I'm returning my Framework 16

Writing this on a first-gen 13 DIY, so it's already a bit dated. I've already added additional RAM and swapped in a much bigger SSD (really underestimated how much space you need if you heavily use docker and VMs).

The 1st year was a bit bumpy with 4k monitors over a USB-C hub being somewhat flaky. Ever since a clean Ubuntu reinstall, I'm very happy, no complaints whatsoever.

Sure, it costs more, but the combo of perfectly running Linux, giving me the piece of mind of repairability and easy upgrades for me justifies a higher price.

On the other hand, I'm not willing to pay the kind of premium you have with Apple products, where for incremental steps in more RAM or SSD you pay a multiple of the off-the-shelf price of the added space.

My brother has a 16, and it’s been good for him. It is big and chunky, more so with the GPU module; only a few paragraphs into the blog post I felt the author was trying to fit a big square peg in a round hole, and then blaming the square peg for being big and square.

That is to say, it’s a big, heavy, expensive laptop. My brother works shifts in a remote location and from what I can tell, the 16 is great for that: you wouldn’t bring a desktop, but once the laptop comes out of the bag, it’s going to stay set up on the desk for the duration of the hitch. He tried leaving the GPU module at home, and found the AMD APU quite capable (he plays Tarkov and BF6, among others).

I support Framework’s vision and ethos and am willing to pay a premium for them. My sister uses my 11th gen Intel FW13 for school and is happy with it (only she wishes it was better for gaming), and the AMD 13 I bought was a massive upgrade in gaming capability and speed – I’m able to play Arc Raiders with my brother, one of the few online shooters who’s anti-cheat works on Linux.

Another big plus is that FWs play very well with Linux. The Wayland window manager Niri is amazing – so smooth and fast, now with alt-tab in the latest release. And I see there’s Dank Material Shell (1), which bundles things like a bar, launcher, and control center that one normally has to assemble piece by piece in WMs like Niri and Sway (which I used before).

1: https://github.com/AvengeMedia/DankMaterialShell

I'm pretty sure part of the reason of integrating everything on the board has some nefarious reasons, at least on Laptop's. Louis Rossman talked about a design flaw in Apple Macbooks where if the SSD fails, in my cases, your system will fail to power up because the mainboard is designed to fail when the SSD fails.(If I am interpreting that correctly)[0]. Remember this flaw is in the Macbooks where the SSD's are soldiered into the board. IMHO there are ways to design integrated hardware in such a way where failures minimize damage and I think many companies decide its not in there best interest to design hardware to prevent that. IMHO this is done in bad faith.

[0}: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qbrLiGY4Cg

I just bought a car, and the same issue exists there. I can buy an expensive car that is also expensive to service, or a slightly cheaper car that is cheap to service, or a cheap car that is cheap to service.

That middle ground is much nicer than realising after the honeymoon period that it's costing you an arm to replace the control box for the left headlight. But TCO is really difficult to find numbers on, especially when you don't exactly know how you'll use the device as you buy it.

> The crux of the matter is that even if one values upgradability and repairability, neither is a frequent need for practically anybody.

Judging reparability and serviceability the same way as you do with other features is absurd, to put it charitably! It is one feature that you rarely use, but brings you huge value when you do use it. You don't realize how much savings we used to extract by progressively upgrading the same desktop PC for two to three generations instead of throwing away the whole PC and buying a new one each time. This dismissal of the feature is bizarrely shortsighted.

> The reality may be that wanting a laptop that's well rounded and competent across the board AND repairable+upgradable is akin to having your cake and eating it too, but that doesn't stop people from wanting it anyway.

I talked about this just two days ago. Unlike how you project it, that ideal is entirely feasible if there was enough investment and a large enough market. Instead, OEMs inflict the opposite on the consumers who take it all in without pushing back. These companies choose and spread suboptimal designs that suit their interests and then insist that it is the only viable way forward. It's absurd that consumers also repeat that falsehood.