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

531–540 of 621 posts

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#531

Post by cosmic_cheese »

moomin wrote: post #530
cosmic_cheese wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The crux of the matter is that even if one values upgradability and repairability, neither is a frequent need for practically anybody. Reliable machines rarely need repairs outside of owner mistreatment, and most people I know who are technically capable enough to care about upgrading generally do it maybe once every 4-6 years, by which point hardware has usually advanced far enough that buying a new laptop is easy t…

It’s frustrating. A small manufacturer can’t hope to beat out a large one on price. And that’s before we consider that the maintainability that Framework offers means you can’t cut the corners the regular manufacturers do. But even I find things like the weight an unappealing proposition even though I have no idea how you’d build a laptop like Framework’s that appreciably lighter.

I think that what it means one needs to pick their battles, at least early on. Trying to achieve repairable + upgradable + novel expandability all in one go might be somewhat overambitious for a brand new company. Do one thing really, really well instead of five things mediocrely. Once you've got one mastered, move on to the next thing.

But then again, I've never run a hardware company, so maybe I'm wrong.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#532

Post by integralid »

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.

My Lenovo P17 saw 5 continents and tens of countries. And it's useful to have 128GBs of RAM (i use VMs a lot).

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#533

Post by cosmic_cheese »

jdujfkhllhl wrote: post #518
Esophagus4 wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah sorry, I must be thinking of the Apple of 2025 that still hasn’t added USB-A to their laptops (even though my Framework has 2) and expects me to carry a dongle everywhere, because after all, it’s my fault for not completely rearranging my world to do what Apple wants. Or I must be thinking about the Apple of 2025 that rolled out Liquid Glass, an OS so disastrously bad I have to toggle accessibility settings just t…

China and EU have mandated usb-c for all rechargeable devices, for many years. Usb-a is legacy, together with vga, parallel printer ports and other old and bulky connectors, such connectors should require adapters. This is a good thing. That’s why apple laptops are using usb-c.

Additionally, most MacBook USB-C ports are also Thunderbolt 3/4/5 ports which can do a number of things that USB-A ports can't. A laptop with 3x TB ports is substantially more expandable than a laptop with 1x USB-C and 3x USB-A.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#534

Post by bronson »

asno3030 wrote: post #340

I'm okay with spending 1000 on a screen and chassis, under the impression I upgrade the computer every 2 years. Unfortunately when a mainboard cost $1000, it's cheaper to buy a new machine every 2 years. This shouldn't be the case... Look at the chinese producing MoDT boards with full IO for $300 (likely the same shops who work with framework. I like framework in the sense that I can ship of thesues my laptop the sam…

You can get a 7040 series Ryzen mainboard for $380.

https://frame.work/products/mainboard-amd-ryzen-7040-series?...

So I don't understand your $1000 complaint ... that's the most expensive mainboard they offer. You think Framework shouldn't offer the high end stuff?

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#535

Post by piskov »

beeflet wrote: post #517
piskov wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s why I specifically told what I meant: it is not about being able to swap SSD, but that for at least 5-7 years you will be able to repair it (expensively). Moreover in basically every corner of the earth there will be either authorised service or local one that will help you if soak your laptop in thailand or what have you.

You can't swap the SSD on a macbook?

Only with a heat gun and some lead :-)

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#536

Post by p_ing »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #366
goku12 wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 t…

> 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 main things I keep long term are the drives and power supply, and those can be kept on most laptops too. In the medium term I get a lot of use out of separat…

> A Framework lets me keep the same screen which is cool

Probably the last thing I'd want to keep. Screen technology still moves forward at a decent pace. Screens are disposable, backlights fade over time, pixels get stuck, screen burn-in.

The only universal thing I can think of about machines I've upgraded over the years (not laptops, of course) are cases, power supplies, CPU coolers, and as long as the form factor hasn't changed/there hasn't been significant progress, HDD.

Everything else goes with the system. New CPU meant new socket, which also meant new RAM. Need to get rid of that old video card, of course.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#537

Post by aragilar »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #376
kec wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But my nearly 10 year old ThinkPad hasn't needed upgrades to last that long, it just has decent build quality. Will the Frameworks last that long?

A good test would be to work out what's the oldest in-use Framework (which should be one of the first, if not there's an build quality issue) and see how many upgrades were needed to keep it functioning compared with similar era machines from other manufacturers.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#538

Post by chasing0entropy »

swiftcoder wrote: post #443
goku12 wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 t…

> 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 Do you actually realise any savings doing that? Pretty sure I never have. Typically by the time I get around to upgrading, they've changed both the CPU socket and the RAM, so I need a whole new motherboard. And I certai…

Aren't part of the cost Yet :) actually upgradeable components were priority when motherboards and CPUs were too expensive to upgrade, it was ram ssds and memory that were changed out...

Soon, now actually, it is the inverse. Ram, ssds, high speed network, consumer GPUs, and anything else that needs a modest amount of DRAM.

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#539

Post by cromka »

heavyset_go wrote: post #271
cromka wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> having to deal with x86 emulation (inherent to an ARM laptop) How so? Is this because some proprietary software that isn't available on ARM on Linux?

Most server and embedded oriented software has been compiled for ARM 7 & 8 for a while now, but in my experience, software you'd use on a desktop might not have ARM builds unless it's popular with RPi or handheld gaming enthusiasts.

But what do you mean by having builds? You should hardly ever need to download a pre built software from the Internet, outside of the repositories, unless it's proprietary software?

Re: I'm returning my Framework 16

#540

Post by vel0city »

trinsic2 wrote: post #275
Philadelphia wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We never had anything different, though. Computers always became so obsolete after a while that there was no longer any point in trying to upgrade them. I think I got eight years out of my 1997 Power Mac G3, including a CPU upgrade to a G4, RAM upgrades, hard disk upgrades, a video card, and USB expansion, but then the new machines coming out were just so much better that throwing money into more upgrades was just to…

I guess its a byproduct of a faster moving curve with improved technology. 20 years ago you didn't need to replace the entire platform for at least 10 years.

20 years ago I was hopping from Intel to AMD and then back to Intel. After that practically every decent jump in CPU performance on the Intel side of things meant a new socket (LGA775, 1156, 1155, 1150, 1151...). AMD typically kept sockets for a bit longer but wasn't as competitive until Ryzen which had a few jumps in chipset compatibility in there.

In the last 20 or so years if I wanted a few years newer CPU for whatever reason it usually meant I needed a whole new motherboard, and that often (but not always) also meant new RAM.

Post reply on HN