Likely to support those ideas and signal that there is money in it. I’m not big on “letting the market figure it out”, but there is logic in voting with your wallet.
I bought a System 76 for similar reason five years back. The price was comparable to a XPS, came with coreboot, and disabled Intel ME.
What ideas? The whole idea is that they’re repairable/upgradable. The went into a market where those things already existed and stripped them away. Why?
I don’t expect this to change your mind (I also wouldn’t really want a framework desktop), but the framework desktop is fairly unique in terms of performance, which is why they stripped away some of the upgradability.
I want that upgradability more than unique performance, but to their credit they did try to make it work with socketed ram, but they couldn’t get it to work because in order to share RAM between the CPU and GPU in the way they wanted (I think, I haven’t looked at it super closely because I don’t want one and am not in the market for a desktop cause I’m broke and have a laptop), they needed ridiculously low latency and even the new upcoming socket design they played with to get it working wasn’t able to get the latency low enough, even with tweaks if I understand correctly.
I’ll stick to building a conventional system if I get around to building a desktop, but to my understanding the performance of the framework desktop is higher than it looks on paper because of its funky design that needed ultra low latency memory. Its a cool product, but I do think perhaps framework were not entirely the right people to sell it, as repairability and upgradability are a massive cornerstone of their brand.
Yeah, I don’t really disagree. Though I do think it’s more upgradeable than if another company made the same sort of product, given you can upgrade the motherboard. But I have no real interest in it. It doesn’t feel like a lazy cash grab to me. But it does feel like they’re confused about who’s actually buying their devices and what those people want.
Though, who knows, maybe they’re selling great. What do I know. I’ll stick to the industry standard of socketed components in a standard case format rather than a new novel design that can’t be as upgradable.
Likely to support those ideas and signal that there is money in it. I’m not big on “letting the market figure it out”, but there is logic in voting with your wallet.
I bought a System 76 for similar reason five years back. The price was comparable to a XPS, came with coreboot, and disabled Intel ME.
What ideas? The whole idea is that they’re repairable/upgradable. The went into a market where those things already existed and stripped them away. Why?
I don’t expect this to change your mind (I also wouldn’t really want a framework desktop), but the framework desktop is fairly unique in terms of performance, which is why they stripped away some of the upgradability.
I want that upgradability more than unique performance, but to their credit they did try to make it work with socketed ram, but they couldn’t get it to work because in order to share RAM between the CPU and GPU in the way they wanted (I think, I haven’t looked at it super closely because I don’t want one and am not in the market for a desktop cause I’m broke and have a laptop), they needed ridiculously low latency and even the new upcoming socket design they played with to get it working wasn’t able to get the latency low enough, even with tweaks if I understand correctly.
I’ll stick to building a conventional system if I get around to building a desktop, but to my understanding the performance of the framework desktop is higher than it looks on paper because of its funky design that needed ultra low latency memory. Its a cool product, but I do think perhaps framework were not entirely the right people to sell it, as repairability and upgradability are a massive cornerstone of their brand.
They stripped away pretty much all of it.
Then they shouldn’t have made it. That’s their whole shtick, and it only took them a few years to go back on it.
It’s not like those speeds deliver any sort of practical advantage anyway, like I said earlier. Especially not in gaming.
It’s just a lazy cash grab.
Yeah, I don’t really disagree. Though I do think it’s more upgradeable than if another company made the same sort of product, given you can upgrade the motherboard. But I have no real interest in it. It doesn’t feel like a lazy cash grab to me. But it does feel like they’re confused about who’s actually buying their devices and what those people want.
Though, who knows, maybe they’re selling great. What do I know. I’ll stick to the industry standard of socketed components in a standard case format rather than a new novel design that can’t be as upgradable.