The reason that people want AMD CPUs is simple - they’re much better than what Intel is offering. We can see empirically how wide this gap is now since we have independent reviews of identical laptop platforms from Lenovo and HP’s ultrathin business laptops (the same segment as Framework):
HP EliteBook 840 G9 1280P vs HP EliteBook 845 G9 6950HS [1] - these are both respective flagship parts, and we can see the AMD version has both a +23% performance rating and a +23% better battery runtime. Note, that on the HP website currently, the same configuration AMD version is also >30% cheaper.
Lenovo ThinkPad T14s G3 6850U vs 1235U [2] - since the Intel version reviewed isn’t a top of the line model, it’s not fair to compare performance numbers, but even with the significantly lower TDP Intel part (15W vs 28W), the AMD version of the laptop ends up with an even bigger lead with a 35% better battery runtime. The AMD version is also 10% cheaper than their Intel counterparts from the Lenovo site pricing.
In both these cases, the AMD version wins significantly on processing power, battery efficiency and price. The 7040 should extend the lead on the latter, and that's not taking GPU performance into account [3], where the AMD Radeon 680M simply crushes the Intel Xe 96EU by an average of +88% in game performance, and +135% in synthetics (and again, the 7040’s RDNA3 GPU and Xilinx AI core will extend the lead even more for the upcoming generation).
[1] https://www.notebookcheck.net/HP-EliteBook-840-G9-laptop-rev...
[2] https://www.notebookcheck.net/Lenovo-ThinkPad-T14s-G3-AMD-la...
[3] https://www.notebookcheck.com/Iris-Xe-G7-96EUs-vs-Radeon-680...
USB features depend ultimately on the laptop manufacturers' implementation (eg neither the HP or Lenovo models linked implement USB4 but they are in other models like the Lenovo Z13), but I haven't seen any that claim to have DP-alt support not be able to support it. As the Framework will have USB4 (and DP-alt and PCIe encapsulation are mandated by Microsoft for Windows 11 compatibility), I don't think that's a real worry for anyone.
AMD still tends to have lower actual TDP than Intel, which is more efficient in a laptop and easier to cool in a desktop.
If you're going to use the integrated GPU, RDNA generally performs better in games.
My home linux machine is a ninth gen intel with Nvidia. Its technically a notebook, but more like a portable workstation. Its powerful, but battery life is terrible (<3) and you can hear the fans. It can game quite well however.
There's a few instances where AMD GPU drivers even outshine their windows counterparts like in OpenGL performance. Intel's driver support is great as well, but their performance recently has not matched AMD, and their iGPUs don't compare to AMD's iGPUs.
Also for beefier laptops with discreet GPUs, intel up until very recently would need an NVIDIA card to get decent performance which would require NVIDIA drivers, which are notorious for complicating things on Linux. On the other hand AMD laptops with discreet AMD gpus already have their drivers built into the kernel which removes almost any potential complication.
Also there's personal preference, which in my case leans toward AMD because of their generally more open stance with their new technology, like raytracing and FSR which is contrasted by NVIDIAs typically closed off approach to the same things. Intel isn't as bad as NVIDIA in this department either but this is just personal opinion.
Lastly AMD CPUs are generally cheaper than intel, and in the last few generations performed better overall than intel.
TL:DR AMD on linux has great drivers with good support, the synergy between AMD's CPUs and GPUs and their combined APUs are very good, and personally I appreciate AMD's more open approach to technology like FSR, even if they aren't anywhere near perfect.
But some people just like supporting the underdog.