Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

frame.work

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 476 posts

Re: The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

#391

Post by afandian »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #330
aussiesnack wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which means that Google can simply lock you out of your Chromebook, for entirely arbitrary (and not even necessarily disclosed) reasons, at any moment. There's no practical avenue of appeal - Google is vast and even governments have trouble keeping it to heel. Individuals have no chance against these obdurate nation-sized entities. I think any Chromebook purchase, beyond the most cheap and cheerful throwaway, would b…

Not going to comment much on how much of a risk it is to use a Google product in this way. Just going to say that ChromeOS is pretty much designed to work with Google's primary apps: GMail, Drive, Hangouts (or whatever it's called these days), etc. So my point is that if you want to stay out of the Google ecosystem, it wouldn't make sense to use ChromeOS in any case.

I only asked in the first place because so many people say that it’s good for Linux. It seems like that’s predicated on a Google account.

Re: The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

#392

Post by puyoxyz »

Chromebooks were great because they ran on ARM. Now all the new chromebooks run on Intel. I can’t find any ARM chromebooks at IRL stores anymore.

ARM chromebooks > Intel chromebooks, and if they continue pushing Intel they’re killing the reason that chromebooks can be both cheap and good

EDIT: And if you want to use it for Crostini… why are you getting a chromebook

Re: The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

#393

Post by quicklime »

javawizard wrote: post #385
kweingar wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Disclaimer: I work on ChromeOS at Google) I would let anyone, even a total stranger, use my Chromebook in guest mode without a second thought (as long as I am reasonably sure they won’t steal it, break it, or disassemble it).

(Disclaimer: I also work at Google but not directly on ChromeOS.) Exactly. I would never let my (non-tech savvy) grandparents near a Linux machine without supervision, but I wouldn't hesitate to let them near a Chromebook in guest mode. Linux is quite secure in the hands of an experienced user. ChromeOS is secure in the hands of anyone who's not state sponsored attacker-adjacent.

It's not quite the same as "guest mode" on ChromeOS, but I make user accounts (no sudo) for non-technical family members and let them use my machines unsupervised. What are you worried about here? Should I be worried?

Re: The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

#394

Post by grey_earthling »

javawizard wrote: post #385
kweingar wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Disclaimer: I work on ChromeOS at Google) I would let anyone, even a total stranger, use my Chromebook in guest mode without a second thought (as long as I am reasonably sure they won’t steal it, break it, or disassemble it).

(Disclaimer: I also work at Google but not directly on ChromeOS.) Exactly. I would never let my (non-tech savvy) grandparents near a Linux machine without supervision, but I wouldn't hesitate to let them near a Chromebook in guest mode. Linux is quite secure in the hands of an experienced user. ChromeOS is secure in the hands of anyone who's not state sponsored attacker-adjacent.

It depends what you mean by “secure”. I don't count leaking data to Google as “secure”.

Re: The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

#395

Post by grey_earthling »

nrp wrote: post #2

I'm happy to answer questions anyone has on this product!

> Framework began with the goal to remake consumer electronics to respect people

Do you honestly believe Google respects people?

What measures have you put in place to mitigate Google's surveillance of its users?

Re: The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

#396

Post by aembleton »

Self-Perfection wrote: post #387
cowmoo728 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't hand my non-technical family member a Linux device and expect it still work a week later without any intervention.

Do you have an example what might go wrong? I cannot imagine how can one mess up desktop Linux system without root privileges. Totally fill up the storage maybe?

Delete .config

Re: The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

#397

Post by askvictor »

gotbeans wrote: post #347
askvictor wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I share your concerns, the user experience and security of ChromeOS is so much nicer than Windows, or Linux (haven't used a Mac for ages so can't compare), for most tasks for most people. It's what I'd recommend to my grandparents. Also, completely disagree with your point about locking people into Google ecosystem - this is an OS that just runs a web browser. You need a Google account to log in, sure (actually…

It all boils down to if what you want is an OS or a browser. If an OS is good enough feature and security wise though, there's no reason to just want the browser for the same price. > You need a Google account to log in This is absolutely blatany lock in, let's not sugarcoat or pretend it is not at least.

First, you can use a Chromebook in guest mode, no Google account required (as said), but they you need to log in to your accounts every time (probably not a problem for people like my mum who log in every time they use a computer, and log out of everything when they're done.

But more to the point, lock in is when you can't move your data to another system. You need a Google account to log in (these days that's not much different from Windows or Mac basically requiring MS/Mac accounts), but you don't need to use the account for anything else you do on the Chromebook; it's just a browser. If you want to, you can export any data that browser holds (passwords, bookmarks etc) and import into any other browser. That's not lock-in. Lock-in is forcing you to continue to use a particular vendor's product because getting out of it is too difficult (usually proprietary data formats ala MS Office, or not allowing cloud exports)

Re: The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

#398

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

askvictor wrote: post #328
kelnos wrote: post #322

I hesitated posting this, because I don't want to be too negative, but: ugh. ChromeOS is just more Google adware/tracking-ware, locking people into the Google ecosystem, and (by default, at least) creating a more locked-down environment than a general-purpose OS would have (not quite iOS or even Android, but still not with the flexibility of a "mainstream" OS). I feel like Framework could be spending their time doing…

While I share your concerns, the user experience and security of ChromeOS is so much nicer than Windows, or Linux (haven't used a Mac for ages so can't compare), for most tasks for most people. It's what I'd recommend to my grandparents. Also, completely disagree with your point about locking people into Google ecosystem - this is an OS that just runs a web browser. You need a Google account to log in, sure (actually…

It is possible to create customised UNIX-like OS with custom kernels, read-only filesystems (mounted images) and writable directories mounted as tmpfs, booting from removable USB. Some call this "diskless". There are some drawbacks from using USB media such as lack of a good randomness source on boot but there are many advantages. Kernels and filesystems are just single files on the USB media and can be easily switched/updated. The system stays "clean". It is "like new" on every reboot. I was doing this with a netbook long before the so-called "Chromebook" came along.^1

The problem with Chromebooks is that they are designed to try to get people to "log in" to Google and to use "the [Google] cloud" for storage. Chromebooks in Guest Mode have an array of Google-authored daemons running the the background from read-only media. There is no way to disable them. You cannot even change the options passed to Chrome, e.g., to disable "Origin Trials". This setup is great if you love everything Google, but not great if you just like computers, you bought the computer for the hardware and drivers, and prefer to choose your own software. With these Google programs always running in the background, it means you do not have ultimate control over the computer, Google does. Another annoying thing is that ChromeOS, as well as Chrome, is a WIP. It is constantly changing. For example, bluetooth may be working fine and then suddenly there is an "automatic update" that breaks it. Then you wait for Google to fix it. I am not too fond of that approach to updates. For the systems I create I choose if and when to update them. I prefer stability as opposed to bleeding edge. Chromebooks OTOH assume the computer user is willingly along for the ride as the Chromebook development teams figures out what they are doing.

1. Google likes to boast about Chromebook security. Indeed the Google programs run from write-protected media, and the user is denied access to parts of the storage media, but this type of setup is nothing one could not achieve, before or after the arrival of the "Chromebook", using an open source project such as NetBSD. IMO, the benefit of the Chromebook project is the hardware support, not the deliberately limited storage, lack of user access to parts of the storage media, mandatory installation and running of Chrome and other Google programs. Additionally, one has to consider the "security" implications of an OS that steers people to use Chrome and cloud storage and to remain online. Those Google programs are constantly probing for internet access. ChromeOS is an OS that encourages risk-taking, i.e., giving more data to Google, including storing user data "in the cloud".

I always make diskless systems to be offline by default. I avoid running X11 unless needed, staying in VGA textmode by default. There is no phoning home for "updates" to an advertising company.

Chromebooks are not designed to be offline by default. ChromeOS forces users to launch a GUI and run Chrome. Google is always trying to collect more data about computer users.

https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2017/11/22/chromebook-explo...

Re: The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

#399

Post by iopq »

robch wrote: post #334
webmobdev wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. This is why I don't really buy all this talk of Intel is "dead and finished" and will "fade away" in the next 5 year ... Even though Intel has an inferior product to AMD, they are really good at selling their product and don't mind indulging in unethical (or even illegal) market practices to do so. They still have a lot of money and they use it well to undercut their competitors. AMD shines in technical competen…

I think it is more complex than that. AMD uses TSMC foundaries to make their chips and has to compete with nVidia and Apple for capacity. Intel can guarentee their yields because they own their foundaries.

This is old news. AMD has since cancelled orders because of GPU sales falling off a cliff. They have enough for Framework, if Framework wants to jump on to make something

Re: The Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition

#400

Post by lhl »

smoldesu wrote: post #75
philliphaydon wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why this over getting an AMD laptop? After the terrible experience of going back to Intel, I doubt I'll ever bother with an Intel laptop ever again. Is Intel giving benefits to ensure you don't support AMD?

I don't work for Framework, but my guess is that AMD doesn't make a chip with powerful enough IO controllers to operate the Framework. It's a shame, because I also like the Ryzen mobile chipset, but even the M1 wouldn't have enough IO bandwidth to drive 4x Thunderbolt 4 ports at full speed. Love them or hate them, this is part of the Intel 'package' that you're paying for. Besides, now is a terrible time to start off…

One thing worth noting is that basically, even now (almost 10 months post announcement), almost no one has a 6000U laptop outs (a search on Amazon and Best Buy shows two 6800U laptop models total, one Asus and one Lenovo). Two niche vendors, XMG and Star Labs, have both publicly stated that they would have loved to have offered Ryzen 6000 laptops, but couldn't get any allotments. There are were also well documented chipset issues - even into the summer Lenovo and Asus talked about requiring firmware updates to enable their USB4 ports.

That being said, starting w/ Rembrandt, AMD now has full 40Gbps USB4 controllers built on-chip. I'm really looking forward to Ryzen 7040 because Phoenix looks great (Zen4 + RDNA3 on TSMC N4 - yes please) and hopefully USB4 support has matured enough on the AMD side that Framework is able to release something.

My understanding is that the I/O limitation is in the re-timers - currently the Framework uses 4X JHL8040R's (labeled as Burnside Bridge) directly connected to the iTBT: https://github.com/FrameworkComputer/Mainboard/blob/main/Ele... Apple used these for their first M1 MBAs as well: https://github.com/ThomasKaiser/Knowledge/blob/master/articl...

But both Apple and AMD are now using Kandou retimers:

* https://www.gizchina.com/2022/07/25/apple-completely-got-rid...

* https://kandou.com/matterhorn.html

* https://kandou.com/assets/downloads/product-briefs/KB8001-Pr...

Post reply on HN