I'm spoiled by Apple Silicon but still love Framework
simonhartcher.com
simonhartcher.com
IMHO that’s a giant issue. If you can’t hibernate (aka suspend to disk) you will never be able to get that power consumption low. And telling people to not run secure boot or lockdown is not really a good answer either. Especially since the default installer already sets those things up. I get that „Linux on laptops“ is not a priority big enough to get a proper fix for that. And that it’s not an easy issue to fix. But the current state is really really sad.
This is cope. An Apple Silicon Macbook does not need to suspend to block devices to save energy (they only do this when the battery is empty). ChromeOS doesn't offer hibernate at all. The only reason that a Framework can't have good battery life in an operating state is that nobody is paying attention to the details.
If you're claiming it is just an oversight, then please back it up.
1%/h is just 0.5W (for a 50Wh battery) which isn't a lot, but fail to bring a component or two to shutdown or sufficiently low power state and you'll observe exactly this behaviour. Of course some drain is going to be almost inevitable just to keep memory contents sufficiently refreshed, but with proper power-saving states memory can go appreciably below 0.5W.
It's not a single oversight, it's a massive project that needs to be carried out throughout an operating system. Linux's usual advantage of decentralization and wide distro variety with massive customization potential is a disadvantage here. To have a power-efficient system you need all of the software to be working toward the same goal. One bad actor process can completely hose the system's power efficiency.
These are important things, but they do not matter for power consumption in sleep, when the CPU is not executing instructions.
How so? You need each thing to do its part, but that decentralizes perfectly well because it isn't actually integration at all, it's just a hundred different pieces each doing it right.
And open source has the further advantage that you're not beholden to the maintainer. If Framework notices that piece #37 is wasting power, they have the code and can fix it themselves. If the upstream isn't completely asleep at the switch they'll accept the patch, and even if they are you can still ship it on your own device.
Where this can get messed up is in one of two ways. The first is if something is not open source and then the vendor fails to fix it but also fails to supply anyone else with the capacity to fix it. But this isn't a problem with integration, it's a problem with filthy knuckleheads not keeping their heads on straight and calls for some new competitors to show them how to do it.
The second is something like an actual trade off, e.g. if you want the machine to be able to wake via network packet or pressing a key on the keyboard then you'd need the network controller or USB controller to stay in a low power state instead of being dead off. And then that might cost you half a watt, but you're paying it in order to get something, and then somebody has to decide if Linux users would typically want a default where that feature works or one where the battery can last a month in standby, since it's one or the other.
And that actually happens in real life. Most of the projects care to begin with because they use their own stuff and don't want to ruin their own battery life or have a competitive disadvantage over the alternative. Then other third parties that find business value in having it work pay someone to clean up the odd stragglers when one of them didn't do it or have the resources to do it themselves.
The main problem is when some vendor both doesn't do it and is hostile to anyone else doing it.
Sure, they try not to ruin the battery life, but who is investing the amount of engineering resources into Linux battery life that Apple invests into macOS's? No one, of course, because the ROI of doing that for Apple is much higher than doing the same for Linux. Linux's open nature means that going for SotA battery life does not yield a competitive advantage, so no one does it.
If you or your company wants to work 80 hour weeks to improve power efficiency on Linux, you can submit patches to all the different projects where nobody else is doing the work.
In other words, centralize the battery life project. Who is doing that?
ChromeOS.
The answer is rather that everyone is doing it. Then most people care about it a little so they do a little, but because it's most people that adds up to being the majority of what needs to be done. A smaller number care about it a lot but all that's left is for them to shave off the rough edges.
> Linux's open nature means that going for SotA battery life does not yield a competitive advantage, so no one does it.
How does it not yield a competitive advantage? If you're Framework, Dell, System76, Canonical, Red Hat, etc., you want people to use your product instead of buying a Mac or some competitor's Windows laptop.
> In other words, centralize the battery life project.
I don't understand how this is centralization.
Suppose Intel does the work to make good open source drivers and make sure their hardware has low idle power consumption, Red Hat does the work to make systemd behave in a way which is power inefficient in the hardware-independent ways, etc. Then Framework does an analysis of where power is going on their systems and finds that Intel and Red Hat did a good job but there's a bug in the third party network controller driver preventing it from going to sleep, so they fix the bug.
Where is the centralization? The work is being done by all different companies who aren't even necessarily interacting with each other. Some of the bugs in third party software are fixed by hobbyists or other vendors. Then Framework is left with a limited amount of work to do and they do it.
The problem comes when they go to do that analysis and find that the thing using more power than it should is a piece of hardware that the vendor both failed to document and failed to provide source code for the firmware, so that no one else can fix it when they don't. In other words, it's caused by a thing that isn't open source.
And to be sure, I do not claim that there is nothing to gain in s2idle. I bet theres still a lot of headroom to safe energy. Its just that it would be easy to safe a lot of power if s2disk "just worked".
The issue is that Modern Standby goes ones step further and keeps the CPU and peripherals in low power states instead of just the memory. This will use more power than S3 sleep by default, and each SoC will need deep integration with the kernel for that to ever be power efficient. That means it will require heavy investment from AMD and Intel to enable efficient Modern Standby in Linux, along with heavy vendor investment to ensure each model they sell implements Modern Standby efficiently.
It isn't a matter of Framework dropping the ball, it's matter of hardware platforms being shitty and platform owners not investing as much resources into Linux as they do Windows.
I don't daily drive an MBP anymore, only occasionally. But I had one for a week or so, and once or twice I've noticed that my backlit keyboard still had its lights on, which is unusual when the computer sleeps. The screen was dark, though, so it can be confusing.
I can't blame Framework, of course. Upstart laptop manufacturer that is open about repair vs tech giant who's spent years optimizing hardware and batteries.
All that said, I'm optimistic for better batteries, better suspend software/hardware support, and more efficient mobile processors outside of the Apple ecosystem in the coming years. The M-series Apple processors are definitely kicking others in the industry into gear.
We used to have better suspend before, when s3 was thing, on both Linux and windows. Maybe not as great as Macs, but way better than the current shitshow. Now I’m not saying pcs are great hardware, but I think this particular issue should be pinned on Microsoft, who tried to copy apple’s power nap, only doing it halfassedly as they usually do.
The MacBook is an existence proof that there is something they can do.
So, I guess Framework could start designing their own CPUs. I think having more competition in this area would be great!
Not sure how realistic this is, though.
Setting that up is pure hell on Linux, with poor documentation and security people actively fighting against making this easy.
On Windows/macOS it just works, on Linux you'll probably break secure boot with it.
BIOS support for proper hibernation has been getting worse too because with MSFT demanding it, there is little reason to continue support.
I've had older laptops that do the sleep->hibernate setup without too much issue but now it is a crap-shoot on if it is even supported in the hardware.
All laptops support that though it's not always enabled as a feature by default.
For example, HP's enterprise lines have S3 stubs in their firmware. If you enable them, nothing happens, because someone deliberately removed the S3 blobs entirely.
You can disable that behavior. See: https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/146593-enable-disable-ne...
The way it works on my Windows laptop is it’ll stay in sleep overnight, then when I open the laptop in the morning it’ll wake up, then hibernate itself, then I have to wait for the computer to turn itself back on. Thankfully this feature can be turned off.
The solution is to disable Wake Timers.
Luckily for me, I usually run Linux on this laptop which sleeps just fine.
It will do it eventually, though if you don't have enough free disk space it'll fail.
AllowHybridSleep=true
Your Linux installer will also set everything up needed for it.
It's also a GUI option in KDE's System Settings.
In most cases your kernel will tell you it's "locked down" and refuse to hibernate. In my case - on a cutting edge kernel no less with Fedora - it refused to believe that the default disk encryption setup with Swap on encrypted LVM actually is encrypted and locked me out.
Linux security bros followed Apple and others here and refused to add any ability for us to configure or tell kernel that it's wrong about that and to fscking allow resume.
This stuff just works out of the box on both macOS and even the mess that is Windows.
1: https://www.phoronix.com/news/AMD-ACPI-C4-Linux-Kernel-Code
I'm unaware of how much access Framework has to the underlying firmware blobs. If they don't have source/license/keys/etc for the right parts, they might be at the mercy of their own vendors for S3 support.
The oldest AMD chip framework sells is two generations, and to me knowledge don't have S3 support.
I'm not sure if that's possible on windows. I know my work laptop doesn't work that way, but then, it probably runs all sorts of enterprise settings.
It is as if the features are implemented by completely different people. But this is not obviously the case since systemd supports both and actively improving both.
Note for me hibernation is a security measure and not about saving battery. I am traveling sometimes with the laptop and risk of theft is non-trivial. If it is hibernated, then it is just a property loss. But with just suspend there is a chance that the data can be extracted. So I configured it to hibernate automatically after 15 minutes in suspension. Surprisingly it has been working reliably with Linux.
This is almost definitely true considering it’s an massive open source project
The solution I found involves making a custom initramfs to support hibernation and compiling the kernel into a signed EFI stub.
To dual-boot, I boot from a removable USB drive on my keychain. When it's not plugged in, it boots windows instead.
This has worked with both Linux and Widows on all my machines: handbuilt 3rd gen intel with an asus MB, 6th gen with some msi, 10th gen with a cheap Gigabyte, and an assorted bunch of HP Elite desks and books with intel and AMD.
I understand there’s even a way for them to auto detect the options, but since this has been a set it forget it type thing, I never bothered to look into it.
A UKI is a kernel+initramfs+boot-arguments bundle all as a single WinPE/UEFI executable using the "EFI Stub Loader".
You configure your system firmware to execute it, passing no arguments. It boots using the command line you set earlier. It's signed, and verified by the platform secure boot.
Hibernation works fine with this approach.
Can you explain why it improves the hibernation behavior? I have seen UKI mentioned before but never heard that it improves hibernation.
UKI allows you to extend your chain of trust from the bootloader to ramdisk, instead of just your bootloader and kernel. From there, you can enable kernel lockdown and checking of module signatures if you want to.
I think you can do the same thing without UKI (I forget tbh), but UKI simplifies it with one UEFI executable that doesn't even need a bootloader.
So its not a direct "linux prevents hibernate on secure boot", its "linux recommends kernel_lockdown when secure booting", "kernel_lockdown prevents hibernate with unencrypted swap" and "theres no well to make the kernel believe the hibernation disk is encrypted", but the result is the same.
You can "just" run secure boot without lockdown. Its a cmdline, you can just omit it. You can run custom patch sets that add cmdline options so the kernel allows hibernation in lockdown (if you pinky-promise the swap is encrypted).
But neither of these are easily accessible to the average user.
1: https://manpages.debian.org/bullseye/manpages/kernel_lockdow...
I expect many of the servers I have deployed, again consumer grade SSDs, would have more writes in a day than you in a year -- even with several suspends a day.
I cannot of course address the specific model you have, or the size of RAM you're suspending to swap space.
That said, I worked the same way many years ago, with browser tabs and desktop sessions that were precious and I didn't want to drop them. But what I ended up realizing was that the stress of losing that state due to random power failures or software bugs was too much. I found it far better for my sanity and actual productivity to instead make sure I had a sane note taking system, where I could track what was actually important to me.
It was a great relief to my mental state and general stress to allow myself to shut down all processes and start clean every day.
It's just a huge waste of time to get it all back. I see it no different than being in the middle of a heavy coding/mental task and being interrupted to the point that you have to 'start over' in the sense of getting all that context back in the right places.
Sure, I _could_ neatly close everything out and have a pristine perfect work/desktop environment. But, personally, when I see the work/desk environment of someone and it's absolutely pristine all I can think about is how they're spending energy to maintain that.
To give another example - in my workshop (woodworking), if I'm in the middle of something and need to take a break/leave the shop... I'm not putting _anything_ away. I turn off the lights and walk out. That way when I return I don't have to set everything back up. Now - when I finish something, then I go through and clean up and organize and get the state freshened up. Same thing with my laptop/computer.
Zero anxiety about it all - it's not about losing anything but time. And that's what's most important.
You might be okay with it, but I suspect most consumers today won’t be.
I go _months_ without rebooting/proper shut downs. And this is on a MacOS install that I've migrated from one Macbook to another for 5 macbooks now O.O
I've been obsessed with building things since I got my first lincoln logs set. I don't "clock out". There's no work computer and life computer, or even more foreign to me, no computer when not at work. I take my laptop nearly everywhere with me and have been known to pull over into the nearest gas station or any parking lot, pull it out and immediately write some code or make some notes due to something I'd just then had some breakthrough or idea about. There's no way I'm doing that if it takes a full minute to boot up and I'm there looking at a fresh rebooted OS. But if I can open it, touch my finger to the fingerprint reader and _immediately_ be productive? Happens all the time.
Hell, I'll walk across the room and open my laptop when my phone is in my pocket because it's just easier to use and it's immediately functional.
Different strokes for different folks, but I'd venture to bet that my experience mimics that of many others.
The exceptions are really narrow. E.g. if you want your SSH sessions to stay alive, you also need to ensure that you never leave the WiFi coverage.
The issue is that firmware vendors disable S3 sleep in favor of s0ix/Modern Standby instead, which just puts hardware into low power states instead of stopping them entirely. This will inherently drain more power over time than just keeping memory powered in S3 sleep.
Modern Standby requires heavy integration with the OS to be power efficient. Turns out that takes a lot of reverse engineering because vendors will not release documentation or tune the kernel for their firmware.
And I often use my laptop for things where seconds matter. I've got things on the stove that could burn, I may not have 5 seconds to spare locating the next step in the recipe.
I don't know what you're talking about, is this an apple Silcon marketing ploy? my linux laptops lose less battery in suspend than my macbooks do powered down
You're already relying on the hardware platform for Secure Boot, it's not far fetched to apply the same view to hibernate if the platform protects memory and disk.
That said, S3 is still a viable option, and IMO, the best option. Some hardware vendors still implement S3 sleep for their Linux laptops.
I’m torn between my instinct to classify anything from DHH as mostly hype, my faith in Linux kernel developers, and my cynicism toward Linux kernel developers.
Small enthusiast distributions with a bit of a hype can gain good features in by just pulling in knowledgable users missing things from their previous distro - and they can move a lot faster than the Debians or Fedoras of the world can, no committee decisions to be made first.
Does Mac hibernate? Because if it does, the wake up is literally under 100ms, it's just imperceptible. You open the lid and it's already awake.
Apple calls it "Safe Sleep" (https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/mac-help/mh10328/mac) and you get a progress bar when it wakes from it. Yes, even on magical Ms.
Not by default. If you just shut the lid on your macbook and put it in your backpack for 2 days, it does not hibernate.
Which is why waking is instant.
It does not make any sense to write 32 or 64G data to secondary memory every time you close your laptop lid, that will accelerate the lifespan of most SSDs.
I authored a patch (I still use it to this day, and I think others do too) that allows this, and sent it to the LKML as an RFC, and was rejected, for some background.
Proceeds to continue enforcing objectively worse solution (evidenced by the existence of this entire thread).
PC as a laptop platform is a complete joke.
For example, for my home lab, I bought a used Intel 12th gen industrial PC from a specialized Taiwanese embedded systems company, whose BIOS allows very granular control of all sleep states plus individual power control of most peripherals, probably because that's a must-have for customers in that space over stuff like benchmark scores and bang for the buck.
So technically, IT IS possible to do, just probably not very cost effective for consumer devices.
https://community.frame.work/t/responded-how-to-enable-s3-sl...
https://novacustom.com is a manufacturer that does do their own firmware and BIOS and gives you full control over all these settings
The real problem is that both AMD and Intel S0 implementations are mediocre at best and this is what they should fix. Also most vendors are dickheads and cannot even verify that their system even goes to S0ix states without any problem before releasing it. Because of their laziness you can buy brand new certified "Linux ready" machine which won't even achieve S0ix states out of the box.
On Windows, network connectivity in S0 standby is optional: https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/146593-enable-disable-ne...
>Which means it's impossible to turn off the CPU during suspend. it's always on.
Hibernation is still an option, if you don't mind a slower resume.
> Pretty much exactly 19 years ago I got on a train to Oxford and made Mark Shuttleworth's laptop successfully suspend and resume using ACPI and that was the turning point in my entire career [1]
[1] https://nondeterministic.computer/@mjg59/111249766634985812
10 years after that I bought a Macbook Air, and haven't gone back to Linux on a laptop since.
While I can understand random Joe and Jane are at the mercy of reverse engineering while installing a Linux distro over the weekend, I expect that anyone selling Linux laptops as OEM, to actually get the specifications and have everything working as any other hardware vendor.
Why do you need hibernation? Apple gets the ultra low power without suspending to disk?
You do need a CPU/SoC that’s efficient, and while Intel and AMD can do this it’s traditionally been a struggle for them.
Next, the OS needs to be capable of taking full advantage of the chip’s efficiency. Windows could be decent here in, but Microsoft doesn’t believe in an operating system that’s ever truly idle (and neither do the third parties living in your taskbar tray), so even on relatively efficient laptops much of that potential is wasted. Linux is kind of all over the place, depending on your hardware, which governor you’re using, how it’s configured, whether your browsers are configured to use GPU acceleration or are burning power intensive CPU cycles, etc.
Then there’s sleep. Most of the problems here come down to x86 laptops not implementing proper S3 sleep but only “modern standby”, which attempts to emulate the sleep mode that Apple uses that allows for emails to be fetched etc while in a near-sleep low-power state. The problem is that modern standby is not implemented well in Windows or Linux and how individual laptop firmwares handle it can vary a great deal, and the sum of it is that it generally speaking doesn’t work, which is why so many x86 laptops drain themselves after being “asleep” for a couple of days. My ThinkPad does this too.
It’s possible for x86 machines to manage this state correctly, as proven by Valve’s Steam Deck which can be put to sleep and drain its battery slowly enough to stay alive for a week or more. This seems to require a level of integration between the hardware and the OS (an Arch based Linux in this case) than practically all laptop vendors are either willing or capable of.
Linux is developed to be compatible with different hardware setups.
SteamOS and MacOS are both (supposed to be) locked to their respective hardware. It works on that hardware, but ymmv on anything else.
I had the original Steam Deck and the OLED Steam Deck and neither of them would hold a charge past a day or so. It's a constant annoyance for me as I don't want to leave it plugged in 24/7 but if I don't, it won't be ready to go when I use it. I often end up playing while plugged in which is just silly.
A week of battery (while it's "off") would be amazing, it feels like I can't get 24hrs without the battery being trash.
Compare this to my iPad or MBP and the difference is stark. I really only use my Switch in docked mode (the joycons suck) so I don't have a good read on how long it holds it's battery but I assume it must be better than the Steam Deck.
The fix is simple but I have to wonder why it's not set by default
https://github.com/nazar256/publications/blob/main/guides/st...
Ideally the Steamdeck would come with hibernation after timeout and FDE enabled by default, but it doesn't. Still love it, and I'm glad/grateful it's open enough to enable these features on my own
And yes, I'm surprised they don't do something like this out of the box. I really love my Steam Deck overall and I agree, the ability to tweak and enable these features really make it an amazing product. Especially in comparison to my Switch 2 which is great but 100% locked down.
https://www.reddit.com/r/SteamDeck/comments/188jgd7/howto_se...
I got a Steam Deck OLED a few months ago. I haven't changed the standby behaviour at all. I can get a bit less than a week of standby + a few hours of gaming out of the box. Currently, my deck is on 52% charge after last charging it 4 days ago and playing ~3 hours of Silksong across those days.
I also have a Framework 13 (11th gen intel) which has terrible suspend battery life (also loses 2-3%/hour like the newer AMD version)– I was hoping that the AMD chips would fare better, but it seems not.
My understanding is that it being all AMD makes a difference, but I don’t know for sure.
My previous two Xiaomi laptops also held charge for a long time on suspend, though not weeks.
That's strange because when I close the lid on my Framework laptop it disables Wifi.
I travel a lot, and often on standby for work during that time. I need to be confident that when I pull the laptop out, there's ALWAYS enough juice to respond to a situation immediately without worrying about anything else.
If Framework offered hot swappable batteries, even if a quick restart is required, I'd be fine with that because at least I wouldn't be stranded in that case. And I'd be happy to pay as much as a MacBook, or a bit more even, purely for ideological reasons. Apple's dominance is bad for all of us.
I count 14, 8 and 5 screws to swap the battery:
https://guides.frame.work/Guide/Battery/425
https://guides.frame.work/Guide/Battery+Replacement+Guide/85...
Browsing around on Amazon, I see there's actually quite a few battery banks that with over 60W of output, and ~100Wh of capacity for under 100€
Not being allowed to use those on an airplane could be one reason.
And a mouse, because non apple laptops are hard to use with just the trackpad.
And the huge power adapter for the "gaming" laptop.
... sadly, it means I'll have to stick to Apple hardware for longer. As much as I think Cook is an idiot who's trying to dumb their products down to the point they're not even usable for power users, let alone developers.
Not if you get a properly standard-compliant laptop that uses USB PD for charging (like Framework)
Have you ever used a Framework's trackpad? It's very good.
> And the huge power adapter for the "gaming" laptop.
First of all, Framework laptops are not gaming laptops. Second of all, Framework ships smaller power adapters than Apple because they invested in Gallium Nitride chargers which are significantly more compact than other options.
Personally, I wouldn't even carry around a power bank, I just mentioned it because the person I was talking to said they wanted to carry around a hot-swappable battery, and I thought a power bank was a better option.
The hardware is the same in most quality laptops including Apple. It's something they do in the software that makes it far less annoying to go trackpad only on Mac OS.
Plus, depending on how/where it's used, having to wait for it to recharge while connected to a power bank might be a non-starter. You also don't necessarily want to recharge while transporting in a bag either because of heat concerns.
Because in terms of actual dominance, Apple is far from that in laptops. Lenovo, HP and Dell each sell more laptops than Apple, and those three alone make up 60% of the market.
https://www.industryresearch.biz/market-reports/mobile-compu...
Granted, I haven't tried most of the newer niche Linux-focused laptops, which I intend to do.
1. The battery life, as others have mentioned.
2. The quality of the hardware: The screen is incredibly nice, the trackpad is VERY nice to use, and no other laptop has even come close.
3. It's so quiet. The fans almost never spin unless I've been compiling something for over a minute. I don't know how they do it but any other Linux laptop I've used, including desktops, have been super loud when running similar tasks.
I can run models on my 96GB RAM MacBook Pro incredibly well.
As soon as someone tells me how this can be done in Linux, I'm ready to switch.
The move to modern standby has been a mess. It seems to have improved a lot but my kid always shuts down his windows laptop before putting it in a bag because it seems to have become urban folklore that laptops turn on in bags, overheat and get damaged. That is new. I carried laptops in bags suspended for years and nobody thought that. It just worked.
I say this as my lab mate had his laptop do exactly that just last week, with up to date windows and a newer XPS laptop. It simply has never happened to my Macs
While I rarely use it, when I do the instant-on still works pretty flawlessly. That is after running a few hours of Windows updates!
I'm in the same boat as the article. I actually use a Macbook Air these days for coding instead of the usual MBP and the battery life still surprises me.
When it's time to replace my M1 air, if the laptop is still working (I tend to replace when they break), I'll try to install Asahi Linux to see how it is. It feels a bit too experimental/me being too inexperienced with OS to risk it on my main computer.
I've had my M1 Air since they launched, five years, and it doesn't show any sign of getting retired soon (except for the slight bend in my case where my lid jumped on it when it was open on the couch... but that mostly bent back.)
I had a 2011 MBA but vastly prefer everything about this one.
My previous laptop cooked its screen like that. Some of the layers warped into a wavy pattern visible through the backlight.
My Windows work laptop has a low-power CPU, so the danger is minimal, but still it consistently goes full throttle when asleep.
The Mac Desktop is vastly inferior to the Linux world (for power users) but the hardware is so, so good.
For me it is about having a completely silent setup. It is so, so hard to go back to noisy fans.
I really hope Asahi Linux keep going so I can have the best of both worlds.
I have to use Mac, Linux, and Windows desktops in my work.
They all have their pros and cons, but I can’t say I’d ever argue that the Mac desktop experience is vastly inferior to the Linux desktop experience.
Edit: Getting a lot of downvotes but most of the comments are about someone’s highly customized Linux desktop compared to completely vanilla Mac desktop. I’m referring to apples to apples comparison where they’re either some standard out of the box version or when customized with available tools and mods. Comparing your highly customized Linux desktop to a completely uncustomized Mac setup with no attempt at other tools or utilities isn’t an interesting comparison because it’s not apples to apples, it’s just a statement about your current preference.
While there are several apps to create custom keyboard commands, only yabai+skhd come close to what's available on linux, and it's not even that close tbh.
Linux Mint with Cinnamon is bliss. Or well anything else, you are absolutely spoiled for choice with Desktop Environments in Linux. There is the perfect one for everyone. At least if you use X11, wayland is still a turd.
I found the Mac Desktop absolutely unusable for any development work as it comes out of the box. You need a metric ton of third-party extensions for simple stuff like proper alt-tab support or custom shortcuts. An configuration is supper limited.
And it will get so much worse with the whole glasses ui thing.
That is both a pro and a con. For someone offering tech support or writing documentation it's a pretty big negative.
This doesn’t seem like a fair way to evaluate MacOS given the effort involved in configuring a Linux installation
This is one of my go-tos when I need a VM, so I’m familiar.
> I found the Mac Desktop absolutely unusable for any development work as it comes out of the box.
But why are we comparing vanilla macOS to an extreme customized Linux setup as if they’re the same thing? Why one set of rules for one platform but those criteria are suspended for Linux, where we get to assume some specific set of perfectly configured everything?
This is the hyperbole that I can’t really take seriously. Calling it “absolutely unusable” just isn’t something I can take seriously.
I understand that some people like to customize their environments to the Nth degree and can’t live without their personal set of customizations, but that’s personal preferences. Calling other platforms “absolutely unusable” or “vastly inferior” is just an exaggeration when millions of devs use them just fine.
My Linux Mint installation is actually barely customized. It absolutely works out of the box. I disabled a few animations and selected a different theme and added like three extra shortcuts but that is it. Nothing that would take more than ten minutes.
I was comparing the vanilla experience.
And yes, I should have specified that I am talking about my needs. I totally believe that the Mac Desktop might be better for the average user but that is no me.
Your assumption that these Linux setups are "extremely customized" is wrong. Personally, I hate configuring or customizing much at all. The appeal of Linux is that there are distros that come configured out-of-the-box pretty much as I like it, whereas MacOS and especially Windows requires configuration and constant upkeep and maintenance. (MacOS doesn't even come with a decent terminal, for starters.)
For me, my main problem with MacOS is that it's full of looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong animations that you can not disable or remove. Disabling animations (or setting them to be <10ms long) is one of the few configurations I like to do. But this is not even an option on Apple's operating systems. It's like running through molasses in a dream-- it's so damnedly and artificially slow.
defaults write com.apple.finder DisableAllAnimations -bool true
That is quite simply false.
Apple is at this point maliciously incompetent...
(For posterity: I am being sarcastic, to highlight how Apple's UX stance increases users exposure to supply chain attacks. "Macs can not get malware" is a long-standing myth.)
When I first started using a mac for dev at my current job, I tried their virtual desktops implementation as a workaround for macOS's lack of alt-tab support. That desktop switching animation is so long it's honestly really funny, I just sat there for a minute switching around and laughing my ass off in disbelief at how slow it is. Unfortunately it does also make the feature completely unusable, so we're just stuck with one desktop and a gimped alt-tab. Just an absolute usability train wreck going on over at Apple.
You are trying to use macOS like your other favorite OS(s). This is not how macOS has ever worked, and the macOS approach is more than fine for millions of people.
It brings up a list of applications in most recently to least recently used order, so two apps switched to/from will constantly switch places.
I don't recall the difficulty you mention happening with Safari.
"Applications" is the problem. I want to switch between windows.
Windows (and most Unix WMs, I don't know where it actually originated) style alt-tab maintains a stack of recent windows. So you can hit alt-tab repeatedly to swap between the two most recent, or hit alt-tab-tab-tab to bring up only the 4th most recent window, etc.
Maybe this used to make sense when apps were single purpose but I do basically everything in a web browser or a terminal so not being able to bounce between the previously selected window(of whatever kind), as I can with Alt-Tab on linux or windows, is frustrating.
Also Command-` switches to the next window, not the previous one like I would expect.
MacOS removed subpixel antialiasing, honestly for understandable reasons, making rendering on low-ppi displays blurry, but high-ppi displays are still super expensive. I got a 32" 4k monitor(~140ppi) at Costco for $250. A >200ppi display of the same size costs 20x that amount.
You can add Shift to both Command-Tab and Command-` to move in the reverse direction.
Then you are deliberately handicapping yourself, this isn't something you can blame on the OS. It's like complaining that a car has bad fuel economy because you always stay in first gear.
As for the displays, you are comparing apples to oranges. You can get a high DPI monitor which is smaller than 32 inches for cheap. Which is plenty of screen for the distances where DPI differences are important.
The classic "You're holding it wrong" defense. Especially when the alternatives don't have this problem.
But other than that? Most macOS apps are now inferior to browser-based analogs. Calendar, contacts, email, iMessage, Music, TV - they all just suck.
It’s the dumbest thing apple has ever done and hats off to betterdisplay dev. Best money ever spent on a desktop tool easily.
These don't matter as much when you have high PPI. But they're a lifeline on low PPI displays (and there are a lot of those).
So CMD+TAB+SHIFT cycles in the opposite order of from CMD+TAB, etc.
People are comparing them to vanilla Mac setups because Macs don't really let you have a non-vanilla experience.
Perhaps you missed the parent's "(for power users)"?
So here's an apples-to-apples comparison: customizing Mac desktop for one's preferences compared to Linux.
I've been on Mac for 10 years because of Work. Before that I was on Linux, using the AwesomeWM tiling window manager.
I dearly miss AwesomeWM. I've tried most 3rd-party window managers for Mac, and nothing comes close to the snappiness and functionality of Linux's tiling managers like AwesomeWM. Nowadays I just use window-movers like Rectangle [1], and I feel handicapped.
The simple fact of the matter is that Mac does not allow the level of customization that Linux inherently does. MacOS' UI hooks are through the Accessibility framework, and in my user experience, it's just a slower, jankier emulation of what a more deeply integrated WM can do. As a specific example, the author of DisplayMaid [2] has complained elsewhere on HN that macOS does not provide reliable identifiers for the displays, so they had to implement their own heuristics. Side-note: for a system so inherently dockable as macbooks, it's a tragedy that I have to rely on a 3rd-party app to re-position my windows for one of my 2 regular work setups.
I'm sure Apple could implement the hooks for better WM customization, they've certainly done their few updates with Spaces and their own poor-man's tiling, but the years with no update to integration demonstrate that they consider the Accessibility hooks to be Good Enough.
Asking out of curiosity, why is this? What's the functionality you miss on Mac?
Like proper alt-tab, better keyboard configuration, Finder is the worst file manager I have ever used, a classical task bar and so on.
You can manage but the defaults are really bad for power users.
Honestly Apple just needs to let me install a proper Desktop Environment like KDE on it. The unix base is decent, just give me more freedom.
you usually also need a bunch of extensions. And 50% of them are broken due to various if you try to use KDE builtin extension thing.
It is so sad that apparently no one else bothers to tune their fans properly. It is such a killer feature for me.
1. No delete button. I know you can do Fn delete but It is more problematic. And I do use delete often.
2. System keeps important system stuff in Library directory in home. Do not do remove any directories.
4. Os x doesnt quit apps and then expects me to go through all apps in windows switcher.
5. The spaces dont wrap around.
6. Finder is always in your alt +tab? Causes issues with switching.
7. Corners are round. How to Disable it control the roundedness
8. Alt +Tab doesnt automatically restore minimized windows.
9. App store is quite weak compared to archlinux
10. There is no spaces pager (a small bar at top where I can immediately see which desktop im in)
11. It seems that I cannot have windows of same app in multiple spaces.
12. Same app has only one window. Apple mail for example. Cannot copy text from email to settings.
13. How to Disable HTML display in apple mail.
14. Kmail has much better interface for signing
Both for viewing rhe signed emails and for deciding which key to use
15. Opening a new windows from spotlight is not possible
16. Download multiple wallpapers at same time is not possible
17. All operations related to an app should be inside an app. Alt+w for tab and ctrl+tab for switching makes me move two fingers instead of one.
18. Spectacle is so much better than screen shot on MAC os
19. Ramdisk on mac os x
21. Threads view in emails isnot possible in apple mail
22. Application specific power optimization (for good battery life) on OS X
23. Better security and access on OSX for apps.
23. Switching between apps of same windows on OSX does not bring up a visual aid..
24. Long press leads to accents which is very cool but also I didn't use it.
Indeed. I would love it if I could name spaces too. Amazing how little details improve productivity.
> It seems that I cannot have windows of same app in multiple spaces.
Right-click app icon in dock.
For different app windows in the same app, appearing in different spaces: Options->Assign to Desktop->None.
For app windows appearing across all spaces: Options->Assign to Desktop->All Desktops.
("Desktop" here actually refers to spaces, for some reason. And it would be nice to be able to do "All Desktops" at the window level, but nay.)
E.g., in Windows apps, menu items are keyboard-addressable by default. This is brilliant for accessibility, and for accustomed power users. MacOS has no _by default_ equivalent.
E.g., managing virtual desktops in Linux are exactly as flexible and powerful as you want them to be. MacOS does it One Way (more or less), and you’d better like it.
I still love MacOS the most. Some of the things you list are real misses (#1). Some of them, I believe, are things you haven’t found yet (#11, #15, #16). Some are MacOS-specific metaphors which I’ve come to love compared with the alternatives (#4). Some I don’t understand but would be happy to discuss with you (#17).
Cmd-Shift-? (really, Cmd-?)
You can begin using arrow keys from there, or start typing to search the menu items of the foreground app
You can also assign arbitrary hotkeys to any application's menu items in the OS system preferences
MacOS allows easy navigation of the menu, but does not guarantee that each item is hotkey-addressable.
26. No ability to use focus-follows-mouse.
27. Home/End keys send you to the top/bottom of the whole document instead of the start/end of a line. The latter is much more useful to me and I use it all the time. You can change this behavior with a terminal command followed by rebooting, but some programs still do whatever they want.
28. Automatic text replacements change the text you entered into the text that Apple thinks you mean. (Can also be disabled.)
29. Holding down an alphanumeric key brings up an accept/symbol selector, as on iPhone. This isn't compatible with many terminal applications like vim.
30. The dock has a tendency to move automatically to another display when there is a maximized window on that display. (I know how to move the dock by going bottom of the display and moving the mouse down, this isn't that.)
31. The camera notch can hide icons and you have no way to get to them without either connecting and external display or a workaround like https://github.com/dwarvesf/hidden.
8 - minimize in macOS is more like "get this window out of the way without closing it", and it is related to 4)
15 - because of 4
23 - wat
Personally, once I got used to cmd+tab and cmd+` for window management, I can't go back, but it needs a different mental model than the one on Windows/Linux.
It has ramdisks (`diskimagetool attach ram://`) and tmpfs.
I’d run kde or even gnome on my work MacBook if it let me without a second thought.
PS just installed ios 26 and what is this? If this low contrast blobby window thing makes its way to the laptop I’ll be very, very not impressed.
You have quite a bit of control over all of these features. Dark mode, contrast controls...
There is a lot there you can tweak to have it look how you want and it stays that way through pretty much all upgrades.
> animations, stage managers and pretty docks.
You can turn all this off for the most part.
Spend as much time and effort customizing your Mac as you do customizing your Linux desktop and a lot of your laments will go away.
I use both often enough to know that linux on the desktop is a much steeper investment if you want it to work for you.
Finder the least flexible file explorer of any OS. There's no location bar. You can't have a dynamically resizing grid of icons, so if you resize your windows, the icons are constantly outside of the horizontal scroll blinds. The view modalities make it difficult to sort and find files. Major system paths (eg. Applications) are locked down and hidden.
The window manager can't be replaced.
Window manager placement hacks exist, but they are not first class. You'll never have first class tiling windows in Mac.
Many of the window manager quirks are forced upon you. You can't change how to cycle and alternate windows. Exposé is flakey...
Option 1: View > Show Location Bar (you can right-click or double-click on any folder to interact) Option 2: Option-click the folder name in the Finder Window's title bar to immediately jump to other folders Option 3: If you want to type a location and go there, press Command-Shift-G for Go > Go to Location
> You can't have a dynamically resizing grid of icons, so if you resize your windows, the icons are constantly outside of the horizontal scroll blinds.
Of course you can. Select View > Clean Up By > and choose the option you like best.
> The view modalities make it difficult to sort and find files.
Name a built-in file explorer with semi-spatial (Sidebar off), browser icon mode, hierarchical list mode, gallery, and column view. Bonus points if they have anything remotely like QuickLook.
> The view modalities make it difficult to sort and find files.
What is difficult about Command-1, Command-2, Command-3, Command-4 to switch views? What is hard about Command-J for granular settings?
> Major system paths (eg. Applications) are locked down and hidden.
Applications is visible at the system-wide and user level. Applications folder is listed in the "Go" menu, present in every Finder menubar. Applications is, by default, on the left sidebar of every Finder window. If you want to type, Command-Space brings up any Application at a whim.
Can't find an Application or want to see EVERY app on the system and connected drives? Hold Option while going to Apple > System Information and click the "Applications" listing on the left sidebar.
> Window manager placement hacks exist, but they are not first class.
Moom wants a chat. BetterTouchTool wonders if you've heard of it. Heck, DockDoor is free and excellent, too! They're only second-class in the sense they won't bring down your system when they act up.
> You can't change how to cycle and alternate windows. Exposé is flakey...
This is either a configuration error or not being familiar with how to use it. Exposé works better than any similar system on any other platform I've tried - what do you think is a better example of a systemwide Exposé alternative on another platform? Wait, I don't need one because Mission Control & Exposé are bulletproof.
Tell me how you getting around your system on linux?
Search is and remains a first class citizen on Mac, and is for the most part on Linux. Spotlight still edges out linux choices. Windows has all the "power tools" to root through folders cause its search is such hot garbage.
> You'll never have first class tiling windows in Mac.
No you have ones that work.
Because the moment that you plug in mismatched or non standard monitors into a modern linux distro all bets are off. To make that work your going to end up with some pretty intense setup where your forced into window management rather than a traditional desktop.
Can you do it... You sure can... But I run an out of the box IDE on a basic Mac with a few tweaks for a reason: because playing games with my tools isnt getting work done. I have an arch, ubuntu and windows desktop and I have a Mac laptop. Is the linux box fun. It sure is. Does running it involve doing a lot of chores, you bet it does.
I do this daily with different displays and have no problems whatsoever. I've probably used over 30 different displays over USB-C and HDMI on Linux and have had no problems.
They were all different sizes, DPIs, panel types, brands, etc.
Meanwhile, I can't even do fractional scaling when using macOS lol
I hear this sentiment often, but I think it's missing the main reason why most people prefer Linux, whether that's for work or leisure.
What you call "playing games" to me is actually configuring our tools and environment to function optimally according to our needs and preferences. Yes, we spend an inordinate amount of time doing this, but it ultimately leads to a more comfortable and enjoyable experience, which is well worth it considering we spend most of our day using our machines.
This is not unlike a carpenter who has very specific preferences about their tools, and how they might spend a lot of time organizing and honing them. Sure they can use a pre-built workbench from IKEA, but chances are that they prefer using one they've customized or partly built themselves over the years.
Dealing with jank and the occasional frustration is unavoidable in Linux, but no operating system and machine are perfect. There are always trade-offs. We just prefer the freedom and flexibility over a corporation forcing us to use our computers the way they think we should.
We all have different priorities and preferences, and I'm not saying yours are in any way inferior, but I wanted to clarify the other perspective.
When I put non techy people on mac they end up having a good experience because they learn quickly there is no reason to touch anything except the web browser. I also want to highlight Macs are high end hardware in a premium package compared to Linux where people usually try it on a really old low/mid range device.
If they're like 95% of computer users, they use them to check their email, their FB/IG/etc and browse the web. A Chromebook would suit their needs, but in my experience, so would a modern Linux installation + a browser.
The biggest friction in my experience is UI differences, but that is solved by just mimicking Windows/macOS UI in KDE. Put buttons and components where they expect to find them and it seems to just work, in my experience.
I know Linux guys don't mind putting up with the Linux experience but if your family is trusting you as "the techie," you'd be doing them a huge favor by not making them put up with that stuff.
Yes, you will find that most material problems can be solved by buying more stuff. If they wanted to buy a new laptop, they would have done that.
> You'll have to do near zero troubleshooting
That's the case now.
Meanwhile, with the Macs they use, I have to explain that there's a difference between Intel and ARM Macs, that no, their software won't work in MACOS_VERSION because Apple deprecated some API, and no, you can't upgrade to MACOS_VERSION+1 to use something that works, no the hardware they've been using for years won't work because the driver for it is no longer compatible with their Mac/macOS version, the simple thing they want to do actually requires $30 paid software to do, I can't help you when Apple sold you a small hard drive at a premium and macOS takes up half of it, etc.
> I know Linux guys don't mind putting up with the Linux experience but if your family is trusting you as "the techie," you'd be doing them a huge favor by not making them put up with that stuff
Yeah, having a fast computer that just works must be tough lol
Either set it to do upgrades in the background automatically or tell her to hit "Install updates" when she sees a notification about it. Ideally you'd click the checkmark that enables the former.
The great thing about Debian and Ubuntu LTS releases is that they're rock solid and nothing changes for like a decade or however long they're kept on life support.
No you don't? Why not tell your grandma about PowerPC and Motorola 68000 Macs too while you're giving her pointless information about CPUs Apple used in the past.
We're half a decade into the Apple Silicon transition. Intel Macs are not relevant to anyone except people who purchased a Mac within a couple years before the M1.
> no, their software won't work in MACOS_VERSION because Apple deprecated some API, and no, you can't upgrade to MACOS_VERSION+1 to use something that works, no the hardware they've been using for years won't work because the driver for it is no longer compatible with their Mac/macOS version, the simple thing they want to do actually requires $30 paid software to do, I can't help you when Apple sold you a small hard drive at a premium and macOS takes up half of it, etc.
I... can't even imagine what scenario you could possibly be running into any of this so I don't know how to argue against it.
I was already speaking on the scenario you brought up where this is someone that is gonna be living 95% in their browser. I don't know what weird proprietary software non-techie users are needing that's apparently not compatible with new Macs. Anything beyond web browsing - e.g. word processing, light photo editing, dealing with PDFs, etc - can be done with very high-quality, free software baked right into macOS.
You describe using a Mac like the black and white "before" footage from an infomercial showing that previously the only way to cut a tomato is smushing it with the side of a dull knife. If a Mac is too difficult for someone, Linux is not the solution.
Yes, I do, when Apple advertises new features in macOS and for whatever reason, they just don't work on their Macs. Why? Because some of their machines are Intel-based and Apple chose not to implement certain features they expect on their Intel hardware.
Similarly, I have to do the same for software. While fat binaries are common, sometimes they end up with ARM binaries that just won't work. Similarly, the ability to run their iOS apps doesn't exist on Intel Macs and they don't know why.
> I... can't even imagine what scenario you could possibly be running into any of this so I don't know how to argue against it.
My family member spent thousands of dollars on software licenses for their business. For years, they could use that software on their Macs, until they couldn't. I'm talking about things like Office and tax software.
Similarly, try using an old macOS version that older Macs get stuck on. You eventually cannot even get a working safe browser anywhere, because the APIs Firefox and Chrome depend on change between macOS versions due to API churn, eventually deprecating old macOS versions altogether when it comes to new releases. Eventually, the entire Mac app ecosystem does this and the only solution is to either upgrade your macOS version through hacks or buy a new Mac with an updated macOS version and then experience that again in a few years.
Then there are driver issues. I have family members that have perfectly good music production hardware that drivers no longer work for. For some of it, it looks like 3rd party companies developed paid drivers for new macOS versions. Same thing with touch screens, had to go down the paid driver route for those, too. That's just not a problem on Linux.
> You describe using a Mac like the black and white "before" footage from an infomercial showing that previously the only way to cut a tomato is smushing it with the side of a dull knife
I mean, that's one way to interpret being honest about my experience as tech support for my family's Macs and other computers over the years. The Intel -> Arm transition + Apple's propensity for API and OS churn affects their users who aren't buying new hardware every time a new version comes out.
> If a Mac is too difficult for someone, Linux is not the solution.
I'd stand by the statement that if a Chromebook would suit a user's needs, so would Linux. Both require a curated experience and there should be no expectation of users setting it up themselves. You can make computers running Linux into solid email/Facebook/Zoom/office/web/etc machines a la ChromeOS, and in my experience, that keeps people happy.
Obviously, Linux is not a universal solution, Macs or other software/hardware might be the right solution. I wouldn't subject musicians in my family to Linux, but it has kept my older family members online and safe.
Sometimes powerful tools need sophisticated users that have time to invest in learning to use the tool. "Inferior" might depend on who is trying to accomplish what, but it's hard to argue that if you're trying to do or build the most sophisticated and cutting edge things that computers are capable of doing, you probably don't want to be using macOS or window.
That doesn't mean that it doesn't work marvelously when you have 0 time to invest in learning to use your computer, and all you want is to access web applications and manage a few files on a screen bigger than your smartphone and with a physical keyboard.
Windows has failed them.
Linux Mint/Cinnamon is closer to windows 95 than windows 11 is. It's cleaner, simpler, better.
Mac osx is annoying compared to cinnamon. I hate the empty space around the dock. I hate how Mac windows don't always consume the same amount of space for some reason so I can see the different rounded corners on different "maximized" windows. I hate Mac osx's full screen mode forcing each fullscreen app onto a different desktop. I prefer cinnamons default window tiling/desktop switching/fullscreening keyboard shortcuts and animations.
Finder's default mode of unaligned randomly placed folder icons is so wild. .DS_Store is so annoying. The lack of a system tray meaning you have to use the dock in order to see if you have a DM in slack. Spotlight opening the "spotlight" app when I type the "spot" of Spotify. Idk I just truly prefer cinnamon.
There's things about Mac osx that are great. The central nature of /Applications and of ~/Library is great. Lots of things are great.
Mac hardware is by far best in class but Mac osx is honestly pretty ugly compared to Cinnamon imo. I'm not biased. I paid through the nose for my MacBook. But I like the esthetics of Cinnamon on my desktop much more than osx.
The M4 is a beast, but I have a different priority for a device I want to call "my own". I want more control over "my" device, and I don't demand the highest performance or battery life. I grew up on Windows, and for a long time dual-booted with various Linuxes, and eventually used WSL on the regular. But now with my Framework I'm running Fedora, so for the first time in my life I don't have to deal with Windows at all.
It helps, I suppose, that I'm one of those weird types who likes to actually shut down their computer when they're not using it, instead of just closing the lid. I like a fresh start each time I open it up.
Erm, both windows and macs can be shut down
Edit: I'm getting downvoted but the way it's phrased I don't understand the issue with shutting down on macs / window. I always shut them down.
In my experience, most people like to just leave their computers on, or sleep or hibernate them. Some people specifically like returning to their windows etc. just like they left them.
How many years will it take to get back the time you now spend researching boot time? :p
I used to have a computer that would use several minutes. I would just turn it on, then get some coffee and have a little pee. It was fine :)
I recommended Framework to someone looking for a laptop a while ago and they were bit by the standby battery drain issue. I felt bad having recommended it to them because I assumed such a basic issue would have been addressed in a laptop that was so highly regarded.
Some other issues remain. Largest I am aware of is independent from the hardware, but an issue with suspend-to-disk & kernel lockdown, which prevents deep sleep.
I’m not sure if this was related to “modern standby” (it was around that time if I recall) but that hasn’t really helped anything. This is a desktop so why they insist on deprecating real standby for everything is beyond me…
* I actually still have it but it became my home server, so now doesn’t ever need to standby, luckily.
My Framework 13 has the Ryzen 5 AI 340 Chip, and I get 5-6 hours of work on a charge. The Macbooks definitely beat this, and their hardware has other benefits (silent if you opt for the Air, bigger/better trackpad, etc) but for me, being able to run Linux is worth the trade-off by far.
I like that on Linux (GNOME) I have all the functionality I need out of the box without having to install a paid app for window snapping (I heard they fixed this recently?) or to make my mouse buttons work. I also find that since I work with containers a lot, developing on Linux removes a lot of friction. I can run docker/containerd natively without having to babysit a VM that likes to eat all my RAM or hang randomly (no docker/rancher desktop layer). Even just having the same coreutils and package managers as I do inside the containers really simplifies things. Our MacOS devs are always struggling with homebrew putting shared libraries weird places that can't be found by the python bindings and this "just works" on Linux.
1. Homebrew: I use Nix package manager (with home manager, though you don't need to) and get rid of homebrew completely.
2. Docker: I assume you referred to Desktop version. You can just just Colima and the Docker/Compose CLI. You will get rid of all the bloats coming with Desktop. Bonus: see #1 for installing Colima and Docker CLI.
Edit: each container still gets its own vm but the container runtime is now native.
This happens every time. I get one and half evenings of light usage out of it before having to charge it.
My idle power consumption at 0% display brightness is around 7.5W, but I've seen people get to as low as 6.5W. Not great, not terrible. With the display at 50% it jumps to the teens(13-17W).
Meanwhile the display in the MBP peaks at 6.2W:
https://andytran93.com/2021/12/05/power-consumption-implicat...
I guess herein lies their secret sauce - with the rest of the device idling at ~5W total power consumption in this state doesn't go beyond 11W.
No, not even close.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Air-15-M4-review...
They’re about 1-1.5 generations ahead of AMDs mobile offering, and OEMs have sweetheart deals with Intel, which is more like 4-5 generations behind.
So flagship business laptops (which are the only comparable laptops in terms of build quality to Macbooks) are hamstrung, and everything else is built like a matchbox even with AMD cpus.
Another thing: the displays are glossy, but still not very reflective. The Windows laptops glossy displays are so much more reflective, they are unusable outside. Also something worth mentioning, the MacBook displays get really bright. A high-end OLED display hardly goes above 400 nits. A MacBook Pro can go to 600 nits and outside it goes to 1600 nits. This is the difference between being able to use a laptop outside, and not.
Durability: if you're not doing anything crazy the MacBook will look brand new even after years of usage. Notable exception is the cheap plastic key caps which degrade very quickly, a bummer.
So the MacBooks beat the competition easily from a hardware quality perspective, and we haven't even talked about the elephant in the room yet: CPU performance, battery life and fan noise, obviously Apple is even further ahead in this area.
And then price, as strange as it sounds, both the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro are cheaper than the competition.
Disclaimer: I don't own a MacBook personally because I think macOS is not great, but that's probably the only reason why I'm not buying a MacBook. I would happily pay same the price of a MacBook Pro for a similar Windows laptop if it existed. It does not. There are always compromises.
I’ve seen companies losing their by far biggest customer because they refuse to hire real engineers instead of juniors to fix their software. The customer tried YEARS of complaining before.
Another customer: different suppliers use different barcode patterns for deliveries, some including nasty stuff like NULL as separators (but only sometimes, can be space, tab, whatever) or non-unique IDs. They rather spent the effort to fix everything else with workarounds than change the contract and demand proper barcodes/delivery data.
Looking for a laptop at dell.com, for example, they seem to offer a choice of 7 different CPUs in 5 product lines (Latitude, Inspiron, Dell Pro, Dell Plus, Dell Pro Plus) with at least 3 different graphics cards (Intel Iris Xe, Intel Arc, and HawkPoint - UMA. I also spot a generic “Intel” that may indicate a fourth one)
Their desktops use different hardware, again, with, for example, Intel® UHD Graphics or Nvidia cards.
To me, that suggests they internally somewhat act as multiple smaller companies with smaller budgets to tune products.
Also, if they ask one of their suppliers about a performance issue, chances are the answer is “get out newest product”, not “let’s help you fix that”.
Apple doesn’t have that problem anymore for most of their hardware.
PC manufacturers, please, for the love of all that is holy, make FIVE laptops: the thin, the tablet-laptop, the "pro", the gaming (the "pro" with RGB) and the workstation (as in Xeon/Quadro). Keep the name you give each of them year-after-year-after-year. And just offer me a lot of CONFIGURATION options to each of these, not a lot of different products.
Dell seams quite reasonable by comparison with Lenovo.
Mac are premium hardware, and they earn higher margin. Apple use that to reinvest into their own hardware. And has been doing so for 30+ years.
Better quality PC generally dont sell as well. They have less incentive to do so. The whole PC business is also cut throat, in the old days you could have most of the margin on PC going to Intel. While others are fighting for what is left.
Recent example speakers. PC Laptop have had appalling speakers for years if not decades. It wasn't until Youtuber start pointing out some of these flaws which became competitive advantage for certain brands did PC marker start paying attention and R&D to it.
At my work, all non-developers are given Microsoft Surfaces. They're not cheap machines by any means, but they have nothing but problems with them. Overheating, battery drain, lag, full-on lockups, requiring regular daily reboots, needing replacement after a year, etc.
I'm guessing they just give everyone PCs because it's what most people are familiar with, but I have to assume they're spending more on those units than a base-spec MacBook Air that would get way better mileage and cause less tickets for IT.
The best kind of repairability is not having to repair something.
I remember when the M1 Macs first came out, an Apple engineer revealed they'd optimized the hardware so one specific low-level operation macOS does all the time was 5x faster than on Intel [0].
Sometimes I find it hard to believe that Apple Silicon implements 2 different togglable memory models, just so that Rosetta can better emulate x86
https://www.sra.uni-hannover.de/Publications/2024/wrenger_24...
The key insight is the kind of “vertical integration” providing the kind of feedback loop to spot the opportunity.
In modern systems memory becomes a major source of power consumption, so reducing how much if it you need to keep active results in big gains, on top of all the other benefits of doing this. This is partly used as the reasoning to explain why Swift has evolved in the direction it has, but also various apps that suspend/resume their state at a higher level than simply relying on the OS to do it.
It would take a gargantuan effort, which would likely annoy almost everyone, to get a desktop Linux distro to do this.
People responded along the lines of "And what is going to run on that?" And they were right. At the time there would have been no killer app, not even Linux could propel it IMO. Of course Apple has the ability to steer their entire ship just like they steered from PowerPC to x86-64. So kudos to them for proving I was right ;-)
Though I still want my AMD Arm GPU SoC...
Apple could do it not just because of their experience from the iOS device family and the IP they acquired for it, but because they didn't need to take care that much about the issues in the Windows ecosystem. Apple has long since discouraged third party hardware that can't be driven with libusb from userspace as kexts have been deprecated, Apple has been pretty ruthless in forcing developers to keep their software compileable, and their ARM Architecture License allowed them to do tweaks and extensions to make performant emulation of x86 code possible.
The lower/ultra-low end market is a different thing - just look at the absurdly massive popularity of Raspberry Pi and their clones - but as said these are toys, not capable of being an actually usable general (as in: general population) computing device.
FWIW, both Intel and AMD also have architectural licences from ARM.
When you close the lid on a laptop, there are a lot of layers that all have to do the right thing. How is Windows configured? How do the drivers installed on that laptop handle the Windows state transitions? How do all the pieces of hardware on that laptop (CPU, etc.) work together to implement the various states?
I think it is possible for a computer manufacturer like Framework to work with operating system vendors like Microsoft and Canonical, and hardware vendors like Intel and AMD to improve how power management is implemented in their hardware.
There is always some level of "friction" involved when you are trying to integrate across different vendors. Some of the best Windows hardware I've used was made by Microsoft. The Surface line, at least in my experience, is really good.
It will require an investment of course, but I think it is possible.
First and this is the elephant in the room, it's probably better for the environment to buy a refurbished think pad. The most environmentally friendly product is one that gets reused instead of going to a landfill.
The 13-in framework only offers one SSD slot, The expansion Bay offers a nice storage option but these are a bit overpriced and then you're down to three ports. The design itself feels really prone to failure, if you're popping in and out expansion cards all the time eventually the ports are going to fail which seems like a really weird design choice. It probably would have been smarter to do something that requires actually screwing in components.
To get comparable specs, you seriously need to spend about 50% more on average, and this is just me comparing ThinkPads to Frameworks. If I wanted to look at laptops on sale you can easily find framework specs at half price.
Finally the support issues don't really inspire confidence, if my Lenovo laptop has issues I can walk into a variety of authorized repair centers and just let them sort it out. Framework simply doesn't have this, I don't have the appetite to pay a premium price and not have this as an option.
Extended warranty options are iffy. You have to first pay more for the prebuilt laptop, and then at the performance tier ( Amd 350) you have to drop $1,690 to get a 3 year warranty. It's out of stock anyway.
The Lenovo E14 Gen 7 with a Intel® Core™ Ultra 7 255H Processor is about 1030$ direct from Lenovo with a 3 year warranty (2 years is available, and is my risk tolerance sweet spot, so I can save 60$ there).
The only reason I'm looking at the E14 is I REALLY want two SSD drives. If I'm ok with just one I can buy a refurbished P14 for around 780$.
I think the core issue is Framework is still a boutique brand, if they ever reach the size of a major OEM then they're pricing will be more competitive.
If you're plugging and unplugging USB-C cables all the time, eventually the ports are going to fail, but we generally consider plugging things into USB-C acceptable.
The Framework expansion modules are just USB-C ports, but they're not subject to much twisting or bending when using the modules so they should last longer.
There are also clips that hold the expansion cards in place. My HDMI one started coming out when I unplug the cable even from really early on, even without pressing the button which should be required to remove the card. That is another way they could fail - in getting loose enough that they weren't securely held in place to be useable. The internal USB-C port would still apply some force in holding them in place though. In my case, this is not related to the socket, but to the card. I'll need to open it up and take a closer look, but hopefully they're designed so the cards fail long before whatever is in the chassis which holds them in. Plastic on the cards vs metal on the chassis would seem robust to me. Otherwise, if the mechanism fails on the chassis side, that would be a much bigger replacement.
Disclosure: I was a big supporter of Framework and bought an early 13 inch (11th gen Intel). I would no longer recommend them due to the mounting list of problems I've had, and despite their responses always being friendly and prompt, they are unable to send any replacement parts, because I've moved to a non-supported country and there is no way they can send anything to the maritime capital of the world. I try to be neutral in my comments, but sarcasm creeps into my disclosures.
It's a premium product with subpar service.
You have Framework the ideal. Right to repair , replaceable parts, ownership rights.
Vs
Framework the company, weird QC issues, parts out of stock, iffy supply. Prices so high you might as well just buy a better laptop whenever you'd swap the main board out.
I think I'm just going with a Thinkpad for my next computer. I also prefer the all black look.
That just blows my mind. Not shipping to one of the richest and tech savvy countries in the world which happens to be less than 5 hours away from Framework's assembly base Taiwan.
Nothing is stopping you from buying a used Framework. Admittedly, the market is much smaller than for refurbished Thinkpads, but it's smaller on both sides (demand and supply), I found several both on Frameworks own community marketplace and on ebay. And considering the fact that after you buy the first one, you will re-use the chassis and other, non-mainboard components across at least a few upgrades, I actually still think that a framework is the correct "environmental" decision. Plus, if I were to buy a used/refurbed Framework, I would be _supremely_ confident that if some sub-component of it came broken (or broke shortly after purchase), that I would be able to get the laptop as a whole up and running and not need to ewaste the whole thing.
Price-to-performance. This is true....the first time you buy the laptop. On subsquent upgrades, you are not paying the full price of the laptop, but only the mainaboard. Over a few upgrade cycles, the framework comes down _significantly_ in price. This is, in fact, close to the entire point of framework.
I can't speak to support. I have had no issues with my 16. I've heard stories in both directions (very good and very bad support). I guess I will say that it is reasonable to be more skeptical about the level of support one will receive from a new company wit a very small team.
https://frame.work/products/mainboard-amd-ai300?v=FRANTE0009
AMD Ryzen™ AI 300 Series - Ryzen™ AI 9 HX 370
1000$
https://www.newegg.com/asus-vivobook-s14-14-0-non-touch-scre...
ASUS Vivobook S14 Laptop, Copilot+ PC AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 32GB RAM 1TB SSD
1000$.
The pricing just isn't competitive imo. Plus PC laptops go on sale pretty often.
Except for Framework.
The issue IMO is a lack of scale. If Dell did this they could probably offer cheaper parts.
Plus the warranty options drive the price up, I can add a 200$ warranty on the above Asus and get 3 years.
1200$ vs 2000$ on the Amd 370 framework.
That said, I want Framework to succeed. It's good for the industry. It doesn't mean I'm personally ready to make the investment.
It’s entirely possible that I missed one. But honestly that also makes me root more for framework - just sell me one high quality product instead of offering 40 models, some of which are shit, half of which are so niche they don’t even get a proper review anywhere.
Anecdotally, I've developed a bad habit of fidgeting with my expansion cards by popping them in and out. I've probably put them through several hundred cycles like that and they still work fine - I think the fact that the cards are "rail-roaded" into the slots helps a lot, since it makes it very difficult to apply pressure at an angle to the internal USB-C port.
On the Framework, I had to get it plugged before I could turn it on, due to a problem with the RTC battery [0]. There is actually a known defect here but they provide a free replacement _and_ a guide to help you perform the swap [1].
[0] https://community.frame.work/t/viability-of-an-ml-1220-recha...
[1] https://knowledgebase.frame.work/fr/how-do-i-replace-the-rtc...
As soon as Asahi supports TouchID, I think my M1 will become a linux laptop...
And according to use reports battery life seems quite awful compared to macOS?
I have a Surface Laptop 7 with a Snapdragon CPU on Windows 11 and it's been awesome so far. Insane battery life, especially in standby. I can reopen it after 48 hours and it only lost 3% of battery, while it stayed connected to WiFi and received notifications all along.
Buying an SSD and RAM that uses less power when idling helped, a handful of settings helped, but then I realized, this laptop is near perfect, and it stands out even more that I have to compensate for lack of a power management setup out of the box.
It was early for Framework though, and it otherwise ran flawlessly. I hope battery power management can be a first class citizen on Framework one day soon.
The rest is so solid and I wish Framework sustainability for a long, long time.
For now, I need my laptop to be invisible so I can do what I need.
That has to be a bug. I have a thinkpad with a Ryzen 7 6850U, running debian, and lose at most 3% per day.
The reason why it works well for Apple is that they control everything. There are limited numbers of parts they have to support, so they can make sure it all works.
In the PC world, there are many… many variables, even from the same OEM. It’s a legitimately hard problem and manufacturers aren’t particularly motivated to get it to work better (particularly with Linux). In fact, at this moment, there’s another post on the front page that talks about this exact issue: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45288440 . It is about debugging an ACPI bug that has existed for years.
Obviously, that’s windows. But I do wonder why sleep modes in Linux/windows don’t actually work effectively. I mean they ‘work’ as in slowed battery drain, but still nowhere near any of the MacBook series (with/without the M* chips). Idk something about them, they get it right..
It amazes me how the legend of ARM being more efficient than x86 took hold. I'm not saying that we don't have a more efficient ARM processors BUT it has nothing to do with the ISA. What you gain with a simple encoder (ARM) you gain with code density (x86) and after that it is converted to microcode. You wouldn't gain more than single percent if any.
Process node is by far more important (5nm , 3nm, etc) and usually Apple gets access to them first. Also placing the memory in the CPU package also proved to be great for efficiency (case of point is Intel's Lunar lake that can last like forever) and last but the least is the intergraded GPU that no one seems to talk about and their respective efficiency (cause there are like 30 people in the whole world that can truly make and educated talk about them and their ISA)
That sounds like a plan!
I suppose that if I was distant from an outlet for a long enough time, the battery life would be great, but I'm rarely if ever. It's nice not to be tethered to a wire, but it's not bad really overall.
On the other hand, yesterday my sons Windows Laptop (we keep an open mind in this family + school requires it) was also cooking in his backpack so there is that...
How are System76 laptops in this regards? You'd think somehow because of the hardware control they should have this down? At least when sticking to Po#@Po!s!.
Ah well, you can see that the money is on the server part when it comes to Linux ;)
I have contention with this; Framework technology is anything but awesome. Their laptop line is just as mediocre as most PC laptops. Mediocre build quality, mediocre display, mediocre battery, lots of annoying flaws, etc.
I didn't want to copy and paste my rant about the specific issues with Framework laptop, but here is one I posted awhile back: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42564335
On the MB a shutdown is quite rare and getting into the system takes 1s with the fingerprint reader. That’s such a huge difference it feels like magic.
1. I just shut down the computer fully more often. It’s annoying so I don’t always do it, but I’ll do it if I know I’m not using the computer as much.
2. I carry a 98Wh battery pack with me. If my laptop is fully dead it’s not a big deal because a full battery pack charges it all the way up, or if both are full it extends the battery life to be MacBook level. Since the framework is lighter than my Mac was anyway it’s not such a big deal.
I was on the fence a few years back when upgrading ancient MPB 2013 and in the end went with M1 instead of "PC" laptop with Linux because of that...
I do hope that the recent surege of ARM laptops and MS finally embraicing it well will result in more machines like that available.
For my current laptops i have been ignoring the battery completely. I rather have max performance, so every energy saving thing gets disabled. Most of the time it's connected to power anyway.
In the meantime, Return of the Mac.
And the X Elite 2 with 18 cores will likely be announced today :D - https://www.qualcomm.com/company/events/snapdragon-summit
Apparently they're working with Qualcomm to make this happen.
Not really, actually. ARM isn’t terribly more efficient to decode than x86, and both are converted into micro-operations that are internal to the CPU.
The real strength is Apple’s custom ARM cores; as evidenced by the failure of Qualcomm and MediaTek to make anything quite like it, even with the same manufacturing nodes.
[1]: https://github.com/Zephkek/Asus-ROG-Aml-Deep-Dive
[2]: https://triangulatedexistence.mataroa.blog/blog/i-uncovered-...
It's still significantly slower than the M4 but you can at least meaningfully compare them nowadays which is a strong come back from where they were when the M1 was introduced.
We are likely to see improvements now that Microsoft buys Arm chips for their Surface laptops. I guess it was hard to justify the investment before.
Battery management is superior in MacOS but I can leave my Framework suspended for more than at least a week (I never measured how long it can stay like this).
I run vanilla Ubuntu with TLP, though, which might be the trick.
The NVMe disk is swappable, which means it has its own controller which manages power management itself. I did my research to pick an efficient SSD and ended up with a Lexar NM790. It tops Tom's efficiency charts and comes in third place for lowest idle power consumption [0]. This is still ~0.8W at idle. On a 60Wh battery an idling drive alone will kill the battery in 3 days.
Now technically there is the APST (Autonomous Power State Transition) feature in the NVMe specification. Is there some lower APST power state that can get the power draw down? Potentially, but that is a feature well beyond the purview of any SSD reviews I have seen, so I don't know- does this drive have reliable and well-implemented APST state support? How does this interact with the platform-specific sleep state implementation, which presumably wakes the disk sometimes to do some Modern Standby features- how often is it spending time in that 0.8W state versus lower? This can vary between board rev or BIOS version certainly. Beyond the actual drive configuration and ACPI interaction, there is also kernel interaction. Do certain drives behave poorly with Linux? Etc etc.
On the RAM side of things, they are using DDR5 and not LPDDR5. There is a lower voltage on LPPDR5 which is a constant inefficiency, but also LPDDR5 has dynamic voltage scaling and dynamic frequency scaling. There is also technically some voltage drop across the SODIMM connector which you don't need to contend with when you solder RAM, which would be a constant source of loss, but I am not sure how significant that is.
Beyond this you have different behaviour for every model of RAM. This post on the Framework forum shows the user could get 7.82 days of suspend time with the HMCG66MEBSA092N DDR5-4800MHz 16GB kit whereas only 2.25 days with the CT2K48G56C46S5 DDR5-5600MHz 96GB kit [1]. Consider that there are effectively infinite combinations of memory people can run, and even inside a model series, vendors can swap their chip providers, etc. Which kits give the best battery endurance? I can't tell you.
Now someone could certainly embark on a long adventure to test different drives, RAM kits, and measure their performance, recommend tunables for the Linux kernel you want to set for each particular set of hardware, etc. But this is effectively what Apple is doing for you with the MacBook. They are choosing their memory supplier, their flash supplier, and integrating as much as possible into their SoC with presumably an entire team focused on extracting the most efficient behaviour out of both.
Consider this same thing extends to display behaviour (beyond VRR support, which I believe Framework has now, you also have local dimming behaviour to tune on the MBP), wireless behaviour, all sorts of embedded controllers that Apple can wrap inside the SoC that I probably wouldn't think of... I don't see how a modular system like Framework can achieve anything close to the idle efficiency of a MacBook.
[0] https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lexar-nm790-ssd-review/...
[1] https://community.frame.work/t/impact-of-ram-density-on-susp...
The result is that in more typical usage where the machine isn’t under a constant load, battery life is much better. When it’s sitting there idle displaying a web page it’s barely consuming any power at all, where most competing laptops at minimum are pulling at least 2-3x as much power between the CPU not being able to scale down that far and constantly getting woken to perform poorly scheduled tasks.
Exactly. Apple's way of doing things is about vertical integration of the stack, which is the polar opposite of how the PC market developed and largely still works.
The vertical integration approach (where you control all the layers beneath the customer facing product) has the benefit of allowing you to optimize that customer experience by tweaking things anywhere in the stack.
Power management in digital systems mostly comes down to being able to slow or turn off clocks when appropriate. Doing this well can be complicated, but you can tell that Apple has put a lot of energy into doing it.
The downside of the vertical integration approach is that components cannot be sourced or replaced with off-the-shelf components, as the interfaces are not really standard, they are tailor made for the use case.
For the Framework folks to pull off something like the M1's power sipping, they'd have to invest a lot of engineering time (a.k.a. money) and have strategic partnerships with hardware vendors and standards bodies to move the commodity chip market forward to support better power management.
The thing is, one of the strengths of the Framework is that the hardware is commodity, making their devices easy to repair. Also, any work that the Framework folks do to move things forward also benefit their competitors, which can shrink the potential reward for doing so.
Sleep/Hibernation works fine on the Framework under Windows. It's just Linux that has this problem.
I use MacOS because of this - I'm never going to use a Windows laptop, and I'd prefer Linux but power management just isn't there.
Like you can make an x86 computer that is not a PC. PS4 is one example: https://fail0verflow.com/media/33c3-slides/#/22
But when you make a PC, you are stuck with multiple layers of legacy crap, any of which can prevent proper low power states or suspend.
I can see they releasing a ARM model in the near future int order to compete with Apple.
Specially because a lot of people who buy framework uses linux, and linux still have better ARM support than windows.
If that is the case then why the snapdragon CPU laptops don’t face these issues?
The initial round of Snapdragon laptops had battery life that was better than what Intel/AMD machines were capable of, but not quite MacBook level and performance wasn't quite there either. Then Intel's Lunar Lake came out and was about as good or better with none of the compatibility problems, basically stealing Qualcomm's thunder.
I know it's gross:
Put this in a file:
GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="mem_sleep_default=deep
In
/etc/default/grub.d/90_memsleepdefault.cfg
Then run
update-grub
And reboot.
Run this to check if deep sleep is enabled:
cat /sys/power/mem_sleep
If it says [deep] your good
My MacBook M1 Air draws a lot of power with the lid closed, while my new Framework 12 doesn't.
But I'm using Linux on both. Fedora Asahi Remix on the MB, BlendOS on the FW.
One thing I found was certain modules like USB-A or HDMI drawing power even when suspended.
and the build quality of the laptop is exactly like the macbook air - i have both.
But Core Ultra laptops have great battery life.
It is all fun and games until they break libc on the next update.
The soldered RAM of the Framework Desktop has already opened the door to soldered RAM on Framework Laptop mainboards.
Don’t think I’ve thought about battery level on my work (windows) laptop once. Home, office, conference rooms - everything has usb C docks
Of course, nowadays power banks are getting so cheap and lightweight, I just toss a couple in my bag, and don't really worry about it. I just ordered one of the Haribo power banks all the backpackers are raving about.
If so, I seriously doubt that the lifetime pollution of a Framework laptop is better than an Apple Silicon Mac.
Macbooks tend to last a very long time. I used my Intel Macbook Air for 10 years. After that, I sold it and maybe it continued to get used by the second owner. While you can keep upgrading Framework laptops (parts require shipping/pollution to manufacture), I doubt it'll last a decade or someone wants to upgrade it for a decade to keep up.
Apple also has recycling programs and it seems to do quite well when it comes to using recycled materials. I doubt Framework is big enough to do these things as well as Apple.
Framework laptops are often more than doubled the price of similar spec'ed Windows laptops. They're also quite a bit more expensive than Apple laptops in the same class.
Framework is one of those things that is great for virtue signaling but doesn't make sense in real life.
Edit:
You can buy an M4 Air for $799 on sale frequently.[0] Meanwhile, a similar spec'ed Framework with a slower AMD CPU/GPU is $1,517.00.[1] So the repairability angle just doesn't seem worth it. If the Air breaks, just buy a new one.
Keep in mind that the M4 Air has a better display, significantly faster CPU, faster GPU, significantly more battery life, is fanless, better speakers, much better trackpad, and a thinner profile.
[0]https://www.macrumors.com/2025/08/27/200-off-every-m4-macboo...
[1]https://frame.work/products/laptop13-diy-amd-ai300/configura...
The enhanced repairability is basically insurance in case of a fault. Compared to a MacBook, or insurance for a MacBook, this insurance is overpriced.
As for the environment, the power consumption + larger design with extra parts to make it repairable + how few people ever buy parts makes this a virtue signaling wash.
Actually no. Where I live there is no local Apple Store. I had to take it to an authorised repairer, and it was there for 1.5 weeks.
In the same time, I've had to repair one Gigabyte laptop. The second Gigabyte that needed repair, I trashed and just stopped buying Gigabyte.
That's the problem with Apple. They're build quality isn't that great, but you don't have an alternative.
I have been buying Apple hardware since the early 2000s (the first thing I own was a 1.5 Gen iPod) and there is almost no product that didn't get an issue. Very often developing early in life because of bad design/engineering. I think the most reliables have been iPhones but that's only if you don't count annoying battery swap and other minor repairs that came for aging (like port replacement).
But they look good and make people feel good, so they get bought.
That's definitely the problem with Apple, if you could run macOS on any machine, they would lose market extremely fast.
The whole thing is fragile as hell; macbooks don't get dents, they turn into dust on impact, just like iphones.
I guess I'm mostly talking about Apple overall.
You're paying a lot more money for self-repairability. Frameworks are generally more expensive than Macs, sometimes 50% - 100% more expensive for a similar laptop. That's crazy.
Macs are tanks. Not a single issue with my 4 year old M1 Air. Even if there is an issue, I can still take it to an Apple Store to get it looked at.
Do you have an example? An 8tb m4 macbook pro runs over 7 grand; the comparable hx370 framework 13 is barely over 3 grand. I bought both within the last couple months and found the macs to be significantly more expensive in the segment i was looking at.
Keep in mind that the M4 Air has a better display, significantly faster CPU, faster GPU, significantly more battery life, is fanless, better speakers, much better trackpad, and a thinner profile.
[0]https://www.macrumors.com/2025/08/27/200-off-every-m4-macboo...
[1]https://frame.work/products/laptop13-diy-amd-ai300/configura...
I have maintained it for years that the base model M-series Air is the best computer for normal people if they plan to keep it for years.
And for me Mac is not an option as I'm not using their crappy OS and I don't want to have the forever struggle of running Linux on their proprietary hardware platform.
The fact that I can repair it, exchange every part, get every part, upgrade every part, and I never have to use a hairdryer or heat gun to do so.
Keep in mind that the Framework spare parts are generally also pretty expensive.
...worse overall experience...
I like Framework's aesthetics more than MacBook already, and like the little customisablity (i.e bezel, mismatched coloured parts etc). I can accept a lower quality screen (compared to MacBook), speakers and camera no problem.
I'm willing to pay higher than MacBook price for the above package due to superiority of Linux over MacOs and supporting this model in general. However, I draw a line in the sand at battery life, so Mac it is for me for the foreseeable future.
Worse how?
Battery is $60. How much does a MacBook battery cost? How long does a MacBook battery take to repair and how much skill do replace need to replace it? How do you upgrade the storage capacity on a MacBook?
What attracts me is:
• Easy (self) repairs, especially OEM battery replacements. If I could carry two - three replacements that could be hot swapped, like old times, that would be acceptable too.
• Easy upgrades of RAM and SSD. I had to buy a new MacBook due to it hanging frequently from RAM filling up, even though rest of it would've been fine for at least three more years.
• Ability to make it "your own". Its a minor thing, but a little whimsy is nice in life. I also like the idea of my main machine being a ship of Thesus that stays with me for a long time, and shows marks of age.
MacBooks had historically tons of design issues with keyboards and GPUs. Which I guess can happen, but the problem with Apple is that they never admin anything until someone drags them to court and the out of warranty repair is always extremely expensive, usually not worth it.
The battery replacement can also be extremely expensive, especially if you live in a country without any Apple Store. Battery replacement for M4 Air is like $340 in my country, which is insane for a $800 machine.
But otherwise, between the Butterfly keyboard, Flexgate, and placing the backlight driver voltage pin next to a data pin on the display connector (Louis Rossmann complained a lot about that one, as debris or moisture could easily cause a short and fry your CPU), indeed Apple does have their fair share of design issues.