[criddell]

The article says the CPU costs Apple less than $50. Why aren't these types of chips for laptops more popular in the Windows and Linux world? Where are the Dell and Framework laptops that can compete with this thing on price, quality, and performance?

[sowbug]

That price is even more wholesale than wholesale. Apple designed the chip and manufactures it with TSMC, as one of TSMC's best customers (currently #2 to Nvidia).

Qualcomm offers the Snapdragon X series, which in theory could be competitive on price and performance. But Qualcomm is in the business of selling chipsets, not building ecosystems, so once a Qualcomm chip is out the door, they tend to forget about it. This makes it harder for manufacturers to continue providing software updates that require an up-to-date BSP (board support package). This has historically reduced the long-term value of a Qualcomm-based phone (unsure about other products). It's why, for example, Google developed their Tensor chipset, which is Qualcomm-free, and which allows Google to offer a 7-year update guarantee on the latest Pixel phones.

Disclaimer: I've been out of this part of the industry for years, and I hope the dynamics have improved since then.

[criddell]

When I saw the Googlebook announcement this week I was super excited until I saw that the hardware will be made by the usual crew of under-performers - HP, ASUS, Dell, etc...

Google could (I think) do a lot of it in house like Apple does and make a killer product. They've done it before with the original Pixelbook. This time I was hoping they were going to essentially clone the Neo, put their software on it, and ship an inexpensive, high quality computer.