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

I'm returning my Framework 16

yorickpeterse.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 621 posts

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#371

Post by copirate »

rjdj377dhabsn wrote: post #257
comte7092 wrote: post #8

I appreciate the authors thoughtful review here, but I can’t help but be frustrated by the constant lack of understanding of the core value proposition of framework both in this post and in many comments here on hn. Frequently the author brings up that for 2,000 euros they expect a premium experience, but no where is there an evaluation of the value granted by upgradability and repeatability of the machine, and only…

The idea of upgrading a laptop may sound great at first, but I don't think most people really want that. After 2-3 years, my laptop is pretty beat up from carrying it around in a bag daily. I usually buy premium laptops, but still the hinges get loose, the corners bent, scratches everywhere, ports loose. Usually superficial issues like that make me buy a replacement before I really need upgraded chips.

With a Framework laptop you could fix these superficial issues while keeping the chips (and the superficial parts that don't need replacement).

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#372

Post by johnnyanmac »

kec wrote: post #68
casenmgreen wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can swap out my mobo for a RISC-V mobo, or ARM. Get away from Intel and management engine.

Or you could just buy a MacBook Air for like $900 (or one of the windows snapdragon machines, but it you care about avoiding Intel I’m assuming you want Linux and doubt the support is as good as asahi on Macs)

I guess that's the issue? I spent nearly $2800 on my current laptop, top of the line specs at the time. I'm just not the kind of person trying to compare down to A $1000 mid-level Mac. I need to use this thing professionally.

In that lens, the config I played with (before ram prices surged) ended up around $2200 and it felt nice knowing I could upgrade the GPU down the line for $400 instead of pondering if I can last another year or 2 before things fall behind. As long as the chassis and screen is solid I can deal with some compromise for that value.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#373

Post by a_sulvanite »

YorickPeterse wrote: post #140
cdev_gl wrote: post #91

I can't speak to the rest of the text or the laptops themselves, but as someone who works with color reproducibility in video and print, those photos comparing colors of two different screens are worse than useless. Uncalibrated screens photographed at different angles in different lighting conditions are not a valid basis for comparison. If you want properly calibrated displays, you need to purchase hardware (dataco…

The photos are just meant to illustrate the difference to the reader, not to be anything scientific. Of course manual calibration is ideal, but having a somewhat sensible default calibration isn't much to ask for and is in fact something many other laptops do just fine.

I am aware that most people don't have any idea of what "display calibration" is actually about (which is primarily about display profiling), but the observation that the "The colors of the display are overly saturated, with reds in particular looking more intense than they should." seems to be to be a fundamental misunderstanding of what is happening here.

The framework 16 has a screen that is more capable of displaying reds than either of your two comparison screens (X1 Carbon 2019 seems to have a sub-sRGB gamut, while the Eizo CS2740 seems to be designed to match AdobeRGB [which has a red primary that matches sRGB]). This is by design, as framework claims 100% DCI-P3 gamut coverage (which has a more saturated red primary than sRGB/AdobeRGB).

In terms of red saturation, the framework monitor is literally displaying superiority over the other two by demonstrating the capability to show more colours, yet it is being framed in a negative light here as being something that is "over saturated".

The responsibility to dictate how much of the display's capabilities (i.e. red saturation) to use to lies squarely in the software (and their associated colour-management systems), which require a display profile (ICC) that accurately models the display's capabilities (profiling), and thus allows colour-managed applications to appropriately scale their source colourspace values into the target display colourspace values. These display profiles are generated via colorimeters or spectrophotometers using specialized software.

Once an appropriate profile is loaded (for each screen), the output image should look identical on all screens that are capable of displaying the colours in the image (e.g. in an sRGB case, all three screens show show the same image, save for maybe the X1 Carbon being slightly desaturated). Correspondingly, attempting to display an image with a DCI-P3 space (that fully utilizes that space) will cause undersaturation on both your X1 Carbon and the Eizo CS2740 (i.e. the ability to show more red saturation is strictly a plus).

If your critique lies in the fact that framework laptop does not ship an appropriate ICC profile for their monitor, then fair enough. But I don't agreement with the statement that "somewhat sensible default calibration isn't much to ask for and is in fact something many other laptops do just fine." I don't believe many laptop manufacturer's ship reasonable ICC profiles at all, and mostly just rely on either the consumer liking the oversaturated look or by having their panels only be rated for around sRGB where implicit colour management (i.e. doing absolutely no colour management and having it work merely because the source and the target are the same space).

It is entirely possible that you do understand all of this and I'm making assumptions about potential misconceptions where none exist. However, you seem to have alluded to using Firefox as your main browser (which is not colour-managed by default) and your Eizo CS2740 being "properly calibrated (at the hardware level at least)," which to be suggests that you might be susceptible the misconception that I have pointed out. If this is not the case, then I deeply apologize.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#374

Post by akvadrako »

Joeri wrote: post #350
Spooky23 wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Screens are dramatically better than a few years ago and have been advancing if you care about and shop for the feature. Trackpads are slowly sucking less. Most people only see this in MacBook Pros, but the other manufacturers have excellent screens that are often hidden behind customization options and complex models/branding. I have a framework and love it, but it’s a computer made for a specific purpose that doesn…

I have to disagree on trackpads sucking less. This year I walked into a big box electronics store and tried the screen, keyboard and trackpad on every laptop they had on display. Trackpads were universally abysmal, with the sole exception of the macbooks. They all had the frustrating diveboard design, every single one at every price point from every manufacturer. I’m sure you can buy laptops with decent trackpads onl…

500 nits is not really good enough for laptop that you might use outside.

Luckily they are still improving and we now have Tandem OLED with about double that.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#375

Post by Dylan16807 »

Terretta wrote: post #180
kelnos wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your assertion seems to be trivially proven false, given that Framework still exists as a going concern. Though I suppose what you say is perhaps still true, if you allow "almost" to do a lot of work.

One can move the word "almost" to make more sense: it's only almost a market even if everyone in it is rabid about those features. It's not a substantial share of the overall laptop market because, quoting from above… people don’t consider the ability to repair or upgrade your machine part of a “premium” experience ... will lament how manufacturers don’t have upgradable ram, etc and then turn around and are upset at…

I think there is a revealed preference that most people don't focus much on repairability, but I don't think it's at odds with a good form factor.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#376

Post by johnnyanmac »

kec wrote: post #152
Pet_Ant wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, this could literally be the last laptop shell, screen, keyboard and power adapter you ever buy. That's a fantastic sustainability story. Not to mention that if it dies you are never at risk of having to replace the whole thing unless it melts in a fire.

It could be… but it won’t be. Internals will be outmoded quickly, and I would be shocked if logic boards from ~5 years from now will still be compatible just as needs evolve (especially around cooling and power delivery)… and this is all before physical wear and tear on screen/keyboard/ports. I would be very surprised if many frameworks are upgraded ship of Theseus style for decades, or if the total cost of ownership…

>It could be… but it won’t be.

Hard to say. If people boast about a ThinkPad lasting a decade, I see no reason (post Moores law) that this can't last that long. The only think not obvious on how to replace is the screen and speakers.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#377

Post by AnthonyMouse »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #355
lotsofpulp wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 re…

I've seen it from Netflix, Steam, and several others. People simply love having all their eggs in one basket, and will stubbornly support it long past the state it starts to exploit them. They support security over freedom every time, consistently. It's a bit crude, but it's also why I'm not surprised AI is catching on so quickly. People will happily outsource their ability to "think" if the product is convincing eno…

> People simply love having all their eggs in one basket

It's more accurate to say that people don't like having twelve different interfaces that all do the same thing.

The proper way to do this is, of course, to have a single interface (i.e. a user agent) that interfaces with multiple services using a standard protocol. But every proprietary service wants you to use their app, and that's the thing people hate.

But the services are being dumb, because everyone except for the largest incumbent is better off to give the people what they want. The one that wins is the one with the largest network effect, which means you're either the biggest already or you're better off to implement a standard along with everyone else who isn't the biggest so that in combination you have the biggest network, since otherwise you won't and then you lose.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#378

Post by filleduchaos »

PKop wrote: post #316
mhluongo wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Happy Framework 13 user here to say this. I recently realized the 32Gb I had originally spec'd isn't enough for work lately. Easy fix, I just ordered more RAM. Pretty straightforward value prop here. If that's not why you want, buy a different device.

You can do this on virtually every non-soldered laptop why is this presented as some unique feature?

I'm starting to realise that many of Framework's strongest soldiers have probably never touched a laptop other than a MacBook or similar in decades. The ability to upgrade the motherboard is niche yet genuinely cool, but instead I keep seeing breathless announcements of RAM and SSD upgrades as if no-one has ever heard of those before.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#379

Post by johnnyanmac »

wmf wrote: post #53
aunty_helen wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what’s lost here is when the framework project was launched, all the companies were moving to SoC designs and reliability was unknown. Replacing a stick of ram is still much cheaper than buying a whole new MacBook, but these systems seem to be reliable enough that ram failures aren’t front of mind. Same for SSDs.

Gaming laptops tend to have replaceable RAM and SSD so the advantage of Framework 16 is much less.

Replaceable GPU and CPU is the big draw draw for me. Heck, the config nature of the shop also means I can chop off buying ram and memory instead of haggling with the store, since I have quite a few spare sticks lying around.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#380

Post by Dylan16807 »

kelnos wrote: post #173
trueismywork wrote: post #167

> The Framework 16 weights about 2.2 kg according to my kitchen scale. For comparison, my X1 Carbon weights 1.3 kg. That may not seem like a big difference, but the extra kilogram makes carrying around the Framework 16 more difficult. In particular, I don't feel comfortable carrying it with just one hand while this isn't a problem with the X1. The author wanted a bigger laptop but the straight goes and compares it to…

Yeah I never get this complaint about 16" laptops. Hell, I don't really get 16" laptops at all: they're huge! You're making a very strange trade off: they're only barely portable, and you lose a lot of the power and flexibility you'd get with a desktop.

I don't understand what people mean when they say "barely portable" about a device that weighs less than 10 pounds. You can't use a big laptop one handed in midair, but that's not "portability". And it can't be a weight hauling problem when small children can handle that much. What is the issue?
Post reply on HN