(Personal thoughts) As a FW13 user... I can't disagree that the Neo is great value, but it's meant for the average user who doesn't care about things like copying files at USB 2 speeds.
If you are the kind of guys who uses Linux (or even BSD), or values repairability... the FW12 is unsurprisingly much better.
“Copying files at USB 2 speeds”, what? Between what? You know USB 2 is 480 Mbps, right?
Yeah exactly. For an average person who's copying their holiday photos eg to or from a pendrive or portable SSD, it's probably not very obvious. If you're copying 4k videos all day for work, the 60MBps (480Mbps) makes much more of a difference.
Yeah that's kinda what I mean. For 90% plus of the "normies" who don't know what linux is, the Neo is just fine. If you're a power user, the Neo really doesn't cut it.
The drop in sustained perfomance - due to the lack of a fan - partly reveals the ethos of Apple and the Neo users. It's meant for bursty quick tasks, not heavy continuous compute demands.
You can very, very easily add thermal pads to the Neo and get much better sustained performance tho. Costs $5-$10 and 10 mins tops even if it’s your first time.
I think you greatly overestimate how much normies store locally. They basically don’t store more than their phones, aside from maybe some documents. Photos/music/video is all in the cloud. Storing more on your proper computer than you store on your phone is a power user thing.
I occasionally move a lot of files around from different drives. Using a dock/hub on the 10gbps port will work in a pinch but I'm not waiting around for hundreds of gigabytes to transfer at 40MB/s (max real world transfer speed)
The I/O is really a pain point for some users - the built in wifi is three times faster than half of its USB ports. I wouldn't turn down a free or super cheap neo but at the normal price point I honestly would probably be looking elsewhere, especially if I could only afford one device.
It's fantastic for the average user but I like having a full size HDMI port, two USB C and and at least one type A. Neo users can get all day battery life and fantastic fan-free performance and my zenbook allows me to do the things I want to do with my laptop while making its own compromises.
I'd say the Neo is more repairable than the FW12. Apple will be around in 10 years for parts. Will Framework still exist by 2030??? I'd say 50/50 on that at best.
I agree, it's just that remembering which port does USB 2 vs USB 3 at 10Gbps is not something I'd imagine the average tech-illiterate person to keep in mind.
For the average r/hardware user it's probably not an issue at all.
Honestly I really don't know how Apple does it, but its by and far the one major differentiating factor that becomes immediately apparent, and has the most impact: the display. Like goddamn, the Neo's display is not gonna win any awards but its still really good, especially when compared to a, frankly, piece of shit 70% sRGB panel. In 2026 thats the equivalent of the shit-tier TN panels Lenovo put in T-books back in the early 2010s. Just inexcusable garbage, panels not worth producing let alone buying.
Officially it's 50% NTSC, ShortCircuit measured 66.6% of sRGB. It's really not enough as the only display option. Neo has 98% sRGB, 73% AdobeRGB and 74% of P3.
This is such an incredible scam that Framework is running and people praise them for it. Idiots dump like $2k+ into "upgrading" their shitty 12 inch laptop over its life just to have it get dumpstered on by a $500 Macbook. Adding OLED options and other upgrade paths for the Framework would make it even worse.
Piss poor screens are the reason I still haven't bought a framework product. I have no idea why they can't add a colour calibrated IPS with 2,000+ dimming zones and DisplayHDR 1000 or 1400 certification...
the macbook neo is e-waste garbage, that MUST NOT get considered ever.
the framework 12 is a real computer, but it is unacceptable slow.
so it must also be ignored.
for the framework 12 to become buyable, it needs for the same price preferably a basic decent amd apu with proper performance and a camm dual channel memory module.
then its performance would be fine and you can talk yourself into buying it.
This is a common sentiment expressed by Neo haters which has always made zero sense. How is it possiblly e-waste garbage? Its a perfectly functional laptop that does anything a normal person would want to do and can even delve into enthusiast territory work, like light video editing and music production, etc. Macbooks are known to keep their value insanely well. Apple is also known to provide good support for their laptops. How is it e-waste? You could buy it today and it WILL last you 5 years easy, or you could buy it and use it for a couple years and then get 60-70% of your $500 back probably by selling it.
yeah this article is just an ad, very thinly veiled
relying on geekbench to say the laptop is objectively faster instead of proving it, is crap. The NEO is even worse than framework in terms of IO/USB
but thats not the worst part, the framework 12 isn't supposed to be the cheapest possible laptop, the neo is. There are much better windows laptops to compare to the neo than the framework 12, but arbitrarily picking this as a competetor causes more clicks and outrage, giving him more views for a literally paid sponsorship.
but thats not the worst part, the framework 12 isn't supposed to be the cheapest possible laptop, the neo is.
And yet the Framework 12 is the laptop made of shitty plastic with an absolutely horrible display, bad speakers, bad touchpad and bezels that make it look like a Fisher-Price toy.
He chose the Framework 12 to compare the Neo to, because he is a chud linux user and Framework is the laptop brand of choice of chud linux users.
The only thing Apple's ever provided is a loaner set of Mac Studios for Exo testing for a couple months: https://github.com/geerlingguy/youtube/blob/master/Sponsors.md
Framework has actually provided more review hardware than Apple over the years. And I like Framework more, FWIW ;)
While comparing it to the Neo, a new entry level powerhouse, is valid, imo it also is not the best of comparisons.
Compare it to other laptops with similar specs running Windows or Linux. Evaluate factors like build quality and whether or not the upgradeability nature of the FW is worth the premium.
They should be comparing it to the Macbook Air, as they are the same price. And seeing as how it gets absolutely shit on by the Macbook Neo, the Air absolutely annihilates it.
But why not? The Neo is cheaper and more powerful. How is that then unfair to compare against a framework laptop.
Personally I think the current ram and storage prices are hurting the frameworks value proposition. Apple is able to get a huge volume discount just because of their size.
But there are windows laptops that are 10x as powerful as the neo for the same 700 euro pricepoint. So the neo is a terrible comparison to begin with. It's extremely weak for its price. 8gb is completely ridiculous. Apple is disgusting as always. Completely pathetic company. Scamming customers.
Unless you’re talking used, I don’t believe you without some proof. I’m also gonna say I’m from the US, so I don’t know what international pricing is. The Neo is cheaper than the Framework in the US, and outside of sustained 100% cpu usage, the Neo is better in every category performance wise.
And guess what, in the article, the framework had 8gb of ram and 256gb of storage. That Jeff bought used. And the laptop was $200 more expensive. From a raw price to performance perspective, the Framework isnt even close.
There’s additional things that Framework offers that I still think the base price of the laptop is fair. It’s just unfortunate that Framework can’t compete on ram and storage prices like Apple can.
I wasn't comparing to the framework, frankly both options are shit. I'm not from the US but in my local market i immediately found 2 laptops better than the neo at the same price in like <30 mins, check my reply to other guy's reply. They both had AMD Ryzen 7 170 btw so should be easily findable.
Neo is locked to the Apple walled garden; Apple can afford to even sell them at-cost because the user will be profitable within their ecosystem over time.
I am not saying the Neo is bad or anything; it is impressive, esp with its M chip, but it feels more like a class of its own.
Not sure what you mean by walled garden. Neo runs Mac OS. While Apple does offer an app store for Mac OS you don’t have to use it. You can download apps from anywhere and run them. You can also freely compile and run software without a developer account.
I am happy for the people who are fans of their Frameworks but it never made much sense to me how buying one of their laptops is any more ecologically friendly than making sure my old laptop goes to a buyer on the used market who needs it.
You could even argue Framework is worse because it is not as straightforward to find a good use for the individual parts you're replacing. Most likely you will have to make more purchases to utilize them in another project. The used market (at least where I live) for Framework is a lot less developed than the overall laptop used market.
So if the laptop is worse in every imaginable way you basically have to be a right to repair and upgrade enthusiast to get any benefit from it.
This is brain-dead. It has been explained a million times already but you just don't want to hear. If you mobo dies in a 4 year old xps you throw away the whole laptop. In a framework you replace the mobo, everything else will be fine.
Even if we just use your example and you just want an upgrade, you can just upgrade the one component you need and not buy a whole new laptop, and still sell the part you don't need anymore to someone else. Still less wasteful.
Why can't you just buy a new mobo for the XPS, same as you do for the Framework? They are all over ebay. Hell I just switched out the motherboard in a obscure Chromebook that is 5 years old like a month ago. Why are you guys under the impression that this is some Framework exclusive voodoo that exists?
An XPS is probably the worst example you could have chosen. Dell is actually pretty good about service time spans and pricing. I recently had to get an out-of-warranty motherboard replacement for a 2019 model XPS 13 and the total parts/labor cost from Dell was $277.
Framework relies on the sunk cost fallacy and promotes ewaste. You spend an astronomical amount up front for a mediocre laptop, and then they slow drip "upgrades" to you for years so that you continue to spend more and more and more and never realize you've dumped thousands into a shitty laptop to only keep it to modern mediocre levels. If you go to the Framework subreddit there are people there who detail the absolute INSANE amount of money they dumped into these laptops with upgrades, its mind boggling.
Man, this whole thread is a breath of fresh air. I will let you all in on a secret.
I own a Framework 13, and to upgrade the chassis into new "Pro" lineup will cost around $576 for speakers, battery, bottom cover. Almost $700-$800 with the new display and top cover.
That is not including the Panther Lake X7 mainboard everybody wants to upgrade to which is $799. Then you gotta pay for LPCAMM2 Memory which is probably $300-600 for 32 gb - 64 GB depending.
Total cost of upgrading FW13 to Pro lineup is over $1,700 if you do a total upgrade. Might as well buy a new laptop at this point.
Who the hell is gonna want this old chassis, it's a dead end design with no upgrade paths. Can't even sell it... who is even gonna buy this junk from me?
💯. We are absolutely reliant on Framework for upgrades.
I see lots of people saying they reuse old mainboards into home servers and what not. But I am curious how true that is, and what really happens to old parts you can't sell, reuse right?
Older computers are repurposed into admin machines at our work, or slower testbeds for our IT staff.
Some things can't be repurposed properly, ie a 160GB HDD is pretty useless in and of itself, but you can put that into a 7th gen i3 with a 256 sata drive, and then donate that to your church or school.
Framework computers are pretty much trash. The idea you can recycle only works if they sold every computer on earth, and you can be sure if they ever got that market share that they would be as bad as or worse than HP with their proprietary shaped mbs.
Eh, having had to junk a few otherwise good laptops over things that would have been easily solvable with a framework, I have no regrets spending the extra to know that it can be piecemieled together.
When the charging circuit on the mainboard of a dell Alienware laptop gave up and no shop would do a board repair, the cost was more than the laptop to source a replacement that was already a few years out of date.
Same situation with a framework, and you can just source whatever currently available mainboard will slot in and carry on. It's less about the repairability and availability of the exact parts today, and more about the peace of mind knowing that the platform as a whole doesn't completely change every year. Next year's parts work on last year's model.
The Alienware predated the framework 16, so the base GPU model of the Framework 16 was far more powerful than the RX 5600 of that Alienware. it was about $300 more than the other competitive laptops at the time of purchase.
Since that time, there is a full hardware refresh available if I decide I need more horsepower.
I would do it again.
I work on computers for friends and family. Replacing the keyboard on recent Asus ROG laptops (for a cousin) is a bloody nightmare. Real world issues of actual serviceability outside of upgrading RAM and storage are what make it worth it to me.
Comparing equalised spec framework vs any run of the mill lenovo/hp/dell/asus models the upfront cost is way too high on the frameworks.
It would even be financially more favourable to purchase those scammy extended warranty that include accidental damage on a regular mid range laptop that will give you a brand new replacement if anything goes wrong. At the model the lowest you will pay for a FW 16 with 5070 is 3.5k with the base everything else config.
Upgrading to a new mid range 1.5k laptop + extended warranty every 3 years will come out as the better deal.
One of the biggest “hidden downside” of a small scale OEM is they’re much more affected by component cost fluctuations than dell, apple, Lenovo. It’s just simple economics of scale, bargaining power, and long term contracts.
but it never made much sense to me how buying one of their laptops is any more ecologically friendly than making sure my old laptop goes to a buyer on the used market who needs it
I don't think Framework has ever suggested that. Reduce, reuse, recycle.
You could even argue Framework is worse because it is not as straightforward to find a good use for the individual parts you're replacing... The used market (at least where I live) for Framework is a lot less developed than the overall laptop used market.
Isn't this purely a function of how long they've been about and how many they've sold? I'm not sure ThinkPads had parts easily available back when they had sold so little either.
I agree that the small used/parts market is partly explained by Framework being newer and having sold fewer units. But that explanation does not really remove the drawback. In practice, it is the drawback.
If I am deciding what is more environmentally sensible today, the current state of the market matters. A used ThinkPad, Dell, or HP has a huge existing ecosystem. Buyers, spare parts, donor machines, chargers, batteries, and so on. A Framework part I upgrade out of may be technically reusable, but in practice it is harder to place somewhere useful unless I buy extra accessories or find a fairly niche buyer.
So "that will improve once they sell more" may be true, but it still means the buyer is accepting worse practical reuse economics right now, on the promise that the ecosystem matures later. I'd also like to add that it has been 6 years and we still hear this argument being made. Will we still hear the same argument in another 6 years? When does "it will work if we just keep buying more from them" stop being a valid strategy?
I also think the "reduce, reuse, recycle" point cuts both ways. The most ecological laptop is usually the one that already exists and keeps being used. Buying a new modular laptop can be defensible for right-to-repair reasons or supporting a company with better design values. But I do not think it automatically beats keeping an older laptop in circulation or buying from the established used market.
My issue is not that Framework has no merit. It clearly does. My issue is when the environmental argument gets treated as self-evident. A lot of the benefit depends on assumptions such as people will upgrade only when necessary, that old parts will actually be reused or resold, and that there will be a healthy secondhand ecosystem for those parts. I am not convinced that any of those very critical assumptions are actually true.
In some ways, the upgradeability angle can even encourage more consumption. A lot of the discussion around Framework is about new modules, new batteries, new mainboards, new chassis revisions, and keeping the laptop current. That is appealing, but from an environmental perspective, "reduce" is still the most important part of "reduce, reuse, recycle". Encouraging people to upgrade sooner than they would have without a modular laptop can actually be worse for the environment.
I do not think Framework is bad. I just think the environmental case is more conditional than people often admit. It is probably strongest for people who genuinely keep the same machine for a long time, repair it instead of replacing it, and actually reuse or resell the parts they upgrade. For everyone else, it may mostly be a nicer-feeling way to keep consuming more and more PC hardware that they might not even need.
$475+ for Framework 13 to upgrade the speakers, battery, bottom cover to become the FW13 Pro. Almost $700-$800 if you upgrade to the new display and top cover.
That is not including the Panther Lake X7 mainboard everybody wants to upgrade to which is $799. Then you gotta pay for LPCAMM2 Memory which is probably $300-600 for 32 gb - 64 GB depending.
Yeah, that's never been a compelling value add to Framework laptops I agree. The main selling points to me were higher build quality than other laptop manufacturers like Dell and HP and being able to avoid the Windows tax by getting the DIY edition. I picked Framework because they're good laptops that will keep chugging along for the foreseeable future, and I'm willing to pay a premium for that.
I considered a Framework because I like that I can replace and/or upgrade the hardware. But that modularity comes at a cost, the performance for the price just wasn't there. Combine that with worse display/speakers/build/keyboard/trackpad and I ended up sticking with a Macbook.
framework died when they made every single port an individual module
I understand my comparison isn't 1:1 because of time and change, but a 15" touchbar macbook pro can wind up having more usb ports than a lot of framework laptops, and it only has 4.
You couldn't pay me to use a Lenovo (actually you can, I have to use one at the company I work for). Cheapest feeling piece of plastic I've ever held, and nowhere as repairable and especially upgradable as a FW.
Yeah all fun and games until you have to run a windows only program. Trust me for university and engineering using a Mac will inevitably lead you to being unable to use some vital programs, so what's better being faster or being able to reach every place?
Please specify which engineering applications would be able to be run on the FW12 that’s specced in the article that isn’t available on MacOS?
I’m not an engineer so this is a genuine question because all my engineer friends had minimum requirements of stuff like 16GB of RAM for Solidworks and other things that make it unusable on the FW12 that's species
It's not hard to justify avoiding capture by Apple's closed software ecosystem. Doesn't matter how good the hardware is if you can't use it the way you want to.
It's hilarious. They never even considered we're talking about the target audience of 12 inch ultrabooks. Their tunnel visioned brains cannot comprehend anything other than their custom built PCMR esque AMD based desktop using scavenged hardware from Microcenter/Mindfactory deals.
I push back on this stupidity as a BIG fan of Framework and their mission. But bad faith, idiotic arguments against Apple only serve to illustrate why enthusiasts sound elitist, dumb, and out of touch with the actual market. I’ve had enough product conversations to know that FW leadership would be over the damn moon if they could even touch a fraction of of the target audience as the neo
I really don't understand why it is so hard to comprehend the vast, vast majority of computer users do NOT want to bother with tinkering with their hardware. At best they send it to a service centre. The average person has never opened their computers (whether a laptop or desktop and doubly so for computers at work). Not even to upgrade ram, if they even know what that is. So the FW audience would always have the ceiling as the hardware enthusiast crowd. Why is it so hard to understand. You even have questions on this sub from time to time asking why there isn't a modular phone ala framework like are you even serious.
There's nothing stopping developers from developing for Mac, their computers are just straight up not built for it and the market share for gaming on Mac is just too small to justify the effort.
Pretty sure you only need the one account to deploy to Appstore/do code signing/whatever else. Besides I’m pretty sure EV cert/Azure signing ends up pricier :D
$100 per developer per year and being forced by Apple to buy Apple's hardware for all their developers says otherwise.
That's only if you want to distribute your software through Apple's App Store or other programs, or if you need their cloud services or other features. You can get access to Xcode and their APIs with a free account. On MacOS, there's nothing stopping developers from publishing through 3rd parties such as Steam or Epic or just distributing games yourself.
Also of course you're gonna need a Mac to develop Mac software, how else are you going to test it? What are you talking about?
Really? So Macs don't have the best hardware after all?
Straw man argument. You're putting words in my mouth. Apple is currently industry leading for efficiency and certain workloads like video. In this thread we're talking about the MacBook Neo which is pretty much unmatched on most performance fronts for its pricepoint. You're the one who brought up AAA gaming.
It's only small because of how actively hostile Apple is to developers, and a feedback loop of gamers not buying Apple because there's no games.
How are they hostile to its developers? Please give examples
That's only if you want to distribute your software through Apple's App Store or other programs
Don't programs distributed separately come with big scary warnings about code signing, and users have to go deep into the settings to just run it?
Also of course you're gonna need a Mac to develop Mac software, how else are you going to test it? What are you talking about?
Funny how you don't need a Microsoft Surface to test on Windows.
Straw man argument. You're putting words in my mouth. Apple is currently industry leading for efficiency and certain workloads like video. In this thread we're talking about the MacBook Neo which is pretty much unmatched on most performance fronts for its pricepoint. You're the one who brought up AAA gaming.
Poster up the thread said "i can install anything i want" on macos. Not true, because a lot of software simply doesn't exist for macs. You then said "their computers are just straight up not built for it", and now you're saying they're industry leading. Which is it?
How are they hostile to its developers? Please give examples
Deprecating APIs deprecating entire CPU architectures, all of this creates a maintenance burden that does not exist on Windows which is known for legendary backwards compatibility.
Don't programs distributed separately come with big scary warnings about code signing, and users have to go deep into the settings to just run it?
You're not wrong but that isn't the whole story. You're right that code signing requires a paid account regardless of app store use, but it's not like code signing is exclusive to Apple software. If you're developing seriously for Windows or for a game console for example, you'd need to have your code signed as well, and to do it to Microsoft's standards it'll likely cost a lot more than Apple's account fee. Although on Windows you can pretty easily bypass warnings. You can still develop for free on MacOS with a free account and you can sign your software for 7 days at a time.
Funny how you don't need a Microsoft Surface to test on Windows.
I mean duh? The operating system is the same, why would you need a Surface to test Windows software? If you were developing specifically with Surface in mind it would be a different story since it's one of the few native Windows machines you can find using an ARM chip. If you want native ARM support rather than using x86 emulation you'd likely want to test on a Surface in that case.
Poster up the thread said "i can install anything i want" on macos. Not true, because a lot of software simply doesn't exist for macs. You then said "their computers are just straight up not built for it", and now you're saying they're industry leading. Which is it?
Straw man again. Apple Silicon Macs are miles ahead of comparable priced Windows machines due to their ARM based architecture and unified memory that leads to higher performance per watt and better battery life. You can build or buy a Windows machine that can do the same sort of Pro work but it's gonna be less compact, spit out tons of heat and drain your battery a lot faster. ARM chips are a lot more power efficient and there's not a lot of Windows software yet that takes advantage of it since Windows support for ARM is pretty recent. Also I don't know if you've ever looked up Mac benchmarks for games that are written to run natively (Fortnite, Baldur's Gate 3, Cyberpunk) run pretty damn well.
Deprecating APIs, deprecating entire CPU architectures, all of this creates a maintenance burden that does not exist on Windows which is known for legendary backwards compatibility.
I mean, their whole new CPU architecture was maybe the best business decision Apple ever made in regards to their Mac lineup. The Intel chips their computers had were holding them AND their developers back.
The operating system is the walled garden. With most windows laptops, if windows gets too bad, you can open the escape hatch and replace it with/duel boot linux.
It just is what it is. If you buy a macbook neo, you can't install an alternative OS on it (for now). It's a real downside. It matters to me. If it doesn't matter to you, then by all mean, buy a neo.
I’m not interested in a Neo, or any ultrabook in its category for that matter, I’m not buying anything similar. It’s not hard to understand the target audience of a product, however.
I will not willingly give money to them, this is a play for market share so they can, obviously, hike prices when people are locked into their ecosystem.
Short term gain (cheap laptop that's not totally shit) for long term loss (vendor lock in).
If you buy an Apple computer, you are locked into the vendor's operating system. No, hobbyist projects on several-generation-old hardware like Asahi don't count.
Because there is no such lock in for the average consumer. It’s a moot point to begin with, no normal user ever changes the operating system whatever computer they use ships with.
It absolutely does affect the average user. If for some reason they need to use Windows software, they have to buy a whole new computer instead of just installing it on the one they already have.
There’s also plenty of alternatives if you need windows. Qualcomm X Plus are on sale. You can get 16g/256 for $600 right now in a decent chassis.
The FW team screwed up by putting money in the hinge instead of the display, or dual channel memory or battery. Most people don’t care by tablet mode because laptops are bulky and annoying to use in a tablet situation. And many times people prefer a dual mobile 10-11in tablet WITH a laptop.
I saw a $600 vivobook s14 with snapdragon x elite. It is so tempting, considering in benchmark it is faster than some ryzen 5 at its price
However my main issue with my current laptop is 16gb max ram which this new laptop won't fix.
I guess I'll stick with my laptop for now until when the rampocalypse (hopefully) ends. Gotta experiment with ubuntu as one of the most ram heavy use case i have is running docker wsl on win 11. Not needing to run wsl will probably save a lot of RAM
I can buy this for 550€, it even has an oled display which is miles ahead of the neo https://estore.asus.com/pl/90nb10t1-m00x80-asus-vivobook-15-x1502.html
Idk about a metal casing but the following laptops i found beat the macbook neo (690-700 euro) in most aspects:
Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 3 15ARP10 (684 euro):
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 170 - much faster than the macbook in multicore, slightly slower in single core, it has 8c and 16t, also the macbook is fanless which means it easily overheats over a prolonged workflow, which results in thermal throttling and its multicore performance (which is already not great) completely halts to an absolute crap, in comparison the lenovo has fans which keep it cool during multicore loads. "If you are rendering a 3D model, batch-exporting 500 high-resolution photos, or running heavy virtual machines, the AMD Ryzen 7 170 will demolish the MacBook Neo. It has almost triple the processing threads to throw at heavy workloads." In singlecore the macbook is snappier but it's not a huge difference the way it is in multicore where the lenovo crushes it, so overall the lenovo is the undisputed winner here and it's not close.
GPU: The lenovo features AMD Radeon 680M, which is way better than the macbook. "The Radeon 680M is built on the RDNA 2 architecture, pushing up to 2.2 GHz, and is widely considered one of the most powerful integrated graphics chips on the market. If you do any light gaming or 3D work, the Radeon 680M is vastly superior in terms of raw compatibility and performance. It will run titles that the Mac simply cannot, thanks to broader Windows support and raw hardware capability."
RAM: 16 gb vs the macbook's 8, night and day difference. 16 vs 8 is a much bigger difference than 32 vs 16, in the same way 144 vs 60hz is huge compared to 240 vs 144hz which is a decent gain but definitely not night and day. Getting an extra 8gb is such a big difference maker, i don't think i need to explain why.
Display: The macbook wins here and it's not very close, it has an IPS display with 500 nits of brightness and 98% sRGB coverage, the lenovo uses a budget ips display with about 250 nits and 60% sRGB. It doesn't get as brighter and the colors look more washed out.
So the lenovo wins in 3/4 major categories.
And then i also found ASUS Vivobook 15 2026 M1502NAQ for 695 euro. It uses the exact same AMD Ryzen 7 170 cpu with AMD Radeon 680M gpu, so everything is the same as the lenovo. Also, both of these laptops in this config come with 512 gb M.2 NVMe SSD, compared to the macbook's 256 gb which is barely enough to install anything tbh. Also u can upgrade it, apple's is soldered to the logic board so u can't upgrade it, u're just fucked, stuck with 8gb and 256gb with no way to upgrade, it's a giga scam. The only good thing about the apple is the display and the battery efficiency maybe (cuz arm), everything else just sucks ass compared to windows laptops of the same price.
The fact that vendors like dell have to scramble to put together a small lightweight model using wildcat lake that focuses on the quality of the external case and display instead of internal specs (and sorry, the rebadged 6800H aka the Ryzen 7 170 from 2022 is really bad in ST performance and the MT performance is useless in this type of ultrabook) should tell you a lot about the priority of the target audience of this type of machine.
Your average Starbucks going student care about a nice display to watch Netflix on more than anything else. And they will never use anything other than web apps, web browser, and office.
Have both personally, and agree with Jeff's article.
Granted, I wasn't sitting there running Geekbench scores, but the Neo does feel faster than my Framework 12. So nice to see the scores line up with my personal experience.
To be honest, I was blaming Windows more than the Framework 12 itself. But still, in a normal market you can justify a Framework 12 simply by throwing more memory/storage at it, or upgrading from the i3 to the i5 motherboard board. But when simple memory upgrades are approaching half the cost of a MacBook Neo... it doesn't make a ton of sense.
I worry that Framework has bitten off more than they can chew with entering the 12 inch form factor. They're too small a company for the added SKU complexity that the 12 introduces and the price point never made sense.
My guess is at least one person at Framework really liked the original Thinkpad Yoga 12, since the Framework 12 is as close to clone to that as you could get minus the Trackpoint stuff and ports.
Yes I know. I still have the TPY12 as a test system, but I would never buy another 12" device that chunky. It's even heavier than one of my 14" laptops.
The uncommon 3:2, 13" form factor itself was a bad choice in my opinion when there were so many good existing 14" 16:10 display options, plus the ability to have a slightly larger battery and slightly better cooling (which were real problems for the first few generations).
They should have just gone with a 14" and 16" and focused on perfecting those.
3:2 is a good differentiator from their competition. I know personally I'm much more interested in 3:2 displays and laptops because 16:9/16:10 were always terrible aspect ratios for anything but watching DVDs. I much appreciate more square ratios when I can get them, and I don't own a Framework if only because I don't need a new laptop. If I did, a FW13 is a dead ringer.
The issue with upgrading a frameworks memory or storage is that you could have just bought a better laptop at the time of purchase and had a better experience the whole time. You know, because they have better screens, processors, etc.
Repairability and upgradability are nice, but if they come at the expense of literally everything else then it's not going to be a very enticing product imo.
The issue with upgrading a frameworks memory or storage is that you could have just bought a better laptop at the time of purchase and had a better experience the whole time. You know, because they have better screens, processors, etc.
It's not about upgrading the memory, but rather the chips. They advertised so much that you don't have to buy a new laptop, You could just upgrade your existing processor, by, you know, completely changing the internals of your laptop equivalently to having gotten a new one? I
Framework 12 costs $800 for the base spec. The upgraded mainboard costs $449, and it's not really worth upgrading right now.
So if you buy a framework 12 and factor in just one mainboard upgrade, you could have instead bought two macbook neos, or an M5 macbook air that would run circles around either, in every metric.
Even if we assume you got a framework 12 before the AI price hikes, lets say it was $700 or even $600 (it wasn't) then the mainboard upgrade would STILL put you in macbook air territory.
And this problem gets far worse when you realize that the framework 13 already shows you how this will go. Mainboards on that bad boy cost upwards of $800, which you'd need to do because the lower spec boards really aren't that much of an upgrade unless you had like an 11th gen intel model. And even THEN the lower specced boards still cost $400-$500. Add that cost to the cost of the device and your framework 13 could be traded for a 14 inch macbook pro lol.
There is never a reason to upgrade a framework, it makes no sense unless you're willing to burn money in support of repairability. And because the costs are this high, repairs often don't make much sense either.
In the UK, the framework 12 with the i5 1334u, 16GB RAM, 500 GB SSD, Windows 11, USB A and C, HDMI, and power adapter is £1300 flat. Right now I can go buy a base M5 Macbook Pro (16GB RAM, 512 SDD) for £1279. Even with repairability in mind, you're getting a CPU found in £300 laptops for M5 Macbook Pro money... it's just not worth it.
Sure Apple is evil etc, but that base M5 MB Pro will last 5+ years if you treat it well, so the upgrade aspect of the FW12 doesn't really matter.
I juat don't see FW winning in this space with PC component prices out of control.
For the framework 12, the i5 mainboard cost $650, more than the base model macbook neo, and that mainboard still needs ram and stoarage separately.
The cheapest mainboard with the i3 is still $429. The framework 12 itself, barebones (so no ram/ssd) still starts at $719, and it goes up to $1100 after you configure it with the cheapest possible spec imaginable. Even before the AI price hikes you'd still be in the $900 range on that.
So I'll be as charitable as possible, and assume you bought a framework 12 before price hikes, and spent $900 flat. We'll be more charitable and assume they release more mainboards, they're actually a decent upgrade, and they cost $500.
You'll have spent $1400 for a device that is still overall pretty poor quality (shitty screen/speakers, medicore battery) that just happens to be faster.
Or, you could have spent that $1400 on 2 separate macbook neos, and had enough for airpods after. Or you could buy a macbook air WITH a storage bump.
And this problem happens with every device in the framework lineup. The prices to upgrade are so INSANELY high that they make absolutely no sense to do. It even extends to repair as well.
ALSO the Neo genuinely has some repair options. Screws are accessible on the bottom, battery is screwed in rather than glued and is easily swapped, ports are on their own boards, no fan that can get gunked up or break, even the screen is somewhat accessible if you really wanted.
It's not framework levels, but it's not unrepairable like old macbooks could be.
Agree. After switching to Apple Silicon, MacBooks are simply very snappy and very power efficient. Then they produced Neo, which just kills any laptop in that price range.
People have this idea that repairability is amazing and magic and should be top of mind.
But people also gotta realise that it ain’t free.
Making everything socketed and repairable has some big compromises - look and feel, software build overhead, extra costs in housing and connectors for everthing, additional design cost for both the modularity, and for all variants. QA in hardware and software for the entire thing.
All these have a very tangible cost. And compared to something like a MacBook neo that is so damn cheap already, these costs add up to something quite substantial.
You can get much better Windows laptops for a similar price as the Neo though. A Framework laptop is not the only option, it's known to be overpriced (but cool tech).
I love the idea of a framework laptop, but they get expensive quickly. I bought a MacBook Neo but returned it after a week and bought a 15” MacBook Air. I’m using it as a coding/administration laptop, and it’s been fantastic in that role.
The fact that the FW is not an Apple product would be reason enough for me, so call me biased. But imo these two devices cater to completely different audiences anyway.
The upgrade of the FW12 to WildcatLake is definitly needed. It would result in a huge jump in energy efficency. But it's also a very natural upgrade, because the old system is already designed around a single DDR5-SODIMM-Slot and WildcatLake is limited to a 64bit-Bus as well.
There should at least be another option for the panel, the current one is simply a disgrace.
AbhishMuk@reddit (OP)
I was wondering and waiting if u/geerlingguy would post this but seeing that he didn't, I thought I'd post it myself.
AbhishMuk@reddit (OP)
(Personal thoughts) As a FW13 user... I can't disagree that the Neo is great value, but it's meant for the average user who doesn't care about things like copying files at USB 2 speeds.
If you are the kind of guys who uses Linux (or even BSD), or values repairability... the FW12 is unsurprisingly much better.
nicuramar@reddit
“Copying files at USB 2 speeds”, what? Between what? You know USB 2 is 480 Mbps, right?
AbhishMuk@reddit (OP)
Yeah exactly. For an average person who's copying their holiday photos eg to or from a pendrive or portable SSD, it's probably not very obvious. If you're copying 4k videos all day for work, the 60MBps (480Mbps) makes much more of a difference.
threepio@reddit
Wait. Did airdrop suddently cease to exist?
996forever@reddit
How do I use airdrop on an external storage device?
threepio@reddit
Plug it into your iPhone or iPad?
knflxOG@reddit
I don’t think that people that edit 4K videos would buy a Neo for that
AbhishMuk@reddit (OP)
Yeah that's kinda what I mean. For 90% plus of the "normies" who don't know what linux is, the Neo is just fine. If you're a power user, the Neo really doesn't cut it.
The drop in sustained perfomance - due to the lack of a fan - partly reveals the ethos of Apple and the Neo users. It's meant for bursty quick tasks, not heavy continuous compute demands.
goldcakes@reddit
You can very, very easily add thermal pads to the Neo and get much better sustained performance tho. Costs $5-$10 and 10 mins tops even if it’s your first time.
doscomputer@reddit
and the macbook neo has a soldered SSD and most units sold are 512gb so a lot of people have to rely on external storage as mandatory
JtheNinja@reddit
I think you greatly overestimate how much normies store locally. They basically don’t store more than their phones, aside from maybe some documents. Photos/music/video is all in the cloud. Storing more on your proper computer than you store on your phone is a power user thing.
See also https://xkcd.com/2501/
Tasty-Traffic-680@reddit
I occasionally move a lot of files around from different drives. Using a dock/hub on the 10gbps port will work in a pinch but I'm not waiting around for hundreds of gigabytes to transfer at 40MB/s (max real world transfer speed)
The I/O is really a pain point for some users - the built in wifi is three times faster than half of its USB ports. I wouldn't turn down a free or super cheap neo but at the normal price point I honestly would probably be looking elsewhere, especially if I could only afford one device.
It's fantastic for the average user but I like having a full size HDMI port, two USB C and and at least one type A. Neo users can get all day battery life and fantastic fan-free performance and my zenbook allows me to do the things I want to do with my laptop while making its own compromises.
horatiobanz@reddit
I'd say the Neo is more repairable than the FW12. Apple will be around in 10 years for parts. Will Framework still exist by 2030??? I'd say 50/50 on that at best.
Noble00_@reddit
Simply playing devils advocate there is a 10Gb/s port
AbhishMuk@reddit (OP)
I agree, it's just that remembering which port does USB 2 vs USB 3 at 10Gbps is not something I'd imagine the average tech-illiterate person to keep in mind.
For the average r/hardware user it's probably not an issue at all.
Nkrth@reddit
They dont have to remember because MacOS notifies you when you plug storage devices into usb 2 port, advise to use the other port.
AbhishMuk@reddit (OP)
I thought the message only came up for displays connected to the port and not for storage devices?
Nkrth@reddit
Example
Tumleren@reddit
I'm pretty sure I saw it mentioned with an ethernet dongle, so not just displays at least
BespokeDebtor@reddit
These little details honestly make it clear that Apple product managers are excellent
crystalchuck@reddit
Why wouldn't you just not use the USB 2 port for that and use the 10 Gbps port instead though
monocasa@reddit
Because for a lot of people the neo is targeting, transferring files via Ethernet in their home is a pipe dream at best.
LastChancellor@reddit
Framework 12 would be an easier sell if its CPU options werent all completely pathetic CPUs
also wheres OLED
wpm@reddit
Honestly I really don't know how Apple does it, but its by and far the one major differentiating factor that becomes immediately apparent, and has the most impact: the display. Like goddamn, the Neo's display is not gonna win any awards but its still really good, especially when compared to a, frankly, piece of shit 70% sRGB panel. In 2026 thats the equivalent of the shit-tier TN panels Lenovo put in T-books back in the early 2010s. Just inexcusable garbage, panels not worth producing let alone buying.
Homerlncognito@reddit
Officially it's 50% NTSC, ShortCircuit measured 66.6% of sRGB. It's really not enough as the only display option. Neo has 98% sRGB, 73% AdobeRGB and 74% of P3.
trololololo2137@reddit
framework 12 oled would approach macbook pro price while being like half as fast lol
LastChancellor@reddit
I mean the point is that you can just buy the OLED later
horatiobanz@reddit
This is such an incredible scam that Framework is running and people praise them for it. Idiots dump like $2k+ into "upgrading" their shitty 12 inch laptop over its life just to have it get dumpstered on by a $500 Macbook. Adding OLED options and other upgrade paths for the Framework would make it even worse.
trololololo2137@reddit
well you can't because they don't make them. fw13 also has only (very mediocre) LCD options after being on the market for like 5 years now
ldn-ldn@reddit
Piss poor screens are the reason I still haven't bought a framework product. I have no idea why they can't add a colour calibrated IPS with 2,000+ dimming zones and DisplayHDR 1000 or 1400 certification...
Hour_Firefighter_707@reddit
Even the 13 Pro has an LCD that is sRGB only
reddit_equals_censor@reddit
the macbook neo is e-waste garbage, that MUST NOT get considered ever.
the framework 12 is a real computer, but it is unacceptable slow.
so it must also be ignored.
for the framework 12 to become buyable, it needs for the same price preferably a basic decent amd apu with proper performance and a camm dual channel memory module.
then its performance would be fine and you can talk yourself into buying it.
until then look at the framework 13/13pro.
horatiobanz@reddit
This is a common sentiment expressed by Neo haters which has always made zero sense. How is it possiblly e-waste garbage? Its a perfectly functional laptop that does anything a normal person would want to do and can even delve into enthusiast territory work, like light video editing and music production, etc. Macbooks are known to keep their value insanely well. Apple is also known to provide good support for their laptops. How is it e-waste? You could buy it today and it WILL last you 5 years easy, or you could buy it and use it for a couple years and then get 60-70% of your $500 back probably by selling it.
doscomputer@reddit
yeah this article is just an ad, very thinly veiled
relying on geekbench to say the laptop is objectively faster instead of proving it, is crap. The NEO is even worse than framework in terms of IO/USB
but thats not the worst part, the framework 12 isn't supposed to be the cheapest possible laptop, the neo is. There are much better windows laptops to compare to the neo than the framework 12, but arbitrarily picking this as a competetor causes more clicks and outrage, giving him more views for a literally paid sponsorship.
horatiobanz@reddit
And yet the Framework 12 is the laptop made of shitty plastic with an absolutely horrible display, bad speakers, bad touchpad and bezels that make it look like a Fisher-Price toy.
He chose the Framework 12 to compare the Neo to, because he is a chud linux user and Framework is the laptop brand of choice of chud linux users.
Sopel97@reddit
yea, like, choosing fw12 as the only competitor is hilarious
77ilham77@reddit
Just like you refuse to believe that Apple made the better valued product.
geerlingguy@reddit
The only thing Apple's ever provided is a loaner set of Mac Studios for Exo testing for a couple months: https://github.com/geerlingguy/youtube/blob/master/Sponsors.md
Framework has actually provided more review hardware than Apple over the years. And I like Framework more, FWIW ;)
(I also have no contract with either company.)
_Lucille_@reddit
While comparing it to the Neo, a new entry level powerhouse, is valid, imo it also is not the best of comparisons.
Compare it to other laptops with similar specs running Windows or Linux. Evaluate factors like build quality and whether or not the upgradeability nature of the FW is worth the premium.
horatiobanz@reddit
They should be comparing it to the Macbook Air, as they are the same price. And seeing as how it gets absolutely shit on by the Macbook Neo, the Air absolutely annihilates it.
suttin@reddit
But why not? The Neo is cheaper and more powerful. How is that then unfair to compare against a framework laptop.
Personally I think the current ram and storage prices are hurting the frameworks value proposition. Apple is able to get a huge volume discount just because of their size.
is-this-a-nick@reddit
I agree, but it runs MacOS, so as far as it is relvant to me it does not exist.
suttin@reddit
Meh, it’s not windows 11.
drykarma@reddit
For you, maybe. But macOS is capable enough for most that the Neo targets and even a superior choice for some like me.
IAmYourFath@reddit
But there are windows laptops that are 10x as powerful as the neo for the same 700 euro pricepoint. So the neo is a terrible comparison to begin with. It's extremely weak for its price. 8gb is completely ridiculous. Apple is disgusting as always. Completely pathetic company. Scamming customers.
crystalchuck@reddit
Consuming 10 times as much power != 10 times as powerful
suttin@reddit
Unless you’re talking used, I don’t believe you without some proof. I’m also gonna say I’m from the US, so I don’t know what international pricing is. The Neo is cheaper than the Framework in the US, and outside of sustained 100% cpu usage, the Neo is better in every category performance wise.
And guess what, in the article, the framework had 8gb of ram and 256gb of storage. That Jeff bought used. And the laptop was $200 more expensive. From a raw price to performance perspective, the Framework isnt even close.
There’s additional things that Framework offers that I still think the base price of the laptop is fair. It’s just unfortunate that Framework can’t compete on ram and storage prices like Apple can.
IAmYourFath@reddit
I wasn't comparing to the framework, frankly both options are shit. I'm not from the US but in my local market i immediately found 2 laptops better than the neo at the same price in like <30 mins, check my reply to other guy's reply. They both had AMD Ryzen 7 170 btw so should be easily findable.
BespokeDebtor@reddit
You could also just copy and paste a link since it’s a trivial thing to do with someone with hands
_Lucille_@reddit
Neo is locked to the Apple walled garden; Apple can afford to even sell them at-cost because the user will be profitable within their ecosystem over time.
I am not saying the Neo is bad or anything; it is impressive, esp with its M chip, but it feels more like a class of its own.
ChrisOz@reddit
Not sure what you mean by walled garden. Neo runs Mac OS. While Apple does offer an app store for Mac OS you don’t have to use it. You can download apps from anywhere and run them. You can also freely compile and run software without a developer account.
iOS is a walled garden, not so much Mac OS.
okoroezenwa@reddit
Everytime someone claims macOS is a walled garden it’s very evident they’re just slotting in what they know about iOS.
Gullible_Goose@reddit
MacOS is no more a walled garden than Windows is.
Gloomy_Necesary@reddit
Apple doesnt sell at cost. Theres definitely a profit margin that no one else could achieve but them on the framework
_Lucille_@reddit
I said they can afford to, not that they do.
Gloomy_Necesary@reddit
Fair enough. My apologies!
SireEvalish@reddit
Because it makes the Framework look bad.
constantlymat@reddit
I am happy for the people who are fans of their Frameworks but it never made much sense to me how buying one of their laptops is any more ecologically friendly than making sure my old laptop goes to a buyer on the used market who needs it.
You could even argue Framework is worse because it is not as straightforward to find a good use for the individual parts you're replacing. Most likely you will have to make more purchases to utilize them in another project. The used market (at least where I live) for Framework is a lot less developed than the overall laptop used market.
So if the laptop is worse in every imaginable way you basically have to be a right to repair and upgrade enthusiast to get any benefit from it.
Feels a bit like homeopathy.
TallDescription1727@reddit
This is brain-dead. It has been explained a million times already but you just don't want to hear. If you mobo dies in a 4 year old xps you throw away the whole laptop. In a framework you replace the mobo, everything else will be fine.
Even if we just use your example and you just want an upgrade, you can just upgrade the one component you need and not buy a whole new laptop, and still sell the part you don't need anymore to someone else. Still less wasteful.
horatiobanz@reddit
Why can't you just buy a new mobo for the XPS, same as you do for the Framework? They are all over ebay. Hell I just switched out the motherboard in a obscure Chromebook that is 5 years old like a month ago. Why are you guys under the impression that this is some Framework exclusive voodoo that exists?
is-this-a-nick@reddit
No, you get a new main board? Dell service is pretty excellent.
wpm@reddit
Personally, I prefer laptops where the mobo simply doesn't "die".
ezkailez@reddit
Why can't you replace a mobo on other laptop?
willbill642@reddit
Good luck finding one that isn't in another laptop and doesn't cost another laptop. And if you want to upgrade, you buy a new laptop.
That's the whole thing Framework solves.
finakechi@reddit
It's also a order of magnitude more obnoxious to swap out a standard laptop mobo than it is the framework.
ezkailez@reddit
Checked some ecommerce site and a whole new laptop with ryzen 5 340 is 70% the price of what framework offers.
996forever@reddit
Buying a whole new laptop is typically most cost effective spec-to-spec and you get brand new everything.
nanonan@reddit
Lack of standardisation.
scenque@reddit
An XPS is probably the worst example you could have chosen. Dell is actually pretty good about service time spans and pricing. I recently had to get an out-of-warranty motherboard replacement for a 2019 model XPS 13 and the total parts/labor cost from Dell was $277.
Framed-Photo@reddit
Just for a point of reference, the i5 mainboard of the framework 12 costs $650, more than the base MacBook neo. The i3 mainboard still costs $429.
You should just buy a new one and transfer your ram/storage over at that point. Or buy a MacBook neo and enjoy the better device.
horatiobanz@reddit
Framework relies on the sunk cost fallacy and promotes ewaste. You spend an astronomical amount up front for a mediocre laptop, and then they slow drip "upgrades" to you for years so that you continue to spend more and more and more and never realize you've dumped thousands into a shitty laptop to only keep it to modern mediocre levels. If you go to the Framework subreddit there are people there who detail the absolute INSANE amount of money they dumped into these laptops with upgrades, its mind boggling.
MXC_Vic_Romano@reddit
This is the same conclusion I've come to whenever I've considered buoying one; they're lifestyle products.
KazuoLysander@reddit
Man, this whole thread is a breath of fresh air. I will let you all in on a secret.
I own a Framework 13, and to upgrade the chassis into new "Pro" lineup will cost around $576 for speakers, battery, bottom cover. Almost $700-$800 with the new display and top cover.
That is not including the Panther Lake X7 mainboard everybody wants to upgrade to which is $799. Then you gotta pay for LPCAMM2 Memory which is probably $300-600 for 32 gb - 64 GB depending.
Total cost of upgrading FW13 to Pro lineup is over $1,700 if you do a total upgrade. Might as well buy a new laptop at this point.
Who the hell is gonna want this old chassis, it's a dead end design with no upgrade paths. Can't even sell it... who is even gonna buy this junk from me?
That-Syllabub6509@reddit
Yup. This was easily foreseeable in the beginning.
I loved when clueless ltt endorsed it and advertised it like it's the greatest invention ever.
You can upgrade it piece by piece... It's ecologically friendly.
Um... What do you do with the useless parts you upgraded from?
You essentially locked yourself into a monopoly for your computer parts going forward, and create useless junk every time you change anything.
KazuoLysander@reddit
💯. We are absolutely reliant on Framework for upgrades.
I see lots of people saying they reuse old mainboards into home servers and what not. But I am curious how true that is, and what really happens to old parts you can't sell, reuse right?
That-Syllabub6509@reddit
Its very true.
Older computers are repurposed into admin machines at our work, or slower testbeds for our IT staff.
Some things can't be repurposed properly, ie a 160GB HDD is pretty useless in and of itself, but you can put that into a 7th gen i3 with a 256 sata drive, and then donate that to your church or school.
Framework computers are pretty much trash. The idea you can recycle only works if they sold every computer on earth, and you can be sure if they ever got that market share that they would be as bad as or worse than HP with their proprietary shaped mbs.
Specific-Path3179@reddit
You put it succinctly, it's a product that on paper should be up my alley but in practice has 0 appeal to me over a Thinkpad.
KazuoLysander@reddit
Keep the Thinkpad honestly.
tlove01@reddit
You guys are huffing your own farts.
Mixter_Master@reddit
Eh, having had to junk a few otherwise good laptops over things that would have been easily solvable with a framework, I have no regrets spending the extra to know that it can be piecemieled together.
When the charging circuit on the mainboard of a dell Alienware laptop gave up and no shop would do a board repair, the cost was more than the laptop to source a replacement that was already a few years out of date.
Same situation with a framework, and you can just source whatever currently available mainboard will slot in and carry on. It's less about the repairability and availability of the exact parts today, and more about the peace of mind knowing that the platform as a whole doesn't completely change every year. Next year's parts work on last year's model.
996forever@reddit
Can you tell me how much you would have to spec to spec a framework 16 to match the performance of your Alienware?
Mixter_Master@reddit
The Alienware predated the framework 16, so the base GPU model of the Framework 16 was far more powerful than the RX 5600 of that Alienware. it was about $300 more than the other competitive laptops at the time of purchase.
Since that time, there is a full hardware refresh available if I decide I need more horsepower.
I would do it again.
I work on computers for friends and family. Replacing the keyboard on recent Asus ROG laptops (for a cousin) is a bloody nightmare. Real world issues of actual serviceability outside of upgrading RAM and storage are what make it worth it to me.
996forever@reddit
Comparing equalised spec framework vs any run of the mill lenovo/hp/dell/asus models the upfront cost is way too high on the frameworks.
It would even be financially more favourable to purchase those scammy extended warranty that include accidental damage on a regular mid range laptop that will give you a brand new replacement if anything goes wrong. At the model the lowest you will pay for a FW 16 with 5070 is 3.5k with the base everything else config.
Upgrading to a new mid range 1.5k laptop + extended warranty every 3 years will come out as the better deal.
Mixter_Master@reddit
Having bought in before the rampocolypse, it wasn't nearly so absurd then. Supply chains will come back to earth eventually... We hope...
996forever@reddit
One of the biggest “hidden downside” of a small scale OEM is they’re much more affected by component cost fluctuations than dell, apple, Lenovo. It’s just simple economics of scale, bargaining power, and long term contracts.
AbhishMuk@reddit (OP)
I don't think Framework has ever suggested that. Reduce, reuse, recycle.
Isn't this purely a function of how long they've been about and how many they've sold? I'm not sure ThinkPads had parts easily available back when they had sold so little either.
LAwLzaWU1A@reddit
I agree that the small used/parts market is partly explained by Framework being newer and having sold fewer units. But that explanation does not really remove the drawback. In practice, it is the drawback.
If I am deciding what is more environmentally sensible today, the current state of the market matters. A used ThinkPad, Dell, or HP has a huge existing ecosystem. Buyers, spare parts, donor machines, chargers, batteries, and so on. A Framework part I upgrade out of may be technically reusable, but in practice it is harder to place somewhere useful unless I buy extra accessories or find a fairly niche buyer.
So "that will improve once they sell more" may be true, but it still means the buyer is accepting worse practical reuse economics right now, on the promise that the ecosystem matures later. I'd also like to add that it has been 6 years and we still hear this argument being made. Will we still hear the same argument in another 6 years? When does "it will work if we just keep buying more from them" stop being a valid strategy?
I also think the "reduce, reuse, recycle" point cuts both ways. The most ecological laptop is usually the one that already exists and keeps being used. Buying a new modular laptop can be defensible for right-to-repair reasons or supporting a company with better design values. But I do not think it automatically beats keeping an older laptop in circulation or buying from the established used market.
My issue is not that Framework has no merit. It clearly does. My issue is when the environmental argument gets treated as self-evident. A lot of the benefit depends on assumptions such as people will upgrade only when necessary, that old parts will actually be reused or resold, and that there will be a healthy secondhand ecosystem for those parts. I am not convinced that any of those very critical assumptions are actually true.
In some ways, the upgradeability angle can even encourage more consumption. A lot of the discussion around Framework is about new modules, new batteries, new mainboards, new chassis revisions, and keeping the laptop current. That is appealing, but from an environmental perspective, "reduce" is still the most important part of "reduce, reuse, recycle". Encouraging people to upgrade sooner than they would have without a modular laptop can actually be worse for the environment.
I do not think Framework is bad. I just think the environmental case is more conditional than people often admit. It is probably strongest for people who genuinely keep the same machine for a long time, repair it instead of replacing it, and actually reuse or resell the parts they upgrade. For everyone else, it may mostly be a nicer-feeling way to keep consuming more and more PC hardware that they might not even need.
KazuoLysander@reddit
It's also very expensive too on top of it all!
$475+ for Framework 13 to upgrade the speakers, battery, bottom cover to become the FW13 Pro. Almost $700-$800 if you upgrade to the new display and top cover.
https://frame.work/products/framework-laptop-13-pro-chassis-kit-graphite
That is not including the Panther Lake X7 mainboard everybody wants to upgrade to which is $799. Then you gotta pay for LPCAMM2 Memory which is probably $300-600 for 32 gb - 64 GB depending.
https://frame.work/products/laptop13pro-mainboard-intel-ultra-3?v=FRANJZ0007
Total cost of upgrading FW13 to Pro lineup is over $1,700 if you do a total upgrade.
SmileyBMM@reddit
Yeah, that's never been a compelling value add to Framework laptops I agree. The main selling points to me were higher build quality than other laptop manufacturers like Dell and HP and being able to avoid the Windows tax by getting the DIY edition. I picked Framework because they're good laptops that will keep chugging along for the foreseeable future, and I'm willing to pay a premium for that.
pmjm@reddit
I considered a Framework because I like that I can replace and/or upgrade the hardware. But that modularity comes at a cost, the performance for the price just wasn't there. Combine that with worse display/speakers/build/keyboard/trackpad and I ended up sticking with a Macbook.
WIldefyr@reddit
In addition to what others have said already, you can actually reuse the mainboard after you replace it as a server for example.
doscomputer@reddit
framework died when they made every single port an individual module
I understand my comparison isn't 1:1 because of time and change, but a 15" touchbar macbook pro can wind up having more usb ports than a lot of framework laptops, and it only has 4.
ParanoidalRaindrop@reddit
You couldn't pay me to use a Lenovo (actually you can, I have to use one at the company I work for). Cheapest feeling piece of plastic I've ever held, and nowhere as repairable and especially upgradable as a FW.
horatiobanz@reddit
The Framework 12 was always a piece of shit. You don't need the Macbook Neo to exist to recognize this.
BoredPersona69@reddit
Yeah all fun and games until you have to run a windows only program. Trust me for university and engineering using a Mac will inevitably lead you to being unable to use some vital programs, so what's better being faster or being able to reach every place?
BespokeDebtor@reddit
Please specify which engineering applications would be able to be run on the FW12 that’s specced in the article that isn’t available on MacOS?
I’m not an engineer so this is a genuine question because all my engineer friends had minimum requirements of stuff like 16GB of RAM for Solidworks and other things that make it unusable on the FW12 that's species
Sopel97@reddit
In my case that would have been NI Multisim. Wasn't a hard requirement but it would have been dreadful without access to it outside of the classes.
BoredPersona69@reddit
pspice, you can use LTspice but the mac version is different.
Teraterm, Serialplot
Plus some professors develop their own softwares and I assure you they are windows first.
996forever@reddit
Yes, that’s the average use case for an average home user.
And absolutely the type of use case on a 12” incher with an Intel 13th gen Low power CPU.
RealThanny@reddit
It's not hard to justify avoiding capture by Apple's closed software ecosystem. Doesn't matter how good the hardware is if you can't use it the way you want to.
trololololo2137@reddit
where is the closed software on MacOS. i can install anything i want unlike an iphone
Sopel97@reddit
install linux
Davester47@reddit
Anything you want, except for all the things that don't exist for MacOS because developers understandably don't want to put up with Apple's crap.
Davester47@reddit
To the downvoters: where are all the AAA games on MacOS?
996forever@reddit
What kind of AAA games do you think you’re playing on an integrated graphics of an Intel 12th gen cpu on the framework 12?
Davester47@reddit
Not particularly demanding games, typical esports stuff like counter strike. Or any of the tons and tons of indies that don't support MacOS.
BespokeDebtor@reddit
Bro took the goalposts and catapulted them into the sun.
“AAA games” to “typical esports and indies” lmfao didn’t even make an attempt
Davester47@reddit
Valve has spent at least 10s of millions, probably hundreds on CS2 over the years. Is that not AAA?
996forever@reddit
It's hilarious. They never even considered we're talking about the target audience of 12 inch ultrabooks. Their tunnel visioned brains cannot comprehend anything other than their custom built PCMR esque AMD based desktop using scavenged hardware from Microcenter/Mindfactory deals.
BespokeDebtor@reddit
I push back on this stupidity as a BIG fan of Framework and their mission. But bad faith, idiotic arguments against Apple only serve to illustrate why enthusiasts sound elitist, dumb, and out of touch with the actual market. I’ve had enough product conversations to know that FW leadership would be over the damn moon if they could even touch a fraction of of the target audience as the neo
996forever@reddit
I really don't understand why it is so hard to comprehend the vast, vast majority of computer users do NOT want to bother with tinkering with their hardware. At best they send it to a service centre. The average person has never opened their computers (whether a laptop or desktop and doubly so for computers at work). Not even to upgrade ram, if they even know what that is. So the FW audience would always have the ceiling as the hardware enthusiast crowd. Why is it so hard to understand. You even have questions on this sub from time to time asking why there isn't a modular phone ala framework like are you even serious.
Gullible_Goose@reddit
There's nothing stopping developers from developing for Mac, their computers are just straight up not built for it and the market share for gaming on Mac is just too small to justify the effort.
Davester47@reddit
$100 per developer per year and being forced by Apple to buy Apple's hardware for all their developers says otherwise.
Really? So Macs don't have the best hardware after all?
It's only small because of how actively hostile Apple is to developers, and a feedback loop of gamers not buying Apple because there's no games.
SomeoneTrading@reddit
Pretty sure you only need the one account to deploy to Appstore/do code signing/whatever else. Besides I’m pretty sure EV cert/Azure signing ends up pricier :D
Gullible_Goose@reddit
That's only if you want to distribute your software through Apple's App Store or other programs, or if you need their cloud services or other features. You can get access to Xcode and their APIs with a free account. On MacOS, there's nothing stopping developers from publishing through 3rd parties such as Steam or Epic or just distributing games yourself.
Also of course you're gonna need a Mac to develop Mac software, how else are you going to test it? What are you talking about?
Straw man argument. You're putting words in my mouth. Apple is currently industry leading for efficiency and certain workloads like video. In this thread we're talking about the MacBook Neo which is pretty much unmatched on most performance fronts for its pricepoint. You're the one who brought up AAA gaming.
How are they hostile to its developers? Please give examples
Davester47@reddit
Don't programs distributed separately come with big scary warnings about code signing, and users have to go deep into the settings to just run it?
Funny how you don't need a Microsoft Surface to test on Windows.
Poster up the thread said "i can install anything i want" on macos. Not true, because a lot of software simply doesn't exist for macs. You then said "their computers are just straight up not built for it", and now you're saying they're industry leading. Which is it?
Deprecating APIs deprecating entire CPU architectures, all of this creates a maintenance burden that does not exist on Windows which is known for legendary backwards compatibility.
Gullible_Goose@reddit
You're not wrong but that isn't the whole story. You're right that code signing requires a paid account regardless of app store use, but it's not like code signing is exclusive to Apple software. If you're developing seriously for Windows or for a game console for example, you'd need to have your code signed as well, and to do it to Microsoft's standards it'll likely cost a lot more than Apple's account fee. Although on Windows you can pretty easily bypass warnings. You can still develop for free on MacOS with a free account and you can sign your software for 7 days at a time.
I mean duh? The operating system is the same, why would you need a Surface to test Windows software? If you were developing specifically with Surface in mind it would be a different story since it's one of the few native Windows machines you can find using an ARM chip. If you want native ARM support rather than using x86 emulation you'd likely want to test on a Surface in that case.
Straw man again. Apple Silicon Macs are miles ahead of comparable priced Windows machines due to their ARM based architecture and unified memory that leads to higher performance per watt and better battery life. You can build or buy a Windows machine that can do the same sort of Pro work but it's gonna be less compact, spit out tons of heat and drain your battery a lot faster. ARM chips are a lot more power efficient and there's not a lot of Windows software yet that takes advantage of it since Windows support for ARM is pretty recent. Also I don't know if you've ever looked up Mac benchmarks for games that are written to run natively (Fortnite, Baldur's Gate 3, Cyberpunk) run pretty damn well.
I mean, their whole new CPU architecture was maybe the best business decision Apple ever made in regards to their Mac lineup. The Intel chips their computers had were holding them AND their developers back.
Saxasaurus@reddit
The operating system is the walled garden. With most windows laptops, if windows gets too bad, you can open the escape hatch and replace it with/duel boot linux.
996forever@reddit
But what exactly is the benefit of that to an average non power user?
Saxasaurus@reddit
It just is what it is. If you buy a macbook neo, you can't install an alternative OS on it (for now). It's a real downside. It matters to me. If it doesn't matter to you, then by all mean, buy a neo.
996forever@reddit
I’m not interested in a Neo, or any ultrabook in its category for that matter, I’m not buying anything similar. It’s not hard to understand the target audience of a product, however.
tigerbloodz13@reddit
this right here.
I will not willingly give money to them, this is a play for market share so they can, obviously, hike prices when people are locked into their ecosystem.
Short term gain (cheap laptop that's not totally shit) for long term loss (vendor lock in).
996forever@reddit
What vendor lock in? What exactly is being locked in?
Davester47@reddit
If you buy an Apple computer, you are locked into the vendor's operating system. No, hobbyist projects on several-generation-old hardware like Asahi don't count.
996forever@reddit
What does that matter for the average home user that mostly rely on web apps and office anyways?
Davester47@reddit
But I'm the one moving goal posts apparently.
996forever@reddit
Because there is no such lock in for the average consumer. It’s a moot point to begin with, no normal user ever changes the operating system whatever computer they use ships with.
tigerbloodz13@reddit
Do you even believe what you are writing? Like, ask chat gpt to explain it to you.
996forever@reddit
Yes I definitely do. You think the average user, will ever try to put a different operating system than whatever the computer they’re using came out?
Like trying to put Linux on a windows dell laptop they buy for school?
Or trying to run bootcamp or VM on a MacBook they bring to Starbucks?
What do you think you’re even suggesting here?
Davester47@reddit
It absolutely does affect the average user. If for some reason they need to use Windows software, they have to buy a whole new computer instead of just installing it on the one they already have.
KrautSauerSweet@reddit
unless you’re using linux you’re just contributing to Microsoft which is barely any better
lol_cat01@reddit
Oh yea that Microsoft spyware that’s where it’s really at
Winter_Bridge2848@reddit
There’s also plenty of alternatives if you need windows. Qualcomm X Plus are on sale. You can get 16g/256 for $600 right now in a decent chassis.
The FW team screwed up by putting money in the hinge instead of the display, or dual channel memory or battery. Most people don’t care by tablet mode because laptops are bulky and annoying to use in a tablet situation. And many times people prefer a dual mobile 10-11in tablet WITH a laptop.
Sopel97@reddit
I can even get an OLED below €700 here https://www.x-kom.pl/p/1354586-laptop-15-16-asus-vivobook-15-i5-13420h-16gb-512-win11-oled.html
ezkailez@reddit
I saw a $600 vivobook s14 with snapdragon x elite. It is so tempting, considering in benchmark it is faster than some ryzen 5 at its price
However my main issue with my current laptop is 16gb max ram which this new laptop won't fix.
I guess I'll stick with my laptop for now until when the rampocalypse (hopefully) ends. Gotta experiment with ubuntu as one of the most ram heavy use case i have is running docker wsl on win 11. Not needing to run wsl will probably save a lot of RAM
Sopel97@reddit
really? you had to choose such a ridiculously terrible laptop to make neo look good? worthless piece of writing
IAmYourFath@reddit
Both are garbage, just buy a normal laptop it will have way better specs than the overpriced apple for the same money.
996forever@reddit
Example of such laptop that is brand new with a metal casing?
Sopel97@reddit
https://www.x-kom.pl/p/1354586-laptop-15-16-asus-vivobook-15-i5-13420h-16gb-512-win11-oled.html
660€, better than the neo in every meaningful way
Sopel97@reddit
I can buy this for 550€, it even has an oled display which is miles ahead of the neo https://estore.asus.com/pl/90nb10t1-m00x80-asus-vivobook-15-x1502.html
Sopel97@reddit
sure, if you have such ridiculous requirements...
IAmYourFath@reddit
Idk about a metal casing but the following laptops i found beat the macbook neo (690-700 euro) in most aspects:
Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 3 15ARP10 (684 euro):
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 170 - much faster than the macbook in multicore, slightly slower in single core, it has 8c and 16t, also the macbook is fanless which means it easily overheats over a prolonged workflow, which results in thermal throttling and its multicore performance (which is already not great) completely halts to an absolute crap, in comparison the lenovo has fans which keep it cool during multicore loads. "If you are rendering a 3D model, batch-exporting 500 high-resolution photos, or running heavy virtual machines, the AMD Ryzen 7 170 will demolish the MacBook Neo. It has almost triple the processing threads to throw at heavy workloads." In singlecore the macbook is snappier but it's not a huge difference the way it is in multicore where the lenovo crushes it, so overall the lenovo is the undisputed winner here and it's not close.
GPU: The lenovo features AMD Radeon 680M, which is way better than the macbook. "The Radeon 680M is built on the RDNA 2 architecture, pushing up to 2.2 GHz, and is widely considered one of the most powerful integrated graphics chips on the market. If you do any light gaming or 3D work, the Radeon 680M is vastly superior in terms of raw compatibility and performance. It will run titles that the Mac simply cannot, thanks to broader Windows support and raw hardware capability."
RAM: 16 gb vs the macbook's 8, night and day difference. 16 vs 8 is a much bigger difference than 32 vs 16, in the same way 144 vs 60hz is huge compared to 240 vs 144hz which is a decent gain but definitely not night and day. Getting an extra 8gb is such a big difference maker, i don't think i need to explain why.
Display: The macbook wins here and it's not very close, it has an IPS display with 500 nits of brightness and 98% sRGB coverage, the lenovo uses a budget ips display with about 250 nits and 60% sRGB. It doesn't get as brighter and the colors look more washed out.
So the lenovo wins in 3/4 major categories.
And then i also found ASUS Vivobook 15 2026 M1502NAQ for 695 euro. It uses the exact same AMD Ryzen 7 170 cpu with AMD Radeon 680M gpu, so everything is the same as the lenovo. Also, both of these laptops in this config come with 512 gb M.2 NVMe SSD, compared to the macbook's 256 gb which is barely enough to install anything tbh. Also u can upgrade it, apple's is soldered to the logic board so u can't upgrade it, u're just fucked, stuck with 8gb and 256gb with no way to upgrade, it's a giga scam. The only good thing about the apple is the display and the battery efficiency maybe (cuz arm), everything else just sucks ass compared to windows laptops of the same price.
996forever@reddit
The fact that vendors like dell have to scramble to put together a small lightweight model using wildcat lake that focuses on the quality of the external case and display instead of internal specs (and sorry, the rebadged 6800H aka the Ryzen 7 170 from 2022 is really bad in ST performance and the MT performance is useless in this type of ultrabook) should tell you a lot about the priority of the target audience of this type of machine.
Your average Starbucks going student care about a nice display to watch Netflix on more than anything else. And they will never use anything other than web apps, web browser, and office.
sooka_bazooka@reddit
And a trackpad I can actually use instead of buying a mouse.
RagnarKon@reddit
Have both personally, and agree with Jeff's article.
Granted, I wasn't sitting there running Geekbench scores, but the Neo does feel faster than my Framework 12. So nice to see the scores line up with my personal experience.
To be honest, I was blaming Windows more than the Framework 12 itself. But still, in a normal market you can justify a Framework 12 simply by throwing more memory/storage at it, or upgrading from the i3 to the i5 motherboard board. But when simple memory upgrades are approaching half the cost of a MacBook Neo... it doesn't make a ton of sense.
pdinc@reddit
I worry that Framework has bitten off more than they can chew with entering the 12 inch form factor. They're too small a company for the added SKU complexity that the 12 introduces and the price point never made sense.
Skellicious@reddit
12 inch form factor? With those bezels it's begger than 13 inch laptops
b84ui@reddit
My guess is at least one person at Framework really liked the original Thinkpad Yoga 12, since the Framework 12 is as close to clone to that as you could get minus the Trackpoint stuff and ports.
https://www.mobiletechreview.com/notebooks/Lenovo-ThinkPad-Yoga.htm
is-this-a-nick@reddit
Thing is, a decade ago this kind of design might have flown but nowadays it looks very clunky.
b84ui@reddit
Yes I know. I still have the TPY12 as a test system, but I would never buy another 12" device that chunky. It's even heavier than one of my 14" laptops.
xylltch@reddit
They've made a lot of strange decisions.
The uncommon 3:2, 13" form factor itself was a bad choice in my opinion when there were so many good existing 14" 16:10 display options, plus the ability to have a slightly larger battery and slightly better cooling (which were real problems for the first few generations).
They should have just gone with a 14" and 16" and focused on perfecting those.
wpm@reddit
3:2 is a good differentiator from their competition. I know personally I'm much more interested in 3:2 displays and laptops because 16:9/16:10 were always terrible aspect ratios for anything but watching DVDs. I much appreciate more square ratios when I can get them, and I don't own a Framework if only because I don't need a new laptop. If I did, a FW13 is a dead ringer.
996forever@reddit
3:2 probably a response to the surface.
jaaval@reddit
I would have preferred 14 inch to 13 and I'm not alone. I'm not sure what drove their decision.
Framed-Photo@reddit
The issue with upgrading a frameworks memory or storage is that you could have just bought a better laptop at the time of purchase and had a better experience the whole time. You know, because they have better screens, processors, etc.
Repairability and upgradability are nice, but if they come at the expense of literally everything else then it's not going to be a very enticing product imo.
blueredscreen@reddit
It's not about upgrading the memory, but rather the chips. They advertised so much that you don't have to buy a new laptop, You could just upgrade your existing processor, by, you know, completely changing the internals of your laptop equivalently to having gotten a new one? I
Framed-Photo@reddit
Framework 12 costs $800 for the base spec. The upgraded mainboard costs $449, and it's not really worth upgrading right now.
So if you buy a framework 12 and factor in just one mainboard upgrade, you could have instead bought two macbook neos, or an M5 macbook air that would run circles around either, in every metric.
Even if we assume you got a framework 12 before the AI price hikes, lets say it was $700 or even $600 (it wasn't) then the mainboard upgrade would STILL put you in macbook air territory.
And this problem gets far worse when you realize that the framework 13 already shows you how this will go. Mainboards on that bad boy cost upwards of $800, which you'd need to do because the lower spec boards really aren't that much of an upgrade unless you had like an 11th gen intel model. And even THEN the lower specced boards still cost $400-$500. Add that cost to the cost of the device and your framework 13 could be traded for a 14 inch macbook pro lol.
There is never a reason to upgrade a framework, it makes no sense unless you're willing to burn money in support of repairability. And because the costs are this high, repairs often don't make much sense either.
noire_stuff@reddit
In the UK, the framework 12 with the i5 1334u, 16GB RAM, 500 GB SSD, Windows 11, USB A and C, HDMI, and power adapter is £1300 flat. Right now I can go buy a base M5 Macbook Pro (16GB RAM, 512 SDD) for £1279. Even with repairability in mind, you're getting a CPU found in £300 laptops for M5 Macbook Pro money... it's just not worth it. Sure Apple is evil etc, but that base M5 MB Pro will last 5+ years if you treat it well, so the upgrade aspect of the FW12 doesn't really matter. I juat don't see FW winning in this space with PC component prices out of control.
Framed-Photo@reddit
For the framework 12, the i5 mainboard cost $650, more than the base model macbook neo, and that mainboard still needs ram and stoarage separately.
The cheapest mainboard with the i3 is still $429. The framework 12 itself, barebones (so no ram/ssd) still starts at $719, and it goes up to $1100 after you configure it with the cheapest possible spec imaginable. Even before the AI price hikes you'd still be in the $900 range on that.
So I'll be as charitable as possible, and assume you bought a framework 12 before price hikes, and spent $900 flat. We'll be more charitable and assume they release more mainboards, they're actually a decent upgrade, and they cost $500.
You'll have spent $1400 for a device that is still overall pretty poor quality (shitty screen/speakers, medicore battery) that just happens to be faster.
Or, you could have spent that $1400 on 2 separate macbook neos, and had enough for airpods after. Or you could buy a macbook air WITH a storage bump.
And this problem happens with every device in the framework lineup. The prices to upgrade are so INSANELY high that they make absolutely no sense to do. It even extends to repair as well.
BaysideJr@reddit
Also apple products hold their value better and last longer than other computers. So just sell it and buy the next one.
Framed-Photo@reddit
ALSO the Neo genuinely has some repair options. Screws are accessible on the bottom, battery is screwed in rather than glued and is easily swapped, ports are on their own boards, no fan that can get gunked up or break, even the screen is somewhat accessible if you really wanted.
It's not framework levels, but it's not unrepairable like old macbooks could be.
costafilh0@reddit
No it's not.
It's either for you or not.
Far_Car430@reddit
Agree. After switching to Apple Silicon, MacBooks are simply very snappy and very power efficient. Then they produced Neo, which just kills any laptop in that price range.
ChadHartSays@reddit
I just don't know if any 12 inch laptop has any value proposition.
AdamChenX@reddit
That’s because it is.
People have this idea that repairability is amazing and magic and should be top of mind.
But people also gotta realise that it ain’t free.
Making everything socketed and repairable has some big compromises - look and feel, software build overhead, extra costs in housing and connectors for everthing, additional design cost for both the modularity, and for all variants. QA in hardware and software for the entire thing.
All these have a very tangible cost. And compared to something like a MacBook neo that is so damn cheap already, these costs add up to something quite substantial.
RemarkableFinger3600@reddit
The Framework 12 looks more like a kids laptop than the MacBook. I’ve seen cheaper laptops from Dell that look fancier.
RemarkableFinger3600@reddit
The FW12 looks more like a kids laptop than the MacBook. I’ve seen cheaper laptops from Dell that looks fancier.
ConsistencyWelder@reddit
You can get much better Windows laptops for a similar price as the Neo though. A Framework laptop is not the only option, it's known to be overpriced (but cool tech).
Seref15@reddit
The Neo makes a lot of competitors hard to justify.
el_f3n1x187@reddit
Wouldn't the apple neo be better compared to a Samsung Galaxy Tablet?
PigSlam@reddit
I love the idea of a framework laptop, but they get expensive quickly. I bought a MacBook Neo but returned it after a week and bought a 15” MacBook Air. I’m using it as a coding/administration laptop, and it’s been fantastic in that role.
ParanoidalRaindrop@reddit
The fact that the FW is not an Apple product would be reason enough for me, so call me biased. But imo these two devices cater to completely different audiences anyway.
Melbuf@reddit
ill gladly pay more money for less performance to not use IOS
JtheNinja@reddit
Lucky for you the Neo runs the real OS that iOS was cut down from
Melbuf@reddit
ya know what i hate them both so much they may as well be the same
RadonGOG@reddit
The upgrade of the FW12 to WildcatLake is definitly needed. It would result in a huge jump in energy efficency. But it's also a very natural upgrade, because the old system is already designed around a single DDR5-SODIMM-Slot and WildcatLake is limited to a 64bit-Bus as well.
There should at least be another option for the panel, the current one is simply a disgrace.
Noble00_@reddit
It'd be interesting to see WCL in FW12 but at that point the value proposition worsens