[imiric]

What evidence? I don't think there's a machine that delivers on all those aspects, and makes Linux a first-class citizen.

Dell and Lenovo generally do a pretty good job, and those machines sell well, but I think the quality is still below what, say, Apple can deliver. Judging by the push to get Linux to run on Apple hardware, I'd say Linux enthusiasts are not only willing to pay a premium for a quality product, but willing to invest time and effort getting it to run well in a hostile and closed ecosystem.

So I think there's a big market opportunity for someone to deliver Apple quality hardware, that integrates well with open source software. Framework is probably at the frontlines in this regard.

[qwytw]

> Judging by the push to get Linux to run on Apple hardware . That's still a very small subset of a very small market. I highly doubt it would be even remotely viable to develop a product comparable to M1/M2 Macs if you're targeting the Linux market. Even if you can get decent margins the scale is just no there. At best you can get some rebadged Windows laptops like HP Dev One.

Framework is probably an exception but I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of those who bought it still use Windows

[trelane]

I have seen a lot of complaining sand saying that the Linux kit is too expensive. Even the stuff that is actually Linux kit (System76, maybe Tux). I'd be glad to be wrong, but I'd be surprised.

I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: the smartest thing Apple ever did was keeping you from running OSX on Windows computers. Nobody buys a commodity PC, slaps OSX on it, and expects it to work as well or better than Windows. Yet this is how many do Linux.