But they’re not locking you in, while other vendors clearly and deliberately are. Definitely the lesser evil. So even a utilitarian like you would choose Framework, provided all else is equal.
They even promote 3rd party enclosures for the mainboard in this post so you can’t even say they’re not fostering the ecosystem when they can. It’s not incumbent upon Framework to actually provide competition. That’s a competitor's job.
The nuance is that being open is the ”right thing to do”. It’s not fair to criticize Framework for doing the right thing because no competitors have stepped up yet. Or because nobody else has come around yet. It’s fine to comment on the situation and say “effectively I can still only buy a Framework mainboard”. Thats true, of course. But that's in no way Framework’s fault.
As companies trying to do open source have found out, throwing code over the wall does not a community make. Similarly, shoving specs onto their website but not engaging with the community (other laptop manufacturers in this case) does not make for a vibrant ecosystem of parts.
I don't think you're getting my point. I can't do anything with the specs Framework publishes, I can't fab my own parts. So for me, either as an individual or a person buying equipment for my business, when comparing Framework with Dell or Lenovo, it's the same outcome: they're the sole supplier of parts for their devices. Thus, I don't really get a benefit with using Framework vs one of the other providers, especially when I could buy a new laptop (on sale or whatever) for the cost of a mainboard upgrade. I won't buy Framework devices.
It you who's not getting my point. I explicitly said I understand that effectively there's no difference for you at the moment with framework vs other vendors. My point was that having an open system still puts you in a better situation than a closed system (and that it's not fair to criticize Framework for 3rd party parts vendors not existing since that's how this thread started), for numerous reasons but especially because you're not wholly dependent on the future benevolence of your chosen vendor to prioritize, manufacture, and provide at reasonable prices replacement parts and upgrades. Since they have a monopoly on that part, they can charge whatever they want so there's literally no incentive whatsoever pulling down the price.
I said this holds if all else is equal. You're now bringing in cost. This is a factor too, for sure, and responds to my all else is equal caveat. And if your cost analysis determines that Framework is not worth the price, then there isn't much I can do about that in a discussion here since I can't speak to their quality/reliability/experience (and why they might be worth the cost or how you might otherwise benefit for the additional price when compared to e.g. Dell) since I'm not an owner.
They even promote 3rd party enclosures for the mainboard in this post so you can’t even say they’re not fostering the ecosystem when they can. It’s not incumbent upon Framework to actually provide competition. That’s a competitor's job.
The nuance is that being open is the ”right thing to do”. It’s not fair to criticize Framework for doing the right thing because no competitors have stepped up yet. Or because nobody else has come around yet. It’s fine to comment on the situation and say “effectively I can still only buy a Framework mainboard”. Thats true, of course. But that's in no way Framework’s fault.