alt Hacker NewsI like their openness on hardware design. They open sourced their design under CC-BY-4.0 (surprisingly no NC!) in hope that it could enable reuse [1].
However, the whole thing is overpriced. Quoting kingsleyopara's comment 4 days ago [2],
...matching specs it comes out as more expensive than the MBP - even worse when you factor in potential discounts/sales which framework doesn't offer.
Framework 13 Pro: £2064 (Ultra X7 358H, 16GB, 1TB, default ports, no adapter)
Framework 13 Pro: £2264 (Ultra X7 358H, 32GB, 1TB, default ports, no adapter)
MacBook Pro 14: £1699 (M5, 16GB, 1TB, no adapter)
MacBook Pro 14: £2099 (M5, 32GB, 1TB, no adapter)
MacBook Pro 14: £2199 (M5 Pro, 24GB, 1TB, no adapter) - added as I think it’s an even better deal
Replies
Comparing Apples to Oranges.
Apple only makes disposable devices now. They're a megacorp can negotiate massive discounts at every stage of the supply chain.
I've helped several people in the last few years set up new Macs, replacing ones that were only 1-2 years old, because they ran out of storage.
Additionally, the comparison doesn't even hold true when you need more than the base configs from Apple, given their ridiculous upgrade pricing. I'm writing this on a $6,000USD M3 MBP with 128gb/4tb. It would have been substantially cheaper to build out on a Framework.
What sells me on it is I get to take a spare Gen4 m.2 ssd out of my gaming PC I wasn't fully utilizing instead of paying for 1TB of storage.
Being able to drive the price down by re-using parts I already have is a pretty big selling point, IMO.
Also, I think Apple is benefitting from scale, since they're able to maintain the (usually too high) storage and memory prices they've had for years. At this moment in time, framework have the misfortune of being forced to pass inflated wholesale prices onto the consumer.
Make this comparison one calendar year ago and the F13 Pro could very easily beat the MBP on price spec-for-spec.
Even putting aside the whole repairability thing, with the Mac you’re stuck with Apple Silicon. Apple’s processors are mostly awesome, of course, but using one does mean you’re stuck with macOS—Asahi Linux seems to be a ways away from M5 support.
SSD and RAM prices are wacky nowadays, but when I got my DIY framework 13, it was MUCH cheaper than the apple equivalent if you wanted more than the minimum specs (in my case, 32GB RAM + 2TB SSD). Main downside was software/firmware that didn't work well with Framework hardware
my main eyebrow raise on price comes from pre-built being cheaper than DIY version
how does that even work?
I had to sell my 2016 MacBook Pro because Apple made a defective keyboard design and I had no recourse other than having it replaced with the same defective design. This repair required the replacement of the entire top case of the computer including a number of unrelated components. Without the widespread negative press and repair program, this repair would have cost hundreds of dollars.
I am willing to pay more for a product made by a company whose respect for its customers manifests itself in the design of the product.
I am willing to pay more for a product that has first-class support for non-commercial operating systems that aren’t trying to collect data and sell services.
Lately it’s become obvious to me that Linux is a better desktop experience than macOS or Windows. Liquid Glass ruined my Mac, and Windows is…well, I only ever ran it so I could play games.
Sure, Apple is cheaper, because they make more money selling you services than selling Macs and iPads combined. These are services that are advertised to you within basic settings panels of the operating system, including apps like News that cannot be uninstalled (even Microsoft allows you to uninstall apps like that!)
I don’t want to pay less for a Mac that feels slick during the warranty period but has no upgrade path and no reasonably priced way to repair even minor issues.
I mean, yeah. There's a reason other companies don't focus on modularity or repairability. Its not free.
We're not the target audience for this thing, but I'm at least happy there's a way people can put their money where their mouth is.
> the whole thing is overpriced
Economy of scale... they cannot make (or sell) anywhere near as many as Apple does, so of course it's going to be more expensive. Just like that "Made in USA" grill brush that costs 75 dollars (but guess where the machines that make it come from).
I mean yeah they’re right but it’s not like the difference is particularly staggering. And unfortunately having control and quality runs a premium these days.
Plus depending on what you’re upgrading it could very well save you money in the long run, as the parts you can replace or upgrade yourself in an MBpro are few and far between. The few things you can replace often cost an arm and a leg and require way more technical expertise than a framework demands.
Also, Mac lock in. Not something to lightly ignore. Framework will run basically anything except MacOS.
Cost of the Macbook Pro 14 in 2031: another £1999
Cost of the Framework 13 upgrade kit in 2031: £499
The point of the upgradability and openness of the design is that you only have to pay that cost once, instead of every time you buy a laptop. How much will it cost to upgrade a MacBook's RAM if you decide you need more after a year or two? £2099?