HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

⬐ kayodelycaon

The comments on this thread make me sad. You can get 95% of the way there and there still seems to be just as many complaints.

I’m not in the target market and from the outside, I’m seeing a community of people that will never be happy with any product that exists and complain loudly about it.

It seems like the only way to win is not to play. :(

Edit: To be clear, I want Framework to succeed. I’ll probably end up with one at some point.

⬐ jcims

Feels a lot like my short stint as a Libertarian. Nothing was ever good enough so you get nowhere. There’s some comfort in that I think, because your ideas never really get tested and you have no burden of compromise.

It’s possible, even likely that a company that fully embraces the purist perspective on right to repair isn’t viable due to a variety of constraints.

⬐ triactual

What really kills me is that none of the complainers have any experience designing consumer hardware let alone running a business that sells those designs. Owning lots of hardware whose design is beyond your ken is not the same thing as designing hardware and running a profitable hardware business. Everyone will be sad when Framework doesn’t make it and no one will reflect on these BS comments and the unnecessary ill will they sow.

Sometimes there is no conspiracy to rip off all ten people off who want to repair their board. Like they’re going to spend any time figuring out how to make an extra $3k. They might just be trying to keep their IP and stay around long enough to make good on the things they did promise: modular hardware.

⬐ xenadu02

> What really kills me is that none of the complainers have any experience designing consumer hardware let alone running a business that sells those designs

This applies to the majority of people commenting about such things here on HN. To them everything is easy, manufacturers are just greedy, idiots, or both.

⬐ jacquesm

'none' is a pretty hard claim to support though.

⬐ quitspamming

Do you really think triactual meant literally probably none, or do you think they were using a pretty common method of conveying their idea? Your comment actually supports what kayodelycaon and triactual are saying, that HN commenters can be so nitpicky and pedantic that they end up missing the plot entirely.

⬐ jacquesm

I'm happy that my comment brought you out of retirement.

⬐ jjcon

I think people are missing the value proposition of framework here - pcmasterrace builders like PCs because you can access all the components and swap out or upgrade parts that are outdated or broken and you can customize your build. Board level repairs are even more out of reach for most the components in that sector (because at least Framework provides them to repair shops that ask).

⬐ Waterluvian

I have Ship of Theseus’d my PC for 20 years now, starting when I was 15. Original ATX case but almost every other component has been replaced multiple times. I do love this about PCs.

⬐ jjcon

Precisely! If Framework succeeds (and stays committed to their current vision) we could be Ship of Theseus-ing our laptops too

⬐ not1ofU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAh8HryVaeY

⬐ tomrod

I agree. A lot of folks in the comments are expressing that this is antithetical to the right of repair & being fully repairable. As far as I'm concerned, I can swap out my LCD, mainboard, and other components with literally no issue. This was Dell's original value prop, and it took repairability from weeks down to a call to the local Dell repair folks.

I hope one day the schematics can be published, but at the moment? I figure let Framework establish themselves as a killer business in the space of laptop configurability/repairability/component swapping before pulling out the pitchforks for not releasing the silicon and metal mining agreements that become for their boards.

⬐ joenathanone

>I can swap out my LCD, mainboard, and other components with literally no issue.

This is the case for 99% of laptops.

⬐ theferalrobot

Nearly all laptops manufactured after 2010 have storage, memory, WiFi and IO (or some combo of those) soldered to the motherboard. Not the case for framework

⬐ jeroenhd

Only ultrabooks, ultra portables and tablets. And even then storage is often swappable since M.2 entered the market.

Microsoft and Apple like to solder everything, but they're only a small part of the overall laptop market. WiFi, storage and memory are swappable way more often than not if you'd try.

⬐ joenathanone

I repair laptops all time, its kinda my job, you are completely incorrect.

⬐ jjcon

99% of laptops have swappable IO, storage? Not even close... not by a longshot. I can't even think of 1 with swappable IO.

Maybe you are conflicted since easy repairs mean you no longer have a job/business?

⬐ joenathanone

>Maybe you are conflicted since easy repairs mean you no longer have a job

I own an IT company among other things, bread and butter is servers & networking. 99% of laptops that people buy aren't the ultra portables with the soldered everything, they are the bulky $600 Laptops. Even in the ultra portables, screens and motherboards are replaceable, it's a toss up with storage and ram.

The comment I replied to specifically said motherboards and LCDs, which I still maintain 99% of laptops fit that.

⬐ tomrod

> The comment I replied to specifically said motherboards and LCDs, which I still maintain 99% of laptops fit that.

Apologies. In that specific subset you are correct, but I meant more broadly and was loose on my verbiage.

⬐ jjcon

I think you're missing the point or are just uninformed.

The parent comment said nearly all laptops have, 'storage, memory, WiFi and IO (or some combo of those) soldered to the motherboard' to which you replied that they are completely incorrect. What about that is completely incorrect? I replied seeing I had never seen swappable IO for starters.

Apple alone accounts for >8% laptop marketshare (higher in 1st world countries) and is one prime example of everything soldered to the motherboard.

Thats all without even mentioning the difficulty of repairs on most machines these days. Finally when it comes to upgradability you can't upgrade the motherboards/cpus on 99% of laptops, certainly not to hardware that came out after the laptop shipped, you can on the framework (now selling 12th gen intel cpus).

⬐ joenathanone

>I had never seen swappable IO for starters. Cool as they may be these are just dongles that integrate into the chassis, the exact same can be accomplished with a dock or dongle. Additionally IMO most consumers could count on 1 hand how many times they have used external IO, a person might use a flash drive once in a blue moon, but everything is in the cloud now.

>Finally when it comes to upgradability you can't upgrade the motherboards/cpus on 99% of laptops, certainly not to hardware that came out after the laptop shipped, you can on the framework (now selling 12th gen intel cpus).

While this is true and awesome, I would like to see if they are able to continue this when the upgrade is more of a major shift, for example to compete with the M1 we could see a shift to integrated HBM, and WiFi in Intel and AMD CPUs.

⬐ washadjeffmad

Framework IO is extendable within the chassis. If the TB ports fail, the IO dongles will not work.

What makes Framework's design different or superior to Apple in this regard?

⬐ jjcon

> What makes Framework's design different or superior to Apple in this regard?

1) You can change your IO as standards change or as your workflow changes

2) The point of failure for IO is at the point where the cable plugs in and creates stress, this point of stress is now separate from the mainboard - like in a desktop you have 20 pin USB ports on the motherboard that you wire your case up to - yeah that port could fail but it is far less likely to

3) If the mainboard IO fails you don't also have to replace your storage, wifi, ram etc

⬐ washadjeffmad

Is that really different from dongles? Since you can't buy them from third parties (yet), it sounds like they're just selling you your ports. Even Apple doesn't do that anymore.

Stress is also negligible, or TB ports are not fragile. We have a few thousand MacBook Pros and almost no mainboard replacements are due to port damage. This doesn't make Apple better, just noting.

Fair enough, but we've had no cases of TB controller failure that weren't covered under warranty. Framework's warranty as-is is insufficient for enterprise or commercial adoption. Swappable RAM, wifi, storage, etc are not unique to Framework (and Framework is more limited in internal ports than many older devices).

⬐ margalabargala

I have six different laptops within an arms length of me made in the last 7 years, almost all different brands (Acer, Asus, Dell, Lenovo, HP) and every single one of them has replaceable storage, memory, and wifi. None of them requires anything more than a screwdriver to swap all of those components.

Perhaps the highest end, lightest, thinnest laptops have these components soldered on, but it is certainly not the case for most middle-of-the-road laptops.

⬐ jjcon

You left out IO but oh well - ifixit has had 5 laptops that have recieved a 10/10 for repairability since 2010 and only 2 were released this decade (one was Framework).

https://www.ifixit.com/laptop-repairability?sort=score

I don't think you can upgrade the CPU for a single laptop on this list, let alone many of the other components and certainly not for hardware that came out after the original laptop release. Framework has that upgradability, that repairability etc.

⬐ jacquesm

If you could then they likely would have been quite a bit more expensive and thicker... That's the problem with all this stuff the form factors and other trade offs regarding cost have relentlessly pushed us in this direction.

⬐ jjcon

Not sure what that has to do with the current conversation but the Framework is only .2mm thicker than a macbook

⬐ margalabargala

I've never actually had occasion to replace the IO bits on my laptops, with the exception of a screen on an Acer that I replaced in about 2012. Also required nothing but a screwdriver.

Agree that you can't upgrade the CPU or other components on them. Agree that Framework allows this and is excellent. My only intention was to refute this patently false claim:

> Nearly all laptops manufactured after 2010 have storage, memory, WiFi and IO soldered to the motherboard.

⬐ tomrod

I disagree. Sourcing parts and fixing broken laptop chasses have been a bane.

⬐ rkagerer

For years, companies profitably sold products with full schematics - even your appliances would come with them.

I applaud the work you're doing, but I hope the Framework team will find a way to close the gap on the pieces of public documentation still missing. This shows why it's important, and how there's a difference between open source and "almost open source".

⬐ userbinator

As a noteworthy point in this discussion, Intel has the schematics for some 8xx series chipsets (Pentium III, early 4 era) reference designs still available on its own site:

https://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/designex/29835002...

https://www.intel.com/content/dam/doc/design-guide/855gm-855...

They started becoming far more secretive after that.

⬐ hh3k0

> For years, companies profitably sold products with full schematics - even your appliances would come with them.

We should really go back to that. I still have the schematic of my Sony CRT lying in some drawer.

⬐ WorldPeas

I do pvm repair from time to time and those manuals are a lifesaver. Recently spent a weekend away and traced all the traces on the 'g' board with a red pen to find the fault at a single bad 5v mosfet. If they still made crts I'd probably end up throwing the poor thing out or replacing the whole board. I reckon Sony isn't wringing their hands now wishing they'd withheld the manuals and instead sold the oem boards for 25 years after the model launched.

⬐ russdill

Reversing the schematics for those appliances would have been a laughably simple exercise for any competitor.

⬐ runnerup

That practice died after products were no longer manufactured domestically. At the time, it was relatively easy to go after someone who stole your IP. Now it's much more difficult.

⬐ notsound

This is a common argument against right to repair. It is worth noting that this only makes IP infringement a little more difficult. Reverse engineered schematics exist for many products.

⬐ jacquesm

I just had a Yamaha P45 from a student at one of the conservatories here handed to me to try to fix. It had been in the rain for a an hour or so and they tried to dry it. The damage is well beyond what it would be worth timewise to fix so I'm very impressed that they even tried this on this laptop, if you value your time I would advise against doing this, if it doesn't come back to life immediately after drying. If you have more time than money then your evaluation may work out differently but at normal hourly rates any device worth a few hundred dollars is probably quickly exceeded in value by the time that you put into such a job, especially if the goal is that the device will function for a long time afterwards.

My process for fixing water damage:

- blow out excess water using compressed air (low pressure!)

- soak the board in isopropyl alchol

- ultrasonic cleaning bath

- drying

- visual inspection for corrosion, fix where required

- trial run, and if the board can be brought back to life check all functionality and fix remaining broken / corroded components where required

The visual inspection is where you get the information on whether or not the board is salvageable, if there is a large amount of visible corrosion, large numbers of components damaged (esp small SMD components) then the board is usually a write off.

Older boards with hole through components fare substantially better when they are damaged by water, I don't recall a single case where the board could not be revived. Based on how I value my own time and the chances of success I reserve working on water damaged devices to vintage music gear and vintage computing gear.

⬐ tzs

> blow out excess water using compressed air (low pressure!)

Why low pressure? (And what do you consider low pressure?)

My current goto item when I wish to blow things out of or away from other things is an electric duster [1], but I've never tried it for blowing excess water out of electronics.

[1] https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00U01YVYK/

⬐ jacquesm

Because if the board is oxidized you may well blow the parts right off the board... (don't ask me how I know ;)).

So use some pressure but don't overdo it, you won't get the last out anyway like this that will happen during the drying phase but at least you'll get the bulk of it.

Also: there may be a lot of very subtle damage that will only show up later: moisture pulled into wires due to capillary action, switch contact corrosion (inside the switches, so invisible), contamination by stuff dissolved in the water, mechanical damage due to swelling and so on. Water damage is pretty nasty.

⬐ vbezhenar

I understand that this is first-world related product. Just want to say that there many countries where talented electrical engineers can’t earn that much money. And laptops are not any cheaper. Repairs are very cost-efficient. Imagine earning $5/hour. Fixing $2000 laptop is worth 50 days of work.

⬐ jacquesm

Yes, that's a very valid point and that's why I left the door open to that possibility. I've seen some videos of people in countries with very low wages whose repair and improvisation skills were off the scale. And when I got into tech in the 70's it was very much like that here too.

It's quite frustrating to me that our tech has become so involved that repairs have become harder or even impossible economically causing a lot of perfectly good stuff to end up in landfills.

⬐ lwhsiao

This is a really great first-hand demonstration of the value of schematics and board views. Very interesting to see exactly what the repair tech is thinking, and what info they are looking for. It's also very clear how what exists now is still insufficient.

Partial schematics are a great start, I'm hoping Framework rises to the challenge!

⬐ JohnTHaller

Framework already makes full schematics available to repair shops under an NDA.

⬐ hda2

Do they also make them available to laptop owners under NDA? I don't mind the schematics not being publicly accessible or open, but they should also be available to customers upon entering into NDA.

I want true repairability, and not just modularity.

Edit: Apparently not: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31576321

As it stands, the framework laptop is NOT repairable. I hope they address this problem soon.

⬐ cbsks

I asked them for schematics after I bought my framework laptop and got the following response:

“We hope you are enjoying your Framework laptop! We only provide full schematics and assembly drawings to repair shops who get Framework products in for repair. Let us know if we can help with anything else.”

⬐ netr0ute

Sad, because a couple decades ago, complete schematics were all too common and included with every electric product sold.

⬐ Alupis

This isn't a toaster or anything.

A few decades ago nearly all but the most complicated devices could have their entire schematic printed in the last few pages of the owner's manual.

Today... a typical PC mainboard schematic might be hundreds or thousands of pages dealing with all sorts of complications for RF and stuff.

What would 99.999% of people do with such a schematic?

⬐ netr0ute

Ironic, because it's gotten easier than ever to include such big files, either on a USB drive or preloaded onto the SSD.

⬐ userbinator

Today... a typical PC mainboard schematic might be hundreds or thousands of pages

Go find one and take a look. Seriously, they're out there. Google an OEM name followed by "schematic" (quoted, because otherwise anti-repair Google will misdirect you to owner's manuals and other shit) and start reading. I'll challenge you to find one that's over 100 pages, because I personally haven't seen one. They're closer to 50-70.

⬐ colejohnson66

Project Olympus[0] from OpenCompute is 238 pages for the Intel XSP version.

[0]: https://www.opencompute.org/wiki/Server/ProjectOlympus

⬐ stormbrew

Maybe more than a couple decades ago? I haven't seen a computer that included schematics since my dad's Tandy 3000 from the mid-80s. And even in the 80s the TVs and VCRs we had were covered in "don't try to repair this yourself" warnings and I really doubt included schematics.

⬐ jamesy0ung

The board is using licensed designs from the part manufacturers such as Intel. I'm quite sure they would be in trouble if they shared too much.

⬐ MarcelOlsz

This sinks the company in my eyes.

⬐ yjftsjthsd-h

They are still better than everything else on the market. Not that I approve, but they still suck less than any other laptop you can buy today (except, perhaps, the MNT Reform).

⬐ JohnTHaller

Not sure of any other company that does this: https://frame.work/marketplace/parts

⬐ Nextgrid

Lenovo laptops are designed to be taken apart and every part can be purchased.

⬐ JohnTHaller

I didn't see any parts listed for a couple of the currently sold models in Lenovo's support section.

⬐ None

None

⬐ cristoperb

I'm naive about the industry, but that's pretty shocking to me considering how much of the Framework marketing copy touts its repairability.

⬐ JohnTHaller

Their repair-ability is better than basically any other commercial laptop: https://frame.work/marketplace/parts

You can upgrade your mainboard/cpu, RAM, SSD, wifi card. Swap in a new speaker, display, hinge, keyboard, touchpad, webcam, fingerprint reader, antenna, headphone jack, etc.

And complete schematics are available to repair shops under an NDA if you would like to have your mainboard or similar repaired at the component level.

⬐ washadjeffmad

They also start at $1049 and go up to $2049 without the functional expansions. I have a $150 Chromebook that has 70% of the features and more ports, and an $850 M1 MacBook Air that outperforms the top end Framework.

I don't see why someone would spend $1000 for a laptop, then spend as much as an entire laptop to swap a single component that provides less utility than another laptop at the same or lower price.

If Framework had a killer warranty or even a buy-back / trade in option in their marketplace, I would reconsider, but any upgrade leftovers aren't useful to other Framework owners barring hardware failures, which shouldn't be a barrier because they are marketed as being repairable.

As it stands, they've just externalized the costs of responsibility in an attempt to create a market for premium modularity.

⬐ washadjeffmad

Also, I was excited to be able to buy a laptop without wifi, but that option has been removed. I would have to sell or discard a perfectly functional wireless chipset to get the laptop I want.

You also cannot buy a Framework chassis without a mainboard. Why not, if they aim to be eco friendly? Why create a barrier to buying second hand components?

⬐ userbinator

For other laptops, complete schematics are available to everyone if you know where to look.

⬐ philliphaydon

> RAM, SSD, wifi card. Swap in a new speaker, display, hinge, keyboard, touchpad, webcam, fingerprint reader, antenna, headphone jack

I can do all that with every Lenovo laptop I’ve owned. All parts can be purchased.

⬐ kaishiro

Having done repairs/replacements on both a Thinkpad X1 and a Framework, all I can say is that the process is not remotely comparable.

⬐ philliphaydon

Framework is easier but the hardware isn’t comparable.

Doesn’t change the fact you can order parts on Lenovo laptops and fix them.

⬐ rkagerer

I've stripped my old Dell Precision laptop down to barebones a few times now, too. It's over 10 years old and still works great as my daily driver after several repairs and upgrades.

⬐ hda2

I've done the same multiple times with my trusty Toshiba. Stripped down to the motherboard and back. People seem to over estimate how difficult it is to take a standard laptop apart.

Not everything is as hostile as a macbook.

⬐ tintedfireglass

Exactly I don't understand a fuss about it. If someone wants an open source laptop companies like system 76 exist. I don't understand what part of the market is being targeted by framework and even then there are better alternatives for framework if you want to replace the ram ssd battery etc.

⬐ JohnTHaller

I looked up a couple currently sold Lenovo laptops and there aren't parts available according to browsing to the model in the Support section and clicking the Parts icon.

⬐ tintedfireglass

Why do you need original parts when there are millions of options. If there is no Lenovo RAM I'd buy crucial ram or Samsung ram. If there's no ssd I'd buy an Intel ssd or whatever else. For a display replacement of course you won't be able to do it on your own and anyways it's not a phone and displays rarely break in laptops so Lenovo center will do it for you if you can't find any displays.

⬐ JohnTHaller

I'm replying to the parent comment that stated that "RAM, SSD, wifi card. Swap in a new speaker, display, hinge, keyboard, touchpad, webcam, fingerprint reader, antenna, headphone jack" were something they can get for every Lenovo they've ever owned. RAM, SSD and WiFi are easy in just about every laptop outside of Macbooks, but touchpads, display hinges, webcams, speakers and mounts, etc are definitely unusual and not something you can easily get from Lenovo.

Displays definitely break in laptops. I replaced one in an old Acer after it cracked in a backback under a seat on a plane. It took some work to find compatible ones and some details on the disassembly. The little plastic clips that often break made it fussy and annoying. Compare that to framework which has a magnetic bezel around the display and easy disassembly, sells the panel directly, and makes available a guide for something that will only take you 5 to 15 minutes: https://guides.frame.work/Guide/Display+Replacement+Guide/86...

⬐ philliphaydon

I bought my Legion 7 in singapore and ordered a new keyboard in Taiwan for the Taiwan keyboard for typing Chinese.

I replace the ram/ssd/wifi in my X1 Extreme Gen 1. And ordered a speaker from Lenovo to replace it.

Yes it’s more complicated to repair. But look at the hardware you get in the form factor compared to the framework.

⬐ ndiddy

From experience, modern Lenovo laptops are significantly more annoying to take apart than the Framework, because the Framework uses magnets instead of plastic clips like Lenovo does. Lenovo has also moved towards soldered memory in their Thinkpads, with the X series having entirely soldered RAM and the T series having one slot available (so the user has to choose between having dual-channel RAM and having more RAM), while the Framework has two slots so this isn't an issue. Lenovo's parts site often has parts back-ordered for at least a month, and I have received counterfeit parts from buying off of eBay.

⬐ philliphaydon

X carbon and nano is soldered but extreme is not.

⬐ post_break

Sounds like we need to get a shop to break the NDA just so other shops and end users can do repairs on the computers they have purchased outright. How else does Louis get board views for other computers? I have a feeling those are in the gray area as well. I'm sure this idea will go over like a lead balloon but for a company that is supposed to be pro right to repair, signing an NDA to get a board view, or if you're a customer telling you to pound sand just doesn't have a great look.

⬐ rkagerer

TLDR: A colleague of popular electronics repair blogger Louis Rossmann wanted to fix a board that had water damage, but was stimied because the documentation is missing the broken components.

Apparently you need to be a qualified repair shop and sign an NDA to get full schematics.

⬐ KingOfCoders

I have been on his side for years, also on the NYC rent rants, but one must realize not everyone on "your side" has the same goals as you.

⬐ amelius

I'm wondering, how often does deionized water fix a water-damaged circuit?

⬐ namlem

DI water can prevent damage to a product that has gotten wet but not yet short circuited, but once something has shorted out, it's most likely too late.

⬐ amelius

In theory, yes, in practice, no. I have short-circuited MCUs at 3.3V many times due to incorrect reflow soldering, and after reheating they still worked fine.

⬐ rasz

About 100% of the time as long as the "damage" you are trying to fix is stain on products case and has nothing to do with electronics. Cleaning is not fixing, you cant clean your way into a reliable repair.

⬐ 64202040067

hacker dir/s hello wolrd

⬐ ourjharkhand

Thank you for sharing. Excellent post…! It is a very great idea and unique content. Thank you so much. Sinkoth :-) https://ourjharkhand.com/

⬐ nrp

We make full schematics and board views available to repair shops under a confidentiality agreement: https://knowledgebase.frame.work/en_us/availability-of-schem...

In this case, we didn't see a request for it come in.

Publicly with no agreement required, we were able to share a sub-set of the schematic focused on the internal and external connectors: https://github.com/FrameworkComputer/Mainboard/blob/main/Ele...

Louis has more context on the latter in an earlier video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cJj8PUY0DU

⬐ LeonM

Sooner or later one of those repair shops is going to leak those schematics. Either intentionally or accidentally, it won't matter.

To me, it feels like Framework is creating a lot of extra work and damage to the brand, just for delaying the inevitable.

Instead of lawyers, hire engineers to support the repair shops. Wasn't the whole promise of Framework that it would be repairable?

Or maybe the laptop "that respects your right to repair", and "that respects the planet" and "that's designed to last" is just another load of marketing bs.

⬐ nabakin

I believe the manufacturer places limitations on the availability of the schematics, not Framework. Iirc Framework had to negotiate with their manufacturer in order to get them released to repair shops.

⬐ PragmaticPulp

> Sooner or later one of those repair shops is going to leak those schematics. Either intentionally or accidentally, it won't matter.

While you may be right, the trade secret value of the schematics decreases by the day. If they can delay schematic leaks for months or even a year, that's still a big win. They'll be on to the next generation by then.

While it may seem futile in the end, delaying the inevitable leak and demonstrating to your partners that you made a best effort attempt to keep them confidential is actually a huge win.

⬐ mook

> Sooner or later one of those repair shops is going to leak those schematics. Either intentionally or accidentally, it won't matter.

If one of the repair shops leak the schematics, it's probably fine for them — it means Framework isn't the one on the hook for any liabilities of the leak. Heck it wouldn't be surprising if they were (unofficially) happy about it.

⬐ shp0ngle

> To me, it feels like Framework is creating a lot of extra work and damage to the brand, just for delaying the inevitable.

They are contractually obligated to do so.

⬐ s5300

No, it’s more like a damned if they do damned if they don’t.

Somebody can & will co-opt their production & magically sell it for less if they completely open source things. Cuz third world country labor n shit.

They made something pretty cool, they definitely deserve to enjoy the fruits of their labor for a bit.

⬐ akelly

Publishing schematics doesn't mean publishing the PCB design, which is where most of the work is. If you wanted to clone Framework you could just as easily grab the leaked schematic for any other Intel laptop, they're all functionally equivalent.

I bet Framework has a legal agreement with someone not to publish the schematic so they're sharing it with repair shops under NDA so they're not liable when it leaks.

⬐ CamperBob2

Somebody can & will co-opt their production & magically sell it for less if they completely open source things. Cuz third world country labor n shit.

Lack of published schematics means that the Chinese cloners will not be able to copy the design in 2-3 weeks as usual. Instead it will take them at least 14-21 days.

⬐ ndiddy

In general, Framework has been extremely transparent, but they haven't given specifics about this issue. In a previous video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cJj8PUY0DU ), Louis Rossman mentions that he asked Framework why they wouldn't release schematics and was given an answer (that he deemed valid) on the condition that he couldn't publicly say what that answer is. I imagine it's because of some sort of legal agreement, either with the ODM that designed the motherboard or one or more of their chip suppliers. I doubt it's for fear of cloning, leaked schematics for products from a variety of manufacturers (Apple, Dell, Lenovo, Samsung, etc) have been available for years and you don't see any cloning going on there.

⬐ kouteiheika

> I imagine it's because of some sort of legal agreement, either with the ODM that designed the motherboard or one or more of their chip suppliers. I doubt it's for fear of cloning, leaked schematics for products from a variety of manufacturers (Apple, Dell, Lenovo, Samsung, etc) have been available for years and you don't see any cloning going on there.

This doesn't make sense to me. If it was because of a legal agreement I imagine they'd just publicly say that they can't "for legal reasons" and everyone would just shut up about it because, hey, it's not strictly their fault, so why give them grief about it? An easy way to snip the whole "no schematics" controversy in the bud. "Sorry, we can't release them publicly for legal reasons, but for future products we'll try to negotiate with the vendors to allow it." And they're done.

But the only thing we get is radio silence, so either they don't want to explicitly say that it's "for legal reasons" (which, again, doesn't make sense to me), or because it's due to something else.

⬐ jjcon

> lot of extra work and damage to the brand

As a framework owner I wouldn't personally care if they never released them at all. What makes the framework repairable isn't board-level schematics, its the modularity and access (similar to a desktop). If a part in my framework breaks I'll just replace the individual part. IMO there is no brand damage here outside of some purists calling for things 99.9% of customers don't give 2 shits about.

⬐ chrisseaton

> some purists calling for things 99.9% of customers don't give 2 shits about

But isn’t that the whole idea of Framework? If you didn’t care about this stuff you’d buy a MacBook like everyone else.

⬐ ClumsyPilot

It is quite arrogant to assume that 99.9% of consumers share your opinion and privilidge of not caring about repairs.

I mean you could check polls and find out that, for laptops >50% want a repair, and something like 30% would attempt repairs themselves.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/technology/articles-reports/2020...

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/consumer/articles-reports/2021/0...

⬐ jjcon

No, not at all. The whole idea is modularity, upgradabilty and access. Most technies people know how to swap out an nvme or ram, basically any ifixit level repair. Board level repairs is a whole other ballpark and the need is reduced greatly due to a modular design.

People like that desktops are modular, you can easily replace a single part when it breaks or upgrade a part too. Framework is the equivalent for laptops.

⬐ ClumsyPilot

> some purists calling for things 99.9% of customers don't give 2 shits about.

It is really arrogant to proclaim that 99.9% of consumers share your opinion and financial privilidge of not caring about repairs.

Polls consistently show that modt xustomers want repairs and repairability, for laptops >50%, and something like 30% would attempt repairs themselves.

We have a real problem with folks like yourself denying that we, people who want repair, even exist. And companies making parts impossible to get hold of.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/technology/articles-reports/2020...

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/consumer/articles-reports/2021/0...

⬐ rpdillon

Are you talking about soldering on the mainboard, or replacing broken parts? It's hard for me to imagine that 30% of customers want to attempt to solder new parts onto their laptop mainboard, which is what I think this discussion is about. There's more discussion upthread, but work that requires board schematics also requires exceptional tooling, expertise, and time, and is therefore also quite expensive ($250-$425 was the number quoted upthread).

⬐ ClumsyPilot

> work that requires board schematics also requires exceptional tooling, expertise, and time, and is therefore also quite expensive ($250-$425 was the number quoted upthread).

Stop thinking about the West, the rest of the world exists.

Where do you think your monitor goes when you throw it away because an $1 capacitor has blown? Not into a black hole. Our broken devices get shipped to other countries as e-waste.

There cost of labour is $5 and people want to repair that device and keep it going for 40 years.

If you want ti say 'i dont care about other countries', then you will have to recycle this shit domestically and pay real money for it's disposal- and then repairing will look different economically

⬐ jjcon

>Stop thinking about the West, the rest of the world exists.

Framework only sells in the west and the west (and 1st world/highly developed countries/regions outside of the west) account for pretty much all high end laptop sales - your diatribe doesn't really hold up even so though. The modularity of the framework means less ewaste than the status quo - that is a net positive.

⬐ ClumsyPilot

Again, youi are missing the forest for the trees - when you sell old laptop on ebay, where does it go? When you get rid of the laptop and give it to recycling, where does it go?

It goes to a second or third world country, where they will try to repair and use it if possible.

Very few institutions in the west actually recycle anything.

⬐ hda2

> What makes the framework repairable isn't board-level schematics, its the modularity and access (similar to a desktop).

That's just wrong. Modularity and repairability are two very different things. They are not interchangeable.

⬐ jjcon

And only 4 other laptops have scored as high as framework for repairability since 2010 - and only 1 other from this decade, none of which were as modular or upgradeable after the fact.

https://www.ifixit.com/laptop-repairability?sort=score

⬐ rasz

Its an aspirational score. Like that Obama Nobel peace prize https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-na-pol-obama-at-war/ while he was associating people with drones, bystanders included.

"The Framework Laptop repair guides are free and easily accessible" .. if you sign the NDA somehow missing from that sentence.

⬐ serf

>What makes the framework repairable isn't board-level schematics, its the modularity and access.

why not both?

no one in their right mind can argue that NDAing and walling documentation aids the repair effort.

so.. in other words.. framework is repairable up until the point that it may hurt their bottom-end profits; then you're on your own.

maybe they should get into selling board-level components so that they have a financial incentive to act morally and within their projected image of 'right-to-repair' advocacy.

⬐ reificator

> no one in their right mind can argue that NDAing and walling documentation aids the repair effort.

There is much more value to be found in moving the needle, and the framework has undoubtedly done that.

⬐ runnerup

> maybe they should get into selling board-level components so that they have a financial incentive to act morally and within their projected image of 'right-to-repair' advocacy.

That might help if the component packs had a decent loyalty markup. I'm sure repair shops and DIY'ers would love to have access to guaranteed-exact-same-components. Just buying the same number from the datasheet doesn't always guarantee identical electrical characterization across different manufacturers and batches.

The primary issue Framework is facing (AIUI) is that if they release the complete board-level schematics, enterprises in Shenzhen will immediately release Framework clones (and sub-module clones) which are part-for-part compatible with the actual Framework laptops. This could undercut their business model at a very high-risk time for their company. They're incredibly capital-constrained and need to meet their pricing/sales targets just to survive (not even considering making their investors happy). Framework is a bit of a "Tech Fad" at the moment, and consumers have historically been known to be incredibly price-conscious, even sometimes demonizing the companies who did the original innovation after they can't meet or beat the clones prices or functionality (I recall this with Arduino). This would make me super wary of releasing the full schematics as well.

I would be very suprised if Rossmann Repair was unaware of the NDA. I suspect Framework are being very very magnanimous in their communications here. Rossmann Group probably omitted that context in slightly bad faith to pressure Framework a bit more. That's normal for zealots -- and it is still a symbiotic ecosystem...Rossmann Group laid so much of the foundation needed for Framework to thrive! Also some of Framework's investors (Linus of Linus Tech Tips) were directly responsible for mediating/facilitating/negotiating the current schematic NDA arrangement after listening to Rossmann's critiques as a pre-condition to investing their money, time, and reputation. It would be strange if that story had somehow slipped past Rossmann Group...

[Edit: According to others, Louis has a video where he acknowledges the current situation and empathizes with Framework about it, so clearly Rossman is aware. Other people have since mentioned that Framework may be legally unable to release the schematics because they are based on licensed designs from an ODM or chipset/component supplier. In which case, perhaps this video from Rossmann group is designed to help the public put pressure on those upstream IP stakeholders.]

I do agree with 'LeonM. Eventually the detailed schematics they provide to repair shops will leak or be stolen or whatever anyways. But I understand Frameworks concerns.

There's a need for truly open source hardware. Please support the projects at CrowdSupply[0] ... many of which do have truly open source hardware+software+schematics+PCB Layout Files. And they are nearly all very very small "cottage industry" side-gigs which desperately need the financial enthusiasm and participatory enthusiasm of early adopters in order to thrive.

0: http://crowdsupply.com/

⬐ CamperBob2

Lack of schematics does not stop anyone in Shenzhen. If they want to clone your device, they will clone your device, along with its packaging and the store it's sold in.

⬐ toma_caliente

You're making a very bold claim that they won't do it because of money. In an earlier video, Louis Rossmann said he can't publicly say what those reasons are but that he understands them. It is not something I would expect him to say if it was purely "they want to make more money."

⬐ colordrops

What would be a legitimate reason that he can't publicly say why? Certainly he would be allowed to say that Intel or some other supplier doesn't allow them to share the specs. So it must be some other reason.

⬐ toma_caliente

> What would be a legitimate reason that he can't publicly say why?

I have no idea. Don't have a clue. However, given that I don't have any idea, I'm not going to go around making bold definitive claims like 'they do it because they want more money."

⬐ tintedfireglass

Aren't all laptops that aren't macs easily repairable?

RAM, SSD, battery, keyboard(but in many laptops the whole top panel has to be replaced), track pad, wifi card, display(framework has the better way only over here).

I mean buying a tongfang OR a system 76 is a way better option than going for framework due to its QR codes I don't understand why.

I'm not shitting on framework this is just what I've been wanting to ask for so long

⬐ maccard

> Aren't all laptops that aren't macs easily repairable?

No. Many laptops, particularly in the compact category come with soldered RAM and SSDs.

⬐ spindle

I'm not an expert myself, but ifixit says that very few laptops are easily repairable.

⬐ palijer

I give a shit what happens to the module I replace. Individual parts go down to the components on the board, there is a distinction between repair and replace.

⬐ bobsmooth

>outside of some purists calling for things 99.9% of customers don't give 2 shits about.

I'm sure if Louis or another technician told you "I could fix your mainboard, but I don't have the schematics. Buy a whole separate board for $400 and I'll install it for you." You might be a little ticked.

⬐ jjcon

1) Framework provides schematics to repair shops that ask

2) Modularity keeps the cost of individual components so low that board-level repair isn't nearly as important. What would Louis charge me? $350 at least for shipping and time according to similar quotes I've seen of his.

⬐ serf

>2) Modularity keeps the cost of individual components so low that board-level repair is hardly worth it. What would Louis charge me? $350 for shipping and time?

I don't know where you get your numbers, and Louis isn't the only person in the world with the ability to repair this stuff; you can make up a number so that it seems anti-competitive against the idea of modularity and buying a whole new replacement module -- but let it be said that these repairs can be done fairly cheap with some research and a bit of parts gathering. Cheaper than 350 cheap, in most cases.

⬐ jknoepfler

$350 is basically free in terms of skilled technician time to solve a problem that requires any non-trivial amount of investigation. You're devaluing the labor and thinking only in terms of the raw materials.

⬐ ksec

Which is sadly the norm on HN, only Web Development is difficult and complex. Everything else in the world is suppose to be simple.

⬐ sigstoat

> You're devaluing the labor and thinking only in terms of the raw materials.

very common for folks to compare the cost of having something assembled for the first time in a low-wage country, to having it disassembled, diagnosed, repaired, and reassembled in a high-wage country.

⬐ minhazm

> Logic board repair – $250-$425 (depending on model)

From https://www.rossmanngroup.com/liquid-damage/. Their pricing is fairly competitive, you won't find many places that are significantly cheaper for good quality work.

> but let it be said that these repairs can be done fairly cheap with some research and a bit of parts gathering. Cheaper than 350 cheap, in most cases.

I don't know about that for component level repairs. Sure you can replace a hard drive, memory, a wifi card or a fan but those can all be done already with the Framework laptop without the detailed schematics. Most people are not knowledgeable enough and even if they were they likely wouldn't feel comfortable doing component level repairs on a motherboard, especially if they have to do any soldering. There's a reason that the vast majority of places computer repair places don't do component level repairs. You need a lot of expertise to do so, and that expertise doesn't come cheap.

⬐ sigstoat

> There's a reason that the vast majority of places computer repair places don't do component level repairs. You need a lot of expertise to do so, and that expertise doesn't come cheap.

you also need tooling. $20 radio shack soldering iron from dad won’t do it for anything that’s worth the labor costs.

if you don’t have any of that you’ll be spending $350 to get the bare minimum to practice the job.

⬐ tomxor

> board-level repair is hardly worth it

Not worth the time and money? or the reduced environmental impact?

⬐ LightHugger

You seem awfully sure that board level repair isn't worth it, what did you base that opinion on?

⬐ jjcon

See my above comments - I've had board level repairs done before and they aren't cheap. Best case scenario with the framework modular design, you save $50 and get back an old part that is prone to additional failures. With modularity you can buy and replace just the part you need and maybe even upgrade while you're at it.

Having both would be ideal but isn't always practical due to agreements with chip suppliers etc. Framework is a huge step in the right direction and I don't think being puristic about things is helpful for the right to repair movement.

⬐ jkhdigital

I was an aviation electronics technician in the Navy, and I can say from experience that it is very easy to underestimate the time and effort that can go into a component-level repair job.

I once troubleshot a faulty RF power meter down to a single transistor, and it was incredibly gratifying to see it working after replacing a sub-$1 part but if I was paid by the hour it would’ve been an unprofitable job for sure.

⬐ cristoperb

That knowledge base answer says:

> We also make full schematics and assembly drawings available to repair shops who get Framework products in for repair

But what about individuals who need to repair their own Framework products? If schematics and boardviews are only avaailable to repair shop businesses, that seems to completely contradict most of the copy on the framework site such as:

"Our philosophy is that by making well-considered design tradeoffs and trusting customers and repair shops with the access and information they need, we can make fantastic devices that are still easy to repair"

⬐ jjcon

For the vast majority of even techie people - repairable means swapping out a modular part, not soldering or replacing chips on the mainboard.

⬐ bobsmooth

Louis has dozens upon dozens of videos where he fixes macbooks doing component-level repair. The schematics he uses are available and you could perform the same repairs if you have an hot air pen.

⬐ jkhdigital

You say that as though the skills required are trivially obtainable. YouTube tends to make everything look a bit easier than it really is…

⬐ jhugo

To be fair, this type of repair is nowhere near as difficult as most people assume it is.

⬐ f1refly

You should try it sometime, component repair is not that hard even with average tools. I stuck a phantom powered aux jack in my laptop once, finding the faulty amp transistor and replacing it took about 20 minutes, and that was without schematics.

⬐ Nextgrid

Is it limited to "repair shops" or to anyone who's happy to sign the NDA (such as an end-customer looking to repair their own machine after spilling a drink)?

If the former, what's the criteria that determines whether one is a "repair shop"? Would Honest Achmed's Used Laptops and Certificates[1] qualify if he wanted to repair his cousin Mustafa's laptop?

[1]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=647959

⬐ simcop2387

The knowledge-base there doesn't give any idea of what kind of criteria you are required to meet in order to receive the schematics. It just says "repair business". How many laptops need to come into the business before any information will be provided? Why are individuals not able to qualify (maybe they can? the page doesn't make it appear to be the case). Would there be any additional requirements for signing the confidentiality agreement such as having to sell products to customers or providing PII of customers? Both of those things are things that happen under other manufacturers repair programs.

⬐ OJFord

> to repair shops under a confidentiality agreement

To be honest (and as a Framework laptop owner) that's a bit disappointing, the 'to repair shops' part and I assume some sort of bar to meet for that, I suppose I understand though. The link you post says pinouts are available, which following through to Github seems to mean just for connectors. I wonder if you could share the BoM and locations perhaps, so not a full schematic, but enough for someone to replace a faulty component like for like or with an equivalent part?

Seems to me that would protect what (I presume) you want to protect, while still giving owner-tinkerer-repairers basically everything they want?

⬐ iratewizard

They're a company truly trying to strike a balance between defending the IP they create and what's best for their community. There's no real winning move here that doesn't open them up to Chinese framework clones on Alibaba in a month

⬐ OJFord

Are BOM & part locations really the key missing pieces that are going to enable that/make it significantly more likely?

Some could already do it, and don't need those; the rest would still be missing schematics, layouts, mechanical drawings, etc. just like a user that wants to know what the unmarked/ambiguously marked chip is in order to try to replace it.

⬐ userbinator

There's no real winning move here that doesn't open them up to Chinese framework clones on Alibaba in a month

Arguably if the Chinese wanted to, they could've already beaten Framework to the market. All the major OEMs/ODMs are in China (or Taiwan, but let's not get political here...) and I'm almost willing to bet Framework just contracted this work out to one of them. Also, those OEMs/ODMs are very much capable of taking the Intel reference design schematics and fitting them into the requested shape. That's basically how things like the Thinkpad X62 happened: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15274644

⬐ rasz

Framework ODM is Compal. This laptop is already manufactured in China.

⬐ netr0ute

> under a confidentiality agreement

That's not so kosher for repairability.

⬐ nabakin

Likely a condition of the manufacturers allowing the release of the schematics in the first place. If Framework proves itself, it will have some more weight to throw around in this area. Maybe enough to make the schematics public.

⬐ mfer

I suspect this is due to their chip suppliers or something like that

⬐ orhmeh09

The simplest explanation is the usual: 100% marketing.

⬐ Rebelgecko

If that were the case, wouldn't they release the schematics for the positive marketing?

⬐ hda2

Do you make full schematics and board views available to laptop owners under similar agreements? This is my main concern.

If I, as the owner of your laptop, can't repair said laptop after a water spill, then I can't call it reparable. Modular, yes. Repairable, NO.

⬐ curiousgal

Oh please, do you have access to a microscope, a hot air station and all of the required hardware to perform component-level repairs? Do you even know how to read a schematics? (I don't mean you in person but you as in the average consumer).

This is why we can't have nice things, y'all keep making unrealistic demands that are seriously disheartening.

⬐ hda2

Yes, I can read schematics and I have preformed multiple component-level repairs on two of my laptops in the past. Even if I hadn't, this wouldn't discount my argument. The fact that the "average consumer" hasn't wouldn't either.

Repairability and modularity are two distinct concepts. The framework laptop is modular but it is not repairable. At least not any more repairable then my Toshiba or MSI laptops. End of story.

⬐ jeroenhd

I think such expectations are perfectly fair for a company that advertises that they "support your right to repair" on their front page. When you claim such support, you change the expectations people have of your product. As a consumer, you pay a significant fee for the repairability of the laptop compared to laptops from other brands. If all you get in return is coloured screws and recessed USB ports then I'd be pretty annoyed too.

This company claims they'll support your right to repair but then doesn't support _certain_ types of repair unless you meet their conditions. That's no different from Google, Apple, or any other tech giants that also will happily let you repair your device if you've got the right contacts and credentials. Even John Deer has repair manuals available.

⬐ Lucasoato

May I ask you why you feel more confident with sharing data only to repair shops instead of publicly? I apologize if this question sounds too invasive, it's just that I can't imagine a scenario in which a malicious actor wouldn't be able to just pay for the data from shops anyway.

⬐ czx4f4bd

You're assuming it's their choice. It's much more likely that they don't own all the IP and can't get the relevant rightsholder(s) to agree to make things public. Notice that they say "we were able to share" and mention "work[ing] through constraints" when talking about sharing more detailed schematics.

I imagine they can't say this explicitly because the terms of their business relationships are themselves confidential and they don't want to say anything that could jeopardize those relationships.

⬐ ravel-bar-foo

It seems this is something that you really want repair shops to be informed of even if they have never heard of your brand. Perhaps putting text to the effect of "Full schematics are available to repair shops under a confidentiality agreement. Please contact [email protected]" on the first page that the QR codes resolve to would greatly improve communications with repairers.

⬐ ncallaway

Could you expand on why that confidentiality requirement is in place?

Is it a requirement from some of your parts suppliers? Is it a self-imposed constraint for internal business reasons?

⬐ desiarnezjr

I'd bet that some companies in Shenzhen would clone the components quickly. If there's money in it. Clone Framework boards and parts.

⬐ netr0ute

Is that a bad thing?

⬐ spaetzleesser

Definitely for Framework.

⬐ jeroenhd

It would be a great thing for consumers. That's how we got the PC industry in the first place.

It'd be bad for Framework though.

⬐ SeanLuke

Of course it is a bad thing. Framework is not a nonprofit. They spent blood and tears developing the designs, and needs to at least recoup the cost spent, if not make a profit.

⬐ netr0ute

What about FOSH companies?

⬐ userbinator

Those companies probably already have access to the same reference designs that Framework (or more likely their ODM/OEM) has.

⬐ infogulch

Louis describes talking to the founder about their reasons, but it was in confidence so he doesn't really say much. https://youtu.be/G2YjKYG8P58?t=50 (just watch the whole thing it's only 3m)

> it really did show me that a lot needs to change throughout the entire industry ... I respect and understand why they have the concerns that they do, they are real concerns ...

If Louis was convinced that there were valid reasons not to publish the schematics then somehow I doubt it is as simple as Chinese copycat manufacturers, but who knows.

⬐ ntoskrnl

If I sign an NDA, would you tell me why the schematics are under NDA?

⬐ dathinab

Simple: Copyright isn't always enough to protect your IP when you are a small company. They do want allow repair-ability, they don't want to make unauthorized clones too simple.

Bigger tech companies don't have to worry to much about this (given how they operate, legal teams they have, influence they have etc.). For small companies in the bootstrapping phase it's a problem.

Also there might be legal requirements, like some small parts of the layout being based on Intel provided schemas or similar. But that last point is pure speculative and irrelevant as the first point is good enough of an reason (while your company is in the bootstrapping phase).

⬐ sprayk

Are you allowed to say if it is the board manufacturer or chip/component manufacturers that require the NDA? I'm mostly curious what level of vendor the restriction is coming from to get a better idea of what needs to change for Framework (or any other company) to be able to release the full schematics without NDA.

⬐ infogulch

Elon Musk dropped a beautiful line in a recent interview, "At SpaceX we specialize in converting things from impossible to late" https://twitter.com/Erdayastronaut/status/152881007064512512...

Unfortunately all industries are slowly boiling away the old standard of shipping schematics and diagrams of products we purchase. It seems layers of bureaucracy, contracts, and misaligned incentives have made it virtually impossible to continue that tradition even if desired. I'm happy with my Framework laptop, I'm glad that you were able to publish the schematics that are available publicly, and I'm glad that you will provide full board views to repair shops that ask for them. I hope you will be able to publish complete schematics for public consumption at some point in the future, even if it's late.

⬐ jareklupinski

I just reached out for schematics using the link provided (using a very similar email to my username)

Fingers crossed :)

⬐ vaylian

If you are allowed to comment on this: Is there an official expiry date when the publishing of the schematics will no longer be an issue? If yes, when?

I'm still very happy with my Framework :-)

⬐ CamperBob2

How about making them available to your paying customers under a "Click here to download" agreement?

⬐ craftyguy

So much for repairability. Thanks for confirming your mission is bullshit:

    Our mission

    The time has come for consumer electronics products that are designed to last: products that give you back the power to upgrade, customize, and repair them. We’re excited for the opportunity to fix the consumer electronics industry together.
    

For shame.

⬐ dang

Whoa. Please don't post like this to HN. We're trying to avoid the online callout/shaming culture here.

https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&type=comment&dateRange=a...

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

⬐ ncallaway

I think that’s completely unfair and you’re letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Are they perfect in meeting their mission because of this clause? Maybe not.

But are they still by far the most open and most repairable mass produced laptop on the market? They are.

Their mission is extremely ambitious, and they’re trying to drag a massive market in the right direction. Maybe cut them a tiny bit of slack on the way?

⬐ girvo

While I absolutely agree with you in general, I was a bit taken aback to find this out this morning: their marketing had worked on me, and I had assumed all of this was open, too. So, I can understand why some people are responding badly to this as well.

⬐ stefan_

What's the big deal? Just upload it somewhere. Don't worry, nobody is embarrassed that the majority of it is copy-pasted reference schematics from parts vendors - that's how it is done!

⬐ userbinator

No kidding. If you've studied enough other laptop schematics you'll quickly realise this. Some might be more cost-optimised ("cost down" in jargon) than others, but they aren't all totally unique and almost always based on reference schematics from Intel or AMD.

⬐ somethoughts

On one hand - it makes sense to push for more visibility - to test the depths of their commitment to right-to-repair.

On the other hand - being overly critical about a new entrant that is attempting to address the right-to-repair market for not getting everything perfect from the get go might send the wrong signals about the right-to-repair market to the rest of the industry.

It seems like a delicate balance might be wise. Having module level repairability for LCD panels, connectors, drivers, memory is a pretty big step relative to the other OEMs.

Perhaps the best analogy would be Raspberry Pi schematics which are also reduced [1] and IMHO, the RPi has generally been a plus for the open source hardware/software community. Similarly I could definitely see Intel having some trade secrets as you get closer the CPU.

[1] https://datasheets.raspberrypi.com/rpi4/raspberry-pi-4-reduc...

⬐ npunt

This is the challenge of trying to do good - no matter how much better you are than the default, for some subset of users you will never be good enough, and they’ll complain just as loudly about you as they do the default (far worse) option.

Unrealistic purity tests ruin all sorts of attempts to make the world a better place. We should celebrate attempts to change the status quo.

⬐ cmeacham98

The problem I have is that if these requests are unrealistic, they should just say that. As far as I can tell, what they're currently doing requires more effort to vet repair shops and create an NDA than if they just dumped the schematics online.

Now, maybe there's a great reason for this. Maybe they're under NDA and can't reveal part of the schematics. Maybe releasing these schematics would make it super easy for a competitor to completely steal everything. Maybe they are going to release the full schematics and we're waiting on their engineering team and legal team to review them.

The problem here is that Framework hasn't communicated any of this. Every time they're asked they don't seem to give any reason and just dodge around with "we'd love to release the full schematics". Well, why haven't you then? Please tell us.

⬐ TheSpiceIsLife

One might even imagine someone would write something like this in an effort to reinforce the parents the point.

The strongest interpretation of "we'd love to release the full schematics" the subtext: but we can't / don't want to due to "reasons*, none of which are likely to satisfy everyone, so we'll try to avoid that discussion as it would help distract us all rather than getting on with our goals.

⬐ somethoughts

I feel its likely the marketing verbiage w.r.t. repairability was targeting the average "prosumer level repairability" - which is probably more closer to an iFixit level of repairability (i.e. more on the torx screw and less on the solder/depop spectrum of repair) [1]. That said in response to these HN and Youtube threads - perhaps they could update it to be more specific about their definition of repairability as well as why schematics will be or can't be released. In the future - if Intel is the issue - it might be smart to design some additional modularity and relegate the proprietary Intel stuff to some sort of system on module (like the RPi4 Compute Module) and increase the amount of open source able main board.

[1] https://www.ifixit.com

⬐ stormbrew

It seems likely that the 'module' would just cover the entire space of the board as-is if they did this with a modern intel system anyways, especially when there's also SODIMM module slots, an m.2 slot, and 4 full tb4 ports on the board.

All those high speed bus interfaces are probably tied directly into the CPU, the chipset, or both, and so are largely gonna be covered by any confidentiality agreement intel imposes on vendors of those parts.

The Pi4 CM is a much more modest device by comparison. It has no ram expansion and only a few lanes of PCIe, USB3, and some other fairly standard IO interfaces otherwise.

Realistically, the frame.work mainboard is the compute module. You plug it into the equivalent of a CM carrier board with the TB4 ports.

⬐ cmeacham98

It's not just about the reason, but other details too. Does "we'd love to release them" mean "we just mean more time", "there's a 50/50 chance we'll be able to release them", or "we'd love to but it's a long shot". If they are going to come out, will it be in weeks, months, or years?

⬐ needle0

Them not mentioning it, despite mentioning it making their optics better, pretty much seem to point to the NDA not even letting them discuss the stuff you stated.

⬐ Dylan16807

> due to "reasons*, none of which are likely to satisfy everyone, so we'll try to avoid that discussion

Being so vague and listing no reasons doesn't seem helpful to me.

⬐ None

None

⬐ tyrfing

The strongest and most likely interpretation is that they simply don't own the IP, and it's based on a licensed reference design. It makes zero sense for a startup like this to have done all of it from scratch - just copy everything possible and innovate the actually interesting parts. If they don't own the design, they can't say that due to NDAs, and the best they can do is a maximally broad interpretation of "repair shop".

⬐ nousermane

I wish "innovative, actually interesting parts" would include delivering an actually repair-friendly laptop - that is - one with full schematics; only ICs that are normally in-stock on digi-key/mouser; no soldered-down components made of melty plastic, especially not next to places that are likely to be reworked; soldermask that doesn't obscure traces; all important signals brought to accessible probe points; mechanical design/connectors/cabling allowing for easy power-on outside of chassis, etc...

Sure, QR stickers and a bunch of new/incompatible iteration of good old ExpressCard are nice to have, thank you, but that doesn't make all that big of a difference to repairability.

⬐ jacquesm

And no SMD mounted connectors, only hole through connectors. The problem with that is that it will preclude the use of certain kinds of cables because the whole industry has now pretty much moved to SMD where possible to shave off the last couple of percent cost.

⬐ nousermane

External connectors are pretty much the only kind of component that is still routinely being used in (full or partial) through-hole form-factor.

Laptop in question does use partial through-hole connectors for all 4 USB-C ports - notice 6 shiny slots around each such port around 0:25 mark in video. Such connectors are actually harder to rework/replace, but also tougher and less likely to require repair in the first place. So overall, well-done here to framework, even if most everybody else is doing that too.

⬐ jacquesm

Yes, but there are plenty of internal connectors as well.

⬐ stormbrew

honestly with how much heat the ground plane can soak up on modern electronics, desoldering a beefy through hole ground connector is such a pain in the ass I might rather they be SMD if I have to do something with them in general.

⬐ rcoder

This sounds like a great set of constraints for an industrial controller, or a custom Cyberdeck-type portable.

I’m confident any device following these guidelines would be DOA in the larger market, though. Even _if_ you could source things like LCD assemblies that fit your criteria, the expected density (high) and labor costs (low) people have for modern electronics don’t leave a lot of room for this kind of bespoke design.

I’m extremely impressed with how far Framework got on the path to “full repairability” using off-the-shelf parts without producing something that looks like a late-90s Thinkpad.

Don’t get me wrong: I love the old IBM, Tadpole, Toshiba, et. al. designs, but I don’t think that many people outside this community would be willing to pay 2-3x as much for something 2-3x larger and heavier and several generation behind in terms of performance. (Not to mention wildly incompatible with any non-hobbyist OS.)

OTOH, what you’re describing does sound a lot like why custom, hand-wired audio amplifier builders do. They manage to make a business out of it, mainly by appealing to folks willing to spend effectively unlimited money to get that “special something”.

⬐ nousermane

Not sure what you meant by "full repairability", but for component-level system board repair, framework laptop is not far at all from current-gen lenovo or macbook. That's the whole point of OP's video.

User-replaceable RAM, SSD and keyboard are all steps in the right direction, of course. But it would be quite a stretch to give product full marks on repairability based on that alone.

⬐ moring

IMHO, the best they can do is being honest about what they can't say due to an NDA. For example, if they can't say that they don't own the design, they might say "due to an NDA we cannot say who owns the design". This goes a long way to earn trust.

⬐ TheSpiceIsLife

I don't know about these things a great deal, but it would seem reasonable to me that an NDA might include limiting what you can say about the NDA?

⬐ jimnotgym

It depends if the NDA allows them to discuss it at all!

⬐ ClumsyPilot

These has to be a limit to this madness, can I get an NDA that does not let you state your name to anyone

⬐ vel0city

There are limits to contracts in the law. There would have to be some form of consideration to that contract. If you gave me a million dollars a year but I just can't use my current legal name in casual conversation, I'd take that contract. If you just wrote a contract that said "you can't use your name, you get nothing" its an unenforceable contract under US (and most of the developed world's) contract laws under the principle of consideration.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consideration

⬐ rasz

They already claim to fully own the design.

>Our main manufacturing partner is Compal, who makes laptops for many other large US notebook makers.

>Apart from off the shelf modules like the SSD, RAM, WiFi, and LCD, the Framework Laptop is entirely custom to us, and we own all of the design and tooling.

If you locate Acer Swift 3 SF313-53 diagram it will be 90% same thing, just shuffled around with different mechanical design.

⬐ mschuster91

They might be owning the design itself, but I can easily imagine that the NDAs required to get access to specifications and design guidelines for parts like the CPU, GPU and other chipsets include a provision that no material must be released that allows others to clean-room reverse-engineer the protected material.

⬐ somethoughts

I feel its likely the marketing verbiage w.r.t. repairability was targeting the average "prosumer level repairability" - which is probably more closer to an iFixit level of repairability (i.e. more on the torx screw and less on the solder/depop spectrum of repair) [1].

That said in response to these HN and Youtube threads - perhaps they could update it to be more specific about their definition of repairability as well as why schematics will be or can't be released.

In the future - if Intel is the issue - it might be smart to design some additional modularity and relegate the proprietary Intel stuff to some sort of system on module (like the RPi4 Compute Module) and increase the amount of open source able main board.

[1] https://www.ifixit.com

⬐ donthellbanme

The veting of repair shops is a ploy.

The watch industry used to vet repair Watch Repair shops on the guise of "Quality Assurance". They would require Watchmakers buy their expensive cleaning machines, and a bunch of other pricy tooling, and requirements; in order to procure parts. 90% of watchmakers couldn't get a parts accout, and the watch companies loved it. it meant more after sales/warranty business.

This was because they didn't want to sell parts to anyone. They wanted to do the repairs

For a few years, certain Watchmakers kept up with the demands from Rolex, and The Swatch Group.

We were just happy to be able to get parts.

About 15 years ago the watch companies just decided not to sell parts to anyone.

That whole Vertical Intregtation consumer ripoff.

I am very leary of any company that wants to vet their repair shops for anything, other than maybe medical equipment.

They will supply the schematics, but they don't want to make it easy.

(I'm pretty sure I'm hellbanned again?)

⬐ onli

It is not them though, they clearly just follow rules here that they have to obey. But I think it is a great idea to compare it with the watch market - independent repair shops there have neven seen like a bad idea, and the schematics are pretty much always open - in that the movement is just there, accessible - and the watches are copyable. Which happens a lot though - might not be the most convincing argument if that were the fear.

⬐ autoexec

> Now, maybe there's a great reason for this. Maybe they're under NDA and can't reveal part of the schematics. Maybe releasing these schematics would make it super easy for a competitor to completely steal everything. Maybe they are going to release the full schematics and we're waiting on their engineering team and legal team to review them.

I guess I'd question 'fear of competitors' being a "good" reason, but I'd agree with you otherwise. Regardless of what the need for secrecy is, unless it's "we're forbidden by the state" and there's some kind of national security letter involved or "We're doing something illegal and we'd get sued if it were known to the public", why not just tell the public why they can't release the full schematics? What else would prevent someone from talking about why they couldn't talk about something? Refusing to even explain themselves just makes it all seem more suspicious.

⬐ vel0city

Sometimes NDAs prevent even revealing the scope of the NDA, because knowing the scopes of things is then potentially exposing information a party doesn't want known by others. Sure, maybe Framework could just go and state those things, but they're potentially burning their relationships with key partners that might be necessary to make the product at the moment.

I'm not arguing this is a good thing, just trying to share some perspective.

⬐ arinlen

> (...) no matter how much better you are than the default, for some subset of users you will never be good enough (...)

What if it is really not good enough?

Should everyone just accept someone's claims that they addressed a problem when they might be actually making it worse by pretending it's solved when it isn't?

I recall the days of old when no laptop supported linux, and the impact there was when a model showed up with claims it indeed supported linux. I bought one based on those claims (don't recall the make-model, might have been an Acer) and I still recall the disappointment I felt when I discovered critical stuff like wifi did not worked at all. There were a few comments like "It boots, right?" followed by "for some subset of users you will never be good enough" when critical problems were pointed out, but the truth of the matter was that a purchase was made based on a feature that was advertised but was in fact not offered.

⬐ mlyle

> and they’ll complain just as loudly about you as they do the default (far worse) option.

This is optimistic. They'll lampoon you and call you hypocrites for claiming to be helpful but not doing the zillions of things they have in mind, while giving the unfriendly incumbent a pass.

⬐ morekozhambu

None

⬐ Springtime

I'm not sure who they is in this context but the person who runs the channel linked in the topic and who is normally in the videos has consistently praised Framework for their efforts, including the release of these public schematics, regardless of being partially complete, and has reminded viewers how it compares to other brands that don't release anything of the kind for helping repair shops.

In a recent video they were considering buying a second Framework laptop of their own just to have it displayed in videos as essentially free advertising. If some of these characterizations are about them it seems misplaced tbh.

⬐ mlyle

> I'm not sure who they is in this context

Same "they" as the parent-- "for some subset of users you will never be good enough, and they’ll complain just as loudly about you as they do the default (far worse) option." Not implying that it's the channel's stance.

On any criterion: ease of repair, privacy, security, good citizenship, etc: there's some subset of critics who treat the best behaved companies and individuals worse than the worst. These are the people who e.g. give Apple a much harder time on privacy than Meta.

⬐ ekianjo

> . We should celebrate attempts to change the status quo

yes but... no. if you go half way to do something you will not reap much of the expected benefits. in certain use cases hard thresholds are important to consider. in this case half available schematics is not good enough to do repairs even if its better than no schematics at all.

⬐ jimnotgym

But half way to something here is demonstrably better. The computer opens with ordinary tools and the parts are modular and available! It was also stated above that this repairer did not ask for the schematics.

⬐ yjftsjthsd-h

I think the difference is in the (perception of) honesty or hypocrisy. If Apple jealously guards details about their hardware and impedes repairs, it's bad but it's expected. If Framework guards details about their hardware and impedes repairs, it's in direct opposition to their claimed mission and the reason people were interested, and it feels like a betrayal. (Obviously this varies; not everyone cares about the same things or to the same degree. But I suspect that's this is where a lot of the dissent comes from.)

⬐ userbinator

Similarly I could definitely see Intel having some trade secrets as you get closer the CPU.

If they're "secrets", they're probably one of the worst-kept in the industry.

You can already find plenty of other, probably leaked, schematics of laptops using the same if not very similar platform. They are all based on reference designs from Intel, after all. It's inevitable that yours will leak too, hopefully sooner rather than later.

Hence I am strongly siding with the "marketing BS" people here. Claiming to be so strongly in support of RtR, and then turning around and keeping the barely-existing artificial moat up, is practically not much better than all the other laptops that already have schematics available.

⬐ Palomides

do you think Intel's lawyers would accept that argument? getting blacklisted (or sued) by Intel would be catastrophic for Framework

⬐ userbinator

Hopefully Intel's lawyers realise that suing its customers who are buying its products would be a bad idea. If anything, getting Intel to open up more documentation --- like it used to have --- would increase sales and community reputation. Especially with its diminishing performance lead, and the rise of performant but even more horribly proprietary ARM SoCs, opening up seems to make even more sense. Remember that x86 and the PC architecture dominated the computing industry because it was open.

⬐ TheSpiceIsLife

Hopefully may or may not be sufficient for them to bet the farm on.

Knowingly breaching a contract you've already invested many dollars and hours building and understanding, against the advice of your legal council, seems risky.

⬐ somethoughts

Additionally - while the legacy bemoth Intel is getting onboard with open source schematics (and figuring out its strategy to open source the VHDL for its 12th gen core to compete against RISC-V - perhaps now that Gelsinger who is more technical than the previous CEO - there is some hope!) -- the question is whether we'd rather see a product like Framework make inroads despite the roadblocks and build up marketshare to further the case toward right to repair.

⬐ icelancer

Exactly.

It's really easy to make speculative quasi-legal decisions when it's not your company.

⬐ somethoughts

Agree - I think Intel would have a big say in what it wants released under no NDA. It's important to keep in mind - NDA's aren't always meant to prevent the average person from accessing it ever. In fact it'd be most likely primarily used to enable an Intel (or Framework) legal team to have some leverage to go for damages against the most extreme cases of abuse [1].

Also - w.r.t. to right to repair - I've always gotten from their marketing more of a right to repair at the iFixit level (swap SSD, memory, LCD panels, keyboards, etc.) versus de-popping the Intel CPU.

⬐ retcon

Module level repair novel you say?

Parts Removal and Replacement Videos - PCs and Smart Devices - Lenovo Support GB

https://support.lenovo.com/gb/en/solutions/ht505031-parts-re...

⬐ somethoughts

Interesting. That said - its one thing to have a knowledge base likely targeted toward corporate IT teams with direct access to order-able parts via Lenovo value added resellers and another to put it on the landing page for a consumer facing laptop.

It'd be a huge win in fact for right to repair if Lenovo did do this in response to Framework.

⬐ userbinator

Thinkpads have always been very repairable at the module level since they were still called IBM Thinkpads. You can also find schematics for them on other sites.

⬐ nrp

Yep, we absolutely understand and respect Louis and community members' requests for full schematics, and we appreciate the folks who extend understanding as we work through constraints (including Louis as noted in that last video). We're continuing to make as much open as we can, and we're adding to that list as we go:

* Mainboard partial schematics, drawings, and pinouts: https://github.com/FrameworkComputer/Mainboard

* Expansion Card reference designs: https://github.com/FrameworkComputer/ExpansionCards

* Embedded Controller firmware: https://github.com/FrameworkComputer/EmbeddedController

On the list of things that we are exploring ways to improve on in the future:

* More of the schematics, including of modules beyond the Mainboards.

* Moving to open UEFI/BIOS solutions.