The main criticisms are a bit surprising to me because I think that it is reasonably easy to guess them before buying. I would expect people for which these are show-stoppers to not buy the laptop in the first place.
The first criticism is that the laptop is too large and too heavy (at 2.2kg). That should be expected when you buy a 16" laptop, right?
Maybe there is a question of culture or habit: in the 200s and 2010s, 16" or 17" laptops were commonplace and "2kg" was a weight target for a light laptop. (There was an "ultraportable" category for lighter things.) Work laptops have generally moved towards being lighter over time, so maybe new users have not experienced a 16" laptop before, or cannot easily tell from the 2.2kg weight in the spec how it feels like in practice.
The second criticism is that the price/quality ratio is not pareto-optimal: it costs 2K€, but "feels like a 1500€ machine". Well, this laptop is designed and sold by a small shop (relatively to powerhouses like Lenovo, Dell etc.), so there will not be as much economies of scale, and it is also explicitly designed to be easily repairable, parts can be exchanged freely, etc. These two special things about Framework do result in a higher price tag, a slightly lower level of build-quality and polish compared to laptop makers who give up on repairability and replaceability, possibly a less optimal internal placement, and finally in a somewhat worse software-hardware tuning.
The people at Lenovo are not incompetent, if they design a laptop where parts are tightly integrated with each other, support a smaller set of configurations, evolve their hardware support slowly over time, it is reasonable to believe that it results in machine which are cheaper (with comparable specs), with benefits in terms of build quality or software configuration tuning.
I see the Framework as an excellent laptop for people who value repairability and evolvability of their hardware (... and are willing to tolerate slightly worse design, less space-optimized layout, etc.) and are aware that they are dealing with a small company (... so it will be slightly more expensive at comparable specs).
In conrtast, this review looks like it comes from unreasonable expectations, that Framework would massively improve in one dimension of laptop design without making compromises on the other fronts, while being a project from a young new company.
Out of curiosity I looked to see what the 16" MacBook Pro weighed in at -- it's 2.14kg / 4.7lbs according to Apple's site. I'm guessing you won't find many 16" laptops that weigh in significantly less than that.
I checked out the 16" Framework when they were released, and ISTM the the laptop's "jankiness" was predictable as well. I think that's in the eye of the beholder, though -- one person's "janky" is another person's cool. One of the things I like about the Frameworks is that they have personality. I'd happily use a Frankenlaptop that's "ugly" as long as it's repairable, runs Linux well, and has the horsepower I need.
But that's me. I enjoy reading people's detailed thoughts on things like this even if I don't share their opinions. I hope the author finds the perfect laptop for their requirements.
At least the spacer jankiness is something I read about and worried about beforehand, but it's something that doesn't quite register until you actually see it in action. For example, on the various Framework 16 photos on the Framework website it doesn't look all that bad, but then you actually see it in action and well, it's...not great.
In conrtast, this review looks like it comes from unreasonable expectations, that Framework would massively improve in one dimension of laptop design without making compromises on the other fronts, while being a project from a young new company.
I agree, I think this is a bit of revealed preferences. The writer complains that Apple's devices are non-upgradable soldered together bricks or that Thinkpads require undoing 100 screws to take apart, and that his 14" laptop screen is too small, but then returns this 16" laptop because the cost of this upgradability and servicability are that it's heavy and "feels janky".
The other complaints are more salient; I would not expect the sound to be so bad or the screen at minimum dim to be still headlights bright, or the sleep mode still burns 5% a night. He didn't even mention the camera, but I'm sure it's probably bad too.
Perhaps one day Framework will find the holy grail: Apple hardware sexiness but complete upgradability.
The first criticism is that the laptop is too large and too heavy (at 2.2kg). That should be expected when you buy a 16" laptop, right?
Not necessarily. For example, my partner has a 16 inch Macbook pro and while it may technically weight more or less the same it doesn't feel nearly as bulky and heavy. I suspect it simply has a better distribution of weight, though that could be a placebo.
The second criticism is that the price/quality ratio is not pareto-optimal: it costs 2K€, but "feels like a 1500€ machine". [...]
I'm going to be honest here and say "But think of the poor startup!" is is a bit of a lame excuse. Yes, up and coming companies often have to charge more and struggle to find their footing, but you can offset that in various ways and I feel Framework doesn't do enough of a good job here to justify that for the Framework 16. Based on the design of the Framework 13 I suspect it works out better there, hence I'm considering getting one of those instead.
In conrtast, this review looks like it comes from unreasonable expectations, that Framework would massively improve in one dimension of laptop design without making compromises on the other fronts, while being a project from a young new company.
I was never expecting massive improvements in a particular dimension, I think that much should be clear. However, when you are charged a premium it's not wrong to expect a premium product, especially in this day and age of greedflation.
Don't you think you're being a bit unfair? In the article you complain that the Framework 16 is heavier than the much smaller Carbon. Here you say it's about the same weight as a as a similarly-sized Macbook Pro but that it feels bulkier?
If you like Apple hardware and are bummed there's no equivalent running Linux that's fair. But why blame Framework for that? They have a different mission, clearly stated on their website, of producing very repairable hardware, and seem to do well by that metric.
I get it, nobody is making a laptop that competes with Apple's offerings and with Apple you are mostly forced into macOS.
I'm still on MacOS machines. I hope some big PC maker gets their act together and spends a decade trying to compete with Apple, but so far it seems they all gave up. It doesn't seem to hurt their sales much. At least Framework is still innovating, though not against Apple, they are trying for an entirely different product.
Around batteries, my macOS machine can idle suspended for a month without issue. Any other laptop, Windows or Linux can go around 48hrs at the top end. Most are lucky to get 24hrs of suspend.
The joy of macOS: I rarely ever think about batteries, I just always have "enough". When I'm around 20% battery on my macOS laptop I think oh I should probably plug it in soon-ish, which might be another day before I manage. No big deal.
Any other laptop, Windows or Linux can go around 48hrs at the top end. Most are lucky to get 24hrs of suspend.
It has been many years since I last heard of a new laptop that would get less than six days of sleep on Windows, barring those “oops, it awoke and stayed awake” problems from I dunno maybe ten years ago in the early days of “connected standby”. Of ones with comparable battery sizes, I feel 10–14 days is more common. (Linux, sure, definitely heard of models that couldn’t sleep properly.)
I'd contemplated the framework 14, but settled for the Thinkpad T14 (gen5) last year. Almost the same price, more ports, simple design, everything works in linux (at least since debian 13). It's still quire repairable, and with the business-support I get 4 years off on-site service. We'll see how it handles itself after this time, but in general, they have been quite maintainable. (I however do always buy the lowest mem+disk options, and replace them after-market, mem-prices however have gone up a lot recently)
I mostly use a MacBook Pro, but I also have a T14 Gen 5 (AMD) for NixOS and I concur, everything works out-of-the-box. I also replaced the SSD, RAM, and added the WWAN option (the laptop already came with the antennas and SIM card tray). The build quality is not MacBook-level, but still quite ok. I'm pretty confident that it'll be repairable when needed.
I've never been convinced by this argument for Framework. Most of the upgrades I would ever want to make are inherently incompatible, like DDR4 to DDR5, or Zen 4 to Zen 5. I think both money spent and e-waste are optimized by buying the highest spec parts you need/afford on the current platform generation so you don't need to upgrade anything until it's time for a full replacement.
On the other hand, for repairs (rather than upgrades) I do find it a bit more convincing. Most of the problems I've had with laptops were with peripherals / batteries, which are easy/cheap to replace if the manufacturer gives you that capability.
Most of the upgrades I would ever want to make are inherently incompatible, like DDR4 to DDR5, or Zen 4 to Zen 5.
Even then, in that case you're just replacing the mainboard and/or the RAM. The former can be repurposed or simply sold. Every other component can be kept in place.
As someone else mentioned, if what you want to upgrade is the CPU/RAM, the Frameworks can swap out the motherboard and re-use the old one as a mini-PC or something with a Coolermaster case or a 3D printed case.
That may not appeal to you, of course, but I find it to be a pretty cool feature. We'll see how it works out in practice for me in a couple of years when I start itching for a much faster CPU, etc. I'm certainly not in the market for an upgrade currently given the price of RAM! :-)
I haven't bought a Framework for similar reasons the blogpost mentions, in that it's very expensive and reading posts about it, it might require some tinkering. For that amount of money I am very hesitant to buy something like that.
But I do love what Framework is doing and I hope it starts a trend; but even the upgrades are expensive and there are some brands(like the Clevo rebrands) that have solid repairability policies, and with a Mac I don't even feel the need to upgrade anytime soon, which I think is an angle worth discussing when talking about e-waste.
Though in a few years older Frameworks might be nicely priced and I am looking forward to that part!
I think upgradability is a tougher sell than it seems. When I was still in the market for a laptop, I did the napkin math and found that upgrading a framework instead of buying a new laptop will pay for itself in 2ish hardware generations. For me that's ~10 years, and it's probably similar for others.
But I realized I probably wouldn't even need a laptop in 10 years. I ended up buying a normal windows laptop at the time, and this year I finally got a desktop. I haven't really looked back since.
Odd world! I still have the laptops I got 15 years ago, and though I've retired them, I still have a laptop as a primary machine when I'm not able to be at my desk. A laptop is an essential part of my workflow - whether going to any form of IRL meeting or simply being able to be untethered from my desk while still able to do productive work.
My future will have even more laptop use than my present. I'm surprised this is not a common perspective.
I got my 13" framework 2 and a half years ago. It replaced a laptop I got 6 years prior where half the keyboard (not geometric half) no longer worked so I was hauling an external keyboard around with the laptop. So far I've upgraded my RAM to 64 gigs and upgraded the speakers. The battery holds 62% of its rated max capacity, and the screen has a cut from when I let something pressure it in my bag. I'll have to replace some parts eventually -- but the machine itself is fine.
I'm a bit torn on this. On one end having an easy to repair and upgrade laptop is amazing. On the other hand, one could argue you can achieve similar results in reducing e-waste by "just" making really good hardware and better regulation for recycling. Hopefully Framework is able to reduce their prices over time so that upgrades make more economic sense (e.g. right now a new mainboard can easily cost more than half of a new laptop), but only time will tell.
The basic idea would be to force them to take back old equipment and recycle it as much as possible. This is already the case here in The Netherlands with certain home appliances to some degree, e.g. washing machines are taken back when you buy a new one (though I don't know to what degree they're recycled). Some companies (e.g. Apple) also let you hand in old equipment for a discount (though it's usually not much).
Of course there will likely be many practical challenges, but I feel right now it's just too easy for companies to not even bother, resulting in far too much e-waste.
I do hope we can change the mindset away a bit from what's on display in this article and start appreciating repairability as a premium feature, even if it adds some extra seams and costs a bit extra. Because creating a repairable product does come with a cost, if only because a repaiable product will not be replaced as often as a non-repairable alternative.
I recently broke the audio port on my framework 13, ordered a replacement for EUR 10 that arrived within days, and was able to swap it out in a couple of minutes. You don't get that from other manufacturers, so I think it's reasonable to expect a more expensive product.
Maybe it's expectations. I appreciate the author's complaints but I've put earlier editions of the Framework laptops 13" AMD 7040 into my wife's and son's hands. Hers is an R5 7640U from the pre-order series running Ubuntu for work (all browser based), his is the R7 7840U with the better screen running Windows for college (and light gaming 🙄). The units have been solid. The only complaints are:
Confusion about USB-C PD in ports and which module can go where (an RTFM problem).
Battery life under Linux (under Windows it's much better despite the higher-tier processor).
I've worried about the firmware updates because neither of them as users are careful about taking updates and minding instructions like keeping it plugged in during updates and not powering it off until it's fully complete. A bit of a user education problem, it needs an upstream manufacturer fix as there's a disturbingly long delay with a black screen between the firmware/UEFI update notice on screen and the laptop returning to visibly running. So far neither of them have messed it up but the updates are often enough that they could but not so frequently that they'd remember.
Compared to previous Lenovo (P-series) and Dell units (an XPS, a few Latitudes and Inspirons) at about the same price point, the fit and finish isn't as good. Though having torn those apart for repairs of keyboards and screens (Dell is better here, especially the Latitude models), I expect that when the next mishap occurs it will take minutes to replace.
What's the battery life in these cases? I've seen many conflicting reports across the different configurations, with some saying the AI CPUs are worse battery wise compared to the Ryzen 70 series, while others are reporting numbers that don't seem all that bad.
Truthfully I don't know as I'm not the user. It seems adequate. My wife (on linux) said that when she while traveling it was unplugged for at least two hours doing video conferencing (I don't know if she has GPU enabled, whatever Chrome does by default, I assume it is), email, and browser with an external keyboard and wireless mouse before she realized it was not charging. My son (windows) said he used it during six hours of classes but I don't know how much of that was active but he does use it for note-taking. I'll ask him over the holiday 😀
I would believe the AI and higher-end CPUs have worse battery life.
Aside, I saw recently that Microcenter (a USA chain) was doing an in-store only sale of the lowest spec M4 Mac Mini's for $400 and the 15" MB Air for $1000 which, if that ecosystem and non-repairable/non-upgradable is acceptable, is pretty amazing amounts of portable computing for the price.
I think we’re so used to the semi-miraculous capital-intensive things Apple does with materials and design, our perception of other hardware is skewed. Compared to any other company, Apple isn’t charging a premium, they’re giving a discount, which they can do based on their huge volume and proprietary technology and supplier relationships. They probably made more production prototypes of the latest MacBook than Framework will ever sell. Expecting anyone else to produce something comparable at the same price and stay in business is just not realistic. If you want to support the scrappy hand-crafted alternative, you’re going to have to be willing to pay for it.
I'm in the same situation as the author, in that I want to replace my Lenovo with a pure Linux laptop that is as nice to use and robust as a Macbook. I'm following the Asahi project, of course.
Right now, I'm very interested in the StarFighter laptop from Star Labs. It is a premium Linux laptop that tries to compete with macbooks. The specs look very good. A 16" laptop that weighs 1.58 kg (far lighter than the 16" macbook or the 16" framework). It has a haptic trackpad, like the macbook, which they claim is so nice they are offering it as an upgrade to other models they sell. All the specs I've seen look great.
This isn't a rebadged Clevo like you get from some other small Linux laptop manufacturers. It's a custom design that has been in development hell for a few years as they have struggled to find a Chinese factory capable of manufacturing it to their requirements.
Right now they are estimating that the laptop will ship in January, and they have a large order backlog to fill. There are no reviews of the laptop, for obvious reasons, so I'm waiting to see what the reviewers say next year.
gasche | 5 hours ago
The main criticisms are a bit surprising to me because I think that it is reasonably easy to guess them before buying. I would expect people for which these are show-stoppers to not buy the laptop in the first place.
The first criticism is that the laptop is too large and too heavy (at 2.2kg). That should be expected when you buy a 16" laptop, right?
Maybe there is a question of culture or habit: in the 200s and 2010s, 16" or 17" laptops were commonplace and "2kg" was a weight target for a light laptop. (There was an "ultraportable" category for lighter things.) Work laptops have generally moved towards being lighter over time, so maybe new users have not experienced a 16" laptop before, or cannot easily tell from the 2.2kg weight in the spec how it feels like in practice.
The second criticism is that the price/quality ratio is not pareto-optimal: it costs 2K€, but "feels like a 1500€ machine". Well, this laptop is designed and sold by a small shop (relatively to powerhouses like Lenovo, Dell etc.), so there will not be as much economies of scale, and it is also explicitly designed to be easily repairable, parts can be exchanged freely, etc. These two special things about Framework do result in a higher price tag, a slightly lower level of build-quality and polish compared to laptop makers who give up on repairability and replaceability, possibly a less optimal internal placement, and finally in a somewhat worse software-hardware tuning.
The people at Lenovo are not incompetent, if they design a laptop where parts are tightly integrated with each other, support a smaller set of configurations, evolve their hardware support slowly over time, it is reasonable to believe that it results in machine which are cheaper (with comparable specs), with benefits in terms of build quality or software configuration tuning.
I see the Framework as an excellent laptop for people who value repairability and evolvability of their hardware (... and are willing to tolerate slightly worse design, less space-optimized layout, etc.) and are aware that they are dealing with a small company (... so it will be slightly more expensive at comparable specs).
In conrtast, this review looks like it comes from unreasonable expectations, that Framework would massively improve in one dimension of laptop design without making compromises on the other fronts, while being a project from a young new company.
jzb | 5 hours ago
Out of curiosity I looked to see what the 16" MacBook Pro weighed in at -- it's 2.14kg / 4.7lbs according to Apple's site. I'm guessing you won't find many 16" laptops that weigh in significantly less than that.
I checked out the 16" Framework when they were released, and ISTM the the laptop's "jankiness" was predictable as well. I think that's in the eye of the beholder, though -- one person's "janky" is another person's cool. One of the things I like about the Frameworks is that they have personality. I'd happily use a Frankenlaptop that's "ugly" as long as it's repairable, runs Linux well, and has the horsepower I need.
But that's me. I enjoy reading people's detailed thoughts on things like this even if I don't share their opinions. I hope the author finds the perfect laptop for their requirements.
[OP] yorickpeterse | 4 hours ago
At least the spacer jankiness is something I read about and worried about beforehand, but it's something that doesn't quite register until you actually see it in action. For example, on the various Framework 16 photos on the Framework website it doesn't look all that bad, but then you actually see it in action and well, it's...not great.
scanner_brightly | 3 hours ago
I agree, I think this is a bit of revealed preferences. The writer complains that Apple's devices are non-upgradable soldered together bricks or that Thinkpads require undoing 100 screws to take apart, and that his 14" laptop screen is too small, but then returns this 16" laptop because the cost of this upgradability and servicability are that it's heavy and "feels janky".
The other complaints are more salient; I would not expect the sound to be so bad or the screen at minimum dim to be still headlights bright, or the sleep mode still burns 5% a night. He didn't even mention the camera, but I'm sure it's probably bad too.
Perhaps one day Framework will find the holy grail: Apple hardware sexiness but complete upgradability.
[OP] yorickpeterse | 4 hours ago
Not necessarily. For example, my partner has a 16 inch Macbook pro and while it may technically weight more or less the same it doesn't feel nearly as bulky and heavy. I suspect it simply has a better distribution of weight, though that could be a placebo.
I'm going to be honest here and say "But think of the poor startup!" is is a bit of a lame excuse. Yes, up and coming companies often have to charge more and struggle to find their footing, but you can offset that in various ways and I feel Framework doesn't do enough of a good job here to justify that for the Framework 16. Based on the design of the Framework 13 I suspect it works out better there, hence I'm considering getting one of those instead.
I was never expecting massive improvements in a particular dimension, I think that much should be clear. However, when you are charged a premium it's not wrong to expect a premium product, especially in this day and age of greedflation.
jasperwoudenberg | 2 hours ago
Don't you think you're being a bit unfair? In the article you complain that the Framework 16 is heavier than the much smaller Carbon. Here you say it's about the same weight as a as a similarly-sized Macbook Pro but that it feels bulkier?
If you like Apple hardware and are bummed there's no equivalent running Linux that's fair. But why blame Framework for that? They have a different mission, clearly stated on their website, of producing very repairable hardware, and seem to do well by that metric.
zie | 4 hours ago
I get it, nobody is making a laptop that competes with Apple's offerings and with Apple you are mostly forced into macOS.
I'm still on MacOS machines. I hope some big PC maker gets their act together and spends a decade trying to compete with Apple, but so far it seems they all gave up. It doesn't seem to hurt their sales much. At least Framework is still innovating, though not against Apple, they are trying for an entirely different product.
Around batteries, my macOS machine can idle suspended for a month without issue. Any other laptop, Windows or Linux can go around 48hrs at the top end. Most are lucky to get 24hrs of suspend.
The joy of macOS: I rarely ever think about batteries, I just always have "enough". When I'm around 20% battery on my macOS laptop I think oh I should probably plug it in soon-ish, which might be another day before I manage. No big deal.
chrismorgan | 3 hours ago
It has been many years since I last heard of a new laptop that would get less than six days of sleep on Windows, barring those “oops, it awoke and stayed awake” problems from I dunno maybe ten years ago in the early days of “connected standby”. Of ones with comparable battery sizes, I feel 10–14 days is more common. (Linux, sure, definitely heard of models that couldn’t sleep properly.)
zie | 2 hours ago
I haven't seen that, but even in your experience, it's still at least 2x worse than MacOS.
sigio | 3 hours ago
I'd contemplated the framework 14, but settled for the Thinkpad T14 (gen5) last year. Almost the same price, more ports, simple design, everything works in linux (at least since debian 13). It's still quire repairable, and with the business-support I get 4 years off on-site service. We'll see how it handles itself after this time, but in general, they have been quite maintainable. (I however do always buy the lowest mem+disk options, and replace them after-market, mem-prices however have gone up a lot recently)
nonagoninf | 3 hours ago
I mostly use a MacBook Pro, but I also have a T14 Gen 5 (AMD) for NixOS and I concur, everything works out-of-the-box. I also replaced the SSD, RAM, and added the WWAN option (the laptop already came with the antennas and SIM card tray). The build quality is not MacBook-level, but still quite ok. I'm pretty confident that it'll be repairable when needed.
mccd | 5 hours ago
Good review, it's unfortunate that it didn't cut it.
For me the best feature of the framework would be that I can keep upgrading it, thus generating less e-waste. I'd happily pay a bit extra for that.
kmicklas | 4 hours ago
I've never been convinced by this argument for Framework. Most of the upgrades I would ever want to make are inherently incompatible, like DDR4 to DDR5, or Zen 4 to Zen 5. I think both money spent and e-waste are optimized by buying the highest spec parts you need/afford on the current platform generation so you don't need to upgrade anything until it's time for a full replacement.
On the other hand, for repairs (rather than upgrades) I do find it a bit more convincing. Most of the problems I've had with laptops were with peripherals / batteries, which are easy/cheap to replace if the manufacturer gives you that capability.
ggpsv | 4 hours ago
Even then, in that case you're just replacing the mainboard and/or the RAM. The former can be repurposed or simply sold. Every other component can be kept in place.
ThatsInteresting | 4 hours ago
When one (or both) of the Frameworks I have given to family members reaches their end I'm hoping that the mainboard is still good and I'll be able to put it into a carrier like this: https://frame.work/products/cooler-master-mainboard-case (and article https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/08/turning-my-framework-laptop-into-a-tiny-desktop-was-fun-now-it-needs-a-job/). Last gen or two laptops make good enough minipc's or running gaming emulators that it's worth doing if you're into that.
jzb | 3 hours ago
As someone else mentioned, if what you want to upgrade is the CPU/RAM, the Frameworks can swap out the motherboard and re-use the old one as a mini-PC or something with a Coolermaster case or a 3D printed case.
That may not appeal to you, of course, but I find it to be a pretty cool feature. We'll see how it works out in practice for me in a couple of years when I start itching for a much faster CPU, etc. I'm certainly not in the market for an upgrade currently given the price of RAM! :-)
zetashift | 4 hours ago
I haven't bought a Framework for similar reasons the blogpost mentions, in that it's very expensive and reading posts about it, it might require some tinkering. For that amount of money I am very hesitant to buy something like that.
But I do love what Framework is doing and I hope it starts a trend; but even the upgrades are expensive and there are some brands(like the Clevo rebrands) that have solid repairability policies, and with a Mac I don't even feel the need to upgrade anytime soon, which I think is an angle worth discussing when talking about e-waste.
Though in a few years older Frameworks might be nicely priced and I am looking forward to that part!
ancienthero | 3 hours ago
I think upgradability is a tougher sell than it seems. When I was still in the market for a laptop, I did the napkin math and found that upgrading a framework instead of buying a new laptop will pay for itself in 2ish hardware generations. For me that's ~10 years, and it's probably similar for others.
But I realized I probably wouldn't even need a laptop in 10 years. I ended up buying a normal windows laptop at the time, and this year I finally got a desktop. I haven't really looked back since.
Vaelatern | 2 hours ago
Odd world! I still have the laptops I got 15 years ago, and though I've retired them, I still have a laptop as a primary machine when I'm not able to be at my desk. A laptop is an essential part of my workflow - whether going to any form of IRL meeting or simply being able to be untethered from my desk while still able to do productive work.
My future will have even more laptop use than my present. I'm surprised this is not a common perspective.
I got my 13" framework 2 and a half years ago. It replaced a laptop I got 6 years prior where half the keyboard (not geometric half) no longer worked so I was hauling an external keyboard around with the laptop. So far I've upgraded my RAM to 64 gigs and upgraded the speakers. The battery holds 62% of its rated max capacity, and the screen has a cut from when I let something pressure it in my bag. I'll have to replace some parts eventually -- but the machine itself is fine.
[OP] yorickpeterse | 4 hours ago
I'm a bit torn on this. On one end having an easy to repair and upgrade laptop is amazing. On the other hand, one could argue you can achieve similar results in reducing e-waste by "just" making really good hardware and better regulation for recycling. Hopefully Framework is able to reduce their prices over time so that upgrades make more economic sense (e.g. right now a new mainboard can easily cost more than half of a new laptop), but only time will tell.
mccd | 3 hours ago
How would you achieve something similar with better regulation around recycling? I am not so sure you can fully recycle computer parts.
[OP] yorickpeterse | 26 minutes ago
The basic idea would be to force them to take back old equipment and recycle it as much as possible. This is already the case here in The Netherlands with certain home appliances to some degree, e.g. washing machines are taken back when you buy a new one (though I don't know to what degree they're recycled). Some companies (e.g. Apple) also let you hand in old equipment for a discount (though it's usually not much).
Of course there will likely be many practical challenges, but I feel right now it's just too easy for companies to not even bother, resulting in far too much e-waste.
jasperwoudenberg | 2 hours ago
I do hope we can change the mindset away a bit from what's on display in this article and start appreciating repairability as a premium feature, even if it adds some extra seams and costs a bit extra. Because creating a repairable product does come with a cost, if only because a repaiable product will not be replaced as often as a non-repairable alternative.
I recently broke the audio port on my framework 13, ordered a replacement for EUR 10 that arrived within days, and was able to swap it out in a couple of minutes. You don't get that from other manufacturers, so I think it's reasonable to expect a more expensive product.
ThatsInteresting | 4 hours ago
Maybe it's expectations. I appreciate the author's complaints but I've put earlier editions of the Framework laptops 13" AMD 7040 into my wife's and son's hands. Hers is an R5 7640U from the pre-order series running Ubuntu for work (all browser based), his is the R7 7840U with the better screen running Windows for college (and light gaming 🙄). The units have been solid. The only complaints are:
I've worried about the firmware updates because neither of them as users are careful about taking updates and minding instructions like keeping it plugged in during updates and not powering it off until it's fully complete. A bit of a user education problem, it needs an upstream manufacturer fix as there's a disturbingly long delay with a black screen between the firmware/UEFI update notice on screen and the laptop returning to visibly running. So far neither of them have messed it up but the updates are often enough that they could but not so frequently that they'd remember.
Compared to previous Lenovo (P-series) and Dell units (an XPS, a few Latitudes and Inspirons) at about the same price point, the fit and finish isn't as good. Though having torn those apart for repairs of keyboards and screens (Dell is better here, especially the Latitude models), I expect that when the next mishap occurs it will take minutes to replace.
[OP] yorickpeterse | 4 hours ago
What's the battery life in these cases? I've seen many conflicting reports across the different configurations, with some saying the AI CPUs are worse battery wise compared to the Ryzen 70 series, while others are reporting numbers that don't seem all that bad.
ThatsInteresting | 3 hours ago
Truthfully I don't know as I'm not the user. It seems adequate. My wife (on linux) said that when she while traveling it was unplugged for at least two hours doing video conferencing (I don't know if she has GPU enabled, whatever Chrome does by default, I assume it is), email, and browser with an external keyboard and wireless mouse before she realized it was not charging. My son (windows) said he used it during six hours of classes but I don't know how much of that was active but he does use it for note-taking. I'll ask him over the holiday 😀
I would believe the AI and higher-end CPUs have worse battery life.
Aside, I saw recently that Microcenter (a USA chain) was doing an in-store only sale of the lowest spec M4 Mac Mini's for $400 and the 15" MB Air for $1000 which, if that ecosystem and non-repairable/non-upgradable is acceptable, is pretty amazing amounts of portable computing for the price.
wrs | 2 hours ago
I think we’re so used to the semi-miraculous capital-intensive things Apple does with materials and design, our perception of other hardware is skewed. Compared to any other company, Apple isn’t charging a premium, they’re giving a discount, which they can do based on their huge volume and proprietary technology and supplier relationships. They probably made more production prototypes of the latest MacBook than Framework will ever sell. Expecting anyone else to produce something comparable at the same price and stay in business is just not realistic. If you want to support the scrappy hand-crafted alternative, you’re going to have to be willing to pay for it.
doug-moen | 2 hours ago
I'm in the same situation as the author, in that I want to replace my Lenovo with a pure Linux laptop that is as nice to use and robust as a Macbook. I'm following the Asahi project, of course.
Right now, I'm very interested in the StarFighter laptop from Star Labs. It is a premium Linux laptop that tries to compete with macbooks. The specs look very good. A 16" laptop that weighs 1.58 kg (far lighter than the 16" macbook or the 16" framework). It has a haptic trackpad, like the macbook, which they claim is so nice they are offering it as an upgrade to other models they sell. All the specs I've seen look great.
This isn't a rebadged Clevo like you get from some other small Linux laptop manufacturers. It's a custom design that has been in development hell for a few years as they have struggled to find a Chinese factory capable of manufacturing it to their requirements.
Right now they are estimating that the laptop will ship in January, and they have a large order backlog to fill. There are no reviews of the laptop, for obvious reasons, so I'm waiting to see what the reviewers say next year.