upvote
Or… there’s a level of value that people will assign to the repairability offered by Framework, but the current cost is too high?

I like and support what Framework offers. But when I last bought a laptop (a couple of years ago now) the FW13 was almost double the price of a similarly-specc’d and thinner/lighter Asus. (From €1000 to ~€18-1900).

I’d probably pay a ~40% premium for FW, all else being equal, but 80-90% is just too much: it just doesn’t make sense to whatever value-assessment algorithms I’ve developed over time.

reply
> I’d probably pay a ~40% premium for FW

and you'd be one of the higher ones.

But a 40% premium is not enough to sustain framework imho. The business model of framework is that you don't buy a new laptop, but just upgrade. Therefore, the lifetime value of one customer on framework is less than that of an Asus buyer (who would have to buy a new laptop every new CPU generation or when batteries die, which is probably at most 5 years).

Therefore, framework has to charge a lot more per customer to make the business make sense. 2x premium is not unreasonable under this sort of assumption.

I personally do think they're doing a good job of course, but i do also wonder the long term viability because their customers are so niche.

reply
Speaking as someone who did buy a framework as my primary computer (and has been happy with it), my hesitation had much more to do with uncertainty about the execution than with price, which is pretty competitive when you diy. Especially because for the value proposition to pay off, the company/ecosystem has to survive for several years at least and continue making compatible product in the categories I would want. It's a big investment for most people and it's not surprising most go with a safe/known option.
reply
13 inch screen is a toy usable only for browsing social media and not for real work.
reply
That's a take, for sure. I use a 14" as my daily driver. Sure, I plug it into a big monitor when I'm at my desk, but it's perfectly usable standalone.

I used to use an 11" as my daily driver (and that was before retina-resolutions were a thing). It wasn't ideal, but it was fine for development work.

reply
13 seems to have emerged as the generally best compromise for using at your desk and traveling. Even a 15” is still small relative to an external monitor and is getting large to fly with.
reply
yeah real programmers only use the biggest screens, the bestest cpus, and discrete graphics
reply
Companies have standardized on, mostly, 13” laptops with whatever accessories. But, honestly, for some people who never leave their desk, a desktop of some sort is probably a better choice— though just connecting to a server works too.
reply
You don't use your laptop as just a thin client connecting to a more powerful machine over the Internet?
reply
No, I do not. We don't even always have Internet nowadays. And how does this solve the small screen size problem?
reply