alt Hacker NewsThis is what I don't get, among <Linux> computer uses, apple macs are a minority. I even went around at Linux conferences and counted, like 30-40%.
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!"
Replies
Because you’re in the minority. The vast majority of the population views the build quality and materials of the macbook pro to be the standard by which all others are measured.
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.
Most Linux users don't use Macs because running Linux on a Mac is difficult.
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.
This kind of mediocrity what holds the Linux world back by a big extent. Arguably Apple makes the best hardware currently, spec wise and build quality wise too. You can ignore them and turn to mediocrity or you can strive to be like them and even better than them! Framework says that we can be better in some departments (modularity) while also trying to match their (Apple’s) design and build quality.
> Why are they so so dedicated to being as much as a look and feel clone as Mac as possible?
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.
> I even went around at Linux conferences and counted, like 30-40%
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.
You wouldn't understand unless you've used one for a few months. There is alot to like and the dream is to have any "normal" laptop like it
I suspect a large number of computers would be thinkpad, primarily due to its repairability, which is the biggest selling point of framework by far. So, together, you cover a pretty significant chunk of the market
You’re confusing the look of the device with the feel of the OS.
There are absolutely some people who avoid Macbooks not because of the hardware part so much as the MacOS part.
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.
+1
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.
Because realistically in the laptop computer space Apple is obliterating everything else right now.
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.