Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Switched from Macbook Pro to Framework?

chars1ub0w

chars1ub0w

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
This seems kinda strange to me. Presumably, these people are choosing to upgrade an older M-series MacBook Pro, not to a M5, but to a Framework 13" Pro with Ubuntu pre-loaded? Why not simply run Ubuntu in WSL under Windows 11? That way, you gets Windows apps (e.g. Office and Adobe) as well as Linux-specific code running with a small performance hit.
On macOS, you get Office and Adobe running under macOS, and most Linux-specific code can be compiled under macOS too.
Screenshot 2026-04-27 at 1.40.08 PM.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: keksikuningas
I've been on the cusp of this for a long time. I think it's people that are tired of the MacOS/Windows duopoly and want a native Linux laptop. Framework seems to do a good job of making sure the typical Linux distros work well on their hardware, but the hardware's not cheap.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Yamcha, Shirasaki, shadowbird423 and 18 others
They aren’t providing order numbers, so even 1/3rd of 3 orders is 1 person. They also aren’t providing any details as to what model MacBook Pro people are upgrading from, these computers could be 10+ years old even. I doubt the numbers involved here are statistically significant to make the claim framework are making noteworthy.

If you want a Linux computer then a framework is a good choice. However, that’s still something like 3% of the PC market at best. There aren’t a groundswell if Mac to Framework/Linux switchers and no publicly available data supports that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: idmean, G5isAlive, NC12 and 5 others
chars1ub0w said:
Presumably, these people are choosing to upgrade an older M-series MacBook Pro, not to a M5, but to a Framework 13" Pro with Ubuntu pre-loaded?
Click to expand...
I am in that camp, making the same consideration. Now that I've grown into 16" laptop I'm less interested in the 13 inch form though 🙁
chars1ub0w said:
Why not simply run Ubuntu in WSL under Windows 11?
Click to expand...
Because they have an early M series MacBook, not Windows?!

They may want the other newer capabilities of the FW13 Pro, specifically the touchscreen.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: shadowbird423 and racerhomie
chars1ub0w said:
Why not simply run Ubuntu in WSL under Windows 11? That way, you gets Windows apps (e.g. Office and Adobe) as well as Linux-specific code running with a small performance hit.
Click to expand...
Maybe they don't need the apps that aren't available on Linux. Also, if enough people DID move to Linux, perhaps Adobe would feel compelled to sell them software.

It does appear that some adobe stuff is running better in later versions of wine. Well enough to replace a work mac? I doubt it. But well enough for a hobbyist? Maybe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shadowbird423, robvalentine, Cape Dave and 1 other person
Basic75 said:
Why pay for Windows if you only need Linux? And why have two operating systems worth of bloat?
Click to expand...
The reason to put up with Windows 11 bloat is the ability to access a vast catalog of apps.
Linux has only a small fraction of that. You get the best of both worlds by running WSL on Windows 11.
In the old days, we used to partition our drives so we could dual boot our Windows PCs.
But it was always a pain in the butt to reboot when you needed to run a Windows app.
WSL used to be flaky, but WSL2 (now just WSL) seems rock solid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wizec, rb2112 and turbineseaplane
chars1ub0w said:
Linux has only a small fraction of that. You get the best of both worlds by running WSL on Windows 11.
Click to expand...
You also get the best of both worlds with wine

I'm running CachyOS on my desktop and it plays games just as fast as it did when windows was installed. That's some significant bloat when I'm seeing just as good (even better) results playing the game through a translation/compatibility layer (Wine)

chars1ub0w said:
these people are choosing to upgrade an older M-series MacBook Pro, not to a M5, but to a Framework 13" Pro with Ubuntu pre-loaded?
Click to expand...
In all honesty, I think the state of Ubuntu is rather bloated, I'd choose another distro.

As for the framework vs. MBP, I see the M5 MBP having more upsides then the Framework laptop. Its claim to fame is the that every single component (including the screen and its bezel) is upgradeable. That's all well and good, as long as the company is still in business. If they go out, then those components disappear.

I think there's better options for linux laptops, but overall for many use cases the M5 MBP is a superior choice
chars1ub0w said:
Why not simply run Ubuntu in WSL under Windows 11?
Click to expand...
Because you're still dealing with all of the dowmsides of windows. Telemetry, advertisements, RECALL, MS unable to actually push out an update that doesn't break something major, slapping copilot buttons everywhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Charlie Bonesx, BSDnostalgia, AxiomaticRubric and 1 other person
chars1ub0w said:
This seems kinda strange to me. Presumably, these people are choosing to upgrade an older M-series MacBook Pro, not to a M5, but to a Framework 13" Pro with Ubuntu pre-loaded? Why not simply run Ubuntu in WSL under Windows 11? That way, you gets Windows apps (e.g. Office and Adobe) as well as Linux-specific code running with a small performance hit.
On macOS, you get Office and Adobe running under macOS, and most Linux-specific code can be compiled under macOS too.
View attachment 2625407
Click to expand...
Not everyone needs Adobe or even Office. WSL is also a compromise. It has issues. It has slower file system access and it's harder to interface with real hardware that might need to reach the Linux side. Linux GUI apps also can tend to be blurry on high DPI Windows machines and don't play nice with things like Windows snap. And there's occasional other issues because it's not native Linux. Plus you're still running Windows 11 with all the problems that entails. For many people it's better to run native.
maflynn said:
As for the framework vs. MBP, I see the M5 MBP having more upsides then the Framework laptop. Its claim to fame is the that every single component (including the screen and its bezel) is upgradeable. That's all well and good, as long as the company is still in business. If they go out, then those components disappear.
Click to expand...
For what it's worth 3rd parties have made components for the Framework 13, there's been mainboards from other companies offering things like RISC V and ARM chipsets. They've also been around for over half a decade at this point. It's not the same gamble anymore.

Worst case you still get a laptop that's very easy to repair even if you have to get used parts. If you're keyboard dies on year 6 of ownership it's not very helpful that Apple still exists when they're quoting a $600+ repair price and more than the value of the machine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shirasaki, Trusteft, ebika and 1 other person
dmr727 said:
I've been on the cusp of this for a long time. I think it's people that are tired of the MacOS/Windows duopoly and want a native Linux laptop. Framework seems to do a good job of making sure the typical Linux distros work well on their hardware, but the hardware's not cheap.
Click to expand...
But it's completely upgradeable and repairable, unlike 90 percent of laptops these days. Worth the money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shirasaki, shadowbird423, eltoslightfoot and 4 others
Steve Adams said:
I dropped Adobe years ago when they moved to their mentally priced subscription business model. Plus their software is so bloated and crappy you need a 14900k and a 5090 just to have a good experience. NO THANKS. There are much better faster, lighter, cheaper options.
Click to expand...
Photoshop runs fine on Apple Silicon.

What better options? It's continually updated. There isn't anything as powerful and good.
That's why they're firmly entrenched and have a huge market share despite the price.
Screenshot 2026-04-29 at 12.56.12 AM.png
 
chars1ub0w said:
Photoshop runs fine on Apple Silicon.

What better options? It's continually updated. There isn't anything as powerful and good.
That's why they're firmly entrenched and have a huge market share despite the price.
View attachment 2625711
Click to expand...
I switched to DXO PhotoLab years ago, I am very happy and I am not missing Adobe Lightroom at all. Please do not fall into this "Lightroom is the best" myth.

Adobe Photoshop is a different story because I have never needed it for my work/hobby so I cannot recommend a standalone non subscription alternative.

Also market position or market share is not everything. Canon dominates on photo market and yet there are people who choose Leica. I am a Nikon man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trusteft
chars1ub0w said:
Photoshop runs fine on Apple Silicon.

What better options? It's continually updated. There isn't anything as powerful and good.
That's why they're firmly entrenched and have a huge market share despite the price.
Click to expand...
There's a ton of alternatives that are cheap or even free, GIMP, Pixelmator, Krita, Paint.net, Affinity Photo, etc. Photoshop is powerful but it's also expensive, for some use cases it's not even the best choice. For making comics for example I'd rather use Clip Studio Paint because it has tools and features geared for that and it's way cheaper. Most people don't need all the power of Photoshop to justify the price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trusteft and capamac
salamanderjuice said:
There's a ton of alternatives that are cheap or even free, GIMP, Pixelmator, Krita, Paint.net, Affinity Photo, etc. Photoshop is powerful but it's also expensive
Click to expand...
Yes and no
Yes, PS is expensive, no that there's truly acceptable and viable alternatives - at least on Linux. The Gimp argument gets trotted frequently on social platforms, only to be shut down over a myriad of complaints, feature parity, slow updates, horrible interface, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shirasaki and Bungaree.Chubbins
I use affinity and Resolve both of which run fine on linux once Affinity is setup. But I had no issue with Gimp, inkscape, kita and others. All a free and open source. Unless you are a professional who only works with Adobe because work pays for it, I see no need to ever pay the bonkers price they ask for their bloated crap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trusteft
Steve Adams said:
But it's completely upgradeable and repairable, unlike 90 percent of laptops these days. Worth the money.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I really love that about the Framework. Although if I'm being honest with myself, I rarely feel the need to upgrade my laptops - usually in 4 or 5 years I'm ready for a complete replacement.

That said I think it's really worth supporting their mission, and once I'm ready to move on from my MBA that'll likely be the direction I go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shirasaki, platinumaqua, wyliej and 1 other person
maflynn said:
Yes and no
Yes, PS is expensive, no that there's truly acceptable and viable alternatives - at least on Linux. The Gimp argument gets trotted frequently on social platforms, only to be shut down over a myriad of complaints, feature parity, slow updates, horrible interface, etc.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is no 1:1 perfect replacement (there never is of any software really btw, Clip Studio Paint for example does a ton of things PS doesn't) but there's a ton of replacements for basic photo/creative editing tasks. For people that are not professional photographers or graphic designers pretty much any modern graphics software will do. They all have layers, brushes, lasso select etc. Most people are not professional photographers or graphic designers. They don't need what the $20 a month modern Photoshop provides.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back