I've had the framework 13 since batch 5 of their original first model and that has never happened to me once. Are you sure you're pushing the expansion cards _all the way_ in? They should click and the little button between the cards should pop up slightly more when the cards are fully inserted. It is certainly possible to have the cards visually look inserted and work normally but haven't actually been pushed in far enough to click/lock into place.

FWIW I've also replaced my chassis once, and never had this issue with either chassis.

If it's what I'm thinking about, they showed it in one of their videos where they compare the old 13 to the Pro. It looked like a latch mechanism that you can operate with one hand but still keeps it secure in place.

Edit: this should be what you want to know - https://youtu.be/GnOpIQJnYWU?t=536

> Current F13 expansion cards will pull out sometimes when you remove a USB cable

That feels like a defect in your particular machine, not a design flaw. With my laptop, the cards are actually incredibly difficult to remove most of the time. I can't imagine one of them coming loose by accident.

> Current F13 expansion cards will pull out sometimes

Just echoing what others have said here: I'm typing this on an original F13 I think from batch 6 which has had many upgrades but not the bottom cover. I have never had an expansion card pop out accidentally. I can't imagine that happening considering how difficult they are to remove. I usually have to lay the laptop flat upside down and use my multitool while holding the button to push a card out.

My wife has an F12 and she has also never had one pop out accidentally. Unlike mine, hers has locking switches to keep them in place, but even with the switches open they're pretty hard to remove.

Is it possible there was an intermediate redesign at some point that made them too easy to remove before they landed on the latest design?

I have an early 13 and find the expansion cards take a lot of effort to remove, so maybe it’s a batch thing. Seems like the new 13 redesigned it a bit anyway. I’ll probably get the new bottom so I can use the new battery.

Cost of the Macbook Pro 14 in 2031: another £1999

Cost of the Framework 13 upgrade kit in 2031: £499

The point of the upgradability and openness of the design is that you only have to pay that cost once, instead of every time you buy a laptop. How much will it cost to upgrade a MacBook's RAM if you decide you need more after a year or two? £2099?

Comparing Apples to Oranges.

Apple only makes disposable devices now. They're a megacorp can negotiate massive discounts at every stage of the supply chain.

I've helped several people in the last few years set up new Macs, replacing ones that were only 1-2 years old, because they ran out of storage.

Additionally, the comparison doesn't even hold true when you need more than the base configs from Apple, given their ridiculous upgrade pricing. I'm writing this on a $6,000USD M3 MBP with 128gb/4tb. It would have been substantially cheaper to build out on a Framework.

Even putting aside the whole repairability thing, with the Mac you’re stuck with Apple Silicon. Apple’s processors are mostly awesome, of course, but using one does mean you’re stuck with macOS—Asahi Linux seems to be a ways away from M5 support.

What sells me on it is I get to take a spare Gen4 m.2 ssd out of my gaming PC I wasn't fully utilizing instead of paying for 1TB of storage.

Being able to drive the price down by re-using parts I already have is a pretty big selling point, IMO.

Also, I think Apple is benefitting from scale, since they're able to maintain the (usually too high) storage and memory prices they've had for years. At this moment in time, framework have the misfortune of being forced to pass inflated wholesale prices onto the consumer.

Make this comparison one calendar year ago and the F13 Pro could very easily beat the MBP on price spec-for-spec.

I had to sell my 2016 MacBook Pro because Apple made a defective keyboard design and I had no recourse other than having it replaced with the same defective design. This repair required the replacement of the entire top case of the computer including a number of unrelated components. Without the widespread negative press and repair program, this repair would have cost hundreds of dollars.

I am willing to pay more for a product made by a company whose respect for its customers manifests itself in the design of the product.

I am willing to pay more for a product that has first-class support for non-commercial operating systems that aren’t trying to collect data and sell services.

Lately it’s become obvious to me that Linux is a better desktop experience than macOS or Windows. Liquid Glass ruined my Mac, and Windows is…well, I only ever ran it so I could play games.

Sure, Apple is cheaper, because they make more money selling you services than selling Macs and iPads combined. These are services that are advertised to you within basic settings panels of the operating system, including apps like News that cannot be uninstalled (even Microsoft allows you to uninstall apps like that!)

I don’t want to pay less for a Mac that feels slick during the warranty period but has no upgrade path and no reasonably priced way to repair even minor issues.

The MacBook's aren't a fungible alternative as they lock you into MacOS effectively and don't use Intel and AMD processors.

Also, I'm not sure what a good alternative is these days to the Framework 13 Pro. I DO NOT USE GLOSS SCREENS on productivity laptops(the only reason I have a laptop). Heck, my LG OLED monitor and top-end Samsung s95f OLED TV are matte as well due to the lighting in my space; I like light!

That means any time I'm looking at laptops I've having to re-asses the landscape because year-to-year manufactures flip-flop between screen finish even in their productivity lines. The Asus Zenbook looks good, but it's all gloss screens. I'm looking at the latest crop of Thinkbook and they don't even have the AMD 350 as an option right now; and I'm not sure about the display finish.

It's not so easy to compare like-for-like when it's apples and oranges.

SSD and RAM prices are wacky nowadays, but when I got my DIY framework 13, it was MUCH cheaper than the apple equivalent if you wanted more than the minimum specs (in my case, 32GB RAM + 2TB SSD). Main downside was software/firmware that didn't work well with Framework hardware

> the whole thing is overpriced

Economy of scale... they cannot make (or sell) anywhere near as many as Apple does, so of course it's going to be more expensive. Just like that "Made in USA" grill brush that costs 75 dollars (but guess where the machines that make it come from).

This always seems to come up in discussions about Framework.

The extra cost is more than made up in not having to buy a full new computer every few years, and in being able to swap out the keyboard for $40 if it breaks.

I would still get a Framework rather than a MacBook. A couple of hundred dollars for the openness, repairability, and upgradability is a great deal.

my main eyebrow raise on price comes from pre-built being cheaper than DIY version

how does that even work?

I mean yeah they’re right but it’s not like the difference is particularly staggering. And unfortunately having control and quality runs a premium these days.

Plus depending on what you’re upgrading it could very well save you money in the long run, as the parts you can replace or upgrade yourself in an MBpro are few and far between. The few things you can replace often cost an arm and a leg and require way more technical expertise than a framework demands.

Also, Mac lock in. Not something to lightly ignore. Framework will run basically anything except MacOS.

I mean, yeah. There's a reason other companies don't focus on modularity or repairability. Its not free.

We're not the target audience for this thing, but I'm at least happy there's a way people can put their money where their mouth is.

It looks like Intel's new Panther Lake chips are a hit, they have amazing battery life and performance compared to their AMD and ARM equivalents (excluding Apple ofc), and the the integrated graphics is better than AMD, ARM, or Apple.

They do not have integrated memory, but by using LPCAMM2 they get better memory speeds than any laptops using the usual SODIMM memory modules.

It's nice to see Intel on the upswing again, more competition is always a good thing.

AMD unfortunately didn't actually get faster this gen. panther lake is faster than zen5 mobile for both cpu and GPU (except for workloads where avx512 matters)

if I understood right, the AMD chip is more power hungry due to not having the ultra-low-energy cores, and doesn’t support the new USB-4 standard.

Benchmarks have to wait until the actual Intel chip is out.

Amd versions can not suspend to RAM, I heard.

Because there’s a hardware shortage going on. I can see why somebody who needs a new machine commits early.

I'd pre-order one, but not with RAM. It might go up more, but I'm hoping not...

Couldn’t you just… get a framework without RAM and buy ECC memory separately?

ECC is a requirement for me as well.

I'll have to pass this time, because no ECC.

Sure, but if you factor in the possibility of never having to do a full system upgrade again, and instead just upgrading individual parts (including the chassis) as needed, the long term cost of ownership would be way lower if you commit to framework

Apples to oranges. NO other OEM makes a modular laptop yet.

At this point RAM prices dwarf everything else in a system, at least for me

Because realistically in the laptop computer space Apple is obliterating everything else right now.

You can usually name a laptop that has some feature better than a macbook, but the overall package is so strong in so many avenues. Sound quality, screen quality (even without leaning on fancy new tech like OLED), trackpad quality.

Would you rather they target the Dell Latitude (Coil Whine, crazy power-off issues caused by C-States, poor thermals) or Thinkpad T-series (USB-C port stops charging and requires motherboard replacement, thermal issues, weak speakers, also coil whine, unstable radio) or HP’s elitebook (randomly doesn’t wake from suspend, hinge cracking and keycaps falling off even with light wear).

The other SKU’s are a race to the bottom, despite being more expensive for the base-system (which I find ironic).

It’s a poor north star to take a degrading product line as inspiration.

This kind of mediocrity what holds the Linux world back by a big extent. Arguably Apple makes the best hardware currently, spec wise and build quality wise too. You can ignore them and turn to mediocrity or you can strive to be like them and even better than them! Framework says that we can be better in some departments (modularity) while also trying to match their (Apple’s) design and build quality.

Because you’re in the minority. The vast majority of the population views the build quality and materials of the macbook pro to be the standard by which all others are measured.

The only thing that’s surprising is that you see 30-40% of the laptops at a Linux conference are macbooks given how poor to non-existent the Linux support is for the newer Apple silicon models.

> Why are they so so dedicated to being as much as a look and feel clone as Mac as possible?

Because Mac hardware is the best in the market. I’m not really sure how you’d argue otherwise. Build quality, components etc are the best, it makes sense you’d want to match that.

A lot of Linux folks would love to own a MacBook that runs Linux. But such a thing doesn’t exist (at least at a first party support level). Not wanting one because it does look like a MacBook doesn’t make a ton of sense.

Most Linux users don't use Macs because running Linux on a Mac is difficult.

But I think many people would like to run Linux on Apple hardware. That's what I do and I haven't found better hardware yet. You just have to be careful in choosing something that's well supported.

If I had to change laptops (I didn't choose mine and I'm just lucky that M1 Macs are well supported by Asahi) I would definitely take a Framework and hope that it's sufficiently Apple-like hardware wise.

I suspect a large number of computers would be thinkpad, primarily due to its repairability, which is the biggest selling point of framework by far. So, together, you cover a pretty significant chunk of the market

> I even went around at Linux conferences and counted, like 30-40%

I don't think the interest in the hardware is necessarily low among Linux users, it's just that MacBooks aren't built with Linux in mind at all, and you can't run Linux on it as easily as on something like a ThinkPad.

> cloned every detail of the product you are definitionally not interested in

I guess a lot of people actually are interested in Apple's hardware, and wish something like that existed, but running Linux. You can't extrapolate your own preferences to Framework's market.

You wouldn't understand unless you've used one for a few months. There is alot to like and the dream is to have any "normal" laptop like it

You’re confusing the look of the device with the feel of the OS.

There are absolutely some people who avoid Macbooks not because of the hardware part so much as the MacOS part.

I'm a huge long time Linux guy, it's been my ride or die since the mid '90s. But when the M1 came out I got one to replace my "couch" chromebook (which was EOL), partly because I was dead tired of trying to get Divinci Resolve working on Linux. I dedicated days trying to get it to work, with nearly 30 years of full time Linux SysAdmin experience under my belt.

I've run primarily Thinkpads before that MacBook. The Mac hardware has been top notch for me, the Thinkpad is superior in repairability and upgradability, but the Mac I haven't had to do any repairs on. I don't baby it, but I also don't abuse it. There are infuriating things about MacOS, for sure.

+1

I have the first gen Framework sitting in a drawer because of some issues and one of the nitpicks is the fact that it looks like a cheap knockoff of a decade old Macbook complete with the Temu apple logo on the front.

I'd rather they made something similar to a Thinkpad/Latitude. But then again, there seems to be a mass delusion that anything non-Apple is a graveyard of garbage regardless of the price. So they're catering to that market.

Maybe I've been extremely lucky in picking refurbed enterprise machines running Linux in the past decade that hasn't faced any of the issues people complain about.

You might be interested in this: https://www.jeffgeerling.com/blog/2026/the-first-good-raspbe...

There are already 3rd party boards with ARM chips

[flagged]

Don't think that's a fair assessment. They set forth to build modular, repairable laptops you could get parts from 3rd parties with design files available to 3d print or manufacture. They are sticking by those goals. They've expressed interest in open sourcing their firmware or supporting coreboot but that's very much a stretch goal and would take a team of lawyers and a lot of money to suss out

Supporting Coreboot is not easy, or "free" with newer chipsets. It makes sense that this takes a while to implement and I'm grateful that Framework doesn't neuter their chipset selection to only represent Coreboot-supported boards.