your stuff upstreamed in Linux is more work than releasing a custom kernel.

AFAIk this has nothing to do with Qualcomm but with vendors and Microsoft.

I don't think that would help with GPU or NPU, which another comment states are the drivers that Qualcomm are upstreaming.

Qualcomm expects to be paid. a toll/fee by each one of the Linux Distro’s for the privilege of being on the hardware with their chips in the device that is their history and one of the reasons why Apple spent five years kicking them out, they very definitely don’t act as a charity, so in the end, it will be interesting because someone is gonna pay their fee. the end user maybe?

Hint: you would know the answer if you are familiar with the Windows, Linux and OSX boot process.

You sound very ridiculous. Why is Apple obligated? to follow Nvidia? or AMD? or Microsoft for that matter?

Intel said no to designing iPhone chips, IBM and Motorola couldn’t see a future of faster/better chips to meet the demands of future tech devices, Apple with that crazy CEO, Steve Jobs? Had to go it alone and the rest is history.

The Apple Silicon design group appears to be on a roll. What next? Bringing memory in house? I think they will. Because that will be the only way they can build the devices they want to build at a reasonable price going forward.

Before you yell no what is it about the last 28 years have you missed? They seem to be able to execute long-range projects when it comes to hardware and software in comparison to their tech peers, looking forward to the M7 ultra, in-house memory and the C3 modem.

Apple’s advantage is being the last vertical computer company from the 1980s speaks for itself. having control of the hardware and the operating system software with the ability to create new ecosystems is their advantage in comparison to hardware or software only companies, Note: the tech world would be a better place if Sun, SGI, Digital, Acorn, Motorola of Schaumburg, Illinois had been able to survive the Microsoft/Intel onslaught.

Looks like they're learning!

Sounds good, as long as a standard Linux distro can replace whatever operating system ships with these machines.

Qualcomm has been upstreaming Linux kernel support for the Snapdragon X for the past 2 years or so, but the community is still having issues with drivers and firmware on devices.

Is QCM slow to upstream or are they doing things in an incomplete manner or is there some other reason?

I'm trying to imagine a world where intel or amd releases a new platform/chip and it takes _two years_ to get linux booting on it

but seems not much came from the effort

That's been my experience dealing with QCM based devices running linux in the past. Some OEM buys a batch of chips, gets a reference design and an old version of the linux kernel with a zillion out-of-tree hacks and patches that make updates impossible.

I generally advise clients to use rockchip as they have _very_ good mainline support and put any QCM modem at the end of a USB connection so it doesn't hold the product back.

Consider me cautiously optimistic.

Consider me dangerously pessimistic

With x1 it was worse. They were literally demoing them running Debian because windows was not ready, but after release silence.

https://canonical.com/blog/ubuntu-coming-soon-to-qualcomm-sn...

Android phones don't need (and often don't have) upstreamed "drivers". They use qualcomm's closed-source code. Also, Android user land driver (HAL) isn't useful for non-Android Linux distros.

Yes, with proprietary blobs. Oh, and also running a version of the Linux kernel that’s been out of support for years (on some devices, not all).

This is the danger when you don’t upstream your shit. Now you’re stuck on kernel 3 or 4 because your chip vendor is lazy. And Qualcomm has got to be one of the laziest.

I don't think so. Every device has locked down firmware really these days, it's not an issue (most peoples BIOS/UEFI/etc is very much not open source).

If the drivers are upstreamed and good, it should work well.

I wonder how long someone can spend a pile of tokens and start shredding these firmwares down to their actual instructions/code.

The Snapdragon X chips are already wonderful with Windows 11 ARM64, so I'm pretty excited to see how much Linux will be able to squeeze out of those!

Was that Framework 13 Pro? I thought these were supposed to have Panther and be much more efficient and quiet?

Ooh, an X2 Elite Extreme Framework laptop with Linux supported would be very tempting.

*Linaro, sorry for the typo

That's the dream. But I am quite sure Framework is looking into it, if not only because Windows on ARM is gaining traction, which means developers need an ARM machine to develop. I can imagine some would want two identical machines, one with X86_64, one with aarch64.

OpenBSD developer Tobias Heider (tobhe@) has already committed the first pieces of OpenBSD/arm64 support for these Qualcomm Snapdragon X2 Elite laptops.

"This gets USB, keyboard and touchpad working in ACPI mode on the HP Elitebook X G2q."

https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=178891082169317&w=2

Tobias (who also works for Canonical) recently demoed Ubuntu on mastodon and confirmed ARM EL2 works, meaning KVM support unlike previous generations.

bsd.network/@tobhe/117122761215052773

(I'd love to get my hands on one of these X2 Elite machines, hmu qcom.)

yeah, heard that before...2 years ago.

I think the GKI initiative is great, personally. I've worked with chip companies that are super-resistant to upstreaming their code, and just give me a fork-of-a-fork of the kernel and kind of say "welp, good luck maintaining that unless you pay us".

I don't love how much control Google is exerting over Android, and I don't love having to use their signed kernel. But I do prefer that vs. being stuck on an abandoned vendor kernel. If I have to accept low-quality proprietary kernel code, I'd rather keep it in small module-shaped boxes.

Companies like Qualcomm complain about this, but their historical practices are what drove Google to mandate it in the first place.

yeah everyone was hyped and it was said to be getting linux support. Some things were upstreamed into the kernel, but it never really got there

So Arch on ARM is basically limited to an SoC with at most 8GB of RAM? It looks like we are still very far from a mainstream ARM motherboard with a socketed CPU, upgradable RAM and support for discrete GPUs. Until then, I see no reason to move away from x86.

in official Arch supported hardware list:

ALARM isn't official Arch, so this also isn't an "official Arch supported hardware list". Arch is currently still only x86_64 and everything else is at best unofficial if not just straight up unaffiliated.

(do note that this might change soon-ish™ considering [0], but I think they want to first get their automated build infrastructure ready)

[0]: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/rfcs/-/merge_requests...

As is WebOS, Raspberry PI, Beagle Boards, netbooks, PS2Linux, PS3 OtherOS,....

Regular OEMs will never give their differentiation factor freely.

Even Linux OEMs like Tuxedo apparently cannot get access to hardware specifications, and have to reverse engineer their own devices.

Sure, not too far, but single core perf is still. And also still very much behind the new M6 in single core and multi core https://browser.geekbench.com/v7/cpu/389219

This really is about business strategy than any technical effort these days. Porting code should be among the easiest things for the llms to do these days

I would have been totally interested in the snapdragon if Linux support was good and the hardware wasn't old at this point. I'd like a 24h laptop!

Notebookcheck¹ measured 17.5h of wifi+websurfing battery life and 12.5h at 500+ nits, how long are the days on your planet effectively?

Also, that's on Ryzen AI 7 PRO 450, you might be getting even more out of the Panther Lake alternative.

¹ https://www.notebookcheck.net/Excellent-business-laptop-with...

M series just always perform better than you expect. I don’t know how to explain it tbh. We use them for live streaming at work and they’re just never pushed to their limits (24gb mac minis) even as we run 7 or 8 independent HD sources + iso recordings of each one. They don’t break a sweat.

I have an m1 16gb MBpro in our fleet for editing and it runs probably as fast as the day I got it (first wave of m1’s).

The low power draw is also very impressive. Fraction of my AMD rig at home.

We get to blame OpenAI et al for this one again. AMD is using their current allocation of TSMC 3nm production to make Epyc rather than Ryzen so Ryzen is jumping from 4nm to 2nm. But 2nm Ryzen is still a few months out, and the 4nm current ones are naturally at a disadvantage when Qualcomm is using 3nm.

From what I can tell, you can get more total performance from intel/amd, but at the cost of more power draw, which besides needing more cooling also means shorter battery life.

And even on my desktop, where battery life doesn't matter, I wouldn't mind my CPU needing less cooling.

I say this as someone who will probably never own a mac.

With the help of vibe coding it might take a lot shorter time to get m series working on Linux. Though the quality of code is not guaranteed to be perfect.

when it comes to Laptop Battery life afaik there isn't even a competition.

I have a beefy AMD system and recently bought a macbook pro M5 pro. I'm still blown away by how much faster the M5 is than my AMD tower, while producing no heat or noise.

Intel panther lake is already very close. Good enough for me to be happy with it.

They hate being under someone else’s thumb and Qualcomm had real control over that. They couldn’t stand it and wanted out. Which is just as well, because clearly Qualcomm could’ve been doing better. Apple cut the power usage of the chip and it’s reportedly better than the Qualcomm one.

Imagine NVIDIA on steroids. Think bad documentation, opaque code, and everything being locked down. The customer gets squeezed for more money (especially egregious if you don't have enough scale they won't even bother engaging).

Onavo is correct: Qualcomm are extremely notorious for aggressive IP enforcement. They're the Oracle of hardware. In particular they held critical CDMA patents which were required for making a modem which worked in the US.

They (along with Intel) also ended up making most of the non-Apple ARM chips, which are not competitive with the Apple ones.

What specific quality issues did you notice? I haven’t heard of any, but I wasn’t paying close attention at the time.

They must think they will sell more chips to OEMs that want to offer Linux. It's not like they're going to be shaking down Debian for cash.

I'd have assumed Qualcom are looking at the Steam Deck / Steam Machine and Steam OS, and thinking: "I might want some of that."

And looking at the direction Microsoft is going, and thinking: "Shackling our laptop and desktop chip sales to this is a bad idea."

The entire landscape outside of the Raspberry Pi is a shitshow in terms of "Just download a distro for your device class and arch and it'll work."

Arm SystemReady appears to be a slow push in the right direction from the opposite end.

Gud lorde, don't be daft. PPW matters until it hits a point where any optimizations above that line are of much less importance to some people (e. g. me) than other specs. Not to speak of necessary attributes completely absent from your PPW dream machine, which indeed negates PPW considerations on a per device/device-class basis. Which excludes optimizations for microprocessor series. It ain't rocket science.

basically: "I want WSL for my overpriced toaster, I'm totally fine with the keyboard lacking most of the essential keys, pretty please. whispers expletive against Apple whilst making sure no one can hear him"

I wasn’t thinking hardware, more software. But either way the closer a competitor is the harder they’ll run, even if still on top.

Again, a computer isn't a chip with nothing else.

In the ARM world, that other part you are completely ignoring isn't standardised, even with device trees, they only help to alleviate the pain that each computer is its own OEM snowflake.

The comment you're replying to is implying that in an ARM world nothing is standard, portable, or compatible by default. Think about smartphones: Every single one a bespoke board with bespoke hardware.

In ARMland, there's no such thing as standard OS images you can install on any machine, or generic components that users can buy and install themselves.

It actually was an accident, enabled by IBM using off the self parts unlike their previous computers, and Compaq's clean room reverse engineering of the BIOS.

It's an Acorn microcomputer, I know this!

One key frustration is it’s typically not possible to have an arm distribution that boots across most arm boards, because they have incompatible boot loaders. Ie you have a raspberry pi image and a banana pi image and an orange pi image and the rock pi S image that are all different from each other. There have been some attempts at UEFI on arm that would address this, but it’s nowhere near as consistent or compatible as on the x86 platform side.

I had Fujutsu laptops that were far lighter and smaller than Airs, touchscreens in the late 90s, convertibles, 2 in ones, touch bars (Thinkpad). Plenty of designs that don't build around ATX type specs, and things that do (open frame cases, and the vast array of expansion cards that benefit from it). PCs that snap onto a monitor. Things Apple copied or hasn't gotten around to yet then claim then as revolutionary. Apple has more integration and can be more strategic (when they don't need bailing out), but as one company they do far less exploration.

I'm more on the Apple hater side, but they getting lazy is simply not true.

For many years Apple dominates the Laptop hardware scene, and while there is no comparably performing competitors threatening them, they keep releasing newer, faster, more efficient chips. After using many operating systems, I know that for sure I don't want MacOS, but the hardware itself is hard to beat.

Me too. Not a fan of Qualcomm, though.

For Geekbench in particular, expect to gain a few percent in Linux vs. Windows. Of course, you should always look at your workload. The thing that causes me to wait for my computer the most is build times, where the multi-core benchmarks are more interesting than single core benchmarks, and these look like they could make for interesting low power dev boxes when/if proper Linux support lands.

Yes, where desktops differ is not so much the chips but rather the cooling capability. You have the space to have proper air flow and water cooling etc. So that do give quite a bit of performance.

Especially when it is significantly faster than literally every non-Apple competitor. Including Intel and AMD's best desktop chips.

better than the closest linux alternative (M3 on asahi)

20% behind that's actually very impressive and if it will support Linux that's more impressive.

laughably behind by nearly 20%

I think we have a different definition of what laughably means. Especially since A16 is 25% ahead of M5 in multithreaded.

You're still trying to deliver your original point after you were told you use the wrong reference and you're not doing a good job.

i wish that wasn't literally the only X2 EE system we could buy! (as i said a while ago in this submission, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49823752)

nothing wrong with it! looks fine! just: there should be other products with the nice core. i could really use a 10-14" tablet. i mean, after all, ROG Flow 13 with a Strix Halo was not even that late after launch! dense is doable!

This. The X1 Elite laptops came out 2+ years ago, but you still need to use a special Ubuntu remix to get everything* working, and support is very dependent on which laptop you bought. You could say it’s not Qualcomm’s job to make audio or the camera work on every Lenovo/Dell/HP, but someone needs to do it…

*: I’m sure there’s some features that still aren’t working right.

Benchmarks?

They'd still have the >99% or so of their customers who prefer Windows or will put up with it for the smartphone-grade battery life.

I considered getting a Snapdragon X2E laptop, but the prices were so unattractive for otherwise similar specs that I went with X86.

I was hearing a lot of hype with regards to the Nuvia acquisition prior to these coming out, happy to see it turned out well.

When can I buy one ?

I want the stuff to work, I want Qualcomm to provide an easy process to grab a X2 Elite Windows Laptop and install Linux.

No magical binary blob extraction. I want everything tested.

With SteamFrame out we might even get decent gaming !

It's called USB4 now.

interesting. I mean day-to-day usage is a requirement if you want to buy some of these machines for real. But good to know that graphics works now. Last time I checked it wasn't and that was significantly after launch

It potentially can be a good thing, but anyone who is jumping up and down celebrating better wait and see, Qualcomm is more of a lawyer/finance company than a tech company in short a patent troll at heart, so it will be interesting to see what type of fee they want to have the privilege of being on their hardware. In the telecom area historically, they like double dipping.

Yeah, this just sucks imo. I mean I think for the copilot button there was something upstreamed, but the useful stuff wasn't

Yeah, I've really wanted an ARM Linux laptop. But I've known ARM is a crapshoot because of my dealing with other devices. So I held off on the initial X release. Then I saw the X1P (or whatever it was) and Qualcomm put out the exact same "someday Linux up streamed!" Promise.

A competent FTC would be fining them for these false and misleading statements. Until that happens, nobody should buy these thinking Linux will ever be supported.

But they support Android right? Won't that mean kernel support is public already? It would have to be merged into mainline. Or is this about something else?

The build quality of Surface seems quite good, seems like unibody aluminum.

Omg, words can't describe how completely botched the Snapdragon X series chip launches have been.

You hold them up to the Apple M series rollout and its just hilarious how far "the competition" is behind when it comes to laptop low power CPUs

6 years since M series and arm PC still hasn't picked up

Is it all upstream? Is there a newer part coming with upstream support on day 1 like every Intel laptop I’ve had for the last decade+?

KVM works this time. For the rest you need to calibrate your expectations against mainstream laptops not RMStops.

Makes me wonder how long until Framework starts shipping ARM-based motherboards. They already sell a RISC-V-based motherboard for the 13.

Finally, the dumb company woke up. On one hand, it’s good. On the other hand, bad Qualcomm is known as a patent troll. We shall see if they can mend their ways…

Part of this is probably motivated by the fact that Microsoft and Nvidia have teamed up.

I have a 64gb ram one, love it.

I always imagined a world where the steam frame used an ARM chip as an ultimate f you for not only microsoft, but intel and amd.

I have an HP AMD laptop with a Ryzen and have nothing to complain about, other than the loud cooling solution. It's a fast non-nonsense system. Also a no-frills physical design. Ubuntu works fully without any additional steps needed from me. I'm not sure what you're hoping the market will provide, apart from quieter cooling.

Look into something with the Intel Core Ultra Series 3. Performance is worse than the Apple M chips but you shouldn't have a problem running Linux and the battery life is good. I have a laptop with the previous generation of Intel chip (Core Ultra 258). The battery life is great, the computer never gets hot, and the fan rarely turns on (only if I'm doing like a long C++ compile or something, never for stuff like web browsing or watching videos).

I also had the X1 Snapdragon T14s and it felt like going back to 2008 linux.

No wifi, no bluetooth, no fingerprint reader, no hardware accelerated 3D..

There is a special version of Ubuntu that largely works (it's a bit old) and if you dist-upgrade to a new version it will break.

I spent about a week trying to get it working and just gave up, awful experience.

I'm 90% sure a laptop with Intel core ultra 300 series processors would suit you well.

framework 13 pro might fit this. Saying from someone who just migrated from m4 macbook pro 14.

I'd buy one on its public release date if it is linux ready.

A x2 based workstation will also be very cool.

I believe the Orin AGX is in a similar position. It does a UEFI boot but you absolutely have to supply a correct dtb and if you don't then key peripherals like USB and ethernet can just completely not work, or in one case I experienced, subtly malfunction in a way that appears to be fine but throws off a bunch of extra radiation that fails a certification test.

and speed doesnt matter at all if no drivers work

This is one of those situations, even if they don't want to release specific code, they could at least release the specifications so that others could build the software stack for this.

One option would be to implement the custom non-standard Qualcomm drivers that technically it needs to implement anyway, but with support for the UEFI/ACPI interface.

On Windows, Qualcomm ships custom drivers that override normal ACPI platform logic in various places, IIRC

This is actually misinformed, the discussion on the mailing list made it clear: there is NO full ACPI on these Windows ARM devices; they only use ACPI marginally and still require and provide device tree.

Phoronix should have revised that article, it's completely misleading.

This is exactly what they have already been doing for the past two months, directly from their devs, posted to Linux ARM MSM mailing list, and despite not having all of the specs from manufacturers. See the EC driver submission for Asus ZenBook A16 from this past week.

Every time I have watched Linaro presentations, I mostly got the feeling that their customers so top speak are embedded (Automobile and co) and Android OEMs, not so much people that would like to some day have GNU/Linux on ARM desktops/laptops.

Just in case anyone unfamiliar reads this, the way to run ARM boards is e.g. https://armbian.com/ (or NetBSD, Debian, whatever you prefer) and never the vendor junk.

RockChip stuff tends to have good support, and in fact I'd trust it more to have good support than Raspberry Pi (Broadcom). When in doubt, check or wait before buying in any case. In many cases support will not meaningfully improve from how it was at release (learned this one the hard way) and most ARM devices are e-waste. Try not to get excited about theoretical hardware specs either, they might as well be fake because of how poorly the majority of ARM stuff actually works. Go for known good software support and then upgrade to new hardware when you find something newer with known good software support a few years later.

RasPi just enshittified, pushing out a firmware upgrade that bricks the Pi if it detects you've upgraded the RAM yourself.

Yup. I remember my dismay when I started working with Linux on arm boards and realizing the absolute massive gap between the hardware vendor claims of "full linux support" and the reality.

Sometimes the SDK is a zip of the developer workspace in a pseudo working state with no clear records of all that's been patched.

Vendors providing binary only kernel and system images containing god knows what is not uncommon either.

I'm convinced now that arm hardware vendors are simply incapable of even understanding what proper software support is. I'm sure some of their devs do their best but management does not care. By the time the chip ships, efforts move to making the next thing so they never properly finish the software side.

I'm sure Claude would be capable to solve many of these. But the next machine probably requires the whole dance all over again, and it just doesn't scale very well, I feel.

It probably will help you maintain a better local fork, but getting all things upstreamed is the bottleneck and won't help too much here.

Even the Surface Pro doesn't work well with the generic image. I had to go get the Surface Recovery one to get it work enough to go through the install because there was no support for the touch screen or the official Surface keyboard on the generic one.

Well, in theory, I don't even care. I want to download an ISO from randomdistro.org and boot it.

People in the thread who have actual experience on actual hardware and software are telling you how things actually work, not some farcical idea of how it theoretically works.

So get a newer, better, and cooler CPU? That really has nothing to do with ARM or x86.

This is depressing, I just got this x13s hoping to give this arm craze a try as supposedly it has fairly full Linux support. I will just ignore any claims about Qualcomm until Dell or Lenovo release models with Linux pre-installed and they get real world reports over time.

Whew, thank you for this summary. I just got this laptop as it seemed to have "good" Linux potential, but I've been stuck so far. And as further caution to others, hibernate doesn't work on Linux, and audio is glitchy. Even on windows 11 pro the shutdown menu is missing. It seems to sleep on windows but not sure about battery drain, which is reported to be 1-2%/hr in Linux.

This sounds like something that LLM assistance might actually be ideal for.

supporting Device Tree by including the blob in a ROM somewhere shouldn't be much more work (if any) than including working ACPI tables, but we all know how that works out in practice!

This is definitely a thing in some embedded systems I’ve used. There are some Marvell boards which do this. They all use U-boot though.

Oh, that's a good point I forgot about; I suppose DT interfaces aren't considered part of the stability contract for users... Really Device Tree is somewhat "Linux-specific"-enough and low level enough that issues like this aren't ideal. But if we could just get to the point that was a problem, I'd be happier than now, I suspect!

Needing the kernel to be changed for each device is an Androidism

It's an Armish not an Androidism. It's an embedded legacy that really doesn't make sense anymore. But inertia is powerful enough that even Apple is still using device trees, even on their M series SoCs ( https://asahilinux.org/docs/fw/adt/ )

There's no universally good solution for connecting varied kernels with varied hardware. Device tree is okay.

Kernels always have to be changed for different hardware, that's nothing new. x86 kernels don't run on ARM machines, full stop. Gameboy Advance kernels don't run on Switch 2. IBM mainframe kernels don't run on AWS EC2.

As part of good engineering practice we like to separate the parts that are volatile with regard to hardware changes from the parts that are nonvolatile. But that's a kernel implementation detail and we shouldn't pretend it means the combined kernel doesn't need to be changed.

We can also embed several volatile components for several different hardware configurations. That's called inefficiency, or bloat.

There were several attempts for hardware to incorporate the volatile component itself and be self-describing. ACPI (in ROM) is one; device-tree-in-ROM is another. Neither turned out to work well, because it turns out you actually want to evolve that code and so kernels contain lists of ROM patches anyway, which isn't much better than just including whatever was in the ROM to begin with.

The curse of open source is that any missing feature is always your own fault, because you didn't do it yourself.

The device trees either exist in the proprietary blobs, or can be written.

Linux evry where haha washing_machine to trafic light evry single sector

Support is coming because of Googlebooks, not because Qualcomm out of the pureness of their hearts is embracing GNU/Linux.

Expect binary drivers for specific releases of Ubuntu and Debian.

Also here is an answer to other day's why people still use Ubuntu.

That is why The Year of GNU/Linux desktop is never going to take off as such.

It was already proven by the whole netbooks, Android, WebOS, and ChromeOS.

Linux yes, as cost cut factor, and as means to power specific commercial products, running on top of WSL/Virtualisation Framework, or expensive racks on hyperscalers.

The whole community stuff, from OEMs point of view, only when it really has to be.

That's not a full solution... proper platform would have backward compatibility, so an OS from today will work on hardware released in 5 years.

X11 is ancient history and not a fit for tiling GPUs found in mobiles socs

Wayland is a protocol that can be implemented by a compositor. Since Wayland intentionally chose to only support a subset of the functionality of a display server like Xorg, it became possible to rip out the Xorg specific hardware drivers and make the X11-supporting Wayland compositor known as XWayland possible in the first place.

"We're stuck with just a protocol that can have arbitrary implementations including full backwards compatible X11 servers"

They give 2 separate dates for debian and ubuntu which looks to me they will just release drivers but haven't decided to be good citizen and have their drivers in the mainline kernel source tree.

In other words: it might be a trap and you could get screwed in n years if they stop maintaining it and some kernel changes make the driver not compilable on newer versions.

Unless Qualcomm steps in and makes every laptop with their chip work flawlessly, I don't see a reason to step into their ecosystem. Right now it is basically flipping a coin when you buy an X1 or X2 product, as you are basically locked to the vendor's idea of 'support'. Qualcomm should coerce and collaborate with vendors to ensure their products are synonymous with great Linux support so that when I see their brand I know it is a good product.

It will take years for Linux users to trust Qualcomm again.

It has been so many attempts to run Linux on this chips without any collaboration from Qualcomm. Companies even drop support after years of development.

Qualcomm provided efficiency (battery life). But intel is catching up fast to make Qualcomm irrelevant.

Welcome, but too late.

Now if only Linux were to conquer the desktop as well ...

Man I’m hoping this support extends to older Snapdragon X2 stuff as well as the current crop of chips. There’s a lot of VR/AR headsets out there otherwise running proprietary operating systems and left to rot that a generic Linux distro like Debian could rescue, though Qualcomm’s history makes me doubt those chips will ever see the same support their newer, AI-focused ones are with this announcement.

Still keeping my fingers crossed that in the near future we can throw Linux onto an HTC Vive Focus or a Meta Quest and re-take ownership of our data and devices, but it’s strictly hopium at this point.

very good!

You mean, Snapdragon X2 series support is coming to Linux.

Unless they're enforcing signed boot from the factory, it's up to software to run on hardware.

Snapdragon X2 Series is expanding to Linux, adding support alongside Windows and Googlebook

Is Googlebook a new name for chrome os? Or is it a typo?

Up voting based on the title alone, though I'm not expecting much.

If we could have a similar experience to Intel-based ThinkPad Carbon X1 or T series with performance, graphics, Wi-Fi, battery life, suspend/resume, external displays, etc, that would be awesome!

Apple hardware is awesome but I want to run Linux.