It's a matter of preferences. Actually I like trackpads that don't mind and have physical buttons. The separation between the surface that moves the pointer on screen and the surfaces that generate the clicks means that there are no misclicks and no involuntary pointer movements while clicking.
Haptic schmaptic, I just want my Framework's enormous trackpad to respect deadzones and stop detecting my palms. I had to entirely disable tap-to-click, because nothing else would work.
I might have to try their preinstalled Ubuntu images or something and see if there's some secret sauce in the input configs.
> For Linux libinput “Disable While Typing” (DWT) problems, this page claims libinput will only use the DWT setting if the keyboard and touchpad are either both identified as internal devices, or are both identified as the same device.
There is no accounting for taste.
For instance, I still prefer discrete buttons over tap-clicks or multi-finger-taps, but I would accept the mild annoyance of tap clicks over the pressing down the pad itself.
Not a huge fan of the "force touch" trackpads on newer macs, the old man yells at the clouds.
In all seriousness though I have used a pre force touch MacBook not too long ago and I prefer that experience a lot over the new one I have from work.
Though the larger size of these trackpads is something I really like and where neither the older MacBook nor the the current non-pro Framework 13 come close.
what's interesting to me about Cluely is that they had one of the smartest programmers I know there doing really cool stuff with React... and then they got laid off when the core team moved to New York
I think this is organic. I've observed the exact same thing over the last week: I tried Google Antigravity and really liked it when I was using my Claude quota. I ran out of Claude quota and tried Gemini 3.1 Pro and it was comparatively terrible at using the tools provided by the IDE. (but it's a useful model in the browser for chat)
A framework laptop is very nice, and definitely has a lot of upsides, but it can't match screen, keyboard, trackpad, camera, or speaker quality with a MacBook Pro, not to mention the battery life.
Those may be nice for people who need them, and are ok with the software side.
for me, the screen on the framework is ok. I think there's little to gain with LCDs at this point. The trackpad on the framework is smaller, so it's better. A nicer camera requires a nicer piece of tape to cover it, I guess. Notification beeps do not require Atmos or whatever. I can pack a powerbank for trans-oceanic flights, but I'm usually at a desk if I work long stretches.
Having nicer stuff would be nice, but the value proposition does not work for me in light of the software situation.
1 - compromised hardware over better software is a trade-off you're willing to make and
2 - you believe that the Framework software experience is better than macOS
i can concede 2 (if true, I've not used a Framework laptop) but I don't understand point 1. packing a powerbank for example just feels ancient if you've used the arm chip macs. then again, I'm now pushing my trade-off
It's going to be a different experience for everyone. For example I never get why people care about the laptop weight. You put it in your backpack anyway, (unless it's a small handbag sized laptop situation then fair enough) it's not like anything below 5kg will be noticeable in reality. Yet for others is a big deal. Personal preferences...
"Packing a powerbank" was more of a hypothetical, as I've never actually had to.
My point was that it's a tradeoff between software preference, tech politics, price, and hardware features. I think it's pretty easy to understand. It's not like Apple has an insurmountable lead; there are some benefits for some use cases.
I concur. I have a Framework 13 I use as my personal laptop and a work-issued M3 MacBook Pro. While I love the freedom that my Framework 13 provides in terms of user serviceability and operating system choice, the MacBook Pro feels more premium, and it has absolutely amazing battery life.
What do people like about MacBook trackpads? I can't stand them because you can only do a "click" action at the bottom of the thing, but there's nothing tactile that would help you to find it.
Gruber seemed like an Apple sycophant for a while because his values and tastes aligned very closely with Apple's (though he still criticized them from time to time). Now, Apple is drifting away from those values and tastes and so Gruber and others in that sphere of Apple blogs are coming down harder on Apple, especially after Alan Dye made such a mess with "Liquid Glass".
> especially after Alan Dye made such a mess with "Liquid Glass".
Your comment makes it seem like Gruber is a big critic of Liquid Glass like many commenters on HN are, but that's not the case. He's certainly critical of some of the execution details like icons or translucency that can hinder reading, but his stance on it is pretty nuanced leaning toward cautiously optimistic.
Listen to the episode of The Talk Show with Louie Mantia. They really rip on Alan Dye and Liquid Glass. Not so much the _idea_ of Liquid Glass, which I think they appreciate, but its execution, which is shoddy, inconsistent, and reveals a dearth of holistic thinking about UI design.
I suppose life is very different inside the citadel. You get curated and triaged feedback from users, Tim Cook doesn't really have opinions about usability and design choices, so there's no one in charge of the classroom.
The reality is in spite of nice touches like call filtering, software quality and usability are both clearly going down.
And Apple's moat, which is a combination of ecosystem lock-in and graphic design, is threatened from one side by AI and from the other by whatever Liquid Glass is supposed to be.
This is the answer. Gruber has and will continue to criticize Apple, but there has generally been very little room for daylight between his values and those of the company (either as expressed in their products or by their leadership). Also, while he doesn't say it, but I suspect that there has long been a feedback loop where his articles defending the company line are well-received internally and have helped him get press access to executives (for his WWDC live show) and preview hardware.
All that said, there has been a marked change since John's "Something Is Rotten in the State of Cupertino". Reading between the lines, it's pretty clear that Apple leadership did not like this article and snubbed him for his liveshow. Since then, there have been many more articles critical of Apple on daringfireball.net.
This is why at work the only required rule for commit messages is that they include the story number, so we can very easily find at least the general reason for a change from git blame.
reply