|
|
|
|
|
|
by fragmede
366 days ago
|
|
|
It's a much more interesting question when framed with numbers! But let's say they ship 500k main boards (since it doesn't need to be a totally assembled laptop to benefit), and it only costs $300k, not $3 million (and a couple laptops) to the right eastern European software developer to perfectly tune some Linux config files. Then it's only $1.50 per laptop, and they could arguably just eat that cost. Framework doesn't have to spend enough to be the next Apple (nor do they have the resources to be), they just need to spend enough to not be so desperately far behind Dell. The explanation makes sense in isolation, it just seems like a local maxima if you zoom out. |
|
|
Also, note that Framework already employs at least one person[1] working full time on Linux compatibility and support, so at least some of the low-hanging fruit may have already been picked. I'm sure they could spend an additional $300k, $3M, $30M, or more on improving Linux efficiency. I can't estimate what the benefit would be at each of those levels, nor do I know what the price impact would be, nor the sales impact. I don't know what they currently spend on Linux support except that it's at least one FTE.
We don't have enough information to answer or even meaningfully estimate most of these questions. I'm not saying they're making good decisions or bad decisions with respect to Linux support, I'm just saying neither of us have enough information to know.
[1] https://matthartley.com who was previously at System 76