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

It's hard to justify buying a Framework 12

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 695 posts

Re: It's hard to justify buying a Framework 12

#401

Post by selicos »

anon7000 wrote: post #384
functionmouse wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The work is done. Why not just leave it in? Or FOSS it so the community maintains it, like WINE?

Apple wants everything to be consistent. I have mixed feelings on it, because I do greatly despise windows, partly because of how inconsistent everything is. It’s chock full of half finished “migrations”. Like, programs still installing to “Programs Files (x86)” Which doesn’t matter but adds the tiniest bit of friction.

I think only 32bit apps install there. Ideally there is a 64bit version that continues forward. This is mostly an issue for me with enterprise/etc software I support at work. A key system I just moved to Server 2022 (on prem and Azure VMs) is 32-bit and still uses 32bit ODBC. It's a great app for our need. Just, still 32bit...

Re: It's hard to justify buying a Framework 12

#403

Post by selicos »

kvuj wrote: post #272
trouve_search wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using an asus zenbook 14 OLED with linux. Compatibility is great. The screen blows apple out completely. It's clearly, obviously better. The fan noise and battery life are worse than Apple. The keyboard feels better to type on, the trackpad is slightly worse, but not enough to annoy me. The new Pop OS cosmic is a very fun OS concept for laptops with the autotiling workspaces as a fundamental primitive.

From a quick search online, the max brightness of your laptop is 400 nits SDR and 500 HDR. My M5 MacBook Pro is 1000 and 1500 nits. Screen brightness is not something I will compromise on after having a taste of greatness. I personally wouldn't mind spending 30-40% more for a Linux laptop with similar qualities + repairability. But I will not settle for something much more expensive and worst in some aspects. There a…

The Macbook Neo is about 500 nits but I'd bet the Asus laptop was more than $600 base.

Looks like the Framework laptops depend on model/screen, between 4-500 but with the new 13 pro hitting 700 nits. For a user replaceable screen, and backwards compatibility (I think), that's pretty solid.

Re: It's hard to justify buying a Framework 12

#404

Post by thelastgallon »

If people like us who understand the long term value of having these things[1] available don't buy (and encourage others to buy), then we can't have nice things. I would always recommend students to buy anything other than apple (most Windows machines can now run Linux), run Linux on it and learn how to make it work. Todays students will be distributed all over the world and they have the skills to run Linux on the desktop, but far more importantly, make it work in the workplace ecosystem. Remember our governments are spending massive amounts of money buying Microsoft services and Apple products.

In fact, we should also highly encourage students to use Linux phones. It is important to get the next generation ready to get out of all these locked in extractive ecosystems.

[1] A standardized commodified market place of parts, available to assemble as new or as replacements for long term repair. There is no compelling reason modern machines (phones/laptops/desktops) can't have second and third lives. Remember how much Apple fights against repairability laws.

Re: It's hard to justify buying a Framework 12

#405

Post by throwaway894345 »

pyrophane wrote: post #320
throwaway894345 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would happily jump ship for any competitor that offers solid AI inference benchmarks at a competitive power efficiency, but as far as I can tell Apple owns that market by a pretty big margin. I’m sure someone will point out if I’m wrong.

I just have a desktop at home that I run inference off of. It is a great setup and I don't find myself wanting to inference models directly on my laptop.

That’s what I would do too, but I haven’t found a desktop build that can rival a Mac Mini or Mac Studio on performance per watt. I haven’t looked super hard, but it seems like Mac is in a different ballpark.

Re: It's hard to justify buying a Framework 12

#406

Post by throwaway894345 »

topaz0 wrote: post #339
throwaway894345 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would happily jump ship for any competitor that offers solid AI inference benchmarks at a competitive power efficiency, but as far as I can tell Apple owns that market by a pretty big margin. I’m sure someone will point out if I’m wrong.

Humans own inference power efficiency by a much bigger margin

Owning a human is much more problematic, and anyway a human’s peak efficiency might be higher, but humans have to sleep and take breaks so overall probably not.

Re: It's hard to justify buying a Framework 12

#408

Post by literatepeople »

porphyra wrote: post #278

Dell just announced an XPS 13 that is $699 (with a $599 education pricing) and fairly nice CNC machined body (1 kg) and nice screen (2560x1600 30-120 Hz 500 nit 100% DCI-P3). That could be a tempting alternative to the Macbook Neo for people who don't want to use macOS. Unfortunately for the Framework, it is no longer competitive even with other PC laptops. https://videocardz.com/newz/dell-unveils-xps-13-its-lightest…

Looks neat for sure. However you are sacrificing some core performance on the CPU (and likely gpu) if these benchmarks of the Core 5 320 pan out.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/compare/18169809?baseli...

This is sort of the brilliance of Apple's supply chain moves here, they get to use binned iphone chips to sell higher performance computers in the lower cost bracket at margins impossible for the competition, and this is just an A18. When they upgrade it to the A19, it'll have 12GB of memory out of the box, giving it even more of an edge in this category. I don't see how others are going to be able to compete here, outside of just being "not apple", which in the entry level market is not enough.

Re: It's hard to justify buying a Framework 12

#409

Post by MBCook »

duskwuff wrote: post #332
MBCook wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They had the classic environment. They could have kept that going. Business decision, pure and simple. Value added and risk of people not moving forward was not worth the cost to them. They were also way smaller at the time than today, though the iPod had taken off. I’m fine with them eventually dropping support for things. Some things I think they do too early. Microsoft HAS to keep supporting stuff forever. That’s…

> They had the classic environment. They could have kept that going. Not for long. The Classic environment depended on the system having a PowerPC CPU - it would not have run on Intel systems. (Rosetta translation would not have been applicable.)

I know it didn’t last long. But why do you say Rosetta wouldn’t have worked?

Re: It's hard to justify buying a Framework 12

#410

Post by simondotau »

makeitdouble wrote: post #347
cardanome wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is all true but even as a hardcore Linux and Thinkpad user, I have to admit it is a hard sell when no one can offer the quality of Apple. Apple is the only hardware company where you can buy a product and it is good hardware wise. Sure other companies have flagship offerings but with apple you get a really good base model. And that is where it breaks down for me. Pay 20% more for freedom? Yes, absolutely. But pa…

> you get a really good base model. Why does it matter to _you_ in particular that the base model is good ? For a decade buying macs I never got the base model, I switched to the Asus ROG series and a Surface Pro, and again I'mm not on the base model of either. I get that MacBooks are very good volume purchases and excellent value for those right in the target, but IMHO that's not the people writing in this thread. I…

Base model used to mean glorified toy with severely compromised fundamentals. The Macbook Neo is not that. It is an excellent screen, excellent keyboard, and excellent silicon, encased in an excellent chassis.

As a remote work terminal / casual computing system, the compromises are IMHO almost entirely psychological.

Post reply on HN