121–130 of 695 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's actually not bad. The rhetoric has had an effect over the years. https://www.ifixit.com/News/116152/macbook-neo-is-the-most-r...
It's actually not bad? "The most repairable MacBook in years" means practically nothing. And for someone who might be comparing with a Framework, it's probably an insult.
I don't like the comparison's fundamental assumption that they're addressing the same market. If these are both addressing the same market then yes of course the Neo wins. But I think actually one of these is for linux nerds and one is for the masses who barely understand what OS is running on it.
There is a segment of Framework's customer base which is ride-or-die for Linux, but it's not their entire customer base: they still exist in a market where they need to compete on features and cost. Before the Neo, that wasn't too bad because they were more-or-less at parity with Apple on cost, close enough on polish, and better on repairability. But the Neo is just so cheap, and with Apple's level of polish it's rea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Are there really a significant number of people willing to buy a computer with no concern for the type of software it will be able to run? Most common software that typical buyers use is available on Mac or Windows: Web browsers, office software, maybe an e-mail client. This is why Chromebooks are a viable option, too. Even my software development workflows are mostly cross-platform when I think about it. I can run…
> Most common software that typical buyers use is available on Mac or Windows That's not how most people think. Most non-techies are either fluent with "how to use a Mac" or "how to use Windows" and they will just stick with that inertia. For a lot of people, learning a new OS is an ordeal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That might be true to some extent but what about the current product? It's nice to tell yourself that you can upgrade it in the future but the best of what the product is today isn't a great value, will the future upgrade make it better? Should we purchase a product today on what it might be tomorrow? I think Jeff is correct when he says, "for an overall worse experience, are you willing to pay 20-40% more?". That's…
I don't think the idea is that the upgrade will take it from decent to stellar compared to other things you might be able to buy for the same money, it's about paying a bit extra now to be able to go from decent-in-2026 to decent-in-2031 while paying a fraction of the cost that you would buying a full replacement in 2031, not to mention saving a bunch of waste. And then in 2036, and 2041, and 2046... They haven't bee…
Does "slower than an iPhone chip from a couple of years ago" meet that bar?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if someone isn't choosing by OS first. What a surprising idea! I have always and only ever chosen by OS first. Are there really a significant number of people willing to buy a computer with no concern for the type of software it will be able to run?
> Are there really a significant number of people willing to buy a computer with no concern for the type of software it will be able to run? Most common software that typical buyers use is available on Mac or Windows: Web browsers, office software, maybe an e-mail client. This is why Chromebooks are a viable option, too. Even my software development workflows are mostly cross-platform when I think about it. I can run…
What Framework is trying to do feels like something that would've made more sense 10 years ago. And the reason for that is b/c of Moore's Law approaching its end. The way to manufacture more efficient compute now is do things like put DRAM closer to the chip and even closer integration between CPU and GPU. The fact that Apple can co-design their silicon such that the CPU and GPU can pull from the same pooled RAM is a…
> There are also latency and bandwidth benefits how they setup their RAM just from pure physics What sort of physics? Dedicated GPUs achieve massive memory bandwidth without needing to put all of their memory on-die.
But even there, the fastest AI accelerator GPUs are putting memory on die, and using chiplet designs, to get the memory closer and closer to the cores.
What Framework is trying to do feels like something that would've made more sense 10 years ago. And the reason for that is b/c of Moore's Law approaching its end. The way to manufacture more efficient compute now is do things like put DRAM closer to the chip and even closer integration between CPU and GPU. The fact that Apple can co-design their silicon such that the CPU and GPU can pull from the same pooled RAM is a…
No it isn't. We are going more parallel and the transistor counts will continue to rise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Framework is and will always be a statement device. Like modern 4x4 suvs that only haul groceries and may never see dirt roads, the upgradability of a laptop is something few will ever exercise. Most people are buying the idea.
Maybe. My wife is non tech and after dropping her XPS and breaking the screen she was real interested in something that can have a replacement display installed in about half an hour. She wishes her F13 were a little slimmer like her XPS, but she gets a lot of peace of mind knowing that repairs something that "even" she could do. I'd also say that Linux support basically from day 1 is their hidden killer feature. Lit…