> In contrast, Framework laptops has many supposed benefits: they're upgradable, repairable
Why would you propose that the author does not care about these things? They clearly do, they are simply not a single issue voter – and who is, when buying something as complex as a laptop? There is a trade-off and the one that Framework made here is not hitting the mark for the author, and they go into some detail to explain as to why.
I am super excited about Framework stuff: They are clearly getting somewhere with this; it's nicer than anything that came before with comparable repairability. I think it's super plausible that we don't exhaust the physical limitations that arise through repairability before it's so nice, that the trade-off will be negligible for most folks.
IMHO I think its not helpful to be comparing Framework's price to whats currently on the market. You are paying for sustainability. If you are doing this I think you are missing the point. This isn't a apples to apples comparison.
I also feel the frustration of the parent, and I also see that many people don't want to pay or consider the ramifications of where we we are at right now in this given time. Most devices are designed to be throwaway, manufactures cut corners, operate at a loss. These are byproducts from our badly designed technology from a suitability perspective that have driven prices down in a unhealthy way IMHO.
Its like trying to compare prices between now and fifty years ago. If you want the world to be more sustainable, you need to consider that its going to cost more, its not going to be comparable to whats out there right now, and you are going to need to deal with the growing pains.
Comparing Framework laptop to whats out there today in terms of features is a losing proposition. The market is built around a lack of sustainability.