If you can send me an open hardware Intel, or Jetson I'd happily use it.

Part of the point of this for me is to see what's possible with open hardware (down to chip level at least)

There are a variety of x86 products with Coreboot support, if what you are looking for is firmware openness. If what you are looking for is PCB design openness, the options are much fewer, but at that point you are probably optimizing for an overly niche objective.

> Part of the point of this for me is to see what's possible with open hardware (down to chip level at least)

I appreciate the idea, but this is essentially saying "this project will prioritize a specific choice of one (core) piece of hardware to the detriment of everything else, users included". Approximately none of your potential users are going to benefit from the "openness" of the SBC versus that of a more broadly-supported platform (I say "openness" because the reality of SBCs is that actually finding a usefully performant one that is completely blob-free is almost impossible). Open hardware means very little if it isn't running an upstream kernel and userland.

	▲	Sabrees 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The software does explicitly support Jetson for example, and I'm sure the stack would run on Intel if you want it to. The Mainline kernel for this particular board is _almost_ there 6.20 or so I expect. Armbian support is good.

▲

Neywiny 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Framework? Maybe?

	▲	Sabrees 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Framweork have done the best they can within the confines of Intel licensing, still a long way from being able to fabricate it though https://github.com/FrameworkComputer/Framework-Laptop-13/tre... In a few years we'll all be using more open RISCV stuff of course.