That's like five people. The real enthusiasm is amongst people waiting for their m1 macbook pros to be delivered.
I ask because it seems like those are two different customers.
The issue of hivemind thinking in forums is that it projects a uniform idea of what customers value while ignoring the obvious demographics. Apple gets a lot of scorn on here because their products suit an audience which differs quite a bit from the typical HN commenter.
If using this forum as an example, everyone wants a fully editable device, and wants every vendor to make such devices - but actually not buy from said vendors because they’re evil. I find this idea of people wanting to control the design of devices they’ll never buy to be such an interesting concept - that’s also why I don’t see the Framework buyer ever being allured to Apple’s laptops.
Following on from this I fully expect this move from Apple to be seen here as anything but a good thing: such as tokenism, part of a grand evil scheme, or similar conspiracy-level plan. This is in spite of a high-level view of Apple steadily expanding repair options over the last decade. Not to get philosophical, but it does have a Friedrich Nietzsche feel to it all: that apple’s actions don’t matter, they’ll always be construed into being a scheme.
That said, my sincere hope is that this move doesn't dampen enthusiasm amongst people considering switching from Macbooks to Framework laptops. We desperately need a computer manufacturer that puts repairability at the core of their design process and Framework has made such a high quality start that it even with their first attempt it doesn't feel like a compromise!
If you care about really owning your device and being able to repair it take a close look at the caveats Apple may include in the actual details of this programme versus with Framework.