Should I take back my $225,000?

[hishnash]

43 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

It does in my book. I cannot install Mac OS on a machine I build DIY, and Apple goes to extreme length to make parts (even spares) as incompatible as possible. If that is not locked down, I don't know what it is

MacOS not running on other hardware due to you not having a license to do it and the os not shipping with drivers to run on that other hardware does no Mac it locked down just means it is software you need to pay for and that driver development costs money. 

Apple really does not put any effort into making it hard to replace parts or buy parts, but it is also true to say they do not put any effort into making it easier.  They are very blinkered to only serving their customers since this is what makes money and as a publicly traded company that is the legal obligation. 

Modern Intel (and AMD) devices are quite a bit more locked down, try getting proper secure boot working on most modern OEM devices for your custom kernel, you cant since the UEFIs have hard coded to only trust MS and people MS trust, M1/2 in contrast trusts the user as the device owner (admin user) you can sign anything you like to give it full access and as part of that make it have full secure boot for your custom kernel.  And when your custom kernel starts nothing else is running on the system, at all. The boot manger hands over cleaning itself out and non of the rest of the this is started, you can then start up each part setting the MMU as you like as you the kernel developer are in full controle.

This is very different from modern x86 sysmste with Management engines running at deep ring levels well below your kernel that have full access to everything on the system and can walk past all the MMU restrictions you might attempt to put in place. As a kernel dev the M1/2 platform is much more open for you to be in controle than any x86 chip that has shipped in the last 10 years.

[crazzp]

22 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Reuse - What happens when the average Joe is going to upgrade his Framework laptop? They are going to end up with a spare mainboard that they can't use. That mainboard will just end up in the trash, which goes against the "reuse" part. If they had bought an entirely new laptop instead, the old one could have been reused. Sure it would have needed more parts like a screen, but those parts are needed to use the mainboard anyway. Making 2 screens and 2 mainboards is better for the environment than making 2 screens and 3 mainboards, one of which ends up sitting in a bin somewhere.

This is absolutely insane. I can't believe the length people go through to diss Linus and anything related to him. I cannot believe you are actually saying buying an entirely new laptop is better. 

The spare motherboard can be 

1. sold to repairer as donor board

2. sell to enthusiast who can make a case and stuff out of it

 

Nobody in the right mind would trash the mainboard.

[LAwLz]

7 minutes ago, ToboRobot said:

Framework isn't encouraging people to wastefully upgrade (other than Linus who is doing so for demonstration), but offering the option to people to upgrade to reuse existing parts rather than simply replace an old unit with a brand new one.

Yes, but the end result of this is that people will most likely upgrade more often, which goes against the recommended "reduce".

Whenever I open a thread about Framework, there is at least a couple of people talking about how good it is because you will be able to upgrade parts in it. That is bad, because as I said it means we will end up with parts that gets replaced not because they needed, but because someone felt like it. I think it is pretty hard to argue that people on this forum, and the people who are interested in Framework laptops in general, are the same people who often upgrade not because they have to, but because they like having new shiny things.

Most people on this forum probably upgrade their computers far more often than they have to.

 

Lowering the barriers and cost of upgrading will inevitably result in more needless upgrades.

 

 

11 minutes ago, ToboRobot said:

Framework helps reduce waste when a laptop gets damaged or needs repairs.  And there are novel ways to reuse it such as the mainboard becoming a desktop.

I don't really see it helping in any significant way compared to other laptop brands that also offer spare parts.

The difference is that those brands aren't advertising it as a way to upgrade your laptop. I also doubt that many people upgrading their framework laptops will end up building a desktop out of it. If the mainboard is still functional and usable then that implies that they didn't have to upgrade to begin with and thus the upgrade went against the "reduce" mantra.

If you can use the mainboard as a desktop then why upgrade to begin with?

 

 

13 minutes ago, ToboRobot said:

If you compare Framework to a mythical perfect laptop it isn't great, but what options on the market are better at reusability and reparability?

Is Framework doing something worse than any other laptop maker?

I think framework are doing some things worse than other laptop makers. They are enabling/allowing/encouraging needless upgrades and there is a potential for reduction of reused laptops (harder to repurpose a spare part than to repurpose a fully functional laptop).

I also don't think they are particularly revolutionary in terms of reparability either. HP's business line have consistently gotten 9/10 and 10/10 from sites like iFixit for reparability either. They also provide detailed instruction manuals and videos, as well as spare parts. They have been doing so for several years and never really gotten any acknowledgement for it.

Then again, HP doesn't have a massive influencer as an investor so that might be why they haven't gotten as much credit.

[LAwLz]

20 minutes ago, crazzp said:

This is absolutely insane. I can't believe the length people go through to diss Linus and anything related to him. I cannot believe you are actually saying buying an entirely new laptop is better. 

The spare motherboard can be 

1. sold to repairer as donor board

2. sell to enthusiast who can make a case and stuff out of it

 

Nobody in the right mind would trash the mainboard.

Relax dude.

My dislike for Framework has nothing to do with Linus. If you go through my post history you will see that I said the same thing before Linus invested in the company. Here is a post from august 2 where I compared it to HP and said it didn't seem like anything special. That was over a month before Linus invested. Pretty sure I have some post somewhere saying that I didn't think Linus should even have invested because of the conflict of interest as well as the company just not seeming like a good idea.

 

I could not care less about what Linus does or his involvement.

 

 

Other companies such as HP already sell mainboards for repairs. So it is nothing special.

I also think the number of enthusiasts who are going to blow a quite large sum of money and build custom things with it is very small. Far smaller than the group of people who will prematurely upgrade their laptop because it is fun to buy new stuff. The enthusiasts who want to build cool stuff can already do that with regular desktop parts. 

 

 

I suspect that most mainboards and other large components sold by Framework will result in the old part being decommissioned. That they end up in a box on a shelf or in a landfill. That they won't end up in some enthusiast project.

I don't have any evidence for this, especially not since we are talking about the future, but neither do you have any evidence that most mainboards will end up being repurposed.

I hope I am wrong, because if I am right then Framework have had a negative impact on the environment. Since I think the odds are very poor I don't think it is a good idea to begin with.

[ToboRobot]

26 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Yes, but the end result of this is that people will most likely upgrade more often, which goes against the recommended "reduce".

Whenever I open a thread about Framework, there is at least a couple of people talking about how good it is because you will be able to upgrade parts in it. That is bad

 

Lowering the barriers and cost of upgrading will inevitably result in more needless upgrades.

I don't think, but if you have data to show otherwise I'd love to see it, that people aren't going to needlessly upgrade their laptops.  I don't even think many people will upgrade from 11th to 12th gen.  

I think it's easier and more wasteful to order a cheap laptop, use it disposably, and buy a new one. 

Essentially you are inventing a problem that most people do not have.

[05032-Mendicant-Bias]

38 minutes ago, hishnash said:

Apple really does not put any effort into making it hard to replace parts or buy parts

That is a false statement. Apple goes above and beyond to make their products hard to repair, even at Apple's own detriment.

Just a few examples from LTT videos:

• Apple made a power cord that can only be removed by a specialized tool
• Apple M1 Ultra SSD Swap
• Apple refuses to repair a monitor Linus broke

  

1 hour ago, Imbadatnames said:

Did you not read? I said the CPU with 6 cores extra should win at MC but doesn’t win as well as it should considering it has 150% more performance cores and 2x the efficiency cores. 

You said it wasn't faster in multicore. I showed you one benchmark where it is faster, and to you it's not faster enough. I don't know what more to say.

 

Nothing will make the M2 run my blaster drivers on Apple OS, so I won't get it even for ultra cheap.

1 hour ago, Imbadatnames said:

What about the iGPU scores too? You ignoring those too? 

Yes. Because of Metal, it's really hit and miss what will work, and what wont. Some games won't run at all, or will run slower than the crappy intel integrated GPU. I'd rather have consistently slow performance on a laptop rather than infuriating inconsistent performance, downloading and installing a game only to find out it is not blessed by metal and doesn't run.

[Lightwreather]

1 hour ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

I cannot install Mac OS on a machine I build DIY,

Just gonna reply to this:

Legally (EULA-wise) yes, but technically no. You can make a hackintosh rn out of even intel 12th get parts and Every Ryzen processor is technically supported (There are certain issues with AMD and a couple trade-offs with newer than 10th-gen parts, there's also the glaring hole of newer than Pascal nVidia cards not being supported but then that's on both companies).

[hishnash]

7 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

Just a few examples from LTT videos:

Non of that shows indicates they actively put work into making things harder to repair. They just put 0 work into making it easy to repair.

> Apple made a power cord that can only be removed by a specialized tool
They did not design the display to be this thickens so that it was hard to repair they design the display to be this thickness due to wanting this thickness for aesthetic reasons. And then yes have no choice but to make it hard to remove as there are no certified mains voltage international regulated power connection ports that are that thin, if you could just easily remove it they would be in violation of regulations.

> Apple M1 Ultra SSD Swap
Again they did not consider people wanting to have SSD configurations different to what they ship. You can replace these SSD modules but only in a configuration they ship in. This is not them trying to be hard to repair it is them not even thinking about personal repair and only thinking about how they are going to ship them/repair them in store.

>  Apple refuses to repair a monitor Linus broke

Apple not having spare parts to do a repair in store a few days after shipping a product does not mean they designed the product to be hard to repair, it means they did a shit job of allocating spare parts to Canadian Apple stores.

Apple designs there products to be repaired but when doing this only considers repair as something done by apple, they do not go out of there way to make it harder to repair outside for apple they just do not put any effort or consideration into this at all. 

[crazzp]

44 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Here is a post from august 2 where I compared it to HP and said it didn't seem like anything special.

Does HP sell laptops that can easily swap out ports? 

[LAwLz]

17 minutes ago, crazzp said:

Does HP sell laptops that can easily swap out ports? 

Depends on what you mean exactly.

Are we talking about repairs or changing the ports?

 

If it's about repairs then I do believe you can quite easily repair that. It's at the very least not more difficult than repairing a port on a framework would be, if it was the port on the mainboard that broke and not the module.

 

If we are talking about swapping one port out for another one then we are once again back to the whole "encourages people to consume rather than reduce".

 

 

If we are championing an environmental cause then the objective should be to make people buy as few things as possible and keep the ones they have for as long as possible. Buying new ports is not exactly the right way to go about that. Besides, if you happen to suddenly need a new port then a dongle would be fine from an environmental standpoint. Hell, a dongle would be even better since that would be easier to reuse for other people and their laptops, compared to a specially made module that only works in Framework laptops.

 

A USB-C to Ethernet adapter will be easier to reuse than a special Framework Ethernet module. One works with essentially all laptops including the Framework laptop. The latter only works with the Framework laptop.

[Imbadatnames]

58 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

That is a false statement. Apple goes above and beyond to make their products hard to repair, even at Apple's own detriment.

Just a few examples from LTT videos:

• Apple made a power cord that can only be removed by a specialized tool
• Apple M1 Ultra SSD Swap
• Apple refuses to repair a monitor Linus broke

Just take it to the store. Easy, everything is fixed. For phones you can order the parts and tools to repair it yourself. 

 

You can also yank the cable out of the monitor if you want, the tool just makes it easier. 
 

They won’t fix a monitor you’ve intentionally broken under warranty. 

58 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

  

You said it wasn't faster in multicore. I showed you one benchmark where it is faster, and to you it's not faster enough. I don't know what more to say.

I said the M2 wasn’t faster in multi core which was expected as the 1280p had 6 more cores. 

58 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

 

Nothing will make the M2 run my blaster drivers on Apple OS, so I won't get it even for ultra cheap.

USE A VM 

58 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

Yes. Because of Metal, it's really hit and miss what will work, and what wont. Some games won't run at all, or will run slower than the crappy intel integrated GPU. I'd rather have consistently slow performance on a laptop rather than infuriating inconsistent performance, downloading and installing a game only to find out it is not blessed by metal and doesn't run.

Wine is a thing dude 

[05032-Mendicant-Bias]

24 minutes ago, Imbadatnames said:

USE A VM 

That's the worst suggestion.

 

At work we do use Windows VM on top of Windows machines because programs from manufacturers are very finiky and fragile, and you can't have two program from two manufacturers installed on the same machine without everything breaking. 

 

And the VM still require the host to recognize the device you want to pass through. Buying an incompatible laptop to run VM to run what I need is just a bad... Lots of extra redundant work you just made for yourself, and any supposed benefit of performance is lost to virtualization. 8GB was enough on a MAC? how do you plan on running host and VM with just 8GB? I run out of ram with 16GB when I spin up a VM, my next machine is going to have 32GB just so I can spin up two VMs when I need to.

29 minutes ago, Imbadatnames said:

Wine is a thing dude

I'm not really sure why you are picking this hill to die on. There are good uses for Apple OS and Apple machine. It became a trillion dollar company because it has a good businness model and ships good products.

 

Trying to argue Apple can compete where they have no businness competing just weakens your overall argument.

• Apple is good at making efficient machines with long battery life
• Apple is good at running audio/image/video editing programs
• Apple is bad at running games
• Apple is bad at repariability
• Apple is trash at running industrial and specialized programs

No amount of VM, virtualization or WINEry can make Apple what Apple isn't.

[crazzp]

48 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

buy as few things as possible

48 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

a dongle would be fine

I meant configuring the ports selection to match my needs so that I dont have to buy a dongle. 

 

Not sure how you can equate HP's reparability with Framework's intention. Let's say screen cracks beyond repair, which option is better for consumer? Sending in for servicing for a few days resulting in you not having your laptop (if it's Apple they might not even repair it hurhur) or purchase a new screen and swop it on your own with ease within 20mins?

Let's not take the REDUCE to the extreme. Going by that standard, we should all just kill ourselves since we're the biggest consumers. They are just trying to find a balance between consumer-friendly and environmental-friendly. 

[ToboRobot]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

 

If it's about repairs then I do believe you can quite easily repair that. It's at the very least not more difficult than repairing a port on a framework would be, if it was the port on the mainboard that broke and not the module.

 

Easier to swap a Framework motherboard than an HP one.  (I haven't personally repaired a framework, but I've seen the videos, and have experience repairing HP/IBM/Dells).

[kumicota]

26 minutes ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

No amount of VM, virtualization or WINEry can make Apple what Apple isn't.

A thing that I "learned" a few years ago is to ignore apple/windows/linux and whatever kind of shill, they don't care if you are right or not, they will still think that they are fully right and the flaws/locks on their platforms are features

[LAwLz]

23 minutes ago, crazzp said:

I meant configuring the ports selection to match my needs so that I dont have to buy a dongle. 

So it is not about swapping out the ports but rather configuring it to have the ports you want?

I am fairly sure the standard port configuration on let's say an EliteBook will be good for most people. Hell, the EliteBook even has more ports than what is possible to get with the Framework.

 

Two USB-C (Thunderbolt 4).

Two USB-A.

One HDMI.

A headphone jack.

Smartcard reader (optional).

 

 

If the set port configuration suits your use case then the ability to customize it is not needed. And I am willing to bet that 99% of people would be perfectly satisfied with this configuration. The ones that wouldn't be are probably not going to be satisfied with the options provided by Framework either because they can't for example get an Ethernet port.

 

 

23 minutes ago, crazzp said:

Not sure how you can equate HP's reparability with Framework's intention. Let's say screen cracks beyond repair, which option is better for consumer? Sending in for servicing for a few days resulting in you not having your laptop (if it's Apple they might not even repair it hurhur) or purchase a new screen and swop it on your own with ease within 20mins?

What makes you think you would need to send in the HP for repair?

There are videos of people replacing the screen on EliteBooks in less than 10 minutes. Hell, HP even has an official guides on how to do it. The guide for replacing a broken screen is 5 minutes in total (video 1, video 2) and shows every step to take. Every screw to unscrew. It is very easy.

There is a reason why iFixit have consistently given them 9/10 and 10/10 for reparability.

 

If you don't believe me, this is what iFixit has to say about for example the Elitebook 840 G5's screen:

Quote

+RAM, SSD, and battery are easily accessible and removable.

+All moving parts, including keyboard, trackpad, and pointing stick are modular and can be independently replaced.

+The display can be quickly and independently replaced without any unnecessary disassembly.

 

It really is not hard, and what Framework has done is not really special. The most unique thing about the Framework laptop is that it has QR code stickers on their parts.

HP have been making very repairable and modular laptops for years upon years. You are probably not realizing how easy they are to repair because nobody has bothered to give them credit for it.

 

 

13 minutes ago, ToboRobot said:

Easier to swap a Framework motherboard than an HP one.  (I haven't personally repaired a framework, but I've seen the videos, and have experience repairing HP/IBM/Dells).

Just barely.

If it takes 5 minutes to do on the Framework laptop then it might take 10 on an EliteBook. Not exactly revolutionary.

Please note that I am talking about HP's premium line of laptops such as the EliteBook series. Their other lines are probably not as easy to repair. But I mean, the Framework laptop is a premium laptop so it only makes sense to compare it to other premium laptops. Plus, just because a company isn't perfect doesn't mean we shouldn't give them credit when they do the right thing for years and years in at least one of their product lines.

[saltycaramel]

What if the most egregious form of disrespect against the environment is using energy, materials, storage space and shipping capacity to create/ship crappy (read: fundamentally flawed or that are going nowhere or that won’t be supported long enough or that will be hastily outgrown by the user needs) products in the first place?

 

What if making great long-lasting products that make the most of what they are on day one (instead of relying on the idea of a small percentage of users tinkering with them down the line) and deploying such excellence at scale is actually environmentally responsible? (kinda like making the most of a pig when you butcher it)

 

What if fixating on “hey but it’s cheap”, “hey but it’s modular”, “hey but it runs 20 years of software back catalog, unlike those super-efficient ARM SoCs” isn’t always aligned with being actually environmentally friendly? Is promoting such “fetishes” on big youtube channels necessarily environmentally friendly? Is promoting dead-end pie-in-the-sky projects (from Valve’s flawed vanity/nostalgia-based Switch lookalikes to this “remember MXM GPUs? now do the whole laptop, for sure this will succeed and scale” Framework thing) for the clicks and for video content environmentally friendly?

 

Food for thought. 

[Lightwreather]

2 hours ago, Imbadatnames said:

Wine is a thing dude 

Not sure you know this but WINE is absolutely terrible on macOS. I tried installing it once, I had to go through a myriad of GitHub repos before finding one that actually supported Big Sur and AS (Thanks Gcenx) but even then performance wasn't great at all...

[Imbadatnames]

59 minutes ago, J-from-Nucleon said:

Not sure you know this but WINE is absolutely terrible on macOS. I tried installing it once, I had to go through a myriad of GitHub repos before finding one that actually supported Big Sur and AS (Thanks Gcenx) but even then performance wasn't great at all...

It’s actually improving a decent amount on MacOS. You have to use 64 bit programs though as MacOS dropped 32 bit support a few years ago. 

[Blademaster91]

7 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Yes, but the end result of this is that people will most likely upgrade more often, which goes against the recommended "reduce".

Whenever I open a thread about Framework, there is at least a couple of people talking about how good it is because you will be able to upgrade parts in it. That is bad, because as I said it means we will end up with parts that gets replaced not because they needed, but because someone felt like it. I think it is pretty hard to argue that people on this forum, and the people who are interested in Framework laptops in general, are the same people who often upgrade not because they have to, but because they like having new shiny things.

Most people on this forum probably upgrade their computers far more often than they have to.

 

Lowering the barriers and cost of upgrading will inevitably result in more needless upgrades.

Upgrading is still much less wasteful than replacing an entire laptop or desktop, which is what most people will do, and upgrading because someone felt like it isn't necessarily a bad thing either because that is how laptops used to be, modular enough you could fix or upgrade things yourself, without needing to buy an expensive business laptop and try to find parts on their site that clearly isn't made for the average consumer.

And I don't see where Framework is encouraging people to upgrade often, besides the video LTT decided to do to show off new parts Framework is offering, lower costs of upgrades will encourage people to upgrade their laptop instead of throwing it away.

7 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I don't really see it helping in any significant way compared to other laptop brands that also offer spare parts.

The difference is that those brands aren't advertising it as a way to upgrade your laptop. I also doubt that many people upgrading their framework laptops will end up building a desktop out of it. If the mainboard is still functional and usable then that implies that they didn't have to upgrade to begin with and thus the upgrade went against the "reduce" mantra.

If you can use the mainboard as a desktop then why upgrade to begin with?

Those brands aren't advertising so I don't see why you'd want to dump on Framework and put HP on a pedestal, Framework is advertising so people are going to notice the brand more than an HP elitebook, replacing parts is still much easier with the Framework, also most people aren't going to be buying business laptops either, and like I already said HP's parts site clearly isn't made for the average consumer, its made for IT staff ordering parts off a SKU list.

And if you can use the motherboard as a desktop, you have a extra computer, it can be turned into an AIO placed behind a monitor, used as a compact HTPC, or given to someone that needs a computer and doesn't care if its a few years old.

6 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I could not care less about what Linus does or his involvement.

It doesn't seem like it when you made this comment in an earlier post.

7 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Then again, HP doesn't have a massive influencer as an investor so that might be why they haven't gotten as much credit.

[schmism]

22 hours ago, BaidDSB said:

Can you say why though?

 

 

Yeah, my post from a year ago hasn't changed,  does not support AMD which for mobile applications is far superior option given currently hardware. 

In addition I also said the product was a non-starter because it did not support wired Ethernet, and while it was showcased in the video, is still not available to purchase if you did actually have framework hardware to put it in.

So again, a year has passed, neither of these basic requirements have been met to make it a competitive option in the laptop space. (not to mention its battery life issue) 

I am also unimpressed the the marketing wank over carbon capture BS credits they want to spend time marketing.   The number of people you could attract with these types of "features" is infinitesimal compared to the number of people that actually want AMD hardware or actual battery life that is comparable/competitive with other options.

[Ashley MLP Fangirl]

12 hours ago, 05032-Mendicant-Bias said:

With M2 you are locked into Apple ecosystem, with framework you can use windows/linux

ahem. 

 

https://asahilinux.org

[LAwLz]

2 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

Upgrading is still much less wasteful than replacing an entire laptop or desktop, which is what most people will do, and upgrading because someone felt like it isn't necessarily a bad thing either because that is how laptops used to be, modular enough you could fix or upgrade things yourself, without needing to buy an expensive business laptop and try to find parts on their site that clearly isn't made for the average consumer.

Upgrading isn't less wasteful if the parts end up on a landfill rather than being reused.

 

If you buy a brand new laptop, the old one still works and can be repurposed very easily.

If you buy only a new mainboard then you suddenly have two mainboards but only one can be used at any given time. Repurposing a spare mainboard is much harder than just repurposing a fully fledged computer.

 

And yes, upgrading just because someone felt like it is bad for the environment. Again, "reduce" is the first and most important step of "reduce, reuse, recycle".

If the argument is that it is environmentally friendly, which is what a lot of people in the right to repair movement champions, then Framework goes against both the "reduce" and "reuse" part.

 

The upgradability is good for people who want to constantly have the latest and greatest because they like new things.

The upgradability is most likely going to end up being bad for the environment.

 

 

2 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

And I don't see where Framework is encouraging people to upgrade often, besides the video LTT decided to do to show off new parts Framework is offering, lower costs of upgrades will encourage people to upgrade their laptop instead of throwing it away.

Go to any thread about Framework and you will see people recommending it because people can swap out things like the mainboard, or talking about how they plan on doing it.

Let's not pretend like it isn't one of the main selling points to a lot of people.

Even you have mentioned at several points in this thread how this will make it cheaper to upgrade laptops, or how it is good that people will be able to upgrade their mainboards.

 

 

2 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

Those brands aren't advertising so I don't see why you'd want to dump on Framework and put HP on a pedestal, Framework is advertising so people are going to notice the brand more than an HP elitebook, replacing parts is still much easier with the Framework, also most people aren't going to be buying business laptops either, and like I already said HP's parts site clearly isn't made for the average consumer, its made for IT staff ordering parts off a SKU list.

And if you can use the motherboard as a desktop, you have a extra computer, it can be turned into an AIO placed behind a monitor, used as a compact HTPC, or given to someone that needs a computer and doesn't care if its a few years old.

I am "dumping" on Framework because other people put them on a pedestal. All I am saying is "it isn't that special, other brands have been doing this for ages without getting any credit".

And no, replacing parts isn't "much easier" with the framework laptop. They both get the same or roughly the same score on iFixit. I don't get why people, who pretend to be championing right to repair, tries to downplay the massive efforts and good deeds other companies have been making for years upon years. HP have been making laptops that scores 9 or 10 on iFixit's reparability scale for over 10 years now and basically nobody, especially not the right to repair crowd, have given as much as a nod to them. It makes me question the entire movement because clearly no attention or credit is being given when big companies are genuinely doing good things. It's only when some influencer with a vested interest tells people to care that people do.

 

 

Even in this thread where I link tutorials and independent third party evaluations, people still refuse to give HP any credit whatsoever. People make up shit about them like "well the Framework is still easier to repair" without actually looking into it, and even if Framework is slightly easier to repair (let's say 8 minutes instead of 10 minutes of work to replace a screen), that does not mean HP shouldn't be given credit for their work.

 

It pisses me off because it shows what a bunch of sheep people are. People didn't give two fucks about the environment or reparability of laptops when HP does it, but as soon as some small company does something similar it and influencers market it, it becomes super important. Oh but let's not give credit to any other company though. Their efforts doesn't matter.

It is honestly scary how well greenwashing and influencer marketing works. 

 

 

It's not about "well people notice Framework more because they advertise more" either, because people in this thread who has read my posts, like you, are aware of the efforts HP have made in for example the EliteBook line. What pisses me off is that even when I point it out to people their response isn't "oh, that's great! I didn't know that. Good work HP for have spent 10+ years making very repairable laptops". The reaction becomes "yeah but that doesn't count" or "it is probably harder to repair than Framework so Framework is still better and you shouldn't buy HP".

If reparability is important then why not give credit to all companies who make easily reparable laptops? Why put a single one on a pedestal and dismiss the achievements of everyone else?

 

Credit where credit is due. 

 

 

2 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

It doesn't seem like it when you made this comment in an earlier post.

That was a comment about peoples' behaviour, not Linus.

I wasn't saying "I don't like Framework because of Linus". I do not care about Linus. The comment was not about him.

What I was saying was "people claiming to champion right to repair should not wait for someone to tell them which brands are allowed to approve of and then ignore all the other ones".

 

If you are for right to repair and have done the tiniest bit of research, like for example opening iFixit's list of most repairable laptops, then you would know that HP has been making very repairable laptops for a long time. If you have to be told which brand that is okay to approve and your default option is to dismiss anything else, then maybe you aren't as pro "right to repair" as you think you are? Clearly it can't be that important to you if you just follow what someone tells you to think, you don't do any of your own research, and don't give credit to other brands who does very similar things because they haven't been "approved" by an influencer.

 

 

If you didn't care about something like reparability until a company started marketing it to you, and you only approve of it when that particular brand does it, are you really interested in it? Because to me that sounds like a person who is just easily manipulated by marketing.

[rikitikitavi]

29 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

The upgradability is good for people who want to constantly have the latest and greatest because they like new things.

The upgradability is most likely going to end up being bad for the environment.

This should get redacted, no one needs to know the truth… cause they can’t handle the truth!

[bluehawk]

I think an interesting approach Framework can take is having a retailer sell the laptops to consumers and the retailer can be the one to upgrade, modify, or repair the laptop as needed. Like if you buy a car you can take it to the dealer's service department for maintenance. That way it can expand beyond the enthusiast demographic. Joe Nobody can buy one, not caring about upgrading or knowing how, but having the ability to do so from a shop.