> most of the Wayland complaints you read are handwave-y bullshit, idk what else to say.
The dislike of the product among users is certainly sincere. I feel like somewhere there is probably an author of a young adult novel with a title like “He’s Just Not That Into You” with a cathartic and cautionary ending and that author should write a pamphlet or something specifically for the benefit of the Wayland people.
> I think ultimately what frustrates me is that people don’t consider the ability to repair or upgrade your machine part of a “premium” experience, but that’s is just something I have to accept. I think it is unfortunate that our consumerist culture places so little value on it though.
Buying one of the original Frameworks and a Macbook Air at roughly the same time made me realize how little I actually care about upgradeability and repairability. This feeling took me by surprise. Modern Macbooks are just so much better in terms of feel it's like comparing tech from a different decade.
(it also turns out that having a defect that the manufacturer doesn't make right can cause a person to feel a few different things, but gratitude for the product's repairability isn't at the top of the list)
Agree. I want rock solid Linux compatibility with mac like hardware quality / battery life and a Thinkpad like toughness and keyboard. I don't really need it to be upgradable as long as it lasts 8 years.
IMHO I dont think people are considering what you lose when you cant upgrade, You get locked in to a device artificially created life cycle that's dictated by the manufacturer.
I understand where you are coming from, I guess it just makes me sad to see more and more people moving away from tech that is less in their control. And i consider upgradability and modularity and important aspect of that.
We never had anything different, though. Computers always became so obsolete after a while that there was no longer any point in trying to upgrade them. I think I got eight years out of my 1997 Power Mac G3, including a CPU upgrade to a G4, RAM upgrades, hard disk upgrades, a video card, and USB expansion, but then the new machines coming out were just so much better that throwing money into more upgrades was just tossing it into a black hole.
Maybe in the late 90s and early 2000s. These days hardware from over a decade ago works fine. I am typing this comment on a 2011 Dell E6410. Install Debian / Arch Linux and the machine is surprisingly capable. Just running HTOP I am using 2.5G of ram (out of 8GB) and the CPU is at 2%.
TBH, I have a Ryzen 5950X based tower and while it is faster than my previous desktop which was a i7 4970K (or whatever it is), the previous machine would be fine tbh. I am not even sure why I upgraded tbh.
I guess its a byproduct of a faster moving curve with improved technology. 20 years ago you didn't need to replace the entire platform for at least 10 years.
Is it artificial though, really? You buy whatever is available now and it eventually becomes obsolete and you have to buy a new one. Maybe there is some kind of multi vendor collusion going on but it doesn't seem that likely.
Where I think repairability really makes sense is in things that don't materially improve and should last 30 years (e.g. appliances).
I'm pretty sure part of the reason of integrating everything on the board has some nefarious reasons, at least on Laptop's. Louis Rossman talked about a design flaw in Apple Macbooks where if the SSD fails, in my cases, your system will fail to power up because the mainboard is designed to fail when the SSD fails.(If I am interpreting that correctly)[0]. Remember this flaw is in the Macbooks where the SSD's are soldiered into the board. IMHO there are ways to design integrated hardware in such a way where failures minimize damage and I think many companies decide its not in there best interest to design hardware to prevent that. IMHO this is done in bad faith.
If there's an ability to upgrade my GPU 3 years in but I can't, then yes. It's artificial. We just got way too comfortable with the mentality of throwing out everything and getting new cheap tech overtime.
I guess the one thing AI is doing that's good for this scene will be to make people value what they have more.
My partner with a Macbook works on AI and has told me how great Apple silicon is, and their Macbook would run so many things so well.. except they don't have enough RAM and there's no way to upgrade it..
I’m in the same boat as your partner except that I generally max the RAM in my laptop when buying it.
The thing is it would probably be the same issue with a Framework or any other brand of laptop as they all have some final limit on RAM or GPU RAM.
If you upgrade the GPU or motherboard you have to ask what will happen to the old one. You can reuse some of them but most probably will just be e-waste.
There’s a chance when upgrading a whole laptop that the old one will a new use somewhere.
I'm a hoarder so I'd just keep it around. I still have my Playstation 2 after all.
Every laptop except my first college one is also somewhere around my house. Even my $300 high school laptop that could really only run Microsoft Word (I remember running Fallout 3 on it at lowest settings at a brisk 10 fps). Even for that college laptop I salvaged the storage, ram, and disk drive.
Some people around me prolesytize these modern Macbooks endlessly but I don't quite get it. I've tried them but I still love my Framework 16 to bits and I'd take it any day of the week. The Macbooks are great machines, and one thing I can say in their favor is the battery life is phenomenal, but I prefer my Framework's aesthetics and feel - it feels more like I'm holding something I've worked on and made my own vs just bought, I prefer the shiny metal over the dull gray of the Macbooks, the keyboard and trackpad are just as good (and I love the rgb pad I have in place of a numpad), and taking it apart/replacing modules just feels so cool. I've also saved those friends various times by lending an expansion card, usually usb-A.
The keyboard on my framework 13 is fine but it’s got a very sketchy touchpad and that classic symptom of a modern, shitty laptop: the whole thing flexes if I pick it up by the corner, and oftentimes actuates the trackpad button. Other times if I’m sitting in an unfavorable position the machine flexes and the trackpad button no longer works. Compare that with the rigidity of a modern Macbook.
Even calling it "deportation" is far too charitable towards what they've done. Deportation involves sending them back to their home countries or, if that's unsafe, to another country. These people were rendered to a prison where they're meant to spend the rest of their lives, without any of the due process even a foreigner who had committed a crime would normally be accorded in the United States under our constitution.
> These people were rendered to a prison where they're meant to spend the rest of their lives
These men were never intended to spend the rest of their lives at CECOT, nor did they. All were released in July 2025 to their home country of Venezuela, and they were in El Salvador for a total of 125 days.
> These men were never intended to spend the rest of their lives at CECOT
Kristi Noem indicated publicly that they should stay there "the rest of their lives."
> nor did they. All were released in July 2025 to their home country of Venezuela, and they were in El Salvador for a total of 125 days.
No kidding. Things did not play out that way because the intention was just for a few months of torture for those people before they'd eventually be deported to Venezuela anyway, it was because of the legal and political uproar over what had been done.
> Improving FreeBSD will make it easier to run BSD on non-apple hardware which will eat into their bottom line.
The number of people who want to run FreeBSD on their laptops probably numbers in the hundreds. Not exactly a threat to Apple's bottom line.
On the other hand, some of those people are FreeBSD developers who create and maintain code that Apple would like to have the option of using. That relationship is worth something to Apple.
>On the other hand, some of those people are FreeBSD developers who create and maintain code that Apple would like to have the option of using. That relationship is worth something to Apple.
It wasn't that long ago that we used to have to endure HN commenters spamming the same copypasta every time BSD was mentioned: "did you know BSD runs your playstation and netflix and <...>. You should donate money!"
Evidently it's not worth more than the cost of assigning engineers to this, otherwise Apple would already be doing it.
There's no GPL in the BSD sources used by Apple or Sony. They are free to release their operating systems as closed source; Sony does this. Apple releases Darwin sources "out of the goodness of their hearts", meaning, back in the 2000s they wanted to capture mindshare amongst the tech community for whom Linux was the strongest contender. Now that the future has refused to change, the year of the Linux desktop never materialized, and macOS has become the default developer's workstation OS, Apple has been much more sparing with Darwin source drops and may cease them altogether.
GPL where applicable. If it's MIT or just "as is" then no, they won't but they definitely publish the sources to what they are required to. Since FreeBSD is "as is" 4.4BSD licensed, they aren't required to publish the sources of Orbis.
Good stuff. I followed the link to Good Scott's wiki page and learned he helped out on a text adventure as recently as 2018. That's pretty interesting.
The dislike of the product among users is certainly sincere. I feel like somewhere there is probably an author of a young adult novel with a title like “He’s Just Not That Into You” with a cathartic and cautionary ending and that author should write a pamphlet or something specifically for the benefit of the Wayland people.
reply