This is arguably a deceptive title. Why not something more clear such as, "All Chromebooks will now support containers." Chromebooks are already running a modified Gentoo Linux kernel. They are already "Linux" laptops.
Chromebook users currently employ chroots to run non-Chromium userlands from Debian, Arch, etc. Ideally, they would like to run their own kernel, usually one they get in binary form from those public distributions such Debian, Arch, etc., but also kernels they compile themselves.
It is possible (=good) but still a pain to install one's own kernel on a Chromebook. The Google Corporation could, but is not, making that any easier.
Instead, what is happening here is that they are adding support for containers. Chromebook is still running Google's modified kernel.
Pure coincidence I am sure, but looking at how Microsoft is marketing using the term "Linux" we see the same thing. They like to use the word "Linux", but the user is still running a proprietary kernel. In that case, it is the Windows kernel.
Linux is a kernel. If you cannot compile it yourself and easily install it on your laptop, then whose "Linux laptop" is it, really? The issue is one of control.
It implies Google is working to make sure third party Linux distros work reasonably, presumably by backporting their fixes and mandating OSS drivers, and easy dev mode support.
From what I can tell, none of those things are true.
Chromebook users currently employ chroots to run non-Chromium userlands from Debian, Arch, etc. Ideally, they would like to run their own kernel, usually one they get in binary form from those public distributions such Debian, Arch, etc., but also kernels they compile themselves.
It is possible (=good) but still a pain to install one's own kernel on a Chromebook. The Google Corporation could, but is not, making that any easier.
Instead, what is happening here is that they are adding support for containers. Chromebook is still running Google's modified kernel.
Pure coincidence I am sure, but looking at how Microsoft is marketing using the term "Linux" we see the same thing. They like to use the word "Linux", but the user is still running a proprietary kernel. In that case, it is the Windows kernel.
Linux is a kernel. If you cannot compile it yourself and easily install it on your laptop, then whose "Linux laptop" is it, really? The issue is one of control.