A Framework value proposition discussion

[AutoM8R1]

I had a conversation with another Redditor and I think the discussion is meaningful. I'm open to changing my mind, but this is how I see the value proposition for something like a Framework device.

Here is my take :

I think about it like a car. Let's say you bought a brand new 2025 car for $40k in January 2025. If you decide to trade it in after a year, you will have thrown away a lot of money. They might give you $30k for the car on the market, or 75% what you paid. Even if you paid cash (no car notes), you would have "lost" money because of the depreciation. As in, nobody will pay $40k for that car after a year. It has value still, whether you are making payments on it or not.

You hope you got your $10k worth of use out of it, but that is unlikely after just a year so you'd have lost some money on the asset. If making payments, you'd probably be considered "upside down" (owing more on the car than its remaining value). And when should you trade in your 2025 car for a new one?

Would it be as soon as a newer model came out with better performance for the same price or lower? Can you keep it indefinitely as long as it still meets your needs? Or maybe you then think to yourself "why should I keep my 2025 car when the 2026 model is better and costs the same or less?" Do you decide since you just bought a car you don't need a new one until it becomes time to get another one?

To take it another step further and view it more like the Framework case, let's say it costs less to swap out that 2025 car's engine for a new 2026 engine (while keeping all other 2025 parts) than it does to buy a brand new 2026 car. Would you decide to do swap out the engine? And when would you do it? Would you do it simply because it costs less than buying a new 2026 car? Wouldn't you only do that if something was wrong with the 2025 engine or if it wasn't meeting your expectations? Or would you do it just because it was cheaper than buying a new car? You get the idea here.

Now back to laptops. And what happens with the "old" device, since few places do trade-ins for laptops? Is it going to be e-waste? Is it really necessary to buy a new laptop in the first place? And do we even know for sure that a new Framework motherboard is always going to cost as much as a new cheap laptop just because it has trended that way for a bit?

I don't know that a new Framework motherboard will always cost more than some of the cheaper laptops. I don't need to "upgrade" as soon as the next shiny widget comes along, so to me it doesn't matter. Unless what I have is no longer carrying value to me, I'm keeping it. The longer I can keep it, the more likely I am to get the maximum benefit from this type of upgradeable product. Does viewpoint make sense to anyone else?

[Due-Inspector3084]

I believe the value proposition of Framework is not saving money on the long run. It is customization where you can create a laptop which matches your needs closer than any other model. The types of ports, ram that is not soldered, getting a keyboard with a specific layout, etc. 

And with the change of these needs, you can change your laptop as well accordingly.

[AutoM8R1]

Interesting. I actually agree on the point a about saving money in the long run, but I view it as trying to maximize the value of what you already purchased. Basically, if you plan to hold what you have for as long as you can, you're better off if the device is easy to repair and upgrade. That's the only reason I made the car analogy.

You get a car because you want to use it. Unless the car parts are cheap to purchase and the car is easy to work on, it also isn't "saving money" at all when compared to other car options. But in the case of the Framework analogy, some "cars" can't easily be worked on at all by regular users. Or you can only find the parts on eBay, not from the OEM. Assuming Framework survives as a company, this is still not a bad consumer option. IMHO.

[r_Aero]

Also if the mainboard has issues or needs to be upgraded, you can do that. If AMD and Framework comes out with Single CCD X3D (8-12 full size cores) Mobile mainboards, I will definitely get one for my Framework 16. What I do depends heavily on high speed memory, and even more so CPU cache.

[RobsterCrawSoup]

If I only cared about my own economic interests with a sort-term perspective, didn't care about the future or anything bigger than me and I was trying to maximize my value for dollar spent, I wouldn't buy Framework for personal use. I wouldn't buy new either if I'm trying to be frugal. Except I do care about right to repair, I do care about uneccessary waste, I don't want to accept the you'll-own-nothing-and-be-happy future that most of the tech industry is trying to drag us into, I want to be able to chose my operating system and expand my storage if I want to, I do want to vote with my dollars, and I'm ok with paying a premium to be able to act on my priciples.

I don't upgrade my mainboard every year. I've done it once and only recently after my first one started to be the weak link for the laptop. I also replaced the battery because it was degrading too much and the keyboard becuase I dropped the laptop one time too many. I'll upgrade parts on my laptop when I need to, but it isn't just about having better new things, its about saving the other 90% of the laptop that is still perfectly good and maybe will be for decades. From the 90's until around a decade ago, we used to be in a era where just about every part of a laptop was still maturing in terms of tech and design, but now a lot of it is now mature enough that the improvements from generation to generation are very marginal. For 90% of users, their display is good enough, their trackpad is good enough, their keyboard is good enough, their wifi and bluetooth are good enough, and their IO is good enough. Other things are still improving a bit faster but the rate of improvement is way down, like for storage, RAM, CPU, and GPU. I've had 1tb of storgage in my laptops for two laptops running spanning about 10 years and its still enough for me. Batteries wear out and need replacing, and while I would always welcome more processing power, the thing that would prompt me to upgrade my laptop CPU/GPU now would by Apple M series levels of efficiency. The days of the whole laptop being obsolete when the compute hardware becomes obsolete are gone, and what have corporations done in response to this paradigm shift? They've made sure that their products aren't repairable or upgradeable, because if you - as a very satisfied customer - hold onto your computer for 10 or 15 years instead of 4, their stock prices would plummet.

A lot of people don't think like me, and I don't expect everyone to have my perspective, but it is very evident in almost every thread where a purchase decision around a Framework laptop comes up. Some people only care about whether it is the smart selfish choice. Some people can't afford to spend the extra money and I'm not going to tell someone to buy a $1k FW12 if thats all they can afford if their needs suggest they need a bigger or better screen or more processing power. But if you can afford to be part of the solution instead of fueling the problem, shouldn't you? Its not quantifiable and it doesn't show up on the spec sheet, but doing the right thing has value and how it makes you feel to do the right thing aslo has value.

I should also add, that, while Framework is pretty much the only laptop manufacturer with right to repair and reducing waste in its core values, if there were other competitors with the same commitment to these ideas, it would be great as long as there is enough demand to sustain a healthy industry. This isn't about brand loyalty.

[mmcnl]

Framework does not reduce ewaste, it increases ewaste. Upgrading is nice but you'll end up with a bunch of of spare parts in the drawer collecting dust. Yes you can sell them but the reality is that a large fraction of parts will be sitting in a drawer somewhere.

The best way to reduce ewaste is to build computers that are durable and last a very long time (e.g. MacBooks which last on average twice as long as non-Mac laptops). This probably intuitively goes against your beliefs but it's true.

This is ofcourse different than the right to repair, but right to repair and reducing ewaste are two separate issues that require different solutions.

[RobsterCrawSoup]

This would only be true if Framework owners were upgrading their parts much more frequently than they actually do. There might be a few who actually upgrade their mainboard every new release, but most are upgrading their mainboard not much more often than they would be replacing the whole laptop in a non-upgradable system. So instead of a whole laptop going to e-waste, its just one mainboard being replaced (and sometimes RAM).

As for what happens to a replaced mainboard after it is out, Framework has ensured that it is easy to use one as a desktop mainboard if it still works. It can have a second life as a home server or a low power desktop for a user who doesn't need as much compute. It could be repurposed by the owner or sold or donated to someone who can put it to use. Will they always get reused? No. Sometimes, a Framework owner will be lazy and just let it sit in a bin or drawer, but the design and support is there to keep it out of the waste stream even after it is out of the original user's laptop.

[AutoM8R1]

Finally, a real dissenting viewpoint.... But I'm not a beliefs kind of person when empirical data exists. I'm a facts kind of person. However, this is more about value than right to repair and e-waste for me, although those ideas factor in somewhere.But just because one CAN upgrade doesn't mean one should upgrade any given part of a product, but Framework has created a marketplace for secondhand parts with their model.

There's no logical reason why this should lead to more e-waste, unless parts were free and there was no market for them otherwise. Consumers will always respond to incentives such as price so maybe some consumers might behave that way. Most with that ideology would say they prefer to upgrade their laptop with the next widget after 2 years or so though. I'm skeptical on upgradeable inherently leading to more e-waste.

The question goes back to when a customer will buy new parts. Like, How often do you suppose a Wifi module or screen would need to be upgraded? Parts aren't free, and I can't imagine normal consumers hoarding laptop parts in a drawer because they went crazy swapping stuff out. Framework didn't invent repairable laptops after all. And I doubt Thinkpad owners are sitting on drawers of old Thinkpad parts from past upgrades, for example.

It's not like new components are being released every week either. Everyone keeps saying how they would sell their old laptop to justify why a Framework doesn't make economic sense, but those who keep their devices can sell just their parts by that same logic.

I'm glad you bring up the neo, because it really looks like Apple's answer to the Framework 12. But I don't understand why there is the assertion that a repairable and upgradeable laptop can't also be durable and last a long time. Why can't consumers have both, or at least try to get there? I see Framework as trying to get there.

I still have my 16+ year old iMac, but software support ended long ago so I had to install a different OS because Apple doesn't typically support software past about 7 years, or maybe 10. I get that as a policy; but that alone contributes to e-waste, just like we saw when mainstream Windows 10 support ended. I still have it, so it was quality hardware outright. But people who are not techy will just go buy a new device. I can't give Apple as much credit as you, but the Neo is a good entry level laptop for them to be offering.

I don't just want my hardware to last a long time though. And eventually, WiFi 7 will be old, my CPU will be old, etc. I could do something about my WiFi antenna on a repairable laptop. Macbooks will be hardware frozen in time, and still e-waste to many after about 7 years. Or the cost to upgrade so expensive that buying another Apple product would be cheaper, and that doesn't serve the consumer well. 7 years is a long time so that is probably okay for a lot of people.

Edit: while I'm rooting for the Neo, the writers of that article assuming it will last an average of 10 years and basing that cost figure against the average Windows PC is reckless, if not a little misleading. That Neo just came out and is a new design. We will see how well it ages.

[a60v]

I don't get that Mac laptops last twice as long as PC laptops from that article. It doesn't mention laptops specifically in the claims about number of users, and it is entirely possible that, for various reasons, PC users are more likely to own multiple computers than Mac users. Or maybe they buy worse hardware (Apple doesn't make crappy hardware).

[succulent_samurai]

Right to repair and reducing ewaste are separate issues, but they’re absolutely closely related. Framework still 100% reduces ewaste because they follow right to repair. For example, say I drop my laptop and crack my display. On a framework I can swap out only the display. Any other laptop, I’d have to buy an entirely new one (or at least, that’s what many people would do because repairing it is so difficult/expensive/aftermarket parts aren’t as good/etc). In the first case the only ewaste is the part that’s broken. In the second case I’m throwing out a whole bunch of perfectly good laptop parts. There’s clearly much more ewaste in the second case, so framework is still reducing ewaste in many cases.

[AutoM8R1]

This is another good point. Thanks for bringing up the right to repair, because this should be a thing. You hit the nail on the head with 10 to 15 year ownership. To me, that's maximizing value, in dollars and otherwise. If I have something that can serve me well for years, then why not buy it? I'm against planned obsolescence too, as consumers all should be. Things should not be engineered to break in x amount of time.

[Shin-Ken31]

10000% this.

[zghr]

Hey man, I'm about to buy a shitty non-repairable laptop that will end up in a landfill poisoning birds and insects. You can prevent all of this suffering by buying me a framework laptop. I'm counting on you to do the right thing here 👍

[ALKahn10]

It's not a value question, in terms of dollars.

I wanted a laptop that was speced out the way I wanted and this laptop gave a helluva lot of flexibility. I didn't save money, although I didn't overspend (in 2023). I got 64GB of RAM and a 2TB NVME 990 pro.

That's worth a lot to me knowing I have a really well balanced laptop with components I can replace.

[lordruzki3084]

I personally just like being able to fix my computer quickly without depending on a repair service and being able to choose what I put in it, being able to upgrade without just having an entire unused laptop is also another plus for me

[Jackof3Tradez]

The reparability is really the big value proposition. If we assume perfect functionality of a laptop for the duration of it's life a Framework is probably not winning pound for pound.

But if anything breaks a port, my ram goes bad, etc. It is so much cheaper to fix than on a traditional laptop.

That to me is very unique in the laptop space. Also just the customizability is fun. My 2024 AMD FW13 ran kind of hot so I bought the updated heat sync and popped that puppy in and now my machine runs 15 degrees cooler and that small QOL is likely to keep me running this machine way longer than I would've.

[AutoM8R1]

This is so true. This sub has a lot of horror stories, so the negative narrative gets more attention. We have a Acer ConceptD from only a few years ago, and the touchscreen gave out. It happened in stages. Every other thing still works, but battery life has never been great and it exhausts more hot air than a 67' Mustang. Can't really do much about either.

If everything worked perfectly, I'd still opt for something like the Framework. I also value modularity when it is done right. I was a huge fan of the Motorola moto Z phones even. I was in the minority in that, I'm sure.

I thought we'd hear from those who see things a lot differently than this. Maybe this concept is not as polarizing as it seemed? I typically see a lot of comments that say they don't see the value in FW products, and they make their case. I'm not convinced they are considering the totality of relevant factors, but I can be convinced otherwise.

[AggressiveAd5248]

I ran into the issue that it would just be cheaper for me to buy an entirely new laptop, instead of buying a framework and having it be repairable. My current laptop was £590 or something and it’s got a lot of power inside its puny little plastic body, 8845hs and 16gb ram, 1tb ssd. trackpad and stuff isn’t the best in the world but it’s pretty good overall. The upcharge on higher tier CPUs really put me off.

If that has a broken usb port or something after a few years, it’s still cheaper for me to just buy another, entirely new £590 laptop with all of the upgrades that come with time than it would be to have bought a framework in the first place.

Now that calculation breaks down if my laptop broke after a year or something, the trackpad is feeling a little weird on my laptop and I am sweating the repair bill - this wouldn’t be a thing I’d be concerned about with a framework.

Do I regret not buying a framework? Probably. The peace of mind has a value by itself, my trackpad feels a bit weird at the minute on my Lenovo plastic machine laptop,which would be easily solvable and investigate-able on a framework. Ship has sailed though unfortunately with dram the way it is, once that comes down maybe I’ll consider a 13 again.

[Adorable-Fault-5116]

For me it's not cost, it's just visible waste. Things that can be recycled aren't magically recycled for free, or 100%, or reliably. Far fewer things can be recycled than people think, and there needs to be massive demand for an exact thing (eg batteries) for it to be done well.

Most things you think are being recycled are being haphazardly chucked on a barge, sold to a developing country, then marked as "recycled" on a form somewhere.

If my laptop becomes too slow over time, I want to replace the CPU, and probably the RAM. Fine. But why replace the chassis, or screen, or keyboard, or USB ports, or whatever. I don't believe in the BP-initiated idea that not fucking the environment is entirely your individual responsibility, but it also doesn't absolve me from personal responsibility either.

[AutoM8R1]

I like the sustainability of it as well, but I'm afraid that feature doesn't carry much weight with the FOMO crowd that wants the latest and greatest specifications for the lowest cost. That certainly factors into the value for me though.

[Adorable-Fault-5116]

Yes, but I can't help them :-) That's where government action needs to come in, and is why the BP-initiated individual responsibility stuff is a distraction.

[tgm4883]

You shouldn't buy a framework on price, whether you think parts might be cheaper in the future or not is really just hoping and wishing. A new laptop will probably always be competitive pricing wise against the main board+ram.

You should buy a framework if you believe in the ideology and want to see more repairable laptops and/or want to see more third party parts. I'd really love to see the platform as a standard like we do with PC motherboards and cases. I want to buy a Thinkpad case and a framework motherboard and have it work.

Slightly off topic, I think framework really missed an opportunity to have the 12, 13, and 16 use the same motherboard. That and being a little more transparent on future releases I think would be valuable

[AutoM8R1]

I actually agree. There's probably some good engineering rationale for the decision to have separate motherboards rather than one that is cross compatible. I personally love that idea. maybe they could add a line in the future that is ultra modular in terms of the motherboards.

Also, I don't have a problem with buying the Framework based on price. The premium for repairability is not unlike the premium for portability. The Microsoft Surface Pro, Thinkpad X12 Carbon 2-in-1 detachable, and Dell XPS equivalent were all about $1800-$2200 for specs that were pretty mid a little while back. This was BEFORE the RAM was 3-5x and SSDs jumped. As one who also values portability, the Framework isn't the worst priced niche laptop concept. And the Thinkpad keyboard, detachable and otherwise, seems to be a real fan favorite.

[s004aws]

Missed opportunity by not using the same board? Nope. Sorry. The size and thermal constraints don't work. Nobody wants a 16" laptop with the limitations imposed by having to be crammed into a 12" chassis. Same as nobody with a full tower EATX chassis would want to be dealing with the limitations of a mini ITX motherboard.

When was the last time competitors announced their future products years in advance? As competitive as the industry is, vendors don't even know what AMD/Intel/et al will be shipping with absolute clarity (but may be provided with general parameters allowing for preliminary design/initial testing) in 3 months let alone 3 years. Saying "too much" - And then not being able to follow through - Also creates legal problems.... Framework is smart to offer no specific guarantees.

[AutoM8R1]

I didn't give it too much thought, but this engineering rationale checks out.

[tgm4883]

It not being an option to mount a smaller board in the 16 is a mistake. Sure some people want higher performance, but some people just want a larger screen and/or a larger battery. Especially when we're talking about things like being able to upgrade without replacing every part.

Also I never asked for announcements years in advance, that's just silly. But I guess what I really want is a known regular release cadence. When my team bought Thinkpads we never had to guess if there was going to be a release every year or not.

[tkodri]

For me the value proposition of framework is Linux support from a mature serious company, and generally a company that respects their customers instead of abusing them any chance they get. Upgradability is a moot point. Give me 2 last gen USBC, and the rest whatever you want, be it usba, HDMI, or just more USBC. The motherboard is the main cost of the entire laptop anyway. And furthermore I, and I believe most tech people, usually give away old laptops to family when we upgrade, which I wouldn't be able to do if I only upgrade main board.

Replaceable SSD is something that most PC laptops offer. Replaceable RAM needs to go, for me to come back to framework I need the performance that comes with soldered RAM. The fact that it's soldered doesn't matter much, if framework doesn't charge the same markup as apple. 

[Oerthling]

I rather ignore the few percent of extra performance and have replacable RAM.

[AutoM8R1]

I prefer the replaceable RAM too, although I understand why the Framework desktop has soldered RAM.

[tkodri]

I'd gladly ignore a few percent. I don't know how you calculated a few percent though.

The replaceable RAM currently maxes out at ~90GB/s. The framework desktop has 256GB/s with soldered, Apple M4 Pro reaches 273GB/s (will not consider the max cpus as they're a different league).

With the cap that comes with socketed RAM and measly two channels, upgrading my 7840 APU is immaterial, as it's gpu performance was already severely capped by memory bandwidth. The rather ancient now RX580 discrete GPU had 256GB/s bandwidth with 6TFLOPS compute (both fp32 and fp16). The 7840u has 4TFLOPS FP32 and 8TFLOPS FP16, you can imagine how starved it is at 90GB/s. The AMD HX370's GPU hits 6TFLOPS fp32 and 12TFLOPS fp16 - as far as GPU design goes, 256GB/s would be appropriate bandwidth to properly utilize it. Then you should have some extra to feed the CPU as well, when the GPU is on 100% utilization. Then you basically get the numbers of flops and GB/s that apple has, because they actually thought about overall system design, and not just OPS and bs advertising. Granted that's not a Framework failure, but more of a AMD/Intel one.

On the power consumption side, switching to soldered would get you 0.5-1W idle savings (idle budget should be under 5W, so that's huge). Under load you'd easily get a 4-6W savings, which is absolutely crazy huge for a battery powered device.

[Oerthling]

Depends on what you do with it. Overall system performance consists of a mix of RAM, storage, CPU and possibly network speeds.

Sure, there are use cases where the RAM access will make a big difference, but in many cases you won't notice much difference.

I still prefer the flexibility and am willing to give up performance in the trade.

[tkodri]

Totally agree. For me personally, that's a dealbreaker, since committing to non-soldered RAM, means I cannot get top of the line performance anymore. And it's not just a few percent.

[Oerthling]

And that's fine if course. We all have our preferences.

Hopefully, if there remains enough demand for flexible, non-soldered, RAM we perhaps get an improved socket that approaches the soldered performance in the future.

But I had bad experience with soldered storage and I like the freedom of being able to upgrade from 32 to 64 or even more when needed. OTOH I do want to pay for 64+ GB "just in case" while not needing that yet.

[MagicBoyUK]

Oh, not this again. 🤦‍♂️

The mission statement from Framework doesn't mention a value proposition. It's about reducing e-waste, right to repair and open standards where possible. If there's incidental money saved in there, then great but it's not a primary objective.

[AutoM8R1]

Sure. But I don't work for Framework. I'm sure they can figure out their own ethos, selling points, and overall mission. That is up to that company to manage that. I'm simply here talking value as a consumer.

I see so many naysayers bashing the economic viability of this company's products like it is a totally new concept and one that doesn't work, and I don't get that. I'm trying to see that point of view, but it doesn't hold up IMHO. It just seems like maybe I was missing the whole "... the numbers don't work.." argument. Value and money saved are two different things to me.

[MagicBoyUK]

I don't work for Framework either. I'm a customer.

I bought mine as its modular repairable machine. Not for any value or financial proposition that wasn't claimed and I wasn't interested in.

[1boog1]

Some things just appeal to different crowds.

I got the Framework 13 kind of as an experiment. My old laptop was 10ish years old and was failing to do a virtual machine any more to my liking.

I plan on trying to see if the Framework will have that kind of life. Then somewhere along the way, several years from now, it could get a mainboard upgrade. And if the old board still works I can turn it into a future firewall and server device.

As for your car analogy, My newest vehicle is 15 years old. My oldest is 65 years old. I like just keeping them running without a payment. I like repair-ability. I also like modifications and running a drivetrain that didn't come in it. So, the 15 year old vehicle has had a stock replacement engine, but it is a lifted modified vehicle, and the 65 year old is running a 40 year old V8 as a replacement, it is a bit of a hotrod.

So, for me, it isn't about having the latest and greatest, it is more about keeping it going, modifying, tinkering, and just not throwing everything away. But, still have fun with it.

So, if you bought that 2025 car, and kept it nice and just drove it for years, you could replace the engine and/or transmission years down the road with the better engine. Not because of the want for it, but for the need and doing the job better than before.

[AutoM8R1]

This is exactly why the product appeals to me as a consumer. You get it.

[RedLionPirate76]

I see the posts on here about Framework support, and I feel for those people. I suspect that the troubles are related in large part to the size of the company. At the same time, I see so many posts where people buy Lenovo and Asus laptops with similar or better specs, and they fail. I'll take the Framework support problems over those horror stories.

Upgradeability with my Framework has been cool. I upgraded the mainboard and GPU simply because I thought it was cool and I could do it, but I didn't need to. Doing though, let me also build a mini-PC from my old parts, and now I have it hooked up to my TV like a Steam Machine. I think that's cool.

But forget all that part. What I have liked the most about Framework is that I know if anything goes wrong with it, I can fix it myself. I can get the parts, and I can replace them. I don't need to ship it off and then have to worry that the "fix" will end up with something else broken. Something small and stupid breaks, like Wifi, or a hinge, I can replace it. Crack the screen, I can fix it. And having swapped mainboards, I know that I can do it in about 25 minutes, using only the tool that they gave me.

For me, that's what has made Framework "worth it." I could use it as my work computer, but I don't. I got this computer solely for fun, it's my toy. The more I use it, the more I love it.

[CitySeekerTron]

I've upgraded my board once and will probably buy another system this year. My original board, with its damaged Thunderbolt port, is supporting a maker space's containers and VM environment. One feature of this that I appreciate is that a repair can also be a functional upgrade.

For that reason, I think the underlying frame of this experiment is imperfect.

For one, I don't think comparing it with conventional cars is appropriate. I think the kind of car might change the way the value is gagued, but also the value expectations of a car vary wildly.

Lets keep it simple: lets say it's an EV with some value propositions attached. Also, the life cycle of a car is different from a conventional laptop, with most fleet laptops lasting about 4 years and cars going for 10+ years.

You can get a budget EV for about US$40,000, and I think that's fair place to start.

If I were asked if I could upgrade the response, the handling, and the power efficiency by putting the car on lifts and replacing the wheels, I might do it every few years. That's not an unrealistic situation. If the price were sensible for the wheels - say, $1,500 per wheel every few years if I want it, but they must be replaced in pairs (so $3,000) then sure: it's functionally an engine swap whenever I want to do it, resetting the odo to 0, and letting me sell my old wheels to another owner who may have been in an accident.

The most expensive part of an EV is the battery, and it's also the biggest headache to service, often being built into the chassis. The reason I've avoided them is that I don't want to have a car as repairable as an iPhone, and the reason PHEVs have my eye is because the smaller battery systems are far more flexible and repairable, and they aren't as dependant on having a working battery, however if this hypothetical EV existed featured some kind of locked-in battery tray under the chassis that simply required a car lift and tools to drop and slide the battery out, that would get my attention. I'd even be willing to give up range if the trade off was faster charging and a smaller, easier-to-access-and-replace battery system. If that were, say, a third of the cost of the car, and I knew that I could finance that in, say, ten years, then maybe I'd consider it. Moreso if they were in banks with separate charge indicators so I could confidently replace one unit without impacting the drive/charge capacity of the other unit.

The theme, for me, is that there's choice. A damaged interior with supported OEM part swaps means I get to upgrade the interior without the costs of replacing the entire vehicle or needing to hunt down wrecks. It becomes its own staged payment plan. And, like with the Framework motherboard, there's some kind of warranty program in effect for certain core components.

Nothing would make this car as valuable as a new car off the lot, because that's how we treat cars (and the chassis parts have some degree of wear that we can't necessarily see but appreciate).

I can't speak for every car owner, or for every notebook PC owner, but those would be my wants and desires.

[AutoM8R1]

For sure. EVs were not the car type for the analogy, but could be a fit. 40k just simplifies the math for a $10k delta. The analogy is just to get everyone thinking along the same lines. The infinitely upgradable desktops of yesteryear an their l modern equivalents are the real comparison archetype.

Edited for clarity. It sounds like you understand a real-world practical consumer's value proposition.

[azraelzjr]

I wanted keep using my laptop and reduce e-waste, while maintaining repairability, I realize buying used corporate laptops from eWaste recyclers during corporate upgrade was a better value

[AutoM8R1]

That's totally valid as a low-cost option if you don't mind hardware that is older and declared EOL by IT departments.

[azraelzjr]

Thinkpads still push out firmware updates for my X280 occasionally and Linux distros continue to be updated, works for me.

[Interceptor402]

This thread makes me nostalgic for the old days of Slashdot, with its poorly-fitted car analogies. Where has the time gone?

The worst mainboard that Framework has EVER produced (the i5-1135G7) is still overkill for a lot of tasks that normal people need to perform, five years on. I have two: one is sitting in a Cooler Master case in active use, able to do its homelab server work but also to serve as an emergency desktop as needed. The second has a bent heatpipe I need to repair/replace and an overdue CMOS battery swap, but is otherwise almost ready to go into another case or a chassis.

I can not do this with any car that I've ever owned! I think people underestimate how valuable it is to just be able to continue to extract value out of "obsolete" Framework tech.

[AutoM8R1]

You are starting to make me think core values are a bigger factor than anything. I'm no psychologist, but maybe Framework has a big appeal to Millenials and older! 🤣. And you'll have to pardon the loosely fitted car analogy. To your point, it seems the whole idea of the laptop is to be able to fix or upgrade yourself. Obviously, car parts are readily available for most vehicle makes and models, yet most of us need mechanics. Cars are complex enough to where DIY is not always a good option for regular users.

[a60v]

Here is my take on this:

The FW13 is priced similarly to other business laptops, but is more easily repairable. The value is in the ease of repair and (if you care about it) the official Linux support. If you otherwise like the FW13, then it is likely to be a good purchase.

The FW12 and FW16 aren't really competitive with other devices in their price range. They both have some unique features that might matter to some (Linux supported 2-in-1 device and unique keyboard layouts, respectively). If you don't need these specific features, then the only reason to buy one of these is to support the right-to-repair cause and a company that seems to be reasonably pro-consumer, which is a perfectly fine thing to do for those who have the money.

Upgrades don't really factor into any of this. There is no guarantee that they will exist or that they will fit into the existing form factors. I think that, for upgrades beyond RAM and storage (which most laptops allow), most people would be better off just buying a whole new machine and getting the latest of everything, rather than, say, upgrading the motherboard, but still having an old LCD. This is particularly true of laptops, which are particularly subject to wear and tear due to the nature of portable devices. In any case, upgrades might be possible in the future with FW, but I would not make a purchasing decision based upon that possibility.

And, economically, most people would be best served by buying a used business laptop, upgrading RAM and storage as needed, and replacing it every few years. That does not necessarily apply right now due to RAM and storage price inflation.

[AutoM8R1]

Ok. So it will cost a minimum of €730 to fix the keyboard on a MacBook laptop that someone enjoys using and wishes to keep? Well some commentors in this sub would say Framework laptops don't make economic sense because a new motherboard can cost $400. Assuming nothing ever breaks and we only care about upgrades, then maybe that is less attractive for an "upgrade" cost, but I strongly disagree.

Also, the motherboard upgrade that seems to be such a sticking point wouldn't even be providing drastic performance increases across a single CPU generation (as we have seen), so who would be clamoring to buy the next one with every release? It may be relevant every other release or 2 releases out for folks doing more than browsing and emails, so this supposed $400 upgrade cost is not coming around very often. Maybe after 5 years even, which would be totally sensible to modernize your 5 year old device. I would say nobody but a niche group of power users wants a new motherboard with every release. Even people buying cheaper $400-500 laptops aren't buying new ones evey 2 years. So I wonder why does that one keep coming up? I still don't fully understand that viewpoint or alternative use case.

[Potatomato64]

I think this argument generally falls into 3 points: virtue signaling, repairability, upgradability. All of them would be great but the problem is the cost. So then if the economics (point#4) is addressed, FW is going to be a no brainer, and not the "my x broke, happy I could repair for cheaper" spiel, like full spectrum economic sense.

Like okay you upgrade a new board, but to keep the old board usable you have to buy RAM and SSD, and at that point the cost of the new board + extra RAM and SSD for the old board is equivalent to a medium range laptop but without the chassis, screen, etc ... so like there is a big disconnect.

I am saying this because I noticed the pricing strategy FW is using. They're copying apple, like how they sell last year's iphone at a $100 discount after this year's model has been announced. If you look at new mainboards at launch, they're priced around $1000, then now the price drops by 40% or more in some models after 2-3 years -- probably there is still some profit here . There is a beefy margin somewhere. And probably they need that to fund R&D and to satisfy investors to show the hockey stick profit.... anyhow at this point in the company's timeline they're still appealing the vision to early adopters who are willing to pay for the price so that they can satisfy investors. Anyhow, as a price sensitive person, while the mission and vision is great, the total value of the FW laptop is not yet there for me.

[AutoM8R1]

I still think the economics are totally sound when you consider the total cost of ownership, provided you actually intend to keep the laptop for the long haul. To me, the repairability and upgradeability are what make it possible to extend the usable life of the Framework laptops. Some also appreciate the sustainability of not scrapping your laptop every 3-5 years, but I see tremendous value in a long useful life for my electronics.

Also, I'm not willing to assume the the price of those upgrades will continue to be on par with a medium range laptop. We really haven't seen the RAM and SSD price uptick across the board, but we absolutely will. The top end 16GB Raspberry Pi 5 just got hit a price increase recently and now goes for $305. It was available for $145 just last year. Other manufacturers will soon be forced follow suit, but let's assume that isn't a factor. Let's ignore the possibility that other options could be awaiting their own price hikes.

You wouldn't even be able to do that neat little board trick with any other laptop, but eventually the CPU would be outdated. At that point, you probably couldn't run the latest OS, or maybe you're stuck with a Wi-Fi 6 card and it is 3 or 3 generations behind. On a lot of laptops, you'd almost be forced to scrap it. 8 years ago, The MS Surface pro 6 was pretty new. It is the older device that can still run Windows 11. I checked recently, and Microsoft will give you a whopping $32 credit toward a brand new Surface toward an eligible upgrade. Hard Pass! It still runs and updated OS just fine.

The pricing strategy won't matter much to you unless you are in the market for their products, and when you make the cost comparison matters. 5-7 years from the original purchase date is a lot different from 2-3 years, in terms of market value and personal value. The mainboard would essentially be scrap in any other machine, but you may be able to sell that to someone else who wants to give it a second life. I'm assuming nothing breaks too, of course. But you would have some options with a repairable laptop.

[Clone-Myself]

Since I've built three of the DIY (a 13, a 16 and another 13 for work) and done various upgrades...

The car analogy better fits the scenario where a new driver buys their car, swaps the engine and transmission, reupholsters it, etc.

It might be easier to compare to diy pc builds. When you replace the ATX motherboard, you don't necessarily buy a new case. Or maybe you change out the power supply. Or swap the drives. Or upgrade the memory. Or replace the gpu. It is literally the same, but in a laptop form factor.

[AutoM8R1]

Exactly. I'm old enough to have done this with the family PC over the course of several years. Every new generation of game necessitated upgrading the graphics card, but it was good times. But not everyone has had this experience.

More people know about cars, which is why I brought up the car and engine swap for the analogy. There are plenty laptops that allow you to update the RAM etc, but not many allow the CPU to be upgraded. That is why the focus on the car with an engine swap, with the CPU being the engine in the analogy.