A FULLY upgradeable laptop. Better ultrabook than Dell, Lenovo and HP and MUCH better than Apple.

[pshufd]

Battery replacement in an Apple laptop is $199 including labor, and the battery lasts for almost 5 years. Buying a new machine is indeed a more reasonable option, simply because by the point you need to have your battery replaced, your laptop is already hopefully obsolete.

And that’s my main problem with products like the framework laptop. They claim that they offer better value to the customer, yet I don’t see it. Their laptop is not cheaper than any other laptop with a similar configuration, and an M1 machine at the same price level offer more performance, twice or thrice as long battery life and a better build quality. Sure, with the framework laptop you can upgrade your RAM to 64GB after couple of years if you feel that you need that. Sounds great, right? Not by that time everyone has moved to Zen 5 and Intel Meteor Lake with DDR5. So now you have 64GB of obsolete RAM in a laptop that’s slower than the cheapest budget PC, with terrible battery life on top.

I replaced the batteries in my 2014 and 2015 MacBook Pros in May. These machines are still quite usable for work even though they are quite old. One is on loan to my son who's work laptop died. They have been taking their time getting him a replacement. These systems are also fine for students and for office work. I could put it next to my M1 mini and split up the office workload between the two systems and never have any swap.

The $199 is for the Retina models. You get a new top case, keyboard and trackpad with the battery replacement and it feels like a new machine, at least where you interact with the laptop.

At the rate we're going, maybe we get new MacBook Pros in 2022. I was planning on selling one of them after ordering a new M1X MacBook Pro at WWDC. I'm glad I didn't sell before WWDC. I have heard of people who did do that and were they pissed at the rumor YouTube channels who thought new M1X systems were a certainty.

 

[boss.king]

Battery replacement in an Apple laptop is $199 including labor, and the battery lasts for almost 5 years. Buying a new machine is indeed a more reasonable option, simply because by the point you need to have your battery replaced, your laptop is already hopefully obsolete.

And that’s my main problem with products like the framework laptop. They claim that they offer better value to the customer, yet I don’t see it. Their laptop is not cheaper than any other laptop with a similar configuration, and an M1 machine at the same price level offer more performance, twice or thrice as long battery life and a better build quality. Sure, with the framework laptop you can upgrade your RAM to 64GB after couple of years if you feel that you need that. Sounds great, right? Not by that time everyone has moved to Zen 5 and Intel Meteor Lake with DDR5. So now you have 64GB of obsolete RAM in a laptop that’s slower than the cheapest budget PC, with terrible battery life on top.

My battery is struggling now roughly three years since it was last replaced. My wifes original battery is saying it needs a service after 4 years. I think 5 years is a pretty generous estimate.

200 bucks is actually a very reasonable price though, I’m genuinely surprised Apple offers that given how much they ream customers on any other part and repairs. I may have to chuck a new battery in this machine to get me through until I can get a redesigned MacBook Air.

 

[raqball]

I am a sucker for cool new tech so I said what the heck and just pre-ordered one!

I went i5, 512, 16GB RAM, 2 USC C, 1 USB A and a microSD.. I might order a few of the other modules later like the HDMI and possibly a storage expansion module..

Maybe it ships in Sept like it said.. Should be a fun DIY project of building it..

 

[GSWForever8]

The Framework laptop is the best ultrabook.

No Dell, HP or Lenovo laptop can match this because this FULLY upgradable.

I see many people on this forum saying look my Dell/ Lenovo has upgradeable SSD and RAM well thats nothing compared to awesome laptop. Framework has built a laptop that is 99.99% upgradeable.
The screen, the bezel, the keyboard, the trackpad, the ports, the motherboard, the speakers and camera and microphone.

We NEED more laptops like this.

Apple should do this. I like this idea!

 

[boss.king]

Apple should do this. I like this idea!

Apple will straight up never do this. They make a lot of money by gouging on repairs or new sales instead of upgradability.

 

[Blue Quark]

I think this is a great idea, but I find now in 2021, this whole concept to be more novelty.

At this point consumers largely think laptops are consumable, once the battery stops holding a charge, or the storage is full, they'll just buy another. Especially the newer one will be, well, newer. We all like new shiny things, just look at how popular leasing is, you get a new car every three years.

Personally, I'm checking them out, because its a great concept, maybe I'll see if I can get one for running linux

Years ago I stopped counting the number of people I'd seen / dealt with who would get a computer, use it until it was overtaken by viruses or other issues, then just junk it and buy another, and then another, and then another...

Most people out there are simply too stupid for their own good.

 

[leman]

Apple should do this. I like this idea!

Why would Apple do this? Tight component integration that Apple uses allows them to deliver much higher performance and battery life at the same price point.

 

[maflynn]

Apple uses allows them to deliver much higher performance and battery life at the same price point.

Actually LTT's video is showing its not the case, as the framework is largely giving you the best of both worlds.

I think many people agree the move to a sealed system with nothing repairable/upgradeable only suits the manufacturer, as it basically forces the consumer to buy another machine well before end of life on the laptop.

Secondly Apple's anti-consumer moves with its fight against right to repair comes into play as their system design does impede the consumer from getting it repaired outside of apple.

 

[leman]

Actually LTT's video is showing its not the case, as the framework is largely giving you the best of both worlds.

The Framework Laptop starts at the same price as the MBA, with a 40% slower CPU, single-channel RAM and 6-8 hours battery life. I really don’t see what’s the best if the both words here. Their main advantage is customizability - you can configure RAM and SSD for your liking, and they are going to be cheaper than the few standard configs offered by Apple. But you are paying for this configurability with battery life and build quality.

Everyone has different use cases of course, but in my book, 6-8 hours more battery life and better performance that I can rely on every single day trumps a promise that I can update RAM one distant day if I feel like it.

I think many people agree the move to a sealed system with nothing repairable/upgradeable only suits the manufacturer, as it basically forces the consumer to buy another machine well before end of life on the laptop.

This is a rather superfluous statement because it’s arbitrary. Where do you draw a line? If modularity is so important, why do we tolerate GPU RAM being soldered on, but not system RAM? Why are we ok with soldered-on mobile CPUs? Why don’t we demand that the iGPU is moved out of the SoC and be placed on a separate board for easier replacement? How about the PSU? Why even solder on the capacitors, those go bad quickly, surely some sort of latching mechanism can be devised instead?

The simple truth is that as you start pushing the boundaries of performance and efficiency, modularity becomes less feasible. By tightly integrating components together, we can build faster, more efficient, more reliable and often cheaper hardware. You want upgradeable RAM in your laptop? That’s fine! But then forget about long battery runtimes or high bandwidth.

The only point where I disagree with Apple in regards to modularity of their computers is the SSD. I would prefer if it were on a separate board, so that it could be theoretically replaceable and/or upgradeable. Sure, from what we’ve seen so far, Apple SSDs have significantly higher endurance than average consumer SSDs, but there is still no good reason for them to be soldered.

 

[JMacHack]

I think many people agree the move to a sealed system with nothing repairable/upgradeable only suits the manufacturer, as it basically forces the consumer to buy another machine well before end of life on the laptop.

Well that depends on how you define “sealed,” personally I think further component integration is what’s going to happen moving forward. See: SoC systems like the M1. Apple has shown benefits to having an SoC vs. a “traditional system”

Now gluing batteries and displays? That’s terrible.

The only point where I disagree with Apple in regards to modularity of their computers is the SSD. I would prefer if it were on a separate board, so that it could be theoretically replaceable and/or upgradeable. Sure, from what we’ve seen so far, Apple SSDs have significantly higher endurance than average consumer SSDs, but there is still no good reason for them to be soldered.

I find it more egregious that the batteries are glued. I find that SSD wear is less common than failing or falling capacity batteries. I agree that the SSD should be on a removable board, (and Apple has even done this with the Mac Pro!) but it’s less problematic than glued batteries.

 

[boss.king]

Why would Apple do this? Tight component integration that Apple uses allows them to deliver much higher performance and battery life at the same price point.

Do you think gluing components together makes the computer go faster? This laptop clearly shows that a machine can be just as good while still being repairable if that's something the designer plans for.

 

[GrumpyCoder]

Do you think gluing components together makes the computer go faster?

In case of what? A battery? No. In terms of what he wrote "tight component integration", of course:

 

[leman]

I find it more egregious that the batteries are glued. I find that SSD wear is less common than failing or falling capacity batteries. I agree that the SSD should be on a removable board, (and Apple has even done this with the Mac Pro!) but it’s less problematic than glued batteries.

I don’t find glued batteries problematic at all, as long as it’s serviceable. And a Mac battery is serviceable - you can have it replaced at a shop for an industry-average fee. Sure, you can’t do it yourself, but why would this be an issue?

By the way, I’d be very curious to see how much Framework charges for a battery replacement

Do you think gluing components together makes the computer go faster? This laptop clearly shows that a machine can be just as good while still being repairable if that's something the designer plans for.

I am really confused that you folks are so worried about glue 😁 No, I was not talking about batteries. I was talking about right integration of processor clusters, RAM and other components. Tight integration for example is what allows M1 to deliver a level of performance while consuming three to four times less power than closest rivals would need.

 

[GSWForever8]

Why would Apple do this? Tight component integration that Apple uses allows them to deliver much higher performance and battery life at the same price point.

Apple should at least let people service their own computers.

 

[leman]

Apple should at least let people service their own computers.

Why?

 

[sracer]

Apple should at least let people service their own computers.

The most effective way to get Apple to do that is... not by purchasing another Macbook, but by purchasing a computer that allows people to service their own devices. Complaining on an Apple forum doesn't speak. Writing to Tim Cook doesn't either. "Money" talks. I know... a single purchase is not going to cause them to budge. But giving them more money certainly isn't.

Why should Apple do it otherwise? They produce systems that are not user-serviceable and have questionable quality... the result... customers not only continue to buy Apple systems but they even give Apple MORE money for AppleCare. If I were a shareholder in Apple, I would be demanding that they continue to do what they're doing.

 

[GSWForever8]

Why?

Right to repair. Apple shouldn't lock up their devices and refrain us from repairing it.

 

[leman]

Why should Apple do it otherwise? They produce systems that are not user-serviceable and have questionable quality... the result... customers not only continue to buy Apple systems but they even give Apple MORE money for AppleCare. If I were a shareholder in Apple, I would be demanding that they continue to do what they're doing.

Lol,” questionable quality”. Apple rates their batteries for 1000 cycles, which is enough to last between 3 and 5 years depending on your usage. Other manufacturers specify between 300-500 cycles or 12-18 months before “significant degradation”, if they specify anything at all. Dell XPS 15” apparently has a battery rated for 300 cycles.

I mean, I have nothing against a device being user repairable, but would you really trade a battery that lasts 4 years to one that has to be replaced every 1.5 years?

By the way, speaking about the Framework Laptop… it’s overall volume is larger that the 13” MBP, yet it’s battery is actually smaller. And it has between 30-50% useable battery life. Do you really prefer an obviously inferior system just because it’s user-maintainable?

 

[09872738]

Why?

Because it makes sense? So why not?

 

[leman]

Right to repair. Apple shouldn't lock up their devices and refrain us from repairing it.

They are not locking them up. They are foregoing safety encodings user-replaceable batteries have in order to deliver a battery that has a much longer lifespan (up to 3 times longer than what’s normal on the market). Since Apple works with battery cells directly, replacing the battery without special tools and training can be very dangerous.

Do you really prefer a user replaceable battery that you have to swap every 1.5 years to one that only a technician can swap but that would last you 4-5 years? Which will end up cheaper in the long run, what do you think?

 

[sracer]

Lol,” questionable quality”. Apple rates their batteries for 1000 cycles, which is enough to last between 3 and 5 years depending on your usage. Other manufacturers specify between 300-500 cycles or 12-18 months before “significant degradation”, if they specify anything at all. Dell XPS 15” apparently has a battery rated for 300 cycles.

I mean, I have nothing against a device being user repairable, but would you really trade a battery that lasts 4 years to one that has to be replaced every 1.5 years?

By the way, speaking about the Framework Laptop… it’s overall volume is larger that the 13” MBP, yet it’s battery is actually smaller. And it has between 30-50% useable battery life. Do you really prefer an obviously inferior system just because it’s user-maintainable?

My comment about "questionable quality" extends beyond the battery. The context being, people in increasing numbers are recognizing the need to buy an extended warranty on their Apple laptops... not only to be covered for accidents, but because the quality issues that might arise. Many would rather give Apple more money than to buy alternatives that don't need an extended warranty on top of the higher cost of the device itself.

 

[leman]

My comment about "questionable quality" extends beyond the battery. The context being, people in increasing numbers are recognizing the need to buy an extended warranty on their Apple laptops... not only to be covered for accidents, but because the quality issues that might arise. Many would rather give Apple more money than to buy alternatives that don't need an extended warranty on top of the higher cost of the device itself.

Over 20% of laptops fail within three years of ownership. Apple laptops fail a bit rarer that some other brands, but they do fail. This is the reality of the industry. The Framework laptop will have these failure rates as well and it’s being modular won’t protect you. If your Apple keyboard fails out of warranty, you’ll have to pay Apple $200 to get a new one. If a Framework keyboard fails, you’ll have to pay Framework to get a new keyboard, and I doubt it’s going to be significantly cheaper. If your CPU fails, you’ll have to get a new mainboard in both cases. And so on. How is Framework “better” here? Because you can potentially save $100 on the technician labor, if at all? You people act as if Apple stuff can’t be repaired at all, and the only choice is to throw it away.

Instead of pushing for weird regulations that would force the manufacturers to deliver inferior products in the name of “repairability”, you folks should be striving for some real consumer protection in form of longer warranties and affordable extended device insurance. With the consumer rights in the USA being a sad joke, I’m not surprised that you are getting obsessed with cheap repairs. I am all for the right to repair. But it has to make sense. The critical areas where lack of repair ability actually harms consumers are things like tractors (those are the worst), cars, household appliances and medical equipment. Not smartphones or computers. The user should also have a choice to yield their right to repair in exchange of receiving superior technology that cannot be reasonably made user-repairable, like Apple‘s “naked” battery cells or low-power tightly integrated RAM. And that’s exactly what Apple gives you. If you want user-serviceable devices, don’t buy Apple products. Nobody forces you to.

 

[boss.king]

I am really confused that you folks are so worried about glue 😁 No, I was not talking about batteries. I was talking about right integration of processor clusters, RAM and other components. Tight integration for example is what allows M1 to deliver a level of performance while consuming three to four times less power than closest rivals would need.

So nothing to do with this machine at all? You realise that there are many more components to a laptop than the cpu, gpu, and ram, right?

 

[boss.king]

In case of what? A battery? No. In terms of what he wrote "tight component integration", of course:

This is very different to gluing components together, but I feel like you already know that.

 

[Blue Quark]

There's a lot more going on here than simply having upgradeable hardware. Yes, there's lots of fairly inexpensive and, arguably, perfectly serviceable boxen out there which are as things have heretofore always been: independent memory, CPU, storage, etc. If all you care about is that you can swap RAM or a battery, then who gives a crap about anything else.

Me, personally, well... I think it ought to be obvious I'm not trying to walk away from Apple's unquestionably restrictive hardware. I wouldn't have bought an M1 MBA if that were the case. The more I use it, the more I really enjoy everything Apple's done with both halves.

That all said, the future lies along a different path than the past, vis a vis hardware and what implications different design concepts have. We didn't used to have to worry about back doors and all this kind of crazy spying going on (or at least the potential to do so). Go back to just the 1990s and most of what we hear about on the news at night would ONLY have been the stuff of the crackpot tinfoil hat brigade. Yes, I want independent components which I can swap out at will for any reason or no reason. It's my property, and absolutely I should be able to do with it whatever I wish. However, if you're only looking at component swapability, you're merely skimming the surface of what in truth should be this thread's discussion.

It's critical to have open firmware driving everything from the lowest level. It's critical to know the MOBO doesn't contain chips it shouldn't, or chips it should, but designed in a way that they shouldn't. It's critical to know, particularly with laptops, that every component not centrally critical to the machine running, can be independently and physically disconnected, on the fly and at will (like the webcam, or BT, or WiFi). There's lots of whacky, crazy crap going on out there, and even if the "average person" in a first-world country doesn't necessarily have to worry that they are going to be the target of government action or espionage, that can't be said for every country, and it's not something which anyone from any country really should just ignore or take for granted.

So, I want my upgradeability unrestricted, but I also want to buy hardware which doesn't allow for others to compromise any other aspect of my life, and to that end, most likely Purism is the only hardware maker which ticks all those boxes. But, this isn't just about them. We honestly should be demanding the same thing out of everyone who sells us stuff.

I think Apple's ARM-based CPUs are very likely representative of the future, probably like Wayland and Pipewire are OS-level underpinnings of the future. Honestly, that was one of the motivating factors behind me buying a new Apple box. So, let's make sure we're firing on all cylinders here if we're gonna go pushing in a more liberating direction, ok?