Hardware Archive

The title is a lie. This isn’t brief at all. Picture the keypad of a telephone and calculator side by side. Can you see the subtle difference between the two without resorting to your smartphone? Don’t worry if you can’t recall the design. Most of us are so used to accepting the common interfaces that we tend to overlook the calculator’s inverted key sequence. A calculator has the 7–8–9 buttons at the top whereas a phone uses the 1–2–3 format. Subtle, but puzzling since they serve the same functional goal — input numbers. There’s no logical reason for the inversion if a user operates the interface in the same way. Common sense suggests the reason should be technological constraints. Maybe it’s due to a patent battle between the inventors. Some people may theorize it’s ergonomics. With no clear explanation, I knew history and the evolution of these devices would provide the answer. Which device was invented first? Which keypad influenced the other? Most importantly, who invented the keypad in the first place? ↫ Francesco Bertelli and Manoel do Amara Sometimes, you come across articles that are one-of-a-kind, and this is one of them. Very few people would go to this length to document such a particular thing most people find utterly insignificant, but luckily for us, Francesco Bertelli and Manoel do Amara went all the way with this one. If you want to know anything about the history of the numerical pad and its possibly layouts, this is the place to go. What I’ve always found fascinating about numerical pads is how effortless the brain can switch between the two most common layouts without really batting an eye. Both layouts seem so ingrained in my brain that it feels like there’s barely any context-switching involved, and my fingers just effortlessly flow to the correct numbers. Considering numbers tend to confuse me, I wouldn’t have been at all surprised to find myself having issues switching between the two layouts. What makes this even more interesting is when I consider the number row on the keyboard – you know, 1 through 0 – because there I do tend to have a lot of issues finding the right numbers. I don’t mean it takes seconds or anything like that, but I definitely experience more hiccups working with the number row than with a numerical keypad of either layout.

Chips and Cheese takes a very detailed look at the latest processor design from Zhaoxin, the Chinese company that inherited VIA’s x86 license and has been making new x86 chips ever since. Their latest design, 世纪大道 (Century Avenue), tries to take yet another step closer to current designs chips form Intel and AMD, and while falling way short, that’s not really the point here. Ultimately performance is what matters to an end-user. In that respect, the KX-7000 sometimes falls behind Bulldozer in multithreaded workloads. It’s disappointing from the perspective that Bulldozer is a 2011-era design, with pairs of hardware thread sharing a frontend and floating point unit. Single-threaded performance is similarly unimpressive. It roughly matches Bulldozer there, but the FX-8150’s single-threaded performance was one of its greatest weaknesses even back in 2011. But of course, the KX-7000 isn’t trying to impress western consumers. It’s trying to provide a usable experience without relying on foreign companies. In that respect, Bulldozer-level single-threaded performance is plenty. And while Century Avenue lacks the balance and sophistication that a modern AMD, Arm, or Intel core is likely to display, it’s a good step in Zhaoxin’s effort to break into higher performance targets. ↫ Chester Lam at Chips and Cheese I find Chinese processors, like the x86-based ones from Zhaoxin or the recent LoongArch processors (which you can buy on AliExpress), incredibly fascinating, and would absolutely love to get my hands on one. A board with two of the most recent LoongArch processors – the 3c6000 – goes for about €4000 at the moment, and I’m keeping my eye on that price to see if there’s ever going to be a sharp drop. This is prime OSNews material, after all. No, they’re not competitive with the latest offerings from Intel, AMD, or ARM, but I don’t really care – they interest me as a computer enthusiast, and since it’s highly unlikely we’re going to see anyone seriously threaten Intel, AMD, and ARM here in the west, you’re going to have to look at China if you’re interested in weird architectures and unique processors.

Late last year, I went on a long journey to rid myself of as much of my remaining ties to the big technology giants as I could. This journey is still ongoing, with only a few thin ties remaining, but there’s one big one I can scratch off the list: mobile in-store payments with NFC tap-to-pay. I used Google Pay and a WearOS smartwatch for this, but neither of those work on de-Googled Android – I opted for GrapheneOS – and it seemed like I was just going to have to accept the loss of this functionality. That is, until I stumbled upon a few forum posts here and there suggesting a solution: Garmin, maker of fitness trackers and smartwatches with a strong focus on sports, health, and the outdoor lifestyle, has its own mobile NFC tap-to-pay service that supposedly worked just fine on any Android device, de-Googled or not. In fact, people claimed you could even remove the companion Garmin application from your phone entirely after setting up the payment functionality, and it would still keep working. This seemed like something I should look into, because the lack of NFC tap-to-pay is a recurring concern for many people intending to switch to de-Googled Android. So, late last year, many of you chipped in, allowing me to buy a Garmin smartwatch to try this functionality out, for which I’m incredibly grateful, of course. Here’s how all of this works, and if it’s a good alternative for Google Pay. The Garmin Instinct 2S Solar First, let’s dive into which watch I chose to buy. Garmin has a wide variety of fitness trackers and smartwatches in its line-up, from basic trackers, to Apple Watch/WearOS-like devices, to outdoor-focused rugged devices. I opted for one of the outdoor-focused rugged devices, because not only would it give me the Garmin Pay functionality, but also a few other advantages and unique features I figured OSNews readers would be interested in: a simple black-and-white transflective memory-in-pixel display, a battery life measured in weeks (!), a solar panel built into the display glass, and a case constructed out of lightweight but durable plastics instead of heavy, scratch-prone metal. The specific model I opted for was the Instinct 2S Solar in Mist Grey. I wasn’t intending for this to become a review of the watch as a whole, but I figured I might as well share some notes about my experiences with this particular watch model. It’s important to note though that Garmin offers a wide variety of smartwatches, from models that look and feel mostly like an Apple Watch or wearOS device, to mechanical models with ‘invisible’ OLED displays on the dial, to ruggedised, button-only watches for hardcore outdoor people. If you’re interested in a Garmin device, there’s most likely a type that fits your wishes. The Instinct 2S is definitely not the most beautiful or attractive watch I’ve ever had on my wrist. It has that “rugged” look some people are really into, but for me, I definitely had to get used to it. I do really like the colour combination I opted for, though, as it complements the black/white transflective memory-in-pixel display really well. I’ve grown to… Appreciate the look over time. The case and bezel of the watch are made out of what Garmin calls “fiber-reinforced polymer”, which is probably just a form of fiber-reinforced plastic. Regardless of the buzzwords, it feels nice and sturdy, with a great texture, and not at all plasticy or cheap. Using a material like this over the metals the Apple Watch and most WearOS devices are made of has several advantages; first, it makes the device much lighter and thus more pleasant to wear, and it’s a lot sturdier and resilient than metals. I’ve banged this watch into door sills and countertops a few times now, and there’s not a scratch, dent, or discoloration on it – a far cry from the various metal Apple Watches and WearOS devices I own, which accumulated dings and scratches within weeks of buying them. The case material is one of the many ways in which this watch chooses function over form. Sure, metals might feel premium, but a high-quality plastic is cheaper to make, lasts longer, is more resilient, and also happens to be lighter – it’s simply the objectively better choice for something you wear on wrist every day, exposed to the elements. I understand why people want their smartwatch to be made out of metal, but much like how the orange-red plastic of the Nexus 5 is still the best smartphone material I’ve ever experienced (the white and black models uses inferior plastics), this Garmin tops all of the metal watches I own. The strap is made of silicone, and has an absurd amount of tightly-spaced adjustment holes, which makes it very easy to adjust to changing circumstances, like a bit of extra slack for when you’re working out. It also has a nice touch in that the second loop has a little peg that slots into an adjustment hole, keeping it in place. Ingenious. Other than that, it’s just a silicone band with the clasp made out of the same sturdy, pleasant “fiber-reinforced polymer” as the case. The lens over the display is made out of something Garmin calls “Power Glass™”, and I have no idea what that means. It just feels like a watch lens to me – solid, glassy, and… I don’t know, round? The unique aspect of the display glass is, of course, the built-in solar panel. It’s hard for me to tell what kind of impact – if any – the solar panel has on the battery life of the device. What quite obviously does not help is that I live in the Arctic where sun hours come at a bit of a premium, so it’s been impossible for me to stand outside and hold out my arm for a while to see if it had an effect on the charge level. There’s a software

“Synology-branded drives will be needed for use in the newly announced Plus series, with plans to update the Product Compatibility List as additional drives can be thoroughly vetted in Synology systems,” a Synology representative told Ars by email. “Extensive internal testing has shown that drives that follow a rigorous validation process when paired with Synology systems are at less risk of drive failure and ongoing compatibility issues.” Without a Synology-branded or approved drive in a device that requires it, NAS devices could fail to create storage pools and lose volume-wide deduplication and lifespan analysis, Synology’s German press release stated. Similar drive restrictions are already in place for XS Plus and rack-mounted Synology models, though work-arounds exist. ↫ Kevin Purdy at Ars Technica I’m honestly surprised it’s taken Synology this long to start nickle-and-diming its users. I’m sure the “Synology-branded” drives will carry substantial markups over regular drives, despite the drives being otherwise identical. Charging insane markups for expansion options is a tried-and-true way to increase your margins, with Apple being the classic example of charging insane prices for basic RAM or SSD upgrades. I think most of us here on OSNews could easily build our own NAS, as it’s not a particularly complex project. The various software options could be a bit more complicated to navigate, but I don’t think it’s insurmountable for most of us. Normal, average people, though, would most likely do best to just buy an off-the-shelf NAS for their storage and local back-up needs, and it’s those kind of people who Synology is aiming this policy at. They’ll be easily fooled into thinking Synology-branded drives are somehow special, and not just a generic drive with a fancy sticker. This is how the world works, but that doesn’t make it any less unpleasant.

The AlphaStation 500 is a workstation from Digital, circa 1996. Mine is a 500 MHz model and has an Alpha 21164A processor (aka EV56). And the way it boots is weird. On your common-or-garden PC, there has always been some kind of ROM chip. It holds a piece of firmware known as the BIOS. This ROM chip is available at a well-known location in the processor’s address space (remembering that any PC processor boots up in 16-bit, 8088 compatible mode, with a 1 MiB address space, just like an IBM PC 5150) and the processor just starts executing code in it after reset. The Alpha (or at least this AlphaStation 500 – although I think they mostly worked like this) is different. ↫ Jonathan ‘theJPster’ Pallant A great read, but a little bit over my head considering I’m anything but a programmer or developer. Still, even I managed to get the basic gist and learn quite a bit from this article, and especially the part about how the AlphaStation uses a little jumper to tell the SROM exactly which stream of boot code to send to the processor is fascinating. I’m not sure just how unusual the Alpha’s way of booting is, but I’d at least never heard of it.

SoftBank Group Corp. today announced that it will acquire Ampere Computing, a leading independent silicon design company, in an all-cash transaction valued at $6.5 billion. Under the terms of the agreement, Ampere will operate as a wholly owned subsidiary of SoftBank Group and retain its name. As part of the transaction, Ampere’s lead investors – Carlyle and Oracle – are selling their respective positions in Ampere. ↫ SoftBank and Ampere Computing press release Despite not really knowing what SoftBank does and what their long-term goals are – I doubt anyone does – I hope this at the very least provides Ampere with the funds needed to expand its business. At this point, the only serious options for Arm-based hardware are either Apple or Qualcomm, and we could really use more players. Ampere’s hardware is impressive, but difficult to buy and expensive, and graphics card support is patchy, at best. What Ampere needs is more investment, and more OEMs picking up their chips. An Ampere workstation is incredibly high on my list of machines to test for OSNews (perhaps a System76 model?), and it’d be great if economies of scale worked to bring the prices down, possibly allowing Ampere to developer cheaper, more affordable variants for us mere mortals, too. I would love to build an Arm workstation in much the same way we build regular x86 PCs today, but I feel like that’s still far off. I have no idea if SoftBank is the right kind of company to make this possible, but one can dream.

Brother laser printers are popular recommendations for people seeking a printer with none of the nonsense. By nonsense, we mean printers suddenly bricking features, like scanning or printing, if users install third-party cartridges. Some printer firms outright block third-party toner and ink, despite customer blowback and lawsuits. Brother’s laser printers have historically worked fine with non-Brother accessories. A YouTube video posted this week, though, as well as older social media posts, claim that Brother has gone to the dark side and degraded laser printer functionality with third-party cartridges. Brother tells Ars that this isn’t true. ↫ Scharon Harding at Ars Technica I find this an incredibly interesting story. We all know the printer space is a cursed hellhole of the very worst worst types of enshittification, but Brother seemed like an island of relative calm in a sea of bullshit. In turn, people are so used to printers being shit, that any problem that comes up is automatically explained by malice, which is not entirely unreasonable. Borther insists, though, that it does not break printers using third-party toner or ink through firmware. Brother does make it very clear that it is standard procedure to only perform troubleshooting on Brother printers using ‘genuine’ Brother ink and toner, which is not entirely unreasonable in my book. There’s no telling what kind of effects third part cartridges – which do contain electronics – have on the rest of the printer, and I don’t think it’s fair to expect Brother to be able to document all of those possible issues. As long as using third-party toner and ink cartridges doesn’t invalidate any warranties, and as long as Brother doesn’t intentionally break printers for using third-party toner and ink, I think Brother meets its obligations to consumers. If you choose to use third-party ink and toner cartridges in Brother printers, I think it’s only reasonable you remove those during the troubleshooting process to ensure they’re not the cause of any problems you’re experiencing.

If you have type 1 diabetes, you need to keep track of and manage your blood glucose levels closely, as if these levels dip too low, it can quickly spiral into a medical emergency. Andrew Childs’ 9 year old son has type 1 diabetes, and Childs was unhappy with any of the current offerings on the market for children to keep track of their blood glucose levels. Most people suggested an Apple Watch, but he found the Apple Watch “too much device” for a kid, something I personally agree with. It ships with so many shiny features and apps and notifications. It’s beautifully crafted. It’s also way too distracting for a kid while they’re at school. Secondly, it doesn’t provide a good, reliable view of his CGM data. The Dexcom integration is often backgrounded, doesn’t show the chart, only the number and an arrow. People use hacks like creating calendar events just to see up-to-date data. And the iOS settings, Screen Time, and notification systems have ballooned into a giant ball of complexity. What we need is something simple. ↫ Andrew Childs And so Childs set out to design and prototype a smartwatch just for his son to wear, trying to address the shortcomings of other offerings on the market along the way, and possibly even bring it to market for other people in similar situations. After six months, he managed to create several prototypes, with both the software and hardware designed from the ground up, that he and his son still wear to this day, to great satisfaction. Since Childs didn’t really know where to go from there and how to turn what he had into an actual product people could be, he decided to document his effort online. In the process, he had to overcome a ton of hurdles, from iOS’ strict BLE limitations, difficult-to-reach soldering points that can’t be moved due to the small size of the PCB, optimising the battery life, dealing with glass manufacturing, and many other issues, big and small. Oh and also, he was a software engineer, not a hardware one, so he had to learn a lot of new skills, from working with 3D modeling to PCB design. In the end, though, he’s now got a few devices that look quite professionally made, that are incredibly easy to repair, and that are focused solely on those things he and his son need. This project has increased the quality of life for his son, and that’s genuinely all that really matters here.

On Monday at CES 2025, Nvidia unveiled a desktop computer called Project DIGITS. The machine uses Nvidia’s latest “Blackwell” AI chip and will cost $3,000. It contains a new central processor, or CPU, which Nvidia and MediaTek worked to create. Responding to an analyst’s question during an investor presentation, Huang said Nvidia tapped MediaTek to co-design an energy-efficient CPU that could be sold more widely. “Now they could provide that to us, and they could keep that for themselves and serve the market. And so it was a great win-win,” Huang said. Previously, Reuters reported that Nvidia was working on a CPU for personal computers to challenge the consumer and business computer market dominance of Intel, Advanced Micro Devices and Qualcomm. ↫ Stephen Nellis at Reuters I’ve long wondered why NVIDIA wasn’t entering the general purpose processor market in a more substantial way than it did a few years ago with the Tegra, especially now that ARM has cemented itself as an architecture choice for more than just mobile devices. Much like Intel, AMD, and now Qualcomm, NVIDIA could easily deliver the whole package to laptop, tablet, and desktop makers: processor, chipset, GPU, of course glued together with special NVIDIA magic the other companies opting to use NVIDIA GPUs won’t get. There’s a lot of money to be made there, and it’s the move that could help NVIDIA survive the inevitable crash of the “AI” wave it’s currently riding, which has pushed the company to become one of the most valuable companies in the world. I’m also sure OEMs would love nothing more than to have more than just Qualcomm to choose from for ARM laptops and desktops, if only to aid in bringing costs down through competition, and to potentially offer ARM devices with the same kind of powerful GPUs currently mostly reserved for x86 machines. I’m personally always for more competition, but this time with the asterisk that NVIDIA really doesn’t need to get any bigger than it already is. The company has a long history of screwing over consumers, and I doubt that would change if they also conquered a chunky slice of the general purpose processor market.

So we all know about twisted-pair ethernet, huh? I get a little frustrated with a lot of histories of the topic, like the recent neil breen^w^wserial port video, because they often fail to address some obvious questions about the origin of twisted-pair network cabling. Well, I will fail to answer these as well, because the reality is that these answers have proven very difficult to track down. ↫ J. B. Crawford The problems with nailing down an accurate history of the development of the various standards, ideas, concepts, and implementations of Ethernet and other, by now dead, network standards are their age, as well as the fact that their history is entangled with the even longer history of telephone wiring. The reasoning behind some of the choices made by engineers over the past more than 100 years of telephone technology aren’t always clear, and very difficult to retrace. Crawford dives into some seriously old and fun history here, trying to piece together the origins of twisted pair the best he can. It’s a great read, as all of his writings are.

Dell has announced it’s rebranding literally its entire product line, so mainstays like XPS, Latitude, and Inspiron are going away. They’re replacing all of these old brands with Dell, Dell Pro, and Dell Pro Max, and within each of these, there will be three tiers: Base, Plus, and Premium. Of course, the reason is “AI”. The AI PC market is quickly evolving. Silicon innovation is at its strongest and everyone from IT decision makers to professionals and everyday users are looking at on-device AI to help drive productivity and creativity. To make finding the right AI PC easy for customers, we’ve introduced three simple product categories to focus on core customer needs – Dell (designed for play, school and work), Dell Pro (designed for professional-grade productivity) and Dell Pro Max (designed for maximum performance).  We’ve also made it easy to distinguish products within each of the new product categories. We have a consistent approach to tiering that lets customers pinpoint the exact device for their specific needs. Above and beyond the starting point (Base), there’s a Plus tier that offers the most scalable performance and a Premium tier that delivers the ultimate in mobility and design. ↫ Kevin Terwilliger on Dell’s blog Setting aside the nonsensical reasoning behind the rebrand, I do actually kind of dig the simplicity here. This is a simple, straightforward set of brand names and tiers that pretty much anyone can understand. That being said, the issue with Dell in particular is that once you go to their website to actually buy one of their machines, the clarity abruptly ends and it gets confusing fast. I hope these new brand names and tiers will untangle some of that mess to make it easier to find what you need, but I’m skeptical. My XPS 13 from 2017 is really starting to show its age, and considering how happy I’ve been with it over the years its current Dell equivalent would be a top contender (assuming I had the finances to do so). I wonder if the Linux support on current Dell laptops has improved since my XPS 13 was new?

Do you think streaming platforms and other entities that employ DRM schemes use the TPM in your computer to decrypt stuff? Well, the Free Software Foundation seems to think so, and adds Microsoft’s insistence on requiring a TPM for Windows 11 into the mix, but it turns out that’s simply not true. I’m going to be honest here and say that I don’t know what Microsoft’s actual motivation for requiring a TPM in Windows 11 is. I’ve been talking about TPM stuff for a long time. My job involves writing a lot of TPM code. I think having a TPM enables a number of worthwhile security features. Given the choice, I’d certainly pick a computer with a TPM. But in terms of whether it’s of sufficient value to lock out Windows 11 on hardware with no TPM that would otherwise be able to run it? I’m not sure that’s a worthwhile tradeoff. What I can say is that the FSF’s claim is just 100% wrong, and since this seems to be the sole basis of their overall claim about Microsoft’s strategy here, the argument is pretty significantly undermined. I’m not aware of any streaming media platforms making use of TPMs in any way whatsoever. There is hardware DRM that the media companies use to restrict users, but it’s not in the TPM – it’s in the GPU. ↫ Matthew Garrett A TPM is imply not designed to handle decryption of media streams, and even if they were, they’re far, far too slow and underpowered to decode even a 1080P stream, let alone anything more demanding than that. In reality, DRM schemes like Google’s Widevine, Apple’s Fairplay, and Microsoft’s Playready offer different levels of functionality, both in software and in hardware. The hardware DRM stuff is all done by the GPU, and not by the TPM. By focusing so much on the TPM, Garrett argues, the FSF is failing to see how GPU makers have enabled a ton of hardware DRM without anyone noticing. Personally, I totally understand why organisations like the Free Software Foundation are focusing on TPMs right now. They’re one of the main reasons why people can’t upgrade to Windows 11, it’s the thing people have heard about, and it’s the thing that’ll soon prevent them from getting security updates for their otherwise perfectly fine machines. I’m not sure the FSF has enough clout these days to make any meaningful media impact, especially in more general, non-tech media, but by choosing the TPM as their focus they’re definitely choosing a viable vector. Of course, over here in the tech corner, we don’t like it when people are factually inaccurate or twisting and bending the truth, and I’m glad someone as knowledgeable as Garrett stepped up to set the record straight for us tech-focused people, while everyone else can continue to ignore this matter.

System76, purveyor of Linux computers, distributions, and now also desktop environments, has just unveiled its latest top-end workstation, but this time, it’s not an x86 machine. They’ve been working together with Ampere to build a workstation based around Ampere’s Altra ARM processors: the Thelio Astra. Phoronix, fine purveyor of Linux-focused benchmarks, were lucky enough to benchmark one, and has more information on the new workstation. System76 designed the Thelio Astra in collaboration with Ampere Computing. The System76 Thelio Astra makes use of Ampere Altra processors up to the Ampere Altra Max 128-core ARMv8 processor that in turn supports 8-channel DDR4 ECC memory. The Thelio Astra can be configured with up to 512GB of system memory, choice of Ampere Altra processors, up to NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation graphics, dual 10 Gigabit Ethernet, and up to 16TB of PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD storage. System76 designed the Thelio Astra ARM64 workstation to be complemented by NVIDIA graphics given the pervasiveness of NVIDIA GPUs/accelerators for artificial intelligence and machine learning workloads. The Astra is contained within System76’s custom-designed, in-house-manufactured Thelio chassis. Pricing on the System76 Thelio Astra will start out at $3,299 USD with the 64-core Ampere Altra Q64-22 processor, 2 x 32GB of ECC DDR4-3200 memory, 500GB NVMe SSD, and NVIDIA A402 graphics card. ↫ Michael Larabel This pricing is actually remarkably favourable considering the hardware you’re getting. System76 and its employees have been dropping hints for a while now they were working on an ARM variant of their Thelio workstation, and knowing some of the prices others are asking, I definitely expected the base price to hit $5000, so this is a pleasant surprise. With the Altra processors getting a tiny bit long in the tooth, you do notice some oddities here, specifically the DDR4 RAM instead of the modern DDR5, as well as the lack of PCIe 5.0. The problem is that while the Altra has a successor in the AmpereOne processor, its availability is quite limited, and most of them probably end up in datacentres and expensive servers for big tech companies. This newer variant does come with DDR5 and PCIe 5.0 support, but doesn’t yet have a lower core count version, so even if it were readily available it might simply push the price too far up. Regardless, the Altra is still a ridiculously powerful processor, and at anywhere between 64 and 128 cores, it’s got power to spare. The Thelio Astra will be available come 12 November, and while I would perform a considerable number of eyebrow-raising acts to get my hands on one, it’s unlikely System76 will ship one over for a review. Edit: here’s an excellent and detailed reply to our Mastodon account from an owner of an Ampere Altra workstation, highlighting some of the challenges related to your choice of GPU. Required reading if you’re interested in a machine like this.

Something odd happened to Qualcomm’s Snapdragon Dev Kit, an $899 mini PC powered by Windows 11 and the company’s latest Snapdragon X Elite processor. Qualcomm decided to abruptly discontinue the product, refund all orders (including for those with units on hand), and cease its support, claiming the device “has not met our usual standards of excellence.” ↫ Taras Buria at Neowin The launch of the Snapdragon X Pro and Elite chips seems to have mostly progressed well, but there have been a few hiccups for those of us who want ARM but aren’t interested in Windows and/or laptops. There’s this story, which is just odd all around, with an announced, sold, and even shipped product suddenly taken off the market, which I think at this point was the only non-laptop device with an X Elite or Pro chip. If you are interested in developing for Qualcomm’s new platform, but don’t want a laptop, you’re out of luck for now. Another note is that the SoC SKU in the Dev Kit was clocked a tiny bit higher than the laptop SKUs, which perhaps plays a role in its cancellation. The bigger hiccup is the problematic Linux bring-up, which is posing many more problems and is taking a lot longer than Qualcomm very publicly promised it would take. For now, if you want to run Linux on a Snapdragon X Elite or Pro device, you’re going to need a custom version of your distribution of choice, tailored to a specific laptop model, using a custom kernel. It’s an absolute mess and basically means that at this point in time, months and months after release, buying one of these to run Linux on them is a bad idea. Quite a few important bits will arrive with Linux 6.12 to supposedly greatly improve the experience, but seeing is believing. Qualcomm made a lot of grandiose promises about Linux support, and they simply haven’t delivered.