You can usually name a laptop that has some feature better than a macbook, but the overall package is so strong in so many avenues. Sound quality, screen quality (even without leaning on fancy new tech like OLED), trackpad quality.
Would you rather they target the Dell Latitude (Coil Whine, crazy power-off issues caused by C-States, poor thermals) or Thinkpad T-series (USB-C port stops charging and requires motherboard replacement, thermal issues, weak speakers, also coil whine, unstable radio) or HP’s elitebook (randomly doesn’t wake from suspend, hinge cracking and keycaps falling off even with light wear).
The other SKU’s are a race to the bottom, despite being more expensive for the base-system (which I find ironic).
It’s a poor north star to take a degrading product line as inspiration.
Probably right, seeing how bad the laptop world is nowadays. Even with its shitty chiclet keyboard and button-less trackpad, the M2 Pro I have to use at work trounces the XPSes my Windows colleagues have.
Still far from the Latitude e64x0 and old 6x series Thinkpads I had but well, they only win on the haptics and repairability level. Thankfully I kept an e6440 that still works "okay" with its Haswell i5 and 1080p IPS screen; the thermals and crappy Intel iGPU are the only thing I really lament.
I’d still be using an x201s.
Best laptop I ever owned, everything else has been a downgrade build-wise.
But I need the battery and performance.
If I'm looking at the framework or the Thinkpad or anything else I've said "no thanks" to Apple laptops
This is my starting point. I've already turned the Mac down.
It's like turning down a very specific slice of cake and then being offered the same kind of cake from different vendors when really you just want a salad
If for software: thats the point.
If for hardware (because its not serviceable): then thats what the framework is fixing.
It is no secret that Apple hardware is superior right now. If you don’t like that as a fact then convince Dell/HP/Lenovo to do better. It is a valid north star for Framework in the current ecosystem to differentiate but chase the best in market.
—
Also, your comments are devoid of things that you actually feel like you’re missing. I think you’re just being snide because you've taken a position as “anything related to Apple is bad” which undermines a lot of genuine engineering they do.
Let's take an industry where there isn't any: showers. You go to a hotel or an Airbnb and you can't figure out how to turn on the shower. They're all so different
This is actually great. People are being very innovative and creative. That's human flourishing and ingenuity.
You go to the electronics store and all the laptops look the same with different logos on the back.
It's suffocating
I'm looking for creative diversity. It's a different set of values
MNT Reform for example; https://mntre.com/
The laptops I mentioned are also very different from Macbooks, but they are increasingly poor quality.
I maintain that its a valid choice, maybe once they have a truly solid product they can be creative. But theres no point being “super creative” and having no product, especially not a product people dislike.
While you're certainly within your right to buy different types of hardware, I don't think you're right to criticize convergent design. There already are wildly different laptop alternatives like the iPad, which is mainly held back by it's refusal to accept basic laptop features that Mac and PC users take for granted.
So making Mac-like hardware with Windows/Linux software is very much a great value proposition to many people.
There is some agreement in terms of the M chips. There is no universl agreement re keyboard layout, screen technology and surfacing, trackpoints, touchscreens, 2-in-1 form factors, port selection, or aluminium unibodies.
I don't think the interest in the hardware is necessarily low among Linux users, it's just that MacBooks aren't built with Linux in mind at all, and you can't run Linux on it as easily as on something like a ThinkPad.
> cloned every detail of the product you are definitionally not interested in
I guess a lot of people actually are interested in Apple's hardware, and wish something like that existed, but running Linux. You can't extrapolate your own preferences to Framework's market.
The only thing that’s surprising is that you see 30-40% of the laptops at a Linux conference are macbooks given how poor to non-existent the Linux support is for the newer Apple silicon models.
I've said a hard and firm no to them. I've even gotten those computers from work and did not use them.
When shopping for laptop from an alternative why would I be wanting a clone of the thing I've already affirmed I'm not interested it by the nature of my interest in alternatives?
The target is people who would buy a MacBook but want to run Linux.
There are many people who turn down the MacBook, not because of build quality, or design, but because it does not support Linux.
I know the HN comment thread is people who don't see this as an ideology and who have drawers full of apple products and used to work there for years but see this as not a preference in the slightest ... I know who I'm talking to but I for some weird strange, neurodivergent reason, insist on reality.
But I think many people would like to run Linux on Apple hardware. That's what I do and I haven't found better hardware yet. You just have to be careful in choosing something that's well supported.
If I had to change laptops (I didn't choose mine and I'm just lucky that M1 Macs are well supported by Asahi) I would definitely take a Framework and hope that it's sufficiently Apple-like hardware wise.
Because Mac hardware is the best in the market. I’m not really sure how you’d argue otherwise. Build quality, components etc are the best, it makes sense you’d want to match that.
A lot of Linux folks would love to own a MacBook that runs Linux. But such a thing doesn’t exist (at least at a first party support level). Not wanting one because it does look like a MacBook doesn’t make a ton of sense.
Maybe because I don't want my personal machine to turn into a brick if the storage/memory fails.
I have the first gen Framework sitting in a drawer because of some issues and one of the nitpicks is the fact that it looks like a cheap knockoff of a decade old Macbook complete with the Temu apple logo on the front.
I'd rather they made something similar to a Thinkpad/Latitude. But then again, there seems to be a mass delusion that anything non-Apple is a graveyard of garbage regardless of the price. So they're catering to that market.
Maybe I've been extremely lucky in picking refurbed enterprise machines running Linux in the past decade that hasn't faced any of the issues people complain about.
It's just a different chassis folks. I've thought seriously about just making that as a business, going all in
Supposedly framework is ok with it
I'm a huge long time Linux guy, it's been my ride or die since the mid '90s. But when the M1 came out I got one to replace my "couch" chromebook (which was EOL), partly because I was dead tired of trying to get Divinci Resolve working on Linux. I dedicated days trying to get it to work, with nearly 30 years of full time Linux SysAdmin experience under my belt.
I've run primarily Thinkpads before that MacBook. The Mac hardware has been top notch for me, the Thinkpad is superior in repairability and upgradability, but the Mac I haven't had to do any repairs on. I don't baby it, but I also don't abuse it. There are infuriating things about MacOS, for sure.
Why are they so so dedicated to being as much as a look and feel clone as Mac as possible?
I've got zero interest in a MacBook chaser. It's not like those are inaccessible to me. I've voluntarily said no to them. Why would I want someone else's imitation of it?
"If you can see here we've meticulously cloned every detail of the product you are definitionally not interested in because you are here!"