As highlighted in my last article, I have been partnering with Framework to bring sustainable computing to enterprise businesses, starting with laptops.

I have documented this journey, including my own experience working with Framework, across a series of articles.

With over fifteen years of experience working with traditional laptop manufacturers (e.g., Dell, Lenovo, HP), I have long felt the life cycle management and servicing business models were fundamentally flawed, with carefully engineered processes that favour manufacturers, requiring consumers and companies to buy new devices on a regular cadence (commonly three to five years).

Therefore, my team and I set ourselves an ambitious goal to redefine these legacy business models, delivering an alternative approach that prioritises environmental sustainability and the right to repair. In our case, we predict the potential for an estimated 33% reduction in e-waste, alongside a positive return on investment for the business, saving an estimated millions over a ten-year lifecycle.

In the article “Framework Business Process”, I outlined our approach, including principles, processes and technical details.

Earlier this year, we launched a business preview, deploying approximately 100 laptops, across the UK, US and Germany. The majority are Framework Laptop 13 (a mix of Intel and AMD), alongside a few Framework Laptop 16.

The business preview itself was a success, verifying the viability of the concept. However, due to specific reliability and support findings, the value was not achieved, resulting in the decision to temporarily pause any additional scale.

In the spirit of transparency, outlined below are the top findings identified as part of the business preview.

Reliability

  1. Boot Device Not Found: ~75% failure rate with the Framework Laptop 13 AMD Ryzen 7040 Series, where the boot device becomes unreadable, requiring a full reinstallation of Windows 11.

  2. Trackpad: ~10% failure rate with the Framework Laptop 13 (AMD and Intel), where the trackpad remains functional but no longer “clicks” as designed.

  3. Device Management Compliance: ~100% failure rate with the Framework Laptop 13 AMD Ryzen 7040 Series, where the Pluton TPM fails attestation within Microsoft Intune.

  4. Dead on Arrival: 5% failure rate with the Framework Laptop 13 Intel Series, where the displays arrived (out of the box) cracked.

The failure rates were certainly higher than anticipated and above what we have seen with equivalent Dell/Lenovo laptops.

We also noticed the impact of “wear and tear” was high, resulting in an increased failure rate for mechanical parts (e.g., trackpad).

In all cases, the laptop could be recovered (software reset or hardware replacement). However, these activities take time and effort, impacting the return on investment.

At this stage, it is unclear if these finders are isolated to our business preview or evidence that business users are “harder” on their devices, increasing the rate of failure with the modular nature of a Framework laptop.

Support

  1. Technical Support: Support tickets directed by our business account manager at Framework took many weeks/months to resolve. This included the coordination of replacement parts and the bugs identified in the software stack (specifically the AMD firmware).

  2. Shipping Quality: The delivery of replacement parts was frequently delayed or damaged in transit. Specifically, multiple failed attempts to deliver to our offices in Germany due to failed hand-offs between carriers and import restrictions.

  3. Invoicing: At the time of writing, Framework does not have established relationships with Value-Added Resellers (VARs), which are commonly used by enterprise businesses to enable global scale. As a result, direct purchasing was required, with issues associated with the timeliness of invoices, impacting internal financial processes.

The highlighted support findings were not unexpected based on the relative immaturity of the company and business processes. It should also be noted, that the Framework team were actively engaged and demonstrated a genuine desire to support and improve. This included regular meetings with Nirav (Founder and CEO of Framework). Therefore, I expect some of these issues to be resolved organically over time, as the company matures.

Finally, in addition to the reliability and support findings, we have also been monitoring the market closely, specifically, the turbulence being generated by Microsoft regarding “AI PC” capabilities and the anticipated launch of ARM-based processors from Qualcomm. I believe these market dynamics could trigger a wave of innovation from Intel/AMD, making any buying decision in 2024 difficult.

These external factors, contributed to our decision to pause, providing time to reflect, learn and improve with Framework, whilst also allowing the market to stabilise.

hardware framework framework_computer framework_laptop right_to_repair sustainability open_hardware enterprise lifeinwork