Where "value" is purely monetary, I think that pretty succinctly sums up my experience/views on the Framework product line.
They make good laptops, but you can generally get more for fewer dollars. If you're shopping on price, you can probably just skip right over their entire product line.
That doesn't mean that their offering doesn't have value. It has value has a vote with your wallet for sustainable, repairable products. It has value as an easily repairable and customizable laptop. It has value in some esoteric use cases it can be customized into (e.g., 4xM.2 NVME slots).
Would love to see some reviews just get this out of the way up front and spend more words on the product itself.
Personally, I'm glad there's a company out there serving a market niche besides being the lowest cost, most value-engineered product. I don't mind paying a bit extra for that in exchange for the other value I get out of it.
(And all that said--at the high end specs their prices get a fair bit more competitive. The price to upgrade a laptop from 16GB -> 128GB on Dell's site is _more than an entire FW16 w/ Ryzen 9 + 96GB RAM_.)
There's a frustrating tendency for reviewers to miss, or just ignore, the point of a product in their review. I wish they'd give a rating based on how well it fits into its niche, not how well it fits the needs of the average reader.
As an example, I recently bought a car, and went with a small crossover SUV because I wanted something that could handle light off-road duties on the weekend. One of the reviews deducted points because the car's clearance was too high and it meant the car didn't hug the road. The clearance is the point of that car. The manufacturer literally took one of their other models, raised it an extra 9cm, and stuck some minor cosmetic bits on.
In the same way, nobody buys a Framework laptop because it's competitive on price. This review does acknowledge that, sort of, but I think it discounts that someone might not be able to afford a Laptop 13 but might still pay a small premium for a Laptop 12 because they like the ethos or they benefit from the customisable design.
Is that group a bit enough niche for profitability? I'm not sure, but I think the review should either directly ask that question or put it to the side.
I actually get a lot of value out of the repairability. It lets me buy a cheaper computer upfront without having to worry about whether i can upgrade later on.
How many times have I thought, maybe i should get 2tb just in case, and then end up using 500gb. With framework, I'll buy the 1TB and the cost to upgrade is very low if I ever need to.
Same thing with memory. Maybe i need 16, maybe 32, maybe 64. I tend to buy more than i need out of fear. I just don't have that fear with framework.
Oh, and don't even get me started with repairs. If my screen breaks, i know the time to fix is however long their shipping lead time is, since the repair itself will take me 15 minutes.
In general, i think that value depends on how you see a computer. $1000-2000 is a lot to spend on something you use for fun. It's really not much to spend on something you use every day for work. And it's even less if your company is paying.
The repair-ability has been a huge thing for me as a father of young kids. I've only had to do it once when a toddler jumped on the laptop screen, but it ended up being a fairly cheap repair instead of what had hitherto been a full laptop replacement.
I want a fully clear case, but apparently that's too brittle and isn't possible? This is what the Framework people say. They have keyboards like this, but won't make a full shell in this style.
I'd kill for a fully transparent phone or laptop shell.
I'd pay $1000 more for this aesthetic. Double if it's in the florescent neon colors of 90's /00's Nintendo / Apple designs.
I think the repairabilty makes it hard to even compare monetary value, since in theory, you'd be keeping the same body, while swapping out the mainboard. Is it cheaper to buy two other laptops compared to one laptop + mainboard? That's what, a 3-5 year timeline? Who knows what prices/capabilities/etc will be like then.
>in theory, you'd be keeping the same body, while swapping out the mainboard.
I love the idea of Framework, but the upgradability seems questionable to me. I base this off my experience with desktops where I've rarely over the decades upgraded more than the hard drive and RAM. When I'm looking at upgrading the motherboard it seems I just end up going all the way and getting a new case/ps/etc at the same time. Maybe that's just me though?
And it isn't just about upgrading for better specs. I'd wager the majority of people's laptop replacement cycle is triggerd by a single part dying (screen, hard disk, keyboard, hinges, PSU), the device being out of warranty, and the store quoting more for the fix than a new device would cost. Being able to purchase the $50 part online and do the repair yourself will probably save the average person thousands over a 3-5 year span.
Yeah, I personally take that into account however I can see why someone may not.
Framework has released fairly consistent upgrades for the Framework 13, but there's no guarantee that they will continue to do so, will release upgrades for the Framework 16, etc.
I think in a few years when they've been in business for closer to a decade than not and released updates across the whole product line, it'd be pretty hard for anyone to make an argument that that _shouldn't_ be factored in.
I think monetary value can be accomplished by streamlining a second hand marketplace. If you've purchased a device the vendor can keep track of what and when. It should be relatively simple to put the known device or part back in the shop. Depending on the part and age they can also buy back and refurbish parts. A standard discount on an upgrade if you return the old part. Etc
One could even allow other manufacturers to offer parts and do certification for a fee.
It should be possible to push down prices and make update paths more appealing.
I guess Framework is maybe too new for us to be able to come up with figures here, but monetary value is hard to measure for a product where the intention is you don't ever fully replace it.
Sure, I might have spent a few hundred more on my Framework 13 back in 2022, but if I'd bought a Dell XPS 13 instead, I probably would be fully replacing it with a new machine in 2026 or 2027. But with the Framework, I'll instead only buy a new mainboard and RAM. My "next laptop" will cost ~$1000 for the same specs as something that would cost ~$2000.
So sure, it's going to take me a bit longer to realize the savings, but there still will be savings, and I appreciate the sustainability aspects too.
It has value has a vote with your wallet for sustainable, repairable products.
The author of the fine article’s strategy of used Thinkpads is more sustainable because reuse is among the most sustainable practices and there is an abundance of Thinkpad repair parts and spares machines.
Of course, Thinkpads are not terribly upgradable. But upgrading is often the opposite of sustainable…in many cases CPU’s, etc. are fast-fashionesque.
I am happy to pay more money given the companies goals, and that extra money is an investment to me. If I didnt buy it they have one less sale, and I won't have contributed to making the world have more companies like framework. I have hope others are doing the same despite them not being the cheapest.
If they stop delivering, ill not buy their next thing, and ill be sad.
And note that if the price is a pain point, you're free to order the Framework DIY without RAM and NVMe and get them cheaper elsewhere. Should bring it closer to the competition price point.
One of the versions that the author compares the Framework 12 to with respect to value is the Framework 13… so, it’s not like they are ignoring the Framework repairable design philosophy.
Here is the “ugly” part of the Ars summary (as in good/bad/ugly):
It's just too expensive for what it is. It looks and feels like a lower-cost laptop, but without a dramatically lower price than the nicer, faster Framework 13.
I really liked the idea of Framework making inter-changeable parts available for their laptops-- allowing the purchaser to keep the laptop running / upgrading as long as they wish. I also liked not having to buy parts with the laptop that I will be replacing anyway (SSD, RAM). Unfortunately, Framework now includes wifi even with the bare bones laptops, so some e-waste from replacing that.
But, the premium paid is high. And, their warranty support was, in my opinion, not a good experience. The expansion cards, which are just USB dongles internal to the computer, are gimmicky and waste space that could be used for something useful, like a slot for a second SSD, or larger battery.
I ended up sending back the Framework 13, I recently purchased, because of the warranty support experience for a mechanical issue with a single expansion card (usb dongle). Framework support had me jump through hoops for a week, repeating tests, asking me to answer the same questions again and again, and finally, "now do everything again and make a video and upload it to youtube" [actual request from Framework]. All for a part that retails for $9. The experience spooked me, and I sent back the laptop for a refund during the 30 day return window.
The Dell I replaced it with has an inferior screen*, a slightly inferior keyboard, vastly inferior CPU cooling (the Dell thermal throttles under heavy load), but Dell was half the price, and it arrived at my door 8 hours after I ordered it. And, unless things have changed, Dell warranty support was always excellent.
Hopefully Framework fixes the issues with their warranty support process. I hope they succeed.
* Dim screen on Dell mitigated by using the money I saved on the laptop price, to buy a portable 13" e-ink monitor which is vastly superior to the Framework display when working outdoors.
The monetary value comes in the long term (5+ years).
Other Brands Notebooks are not upgradable, not repairable and the most frustrating part are the batteries - which framework offers an original replacement for.
"Modern" office notebooks don't have to be that powerful. I'm still using a T480s which will only render unusable as soon as the battery dies with no <100 bucks replacement parts available.
I think buying a framework is an investment for people planning to keep the device for 5+ years and/or want to support the right to repair movement.
I'm really suprised and impressed they managed to ship such a great device and keep their promises for so long even if it is not the besteht bang for the buck (short term). Keep up the great work.
I’d add that the potential to support other architectures is also a benefit. At the moment the framework 13 chassis supports risc-v [0] [1] with rumors about an arm variant.
Beyond practical repairability and sustainability, I appreciate the possibility of swapping out a mainboard for another with a completely different arch
Repairability sounds good in theory but in practice outside of two year warranty period I'm fine if I have to replace the device because of failure, but I got 4-5 out of most of my devices. Like my 2018 Intel MBP was the worst laptop in terms of thermals/battery etc. It's still going with a family member I handed it over to. I don't think I've had a laptop die on me in last 12 years of using laptops, I usually keep them around after upgrade or pass them off to family.
And the upgradable internals sound like more of a hassle than a benefit - especially since buying a different device will be cheaper and probably a better experience since they don't have to engineer for replaceability.
Theoretically you'd get the option to plug in stuff not available in other laptops like strix halo - but then they still don't offer that in laptops. So meh.
Kind of with you on this. I just installed Arch on my wife’s old 2013 MacBook Pro. Works like a charm.
My work laptop (Fedora Linux, Dell XPS)is over 5 years old. I haven’t bothered to replace it, but will next year just because. The old one will become a retro gaming device for the kids.
I broke some of my devices, and some have battery become useless, and the price of changing is just not worth it, but overall? They last really long time. I even have some shitty 7 years old Chromebook still working okay passed to a family member, and Macbooks in general last very long.
And upgrading laptop components after 5 years just doesn't sound like a good value proposition.
Not sure how your family is using it. But I find that a laptop using as a desktop has a much longer lifespan than a laptop using as intended ( a traveling work station ). Things like moisture, accidental drops, keyboard issue is much more common.
I don't really understand the repairability appeal of the Framework. Hasn't that already been a selling point for the business line laptops of HP, Lenovo and Dell for years? They all offer premium business laptops with removable RAM, SSD and battery and very detailed maintenance guides. Part availability is good too.
What’s the current procedure for getting HP or Lenovo or Dell to sell you replacement monitor? What about just a chassis if you drop yours and get a dent? Even a spare battery? If you’re not buying one of their premium business laptops, you’re kind of SOL.
How about in five years from now when all of that is still fine, but you just want to replace the mainboard.
What about when framework comes out with upgrades down the line? The great thing is because they’re so modular you can just buy that and slap it in without having to buy an entirely new machine.
My previous laptop was HP, and servicing it was fairly unpleasant. It required removing around 30 screws of multiple sizes to get access, where the Framework requires 5 screws, which are captive. By the third time I needed to service the HP, the part I needed was no longer available directly from HP, and the 3rd party price was too expensive to sink into an aging laptop.
Some of the business lines are better, but the ultrabook styles that Framework is competing with can be pretty difficult to work on because the internals are so optimized for performance in a small space. The big manufacturers also tend to change the internals enough between models/versions, that if you want to fully gut and swap the insides, or maybe just replace the keyboard, the chassis is incompatible. Framework is designed to service over a longer period of time.
There is a tradeoff, because the super-optimized layouts of the big manufacturers are often superior. But for me at least, the Framework is good enough, and when I do need to make changes, it's a better experience. I'm also voting with my wallet for the change I want to see, even though the cost is probably a slightly worse laptop.
While HP's service guides have been good, even on their non-business models, the actual serviceability isn't great. You have rubber feet that can't be re-applied after removal, and good luck getting replacement parts as an average consumer (I haven't even been able to get a first-party battery for my HP Envy x360). Not every laptop is going to a corporation with an IT department and direct procurement connections.
RAM, SSD, and battery are also the very minimum in terms of serviceability on a laptop, they've been traditionally user-serviceable. It's components like the touchpad, display, ribbon cables, etc. that haven't been traditionally easy/possible to replace.
I really love the lavender — VAIO-core! I do wish I could get the other modules in lavender too, but I understand why they wouldn't want to fractally-complicate their stock keeping for those items.
> the Laptop 12 can only fit a single DDR5 RAM slot, which reduces memory bandwidth and limits your RAM capacity to 48GB
> Old, slow chip isn't really suitable for light gaming
I wish the reviewer would specify what phrases like “light gaming” mean to them. My FW12 is in a later batch that won't ship for a few more months, but I'm coming from a ThinkPad T470s where I already do “light gaming” (mostly TBoI Repentence and Team Fortress 2 with mastercomfig medium-low). I can't imagine the 13th Gen graphics would be worse in that regard than my old laptop's 7th Gen.
Not having Thunderbolt seemed like kind of a bummer to me too, but then again my T470s has it and I can't think of a single time I ever actually used it for anything. I tried one of those external GPU enclosures once, and it was kinda cool just to see that such a thing was possible, but I've never been one to want to tether a laptop with a thicc cable lol
TF2 won't actually run on a system like that, the system requirements on Steam are a bit of a meme. It's 18 years old but it's also been updated for 18 years.
Even these feel a little suspect (minimum Intel HD Graphics 3000? no way) since I had to do some tweaking to avoid my framerate tanking on Intel 7th Gen iGPU when playing the PvE mode (Mann vs Machine, waves of robots on the other team far larger than any PvP match would ever be), and/or when other players use cosmetics or weapons with flashy particle effects:
Is it unreasonable to think Framework should be able to make a laptop competitive with the 5 years old MacBook Air M1? I get that Framework focuses on making repairable machines, but does that prevent them from making a fanless, hi dpi, good performing, long battery life machine?
I wouldn’t expect parity with an M4 machine, but it doesn’t seem unreasonable to think they should be competitive with the much older M1.
I have the same complaint with Lenovo (I usually buy ThinkPads). Where are the fast, fanless, hidpi, long battery life laptops?
> Is it unreasonable to think Framework should be able to make a laptop competitive with the 5 years old MacBook Air M1?
Kind of unreasonable. I mean which Intel or AMD cpu can be run fanless and perform well?
On the topic of displays, my understanding is that they "kind of use what they can get". That's how there can be a 13 display with rounded corners in a straight edge case.
What you're asking are the things I'm looking for, though still every time I go into their forum I see enough thermal, fan noise issues and AMD firmware bugs, that I'm still on the fence on buying one.
I wish them luck with the 12, for me sounds like a model for "true believers" because it doesn't seem to compete well enough with run of the mill chromebooks (or an Air) that are more established in the students segment.
It isn't the chip which determines whether it's fanless. Basically every modern chip supports power capping and then the power cap is determined by how much heat the machine can dissipate.
What that really determines is multi-thread performance. Fanless laptop that can dissipate the power of one core? No problem. Fanless laptop that can dissipate the power of all the cores? For that you have to lower the clock speed quite a bit. Which is why you see AMD chips on older TSMC process nodes getting better multithread performance than Apple's fanless ones.
The cost/benefit ratio of adding a fan is extremely attractive. The alternative way of doing it is to add more cores. If you have 8 fanless cores at 2 GHz, how do you improve multi-thread performance by 50%? Option one, clock them at 3 GHz, but now you need a fan; cost of fan ~$5. Option two, get 16 cores and cap them at 1.5 GHz to fit in the same power envelope, but now you need twice as much silicon, cost of twice as many cores $500+.
The number of people who pick the second option given that trade off is so small that hardly anybody even bothers to offer it.
Apple continues to do it because a) then they get to claim "see, they can't do this?" even when hardly anybody chooses that given the option, and b) then if you actually want the higher performance one from them, you're paying hundreds of dollars extra for more cores instead of $5 extra for the same one but with a fan in it.
Anecdotal, obviously, but disabling Turbo-Core [0] on my AMD Framework 13 stopped all of my fan noise and heat complaints, with no noticeable performance impacts. It went from being so loud that my wife on the other side of the room would ask if my computer was okay to quieter than my ThinkPad, and from noticeably hot to just slightly warm.
Kind of ridiculous that it takes messing with an obscure system file to resolve it, but not any more ridiculous than issues I've had with other brands.
[0] It's `echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost` or something like that, and `echo 1` to turn it back on when you want that extra performance.
Intel's T variants in the Core series can be passively cooled. They have pretty good burst performance in case you need it. I don't know if there are laptops using them (I only have fanless desktop systems with these CPUs).
> which Intel or AMD cpu can be run fanless and perform well?
For example, AMD Ryzen 7 8840U or 7840U can be configured for the same 15W TDP as Apple M1. At 15W, the overall performance going to be about the same as M1.
> I mean which Intel or AMD cpu can be run fanless and perform well?
I don't follow CPU news and have no idea what lake they're at now, but I'd be surprised if Intel and AMD didn't have a chip competitive with an M1 by now.
When I google "fanless amd intel laptop cpu" I find this old thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31142209 which does suggest some fanless machines exist. That's from 3 years ago so surely there are even more options today, no?
> but does that prevent them from making a (...) hi dpi (...) machine?
It pretty much has that though? 1920x1200 at 12.2" is 185.59 PPI. Standard DPI (PPI) is 96. HiDPI to my knowledge isn't properly defined, but the usual convention is either double that or just more than that - the latter criteria this display definitely clears, and the former (192 PPI) is super super close, to the extent that I'd call it cleared for sure.
It's pretty hard to not clear at least the latter criteria on a laptop anyways. You'd see that on 720p and 768p units from like a decade or two ago.
The baseline of 96ppi is nominal only. Form factor and intended distance from screen matters a lot. In the laptop form factor, you’re aiming for more like 110–125 as 1×. Apple laptops range from 221–254ppi as 2×.
186ppi is designed for 1.5×, an uncomfortable space that makes perfection difficult-to-impossible, yet seems to have become unreasonably popular, given how poorly everything but Windows tends to handle it. (Microsoft have always had real fractional scaling; Apple doesn’t support it at all, downsampling; X11 is a total mess; Wayland is finally getting decent fractional scaling.)
They didn't describe the full specs of their test rigs (that I saw) but a similarly spec'd Macbook Air is going to get better battery life than the equivalent Framework 12 or 13 based on the 10 hours they quoted for the 12. (The 13 gets even less). And saying that the best possible CPU framework offers in a 13 inch format beats the consumer line of Macbooks.. sometimes.. you would really need to like/need Linux. At which point, get the cheapest Macbook Air M4 you can and then just use the money you save to get a decent NUC.
Exactly that is what I think, and I do think it is just not possible.
I’m searching for a new laptop, I want unix, so either linux or macos. I was looking at framework, system76, tuxedo and slimbooks, and mac air. I want an ANSI keyboard, which seems an oddity in Europe (there is English iso, which viscerally hate)
If you want thunderbolt ports, and some good specs, mac air is cheaper. And I’ve heard with arm processors you can tun linux at almost native speeds… I’m almost decided for Mac Air…
If somebody wants to add something to make me change my mind, you are more than welcome.
BTW I’m replacing a 2016 Macbook pro, which was buggy as hell, and I learned to really hate it. Also I’m not a fan of MacOs… but !4$ I cannot beat it.
The MacBook Air is undoubtedly good hardware, even good value, but from experience I personally just hate the Apple software ecosystem/wardship so much, it’s a dealbreaker. The pretentious presentation while neglecting practical details, the inflexibility you will sooner or later fight… it’s a special kind of hell. You strictly don’t have options on their devices. Asahi is a nice effort, but still too limited. The happy Apple users I know, have adapted their expectations, bought fully in. I am honestly never sure, if they are merely fantasizing about productivity, or actually (just) work. For me, after the honeymoon phase, it always ends in deep frustration. IMO with Apple you have to embrace the "yes, daddy“ mentality, be gaslit into overstating the good, while disowning the bad, or you will end up angry.
In The Netherlands ANSI is the most common keyboard layout, so you might want to look there if you really want/need ANSI. Only Apple and Logitech are outliers and insist on ISO.
Lenovo X9 Aura is pretty great. 80 Wh battery which gives you 6-10 hours of usage, 15’’ 120 Hz 3k OLED screen, new 3 nm Intel CPUs. Only half as fast as my M4 but less than one third the price, with an upgradable SSD and a customer-replaceable battery. My only gripes are the soldered 32 GB of RAM and that they only put one USB C connector on each side, otherwise a tremendously good machine for that price. I think it has a fan, haven’t noticed it yet though.
What? You can get an M4 MacBook Air with 32 GB of RAM for $1400, and from googling the X9 Aura is the same price. How is that "less than one third the price"?
Good point. They don’t really seem to care about actual user needs — their products feel more like they’re built around what’s easy to implement. I would’ve loved to see a Snapdragon motherboard focused on battery life and quiet operation too.
And M1 laptops are what about three years from the vintage list? They'll be e-waste at the end of this decade even while other laptops fail to match it.
There isn't any CPU that is competitive with the Apple M series. Maybe regulators will force Apple to sell the M series chips to competitors, if not, it is what it is.
The Apple M-series laptops get a performance boost by putting the RAM inside the CPU, which makes it completely impossible to upgrade RAM. That is the antithesis of what Framework is doing. Apple are the kings of disposable hardware that costs way more than the competition for no good reason. You want 32GB? You're going to pay a lot for it. Oh, now you need 64GB? Too bad, throw out that old laptop and get a new one.
There is a lot you can fault Apple for, but we're literally talking about a 4 year old CPU that is still unmatched by their competition. People often argue "how much is Apple ahead of the competition" if at all, right? Guessing you're in the "not at all, it's all PR bullshit" camp, which is fine.
This is the one undisputed example though where we can put a definitive number on it. So far Apple is 4 years ahead of their competition on this very particular metric (High performance, low energy, fanless CPU)
"Repairable" is a bit of a fool's errand. It really hinges on availability of spare parts, supply chain, etc. They will never sell enough of this niche product to nerds to make that a long-term reality.
An old MBP is far more repairable because so many were made there will never be a shortage of parts on eBay.
While an emphasis on repairability is noble, the false prophet of brick-like pluggable USB modules ain't it.
The newest Apple laptops all have easily replaceable ports that do not require replacing the logic board, so that novelty is even more useless.
I'm far more likely to buy a RAM stick off the shelf and install it in a Framework than I am to desolder the RAM from a Macbook.
Similarly, if I spill orange juice on a Framework, I can just buy a new keyboard and install it in a minute. If it were a Macbook, I'd probably throw away the whole thing, since I'd have to disassemble all of it to get to the keyboard, and it would take me hours, if I even managed to not break something.
So, "Macbooks are more repairable than Frameworks" is quite the take.
FrameWork is not openly hostile towards right-to-repair, and do not actively sabotage repair efforts. Try calling Apple and ask for spare parts or circuit diagrams. Anything you find is either leaked, cloned/copied or trash-picked. It barely qualifies as spare parts.
>"Repairable" is a bit of a fool's errand. It really hinges on availability of spare parts, supply chain, etc. They will never sell enough of this niche product to nerds to make that a long-term reality.
I don't think that's the case - there are plenty of people who realise that eWaste is a problem, and I've lost count of the number of times I've been asked why a laptop can't just have a "new CPU" fitted to speed it up when everything else works. In reality this means a new system board, but Framework does this.
>An old MBP is far more repairable because so many were made there will never be a shortage of parts on eBay.
That's not comparing like with like. I've done a -lot- of fixing of old (2012-era) macbooks and secondhand parts are always a crap shoot. Plus there are lots of minor changes between otherwise identical-looking parts which mean they don't fit (such as the higher-DPI screen connector between 2011 and 2012 for otherwise identical-looking parts which are indistinguishable until it doesn't quite fit.
>While an emphasis on repairability is noble, the false prophet of brick-like pluggable USB modules ain't it.
That's adaptability and means you can get the IO you need. The computer could be entirely non-repairable and have this, or it could be framework where everything is available brand new as a spare part if you need it.
>The newest Apple laptops all have easily replaceable ports that do not require replacing the logic board, so that novelty is even more useless.
I think you might be misinformed here. Lots of stuff is now serial locked and won't work even if you swap it over. And that's not counting some of the terrible low-level engineering stuff which people like Louis Rossman highlight (such as placement of higher-voltage lines right next to direct-to-cpu lines in display connectors). And I'm sure you know about the simple voltage controller that fails that Apple won't allow the original supplier to sell to anyone else.
Even replacing the battery in my 2022 MBP (which I'm using now and absolutely love) would be a trial compared to the framework. One of the USB ports has always been dicky and I've just left it as is precisely because this is a can of worms.
Watch some dosdude1 repair videos of examples of how much work and skill is needed to do something such as upgrade the storage in a MBP/Air. And compare this to the framework. They are several orders of magnitude different in terms of skill level.
If you go to the Framework website you can still find spare parts for their first gen laptops, because one thing they did is make sure that the latest gen parts are still compatible with their first gen.
Also, on a Mac if the memory or storage dies, you need to replace the whole motherboard, that isn't true in a Framework laptop. You can't even say that those parts will be difficult to get in the future because they're off the shelf parts.
I will not even start on the fact that replacing other parts that commonly break in a laptop like the screen or the keyboard are hard to do in a MacBook (needs to disassemble almost the whole laptop) vs doing it in Framework that is much easier and probably takes 20 minutes even without experience.
I had a usb dock that surged, destroying the dock and my touchpad. A $25 replacement from framework, and under 5 minutes to swap things out, and I was good as new!
Our company bought about 4-5 Framework 13s, and boy were they a bad experience. All sorts of driver issues, random crashes, USB ports not working right, etc.
Just about all of them had some kind of issue, which is really fun when your PM has a USB port not work randomly.
Ended up going back to HP laptops, 30% cheaper for the same specs and they just work consistently.
Would love to hear a hobbyist perspective, Frameworks are not a good choice for a business but I would be interested to hear if the replaceable parts / ports provided value for someone. My gut feeling is that something that can't be replaced easily in the Frameworks will die and it'll just end up being cheaper to replace the whole laptop.
Hobbyist here, and while my issues have been fixed, I had a pretty bad experience. I had the 12th-gen Intel model I bought in 2022, and moderate amounts of load would trigger thermal protection and throttle all CPU cores to 400MHz. The throttling could last for seconds, or several tens of minutes, or even require me to power down the laptop for a while and come back to it later. (This was even though temperatures would always drop out of the danger zone in under a second.)
After nearly two years (two years!) of back and forth with support, including a mainboard replacement that didn't fix the problem, they finally upgraded me to the 13th-gen Intel mainboard, and the problems immediately went away.
Right now I'm struggling with a keyboard issue; a few of the keys intermittently don't register presses. I have a new keyboard that I ordered that I hope will fix the problem, and need to install, just haven't gotten to it. (I'm not sure if this is a result of a defect, or of one of my cats walking on the keyboard and possibly damaging it, so I'm not ready to blame Framework for this one.)
Aside from that, I haven't had driver issues, random crashes, or any problems with the USB ports. But I assume you're talking about Windows; I use Linux, so that's not an apples-to-apples comparison.
> My gut feeling is that something that can't be replaced easily in the Frameworks will die and it'll just end up being cheaper to replace the whole laptop.
The mainboard is of course the most expensive part, but it's still gong to be cheaper to replace it than the entire laptop. I don't believe there are any available replacement parts to the laptop that cost more than the full cost of the laptop.
The replaceable parts definitely add value as someone who's had one for 4 years now or something like that. It's probably got more new parts than old, some for performance improvements, others for damage because I'm not especially gentle.
I don't really think it's tremendous value if you're purely talking about laptop per dollar. I probably could've bought two similarly performant laptops for the amount I've spent on the Framework over the years, maybe two and a half. But it is incredible peace of mind to know that the same machine I already have will keep working even if some part of it breaks, I don't have to worry about reinstalling or losing anything or losing the stickers I have on the thing or whatever else. The old mainboard I upgraded from is now a home server with a nice 3D printed case. There's way less e-waste, one thing going wrong doesn't make the whole device a brick. And there is just a genuinely enjoyable novelty to how easy it is to take apart.
It's a hobbyist device through and through. It's for people who like using desktop Linux, because they feel empowered by being able to fix their problems, with the occasional side effect that sometimes they'll have to.
The first run of Frameworks had a weak hinge on the monitor, which isn't an uncommon problem with other brands of laptop. With Framework, you can easily replace the hinge, but that's unlikely with most other brands, and you'll need to pay to replace the entire monitor.
Another example, I didn't need an HDMI port anymore, and wanted an extra USB-C instead. Just a few bucks to swap with Framework, but impossible with other laptops.
I did have an issue with one of my USB ports on the Framework however. It was solved by removing the module and updating the bios firmware. Can't say I've ever had that happen with another laptop. I agree they're probably not ready for business use yet, where cost is the primary measurement.
I have one as a developer laptop running Linux. It works fine, battery life is bad. (On AMD 7640U Framework 13).
I currently couldn't recommend them to anyone except users (developers?) who want to run Linux specifically. Otherwise a Macbook is going to be a much better computer at a better value, or just get any boring Windows laptop provider.
Pros compared to Macbook:
- Runs Linux
- amd64 makes some legacy software work easier
- Easy and commodity prices to get 96gb of RAM and 2tb SSD.
Macbook pros:
- Massively better battery life
- Snappier/faster in general usage
- Much more polished than Linux
I evaluated Thinkpads as well but trying to find one with the right configuration that wasn't too expensive or worse than the Framework was pretty hard.
One of my mentors had the great sentence: "I dont buy laptops- they suck, because they are tailored to transport. I buy desktops- and connect them via internet to flat transportable terminals. And desktops can be upgraded, merged, reused and send to the closet as server at the EOL-"
And he was kind of right. For almost all purposes, even for gaming in a way- a remote desktop is kind of superior. Yes, stadia is dead- but for everything else- this shall do.
Maybe you live somewhere with crazy-stable, ultra-low-latency internet covering every little nook and cranny you could ever care to find yourself in, but I doubt this is the case for most of the world. Until we realize this utopia globally a remote desktop setup is simply not flexible enough.
I am of the same mind. Desktop for heavy lifting and a mid-range Chromebook (technically a chrultrabook now) for browsing w/ a lightweight yet modern feel.
I do think the plunge to leveraging a desktop/server across devices does require an understanding of ssh/rdp and tailscale/reverse proxies though, which is why it isn't as popular as it could be.
One could argue, that the "reusability" of the laptopbricks, in a desktop-server blade like structure is the biggest argument for the framework as a laptop though.
You are absolutely right- forgive me, im kind of out of touch with the whole steam revolutionizing gaming on linux.
I think the comment about the "transporttax" on hardware, ergonomic and cooling still holds up though even in a world where things like steam-deck exist.
Even more so, if you may have lightweight ar-headsets one day, with a glorified cellphone + mouse and keyboard.
I'd be a lot more into Framework if they had come out with a single other GPU option than the Radeon 7700S that's been the only GPU option available since the brands launch. The 7800M and 7900M have both been out over a year or more, and Framework has made zero mention of when or even if those models would ever be available as upgrades for Framework devices. I don't even really play games, but for my video editing workloads, more GPU cores and VRAM make a world of difference, and the RTX 3070 level of performance out of the RX7700s that's thus far the only GPU option for Framework devices just doesn't cut it. There's just no way I'm spending $2500+ USD for a laptop that has worse performance than devices costing half as much at this point.
They just aren't really delivering on the promise of "Future upgradeability" in any kind of meaningful way so far, and I just can't see the value in purchasing what's undeniably a wildly overpriced machine based on promises that have yet to be delivered upon. They've had plenty of time to communicate when, or even if, new GPUs are coming, yet there's been absolute radio silence from the on this front.
Personally I think they need to focus more on actually delivering on the fundamental promise of the brand, that being future upgradeability, than on releasing new devices, as until they can demonstrate they are committed to delivering on their promises, I won't be buying any of their devices.
I was this close to buying the newest generation Framework, but in the end, could not justify the price when I found a far better bang for my buck and respectable self-repairability with a refurbished Gen 5 T14. It's even surprisingly thin and light.
Readit News
Where "value" is purely monetary, I think that pretty succinctly sums up my experience/views on the Framework product line.
They make good laptops, but you can generally get more for fewer dollars. If you're shopping on price, you can probably just skip right over their entire product line.
That doesn't mean that their offering doesn't have value. It has value has a vote with your wallet for sustainable, repairable products. It has value as an easily repairable and customizable laptop. It has value in some esoteric use cases it can be customized into (e.g., 4xM.2 NVME slots).
Would love to see some reviews just get this out of the way up front and spend more words on the product itself.
Personally, I'm glad there's a company out there serving a market niche besides being the lowest cost, most value-engineered product. I don't mind paying a bit extra for that in exchange for the other value I get out of it.
(And all that said--at the high end specs their prices get a fair bit more competitive. The price to upgrade a laptop from 16GB -> 128GB on Dell's site is _more than an entire FW16 w/ Ryzen 9 + 96GB RAM_.)
As an example, I recently bought a car, and went with a small crossover SUV because I wanted something that could handle light off-road duties on the weekend. One of the reviews deducted points because the car's clearance was too high and it meant the car didn't hug the road. The clearance is the point of that car. The manufacturer literally took one of their other models, raised it an extra 9cm, and stuck some minor cosmetic bits on.
In the same way, nobody buys a Framework laptop because it's competitive on price. This review does acknowledge that, sort of, but I think it discounts that someone might not be able to afford a Laptop 13 but might still pay a small premium for a Laptop 12 because they like the ethos or they benefit from the customisable design.
Is that group a bit enough niche for profitability? I'm not sure, but I think the review should either directly ask that question or put it to the side.
How many times have I thought, maybe i should get 2tb just in case, and then end up using 500gb. With framework, I'll buy the 1TB and the cost to upgrade is very low if I ever need to.
Same thing with memory. Maybe i need 16, maybe 32, maybe 64. I tend to buy more than i need out of fear. I just don't have that fear with framework.
Oh, and don't even get me started with repairs. If my screen breaks, i know the time to fix is however long their shipping lead time is, since the repair itself will take me 15 minutes.
In general, i think that value depends on how you see a computer. $1000-2000 is a lot to spend on something you use for fun. It's really not much to spend on something you use every day for work. And it's even less if your company is paying.
I'd kill for a fully transparent phone or laptop shell.
I'd pay $1000 more for this aesthetic. Double if it's in the florescent neon colors of 90's /00's Nintendo / Apple designs.
This: https://imgur.com/a/DedpbHQ
I love the idea of Framework, but the upgradability seems questionable to me. I base this off my experience with desktops where I've rarely over the decades upgraded more than the hard drive and RAM. When I'm looking at upgrading the motherboard it seems I just end up going all the way and getting a new case/ps/etc at the same time. Maybe that's just me though?
Framework has released fairly consistent upgrades for the Framework 13, but there's no guarantee that they will continue to do so, will release upgrades for the Framework 16, etc.
I think in a few years when they've been in business for closer to a decade than not and released updates across the whole product line, it'd be pretty hard for anyone to make an argument that that _shouldn't_ be factored in.
One could even allow other manufacturers to offer parts and do certification for a fee.
It should be possible to push down prices and make update paths more appealing.
https://community.frame.work/t/community-market-category/522...
Sure, I might have spent a few hundred more on my Framework 13 back in 2022, but if I'd bought a Dell XPS 13 instead, I probably would be fully replacing it with a new machine in 2026 or 2027. But with the Framework, I'll instead only buy a new mainboard and RAM. My "next laptop" will cost ~$1000 for the same specs as something that would cost ~$2000.
So sure, it's going to take me a bit longer to realize the savings, but there still will be savings, and I appreciate the sustainability aspects too.
The author of the fine article’s strategy of used Thinkpads is more sustainable because reuse is among the most sustainable practices and there is an abundance of Thinkpad repair parts and spares machines.
Of course, Thinkpads are not terribly upgradable. But upgrading is often the opposite of sustainable…in many cases CPU’s, etc. are fast-fashionesque.
If they stop delivering, ill not buy their next thing, and ill be sad.
Here is the “ugly” part of the Ars summary (as in good/bad/ugly):
It's just too expensive for what it is. It looks and feels like a lower-cost laptop, but without a dramatically lower price than the nicer, faster Framework 13.
But, the premium paid is high. And, their warranty support was, in my opinion, not a good experience. The expansion cards, which are just USB dongles internal to the computer, are gimmicky and waste space that could be used for something useful, like a slot for a second SSD, or larger battery.
I ended up sending back the Framework 13, I recently purchased, because of the warranty support experience for a mechanical issue with a single expansion card (usb dongle). Framework support had me jump through hoops for a week, repeating tests, asking me to answer the same questions again and again, and finally, "now do everything again and make a video and upload it to youtube" [actual request from Framework]. All for a part that retails for $9. The experience spooked me, and I sent back the laptop for a refund during the 30 day return window.
The Dell I replaced it with has an inferior screen*, a slightly inferior keyboard, vastly inferior CPU cooling (the Dell thermal throttles under heavy load), but Dell was half the price, and it arrived at my door 8 hours after I ordered it. And, unless things have changed, Dell warranty support was always excellent.
Hopefully Framework fixes the issues with their warranty support process. I hope they succeed.
* Dim screen on Dell mitigated by using the money I saved on the laptop price, to buy a portable 13" e-ink monitor which is vastly superior to the Framework display when working outdoors.
Other Brands Notebooks are not upgradable, not repairable and the most frustrating part are the batteries - which framework offers an original replacement for.
"Modern" office notebooks don't have to be that powerful. I'm still using a T480s which will only render unusable as soon as the battery dies with no <100 bucks replacement parts available.
I think buying a framework is an investment for people planning to keep the device for 5+ years and/or want to support the right to repair movement.
I'm really suprised and impressed they managed to ship such a great device and keep their promises for so long even if it is not the besteht bang for the buck (short term). Keep up the great work.
Beyond practical repairability and sustainability, I appreciate the possibility of swapping out a mainboard for another with a completely different arch
[0] https://frame.work/products/deep-computing-risc-v-mainboard
[1] https://store.deepcomputing.io/products/dc-roma-risc-v-mainb...
And the upgradable internals sound like more of a hassle than a benefit - especially since buying a different device will be cheaper and probably a better experience since they don't have to engineer for replaceability.
Theoretically you'd get the option to plug in stuff not available in other laptops like strix halo - but then they still don't offer that in laptops. So meh.
My work laptop (Fedora Linux, Dell XPS)is over 5 years old. I haven’t bothered to replace it, but will next year just because. The old one will become a retro gaming device for the kids.
And upgrading laptop components after 5 years just doesn't sound like a good value proposition.
Deleted Comment
sigh.
How about in five years from now when all of that is still fine, but you just want to replace the mainboard.
What about when framework comes out with upgrades down the line? The great thing is because they’re so modular you can just buy that and slap it in without having to buy an entirely new machine.
That’s the appeal
Some of the business lines are better, but the ultrabook styles that Framework is competing with can be pretty difficult to work on because the internals are so optimized for performance in a small space. The big manufacturers also tend to change the internals enough between models/versions, that if you want to fully gut and swap the insides, or maybe just replace the keyboard, the chassis is incompatible. Framework is designed to service over a longer period of time.
There is a tradeoff, because the super-optimized layouts of the big manufacturers are often superior. But for me at least, the Framework is good enough, and when I do need to make changes, it's a better experience. I'm also voting with my wallet for the change I want to see, even though the cost is probably a slightly worse laptop.
RAM, SSD, and battery are also the very minimum in terms of serviceability on a laptop, they've been traditionally user-serviceable. It's components like the touchpad, display, ribbon cables, etc. that haven't been traditionally easy/possible to replace.
> the Laptop 12 can only fit a single DDR5 RAM slot, which reduces memory bandwidth and limits your RAM capacity to 48GB
According to this post from a Framework team member, a single 64GB SODIMM will work too and just didn't exist yet at the time Intel wrote the 13th Gen spec, so they only advertize 48GB: https://community.frame.work/t/64gb-ram-for-framework-12-sin...
> Old, slow chip isn't really suitable for light gaming
I wish the reviewer would specify what phrases like “light gaming” mean to them. My FW12 is in a later batch that won't ship for a few more months, but I'm coming from a ThinkPad T470s where I already do “light gaming” (mostly TBoI Repentence and Team Fortress 2 with mastercomfig medium-low). I can't imagine the 13th Gen graphics would be worse in that regard than my old laptop's 7th Gen.
Not having Thunderbolt seemed like kind of a bummer to me too, but then again my T470s has it and I can't think of a single time I ever actually used it for anything. I tried one of those external GPU enclosures once, and it was kinda cool just to see that such a thing was possible, but I've never been one to want to tether a laptop with a thicc cable lol
The system requirements for TF2 are 1GB RAM, a single-core 1.7GHz CPU and a graphics card with 64 MB of VRAM [1] - the game is 18 years old.
If a review told me a laptop exceeded those specs, it wouldn't tell me much :)
[1] https://www.5kgamer.com/game/team-fortress-2
Even these feel a little suspect (minimum Intel HD Graphics 3000? no way) since I had to do some tweaking to avoid my framerate tanking on Intel 7th Gen iGPU when playing the PvE mode (Mann vs Machine, waves of robots on the other team far larger than any PvP match would ever be), and/or when other players use cosmetics or weapons with flashy particle effects:
https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Team_Fortress_2/Par...
https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Team_Fortress_2/Par...
Since we're in plastic/budget territory, is it absurd to consider a color matching sticker/wrap over the basic modules?
Wait, are 64GB DDR5 SODIMMs finally out? I’ve been monitoring that for ages but almost lost hope.
https://pcpartpicker.com/products/memory/#ff=ddr5_sodimm&Z=6...
I wouldn’t expect parity with an M4 machine, but it doesn’t seem unreasonable to think they should be competitive with the much older M1.
I have the same complaint with Lenovo (I usually buy ThinkPads). Where are the fast, fanless, hidpi, long battery life laptops?
Kind of unreasonable. I mean which Intel or AMD cpu can be run fanless and perform well?
On the topic of displays, my understanding is that they "kind of use what they can get". That's how there can be a 13 display with rounded corners in a straight edge case.
What you're asking are the things I'm looking for, though still every time I go into their forum I see enough thermal, fan noise issues and AMD firmware bugs, that I'm still on the fence on buying one.
I wish them luck with the 12, for me sounds like a model for "true believers" because it doesn't seem to compete well enough with run of the mill chromebooks (or an Air) that are more established in the students segment.
What that really determines is multi-thread performance. Fanless laptop that can dissipate the power of one core? No problem. Fanless laptop that can dissipate the power of all the cores? For that you have to lower the clock speed quite a bit. Which is why you see AMD chips on older TSMC process nodes getting better multithread performance than Apple's fanless ones.
The cost/benefit ratio of adding a fan is extremely attractive. The alternative way of doing it is to add more cores. If you have 8 fanless cores at 2 GHz, how do you improve multi-thread performance by 50%? Option one, clock them at 3 GHz, but now you need a fan; cost of fan ~$5. Option two, get 16 cores and cap them at 1.5 GHz to fit in the same power envelope, but now you need twice as much silicon, cost of twice as many cores $500+.
The number of people who pick the second option given that trade off is so small that hardly anybody even bothers to offer it.
Apple continues to do it because a) then they get to claim "see, they can't do this?" even when hardly anybody chooses that given the option, and b) then if you actually want the higher performance one from them, you're paying hundreds of dollars extra for more cores instead of $5 extra for the same one but with a fan in it.
Anecdotal, obviously, but disabling Turbo-Core [0] on my AMD Framework 13 stopped all of my fan noise and heat complaints, with no noticeable performance impacts. It went from being so loud that my wife on the other side of the room would ask if my computer was okay to quieter than my ThinkPad, and from noticeably hot to just slightly warm.
Kind of ridiculous that it takes messing with an obscure system file to resolve it, but not any more ridiculous than issues I've had with other brands.
[0] It's `echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/boost` or something like that, and `echo 1` to turn it back on when you want that extra performance.
For example, AMD Ryzen 7 8840U or 7840U can be configured for the same 15W TDP as Apple M1. At 15W, the overall performance going to be about the same as M1.
Lunar Lake.
I don't follow CPU news and have no idea what lake they're at now, but I'd be surprised if Intel and AMD didn't have a chip competitive with an M1 by now.
When I google "fanless amd intel laptop cpu" I find this old thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31142209 which does suggest some fanless machines exist. That's from 3 years ago so surely there are even more options today, no?
It pretty much has that though? 1920x1200 at 12.2" is 185.59 PPI. Standard DPI (PPI) is 96. HiDPI to my knowledge isn't properly defined, but the usual convention is either double that or just more than that - the latter criteria this display definitely clears, and the former (192 PPI) is super super close, to the extent that I'd call it cleared for sure.
It's pretty hard to not clear at least the latter criteria on a laptop anyways. You'd see that on 720p and 768p units from like a decade or two ago.
186ppi is designed for 1.5×, an uncomfortable space that makes perfection difficult-to-impossible, yet seems to have become unreasonably popular, given how poorly everything but Windows tends to handle it. (Microsoft have always had real fractional scaling; Apple doesn’t support it at all, downsampling; X11 is a total mess; Wayland is finally getting decent fractional scaling.)
The article shows a few charts where a Framework laptop is faster than M4 Air both in single and multicore CPU benchmarks.
Their office suite benchmarks puts it at almost 10 hour battery.
See Framework 13 Ryzen AI 9 HX 370.
To me, being able to run native Linux alone is worth its weight in gold, even if it was slower.
Every single chart in the article showed the M4 MacBook Air beating the Framework 12 by a large margin.
I don't know what charts you were looking at.
I’m searching for a new laptop, I want unix, so either linux or macos. I was looking at framework, system76, tuxedo and slimbooks, and mac air. I want an ANSI keyboard, which seems an oddity in Europe (there is English iso, which viscerally hate)
If you want thunderbolt ports, and some good specs, mac air is cheaper. And I’ve heard with arm processors you can tun linux at almost native speeds… I’m almost decided for Mac Air…
If somebody wants to add something to make me change my mind, you are more than welcome.
BTW I’m replacing a 2016 Macbook pro, which was buggy as hell, and I learned to really hate it. Also I’m not a fan of MacOs… but !4$ I cannot beat it.
In a lot of ways it's better than the M2 max macbook pro I had before (better screen for one). It was also, uh, 1/6th the price.
And M1 laptops are what about three years from the vintage list? They'll be e-waste at the end of this decade even while other laptops fail to match it.
If PC vendors can’t match some important specs from multiple years ago on an Apple laptop, isn’t that kind of a problem?
Sure you can get a faster laptop than an M1. But can you get one that’s faster and silent at all times?
You can get a bigger battery. Or screen or whatever. But all those trade off some other desirable quality.
Has anyone matched the full package? Speed + size + weight + battery life + noise + specs?
Shouldn’t framework be able to match that, especially if you’re willing to give some on the weight or cost? If not, why?
Deleted Comment
Does the Thinkpad X1 Carbon Gen 13 Aura Edition not meet these requirements? (It does have a fan but runs fairly cool according to reviews.)
Deleted Comment
This is the one undisputed example though where we can put a definitive number on it. So far Apple is 4 years ahead of their competition on this very particular metric (High performance, low energy, fanless CPU)
"Repairable" is a bit of a fool's errand. It really hinges on availability of spare parts, supply chain, etc. They will never sell enough of this niche product to nerds to make that a long-term reality.
An old MBP is far more repairable because so many were made there will never be a shortage of parts on eBay.
While an emphasis on repairability is noble, the false prophet of brick-like pluggable USB modules ain't it.
The newest Apple laptops all have easily replaceable ports that do not require replacing the logic board, so that novelty is even more useless.
Similarly, if I spill orange juice on a Framework, I can just buy a new keyboard and install it in a minute. If it were a Macbook, I'd probably throw away the whole thing, since I'd have to disassemble all of it to get to the keyboard, and it would take me hours, if I even managed to not break something.
So, "Macbooks are more repairable than Frameworks" is quite the take.
I don't think that's the case - there are plenty of people who realise that eWaste is a problem, and I've lost count of the number of times I've been asked why a laptop can't just have a "new CPU" fitted to speed it up when everything else works. In reality this means a new system board, but Framework does this.
>An old MBP is far more repairable because so many were made there will never be a shortage of parts on eBay.
That's not comparing like with like. I've done a -lot- of fixing of old (2012-era) macbooks and secondhand parts are always a crap shoot. Plus there are lots of minor changes between otherwise identical-looking parts which mean they don't fit (such as the higher-DPI screen connector between 2011 and 2012 for otherwise identical-looking parts which are indistinguishable until it doesn't quite fit.
>While an emphasis on repairability is noble, the false prophet of brick-like pluggable USB modules ain't it.
That's adaptability and means you can get the IO you need. The computer could be entirely non-repairable and have this, or it could be framework where everything is available brand new as a spare part if you need it.
>The newest Apple laptops all have easily replaceable ports that do not require replacing the logic board, so that novelty is even more useless.
I think you might be misinformed here. Lots of stuff is now serial locked and won't work even if you swap it over. And that's not counting some of the terrible low-level engineering stuff which people like Louis Rossman highlight (such as placement of higher-voltage lines right next to direct-to-cpu lines in display connectors). And I'm sure you know about the simple voltage controller that fails that Apple won't allow the original supplier to sell to anyone else.
Even replacing the battery in my 2022 MBP (which I'm using now and absolutely love) would be a trial compared to the framework. One of the USB ports has always been dicky and I've just left it as is precisely because this is a can of worms.
Watch some dosdude1 repair videos of examples of how much work and skill is needed to do something such as upgrade the storage in a MBP/Air. And compare this to the framework. They are several orders of magnitude different in terms of skill level.
Also, on a Mac if the memory or storage dies, you need to replace the whole motherboard, that isn't true in a Framework laptop. You can't even say that those parts will be difficult to get in the future because they're off the shelf parts.
I will not even start on the fact that replacing other parts that commonly break in a laptop like the screen or the keyboard are hard to do in a MacBook (needs to disassemble almost the whole laptop) vs doing it in Framework that is much easier and probably takes 20 minutes even without experience.
Just about all of them had some kind of issue, which is really fun when your PM has a USB port not work randomly.
Ended up going back to HP laptops, 30% cheaper for the same specs and they just work consistently.
Would love to hear a hobbyist perspective, Frameworks are not a good choice for a business but I would be interested to hear if the replaceable parts / ports provided value for someone. My gut feeling is that something that can't be replaced easily in the Frameworks will die and it'll just end up being cheaper to replace the whole laptop.
After nearly two years (two years!) of back and forth with support, including a mainboard replacement that didn't fix the problem, they finally upgraded me to the 13th-gen Intel mainboard, and the problems immediately went away.
Right now I'm struggling with a keyboard issue; a few of the keys intermittently don't register presses. I have a new keyboard that I ordered that I hope will fix the problem, and need to install, just haven't gotten to it. (I'm not sure if this is a result of a defect, or of one of my cats walking on the keyboard and possibly damaging it, so I'm not ready to blame Framework for this one.)
Aside from that, I haven't had driver issues, random crashes, or any problems with the USB ports. But I assume you're talking about Windows; I use Linux, so that's not an apples-to-apples comparison.
> My gut feeling is that something that can't be replaced easily in the Frameworks will die and it'll just end up being cheaper to replace the whole laptop.
The mainboard is of course the most expensive part, but it's still gong to be cheaper to replace it than the entire laptop. I don't believe there are any available replacement parts to the laptop that cost more than the full cost of the laptop.
I don't really think it's tremendous value if you're purely talking about laptop per dollar. I probably could've bought two similarly performant laptops for the amount I've spent on the Framework over the years, maybe two and a half. But it is incredible peace of mind to know that the same machine I already have will keep working even if some part of it breaks, I don't have to worry about reinstalling or losing anything or losing the stickers I have on the thing or whatever else. The old mainboard I upgraded from is now a home server with a nice 3D printed case. There's way less e-waste, one thing going wrong doesn't make the whole device a brick. And there is just a genuinely enjoyable novelty to how easy it is to take apart.
It's a hobbyist device through and through. It's for people who like using desktop Linux, because they feel empowered by being able to fix their problems, with the occasional side effect that sometimes they'll have to.
I want to love framework, but their prices just don’t justify the switch for most people.
Another example, I didn't need an HDMI port anymore, and wanted an extra USB-C instead. Just a few bucks to swap with Framework, but impossible with other laptops.
I did have an issue with one of my USB ports on the Framework however. It was solved by removing the module and updating the bios firmware. Can't say I've ever had that happen with another laptop. I agree they're probably not ready for business use yet, where cost is the primary measurement.
I currently couldn't recommend them to anyone except users (developers?) who want to run Linux specifically. Otherwise a Macbook is going to be a much better computer at a better value, or just get any boring Windows laptop provider.
Pros compared to Macbook: - Runs Linux - amd64 makes some legacy software work easier - Easy and commodity prices to get 96gb of RAM and 2tb SSD.
Macbook pros: - Massively better battery life - Snappier/faster in general usage - Much more polished than Linux
I evaluated Thinkpads as well but trying to find one with the right configuration that wasn't too expensive or worse than the Framework was pretty hard.
Dead Comment
One of my mentors had the great sentence: "I dont buy laptops- they suck, because they are tailored to transport. I buy desktops- and connect them via internet to flat transportable terminals. And desktops can be upgraded, merged, reused and send to the closet as server at the EOL-"
And he was kind of right. For almost all purposes, even for gaming in a way- a remote desktop is kind of superior. Yes, stadia is dead- but for everything else- this shall do.
I do think the plunge to leveraging a desktop/server across devices does require an understanding of ssh/rdp and tailscale/reverse proxies though, which is why it isn't as popular as it could be.
I think the comment about the "transporttax" on hardware, ergonomic and cooling still holds up though even in a world where things like steam-deck exist.
Even more so, if you may have lightweight ar-headsets one day, with a glorified cellphone + mouse and keyboard.
They just aren't really delivering on the promise of "Future upgradeability" in any kind of meaningful way so far, and I just can't see the value in purchasing what's undeniably a wildly overpriced machine based on promises that have yet to be delivered upon. They've had plenty of time to communicate when, or even if, new GPUs are coming, yet there's been absolute radio silence from the on this front.
Personally I think they need to focus more on actually delivering on the fundamental promise of the brand, that being future upgradeability, than on releasing new devices, as until they can demonstrate they are committed to delivering on their promises, I won't be buying any of their devices.
Then again, you end up with underpowered hardware; I don't think something in an 11" MBA form factor would have the beefiness I require these days.