B) I think the disclaimer on the product page that it isn’t compatible with the framework should be larger and more prominent. I feel like one sentence at the end of the product description might not be enough warning.
Luckily, Framework sees things as the same way as me, hence the compatibility warning.
Since they think it’s not compatible, I think that warning should be more prominent.
and
>We’re continuing to search for ways to help you with hard-to-find upgrades for other products, so let us know if there is anything we should focus on!
From the article.
> Since we order a huge number of Western Digital drives already, it’s relatively easy for us to add one more line item and stock 2TB SN740 2230 ones.
I don't know to what extent this is part of a high-level strategy rather than a clever idea by someone in purchasing that got approved by some VP (sounds like the latter), but as a strategy it makes sense and gives me confidence in Framework's longevity.
0. Framework has a small target market to begin with, since most people really don't care about right to repair.
1. Selling components is a different business with different logistics and economies of scale than selling computers. (Maybe 1% of people who buy Frameworks will ever replace their display.)
3. I don't have numbers for either, but I suspect the Steam Deck is outselling Framework by orders of magnitude.
4. Stocking parts for other, better-selling devices may be what it takes to make their parts business self-sustaining.
As long as selling parts is a money-loser for Framework, the company will have a financial incentive to scale that operation back, no matter what their vision statement and marketing says. And if they run into financial difficulty, that's a decision that they'll have to evaluate. Framework without parts is just another laptop that's thicker and heavier than necessary.
NB: If it isn't apparent, this is all based on my own conjecture. But I think it makes a reasonable case for expanding their parts business nonetheless.