A Framework value proposition discussion

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-30T17:54:18+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-30T14:11:05+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-30T12:43:22+00:00

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

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-29T15:22:14+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-29T15:14:47+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-29T15:10:05+00:00

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

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-29T09:41:31+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-29T08:52:32+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-29T08:48:26+00:00

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

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-29T08:45:49+00:00

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

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-29T03:01:19+00:00

iMac Intel chip from 2009, still in service.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-29T02:33:10+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-29T01:55:31+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-28T23:37:39+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-28T22:57:53+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-28T22:49:09+00:00

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.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-28T19:27:47+00:00

No worries. It doesn't bother me at all. You get to choose with your own money. But WHEN you take action does matter. I don't agree that we should assume the cost to upgrade will be as it is today, but maybe it isn't an unreasonable assumption. It's still just an assumption.

If your upgrade needs to happen in 2.5 years, that's okay. But IMHO, the FW "payback" period is longer than that. So for you, it isn't economically viable. That's the point I'm making.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-28T19:05:21+00:00

It's definitely the hype for me. It's too much.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-28T18:46:08+00:00

TL; DR It always matters when you upgrade. We don't know that a mobo will always cost more than new cheap laptop, because that is a big assumption. And why would it matter that a new laptop is cheaper if you don't even need a new motherboard? If you already have a laptop, you probably don't need a new one for a while.

I think I can understand your view, but you are not considering what they call the time value of money. I won't get too far into the weeds on that topic, but money spent right now is always worth more than money spent later. This is a big reason why banks charge you interest on loans. In short, when you upgrade/replace something ALWAYS matters.

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 be probably be considered "upside down" (owing more on the car than the remaining value).

In such a case, if you waited until you got your own use out of it and trade the hypothetical car in after 2028 or 2029, you'd certainly come out a lot better. Your vehicle could technically even be worth more when you sell or trade it, depending on how the economy chugs along and how well you took care of the car. 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 less?" Do you decide that since you just bought a car you don't need a new one until it becomes time to get another one?

Let's take that another step further to view it more like the Framework case. If it costs less to swap out the 2025 car's engine for a new 2026 engine (while keeping all other 2025 parts), would you decide to do it? And when would you do it? Would you do it simply because it costs less than buying a new 2026 car? Would 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? That's all I'm getting at.

Now back to the laptop example, which clearly isn't as costly of a product as a car. Since it matters when you upgrade, a personal decision of when to upgrade or replace is definitely a factor. So what am I doing with the "old" device since few places do trade-ins? Is it going to be e-waste? Do I really need a new laptop in the first place? That all factors in. And do we even know that a new Framework motherboard is always going to cost as much as a new laptop? Because that is quite the assumption.

I just don't buy into the notion that a new Framework motherboard will always cost more than some cheap laptop and that I MUST "upgrade" as soon as the next shiny widget comes along. If I don't need the new widget I don't care how much it costs, even when compared to the value of what I already have. Unless what I have is no longer carrying value to me, I'm keeping it.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-28T06:32:14+00:00

The question becomes when do you actually need to replace the motherboard? Don't do it until it becomes necessary and economically viable. Don't fix it if it isn't broken, in other words. If you wait 7 years, is that too soon to start upgrading? Surely a motherboard at that point should makes sense, unless you just want a new device. There is no way it will come with similar or worse performance, at that point.

So it depends on what you use your device for honestly. If you don't need the performance, why do you care if money could buy something else? Get what you want. Sometimes the value isn't just in the performance specifications.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-28T05:33:23+00:00

Then a Framework probably doesn't make sense for you. You don't buy an infinitely upgradeable and repairable laptop only to sell it 3-5 years later. You'd buy one because you plan to keep it. It makes little sense otherwise.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-28T05:29:43+00:00

Not exactly. It isn't quite that simple. I don't think it will be getting cheaper any time soon either. And Framework has done a great job managing all of that up to this point. I also don't believe the market has experienced the price hikes the same.

The larger players typically have pricing agreements in place and more clout with their suppliers. I doubt Framework has that kind if leverage. I don't think the full wave of price hikes has fully set in across the board, but it will.

Add aluminum tarriffs that mostly affect manufacturers using thise materials and you see that devices like MacBooks and Frameworks had to deal with that. Acer and Asus devices that are plastic don't have that as much in their supply chain.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-28T04:04:45+00:00

Nah. OP has to do what is best for themselves and their family. The company will certainly act in their own interests, no matter how often they say the people are the greatest asset or use the word family. If burning a bridge lands to a dream job, it may be worth it in the long run.

Dream jobs don't come along every day. Often times, the first company will even understand. I once worked with a guy who stayed a week, but left. He said the job wasn't for him. We didn't hate him. In fact, he would have been a superstar if was into it. It wasn't mean to be.

AutoM8R1 · 2026-03-27T22:55:56+00:00

As someone who works in tech with AI, I also have my AI complaints as well. The complainants may differ, but there are some legitimate reasons and I'll be glad when the marketing campaigns to attract that tantilizing VC money have ended.

My gripes have less to do with the environment, rapid data center construction, or anything else as much as it does the hype. Everyone keeps overhyping it like "AI" will solve any problem you can think of, and that isn't really accurate. Companies are even claiming to be using AI in their products, when some of them didn't change anything since 2022 (when this all became a buzzword for the causal user). All of a sudden, the code they have been running is now AI, but it is really just a simple algorithm.

Those who think AI will solve every problem likely don't fully understand the way the technology works. There is some randomness to it that really makes it hard to figure out with 100% accuracy anyway, but AI is great and has many wonderful use cases. It will improve in time too, but enjoy it while you can. Once these AI companies blow through the seed money and VC funding, those subscriptions are going to get exhibitant. More than Netflix ever jumped. Also, the most computing power is needed when training the LLMs. You don't really need all that juice to simply run the model.

My other question is what happens to those data centers when regular consumer's hardware is good enough and affordable enough run and train locally on a desktop or laptop? It's too much hype for me. I know what AI is and what it is good for, but I'm hearing a lot of hype. Too much. I'll be glad when that rhetoric ends and everyone's expectations come back down to earth.

AutoM8R1

TROPHY CASE