I like my framework, but I do wonder if the repairability angle is overstated if you're already used to fixing normal laptops. Yes, Framework's parts are easier to find, and the laptops are easier to open, but it's not like doing any of the typical repairs - keyboard, screen, touchpad, battery - are impossibly difficult on those other guys.

Used thinkpads and the glut of EBay parts for them reach about 85% of what Framework does for me, and at half the price. But it's a different experience.

Framework does seem like better build quality than most laptops I've had, but I'm used to cheap crappy ones.

On the other hand, you do seem to find more cases of multiple people doing things like the linked bios update procedure on framework.

I had a very different experience with the Framework team. The battery died (within the warranty period), I reached out to them, they asked some questions, then sent me a brand new one.

Very satisfied with my Framework laptop and the customer support. I can't imagine buying another laptop.

Any other laptop is going to have the same risk of a failed BIOS flash, and will likely require the same degree of manual intervention to fix. That the replacement process entails swapping (and potentially upgrading, as I did in this exact situation with my FW16) just the motherboard instead of the entire laptop is a strict improvement.

That said, I agree with the article that a company like Framework with an ostensible mission of maximal repairability can and should at minimum provide header pins to reflash the firmware instead of requiring a bunch of adapters. Ideal would be an internal USB-C port that presents the flashed firmware as a file on a FAT filesystem that you can copy to backup or overwrite to restore/upgrade, like what the Raspberry Pi Pico does. Either approach would entail pennies of added cost per board, at most; it wouldn't take very many prevented warranty claims for that investment to pay off.