[talldayo]

Framework is great, but their existence doesn't change the harmful antirepair practice of other companies. Similarly, the ratio of servicable cars on the road won't change the fact that offering less service is cheaper, and forcing first-party repair can even be profitable.

[margalabargala]

> their existence doesn't change the harmful antirepair practice of other companies

Their existence doesn't but their success does. If and when Framework becomes large enough to steal a significant portion of marketshare from less repair friendly companies, they will adapt or die.

[talldayo]

I wish you were right, but historically I don't think anything suggests a change. There has always been a market for repairable and rugged laptops, but their market share loses out to expensive and easily replaceable machines. Skimping on repairability lets you focus on some other feature that you can market instead, which will almost always seem sexier than "the topcase costs less than $500 to replace".

There are success stories here; IBM and Panasonic didn't struggle to find customers for the Thinkpad and Toughbook respectively. But the market was never forced to "adapt or die" as you put it; in fact, the rugged and repairable machines were now the ones that had to adapt. How can you compete against a monopoly on repair pricing?