What’s the main cause? Upgrading to 3.20 or upgrading from 3.18?
1 Like
We don’t know yet; I think this is what @Rei wants to find out. We also don’t know if it’s only when updating on Linux or also on Windows.
It’s also affecting Windows. I updated 5 units perfectly fine. One from 3.19 to 3.20 and 4 others from 3.18 to 3.20.
Then had 1 unit from 3.18 to 3.20 have the lock up issue and died last week. Replacement board is on the way as off this morning.
2 Likes
(OP - I’ve modified the title to reflect what I think is the thread’s consensus. Just a suggestion.)
3 Likes
There’s a thread trending on HN about this very issue:
2 Likes
Waiting on Framework to respond… last response 4th of August. I provided an update, nothing in return.
1 Like
extracts from Fixing a bricked AMD 7040 series Framework 13” laptop with $20 tools | Quantum (with thanks to @Quantum)
… after being encouraged to update the BIOS by Framework, Framework told me that because my warranty has expired, I have no other option but to throw away the entire motherboard, including the perfectly working but soldered CPU, and buy a replacement for over $500 on their store.
How does it make sense that some bad data on a BIOS chip that retails for US$5 should force me to buy a whole new board and CPU for $500+? Especially when this happened as a result of Framework’s own instruction? Especially when many users have complained on the Framework official forums without anything being done to stop further instances of bricking?
[ … non-trivial instructions on how to unbrick with external hardware and software … ]
As for Framework Computer Inc, I have a lot more to say…
First, it is clear that Framework’s BIOS updater is broken, at least on the AMD 7040 series. There clearly is some bug with the software that caused it to display what appears to be random memory on the screen, especially when this has happened before to other people for other BIOS versions, and even on the 16” laptops. At the same time, it somehow flashes the BIOS slower in regular operation than a cheap 15 MHz programmer over pogo pins, which really makes you wonder what it’s doing under the hood.
Secondly, Framework encourages users to perform BIOS updates in their newsletters, and yet if the update results in bricking, Framework has nothing to say except that I should throw away perfectly good hardware due to a firmware issue, simply because it’s out of warranty. While this behaviour may be legal per the warranty terms, it nevertheless is morally the wrong way to treat users. It also goes against the whole philosophy of reducing e-waste that Framework claims to believe deeply.
Thirdly, Framework claims to have made a repairable laptop, and I think my experience and the hoops I had to jump through to flash the BIOS have decidedly shown this not to be the case. Framework has undoubtedly created an easily serviceable laptop on which it is trivial to replace the RAM and SSD, but it is not a repairable laptop when the manufacturer simply told me to buy a new motherboard and CPU while offering zero assistance in the way of fixing it myself.
(…)
I think it’s especially egregious when you consider that brands that specifically aren’t repairable are able to recover from a bad BIOS flash, and that even my 2004 vintage motherboard could do so…
So really, while Framework claims to support the right to repair, their actions have shown quite the opposite. As such, I cannot in good conscience recommend Framework laptops to anyone in their current state.
(…)
As the owner of a Framework laptop who wants to benefit from the upgradability down the line, I would like to see Framework clean up their act and deliver on the promise they made when they sold the product. As such, I call upon Framework to:
- Immediately stop encouraging any users out of warranty to update their BIOS until the updater is fixed;
- Fix the BIOS updater as soon as possible;
- Provide immediate relief to any out-of-warranty customers whose laptop was bricked through a BIOS update, either through motherboard replacement like warrantied customers, or the free delivery of a toolkit and detailed guidance to perform the repair;
- Provide official documentation for BIOS flashing, raw BIOS images, and instructions to restore the serial numbers and UUIDs;
- Design all future motherboards to be easily recoverable from bad BIOS flashes; and
- Immediately cease any unnecessary data sharing with third parties.
@Eagle @Quin_Chou How in the world can there just be no statement about this update bricking some people’s computers? Why is it still being distributed as a recommended update?
In some professions they talk about a “mistake of the head” versus a “mistake of the heart.” Not having things well-organized, so things don’t function well despite everyone working hard, that’s a mistake of the head. The impact on your customers can still be huge, mistakes of the head are a big deal sometimes, but it’s fixable. Sometimes things just happen when you’re trying to do something outside the comfort zone.
Framework shipping an update that bricks people’s machines, not pulling it after over a month of reports of what’s happening, and telling some people affected to throw their mainboards in the trash and buy new ones at full price, that’s a mistake of the heart. That’s on purpose. There’s no misunderstanding or failed aspiration involved.
I would really recommend changing course from this. Not just the handling of the BIOS issue, although yes definitely that also, but the whole decision making process that took FW to behaving that way in the first place. Usually when the reputational impacts of treating your customers that way get going for real, they are permanent.
2 Likes
It would at least be helpful to know what conditions might cause an error and which methods are safe for the update.
Without this information, I won’t be updating my two laptops. Even if I were able to flash a new BIOS afterwards, I need my laptops to work properly and I don’t have the time to tinker with them.
My best faith argument is that Framework is still in talks with AMD (chip firmware) and Insyde (BIOS software developer) to figure out the exact cause and who can be held responsible. Regardless it would still be ideal to replace any and all bricked boards though.
Withdrawing BIOS 3.20 from circulation would be a good start. Alas, even this hasn’t been done yet.
4 Likes
Do we know this categorically?
I suspect FW could take a bricked machine and reflash it themselves, send the out-of-warranty owner a new mobo, and then sell the reflashed mobo in the Marketplace. It would be a hassle for them, but it would save them a lot of expense with Support and Escalations. I assume reflashing would be easy for FW.
I do hope they get to the bottom of the bricking bug though…
My first reaction to this would be to open source the flashing program so all the users could look at it and fix any bugs themselves.
They have open sourced the EC flashing program, and that has been improved a lot by users. I made some improvements to it myself.
I would ask them to also open source the bios flash and usb-pd chip flash programs.
Flashing a chip is a really simple task.
I think the bug with these failed flashes is due to gpu bugs and the update program is quite graphical and therefore likely to trigger gpu bugs, chashes etc.
If i saw the source code, i would rip all the graphical bits out, and keep it very simple, so less likely to fail.
The prime importance of a bios/ec/pd flash is to be safe and not brick the laptop.
2 Likes
I suspect FW could take a bricked machine and reflash it themselves, send the out-of-warranty owner a new mobo, and then sell the reflashed mobo in the Marketplace. It would be a hassle for them, but it would save them a lot of expense with Support and Escalations. I assume reflashing would be easy for FW.
It seems to me that FW has a tier of support that is basically oriented to just throw up a bunch of obstacles in the customer’s way, and if you’re willing to jump through some hoops to show you’re serious and you’re in warranty, then you get a hardware replacement. And if you’re not, you get a brief apology for your troubles and sent on your way. I don’t think there is much attempt to diagnose the problems or recommend a fix beyond a basic “reset to factory settings, try it in Ubuntu” level.
There are clearly support people who take their job seriously and are capable and motivated to help the customers when they have trouble. I’m not trying to be critical of those people. But also, there is clearly a type of “support” which has been organized by some kind of call-center-manager type who doesn’t really understand (or care maybe) how to make it function well from the customers’ POV. Whoever it was that set up that system has done an incredible amount of damage to Framework’s brand. In addition to obviously costing them money from returned hardware when people aren’t willing to put up with it and just send their stuff back, and extra load on the system from repeatedly dealing with tickets from the same people who still aren’t getting their same problems resolved.
This is obviously speculative, but I have observed it (people getting repeated hardware replacements for the same problem with no resolution of the problem) and I’ve experienced it myself (two times being offered a hardware replacement when it doesn’t seem like that was the real solution to the problem either time). I think they just default to replacing hardware. Sending new hardware always lets them close the ticket, and it’s free from their POV (since what they’re sending you is “refurbished” hardware which someone else had returned to them, and since you’re doing the installation process, it ultimately costs them nothing except postage). So no, just deciding that a mainboard with a broken BIOS update should go in the trash now doesn’t make any sense from a common sense POV, but within the structure that’s been set up, I feel like I understand why that’s the guidance people are being given.
I appreciate you’re smarting from the support challenges you’ve had. I’ve a Pro on the way, so who knows - maybe I will have my own challenges too. But I think openly speaking of Support staff as ill-motivated (or similar) while also demanding improvements is counterproductive. I don’t just offer this advice to you, but to several people in this forum, who in the last few weeks have come in far too hot.
I would certainly be on the side of encouraging FW Support to offer mobo replacements for out-of-warranty customers, per my earlier post, and I don’t think that would be an excessive demand given that FW could put a couple of people on reflashing-and-resell duty. But policy sometimes is formed by individuals rather than committees, and if an support manager has been metaphorically slapped in the face, they may hunker down rather stick their neck out.
2 Likes
But I think openly speaking of Support staff as ill-motivated (or similar) while also demanding improvements is counterproductive.
I did the exact opposite of that. I actually don’t think it is the individual support staff at fault, and I made sure to say so. I think pretty much every one I’ve communicated with in a non-scripted interaction has been capable and motivated, as I described. Some of the scripted interactions, not so much, but that’s not really the fault of the script-follower. The person that organized the system, they should feel slapped in the face by this if they do happen to read it somehow, yes.
I’ve worked on a team that did engineering support before. It wasn’t exactly end-user support like this, but in general I’m not unfamiliar. I’ve spoken with angry customers before and calmed them down and got them a resolution they were okay with. Maybe that (in addition to personally owning busted hardware that I sometimes have to spend time on) is why I feel strongly about this whole issue.
I am not trying to ask Framework to change any of these things. It seems unlikely that anyone with decision-making power reads these forums. And I don’t think I’m getting any substantive help from Framework with my laptop’s issues regardless. I’m not demanding anything. Mostly I am just sharing my thoughts about what the impacts will be of not changing this. The narrative “Framework’s update bricked my machine and they told me to just buy a new one” is just bite-sized enough to take hold in the public consciousness in a very business-destructive way. People won’t absorb that that only happened to 0.1% of the customers, they won’t absorb that it was a tier 0 support person whose response was just dictated by the same script they’d been following for years, but they will absorb and remember how out-of-pocket and abusive that response was and that “Framework” was the one that was doing it.
I’ve a Pro on the way, so who knows - maybe I will have my own challenges too.
Might be fine. If you get lucky and it works great, you will have a wonderful machine. Personally my advice if you have issues would be to just return for the full refund, but you can also investigate the support process if that does happen.
1 Like
I don’t see anything on the FW blog page (yet), but good news?
Funny how Framework made a response via ArsTechnica, but (so far) nothing here on the forums.
1 Like
Perhaps the solution, for all of us, is merely to be happy that FW came to the right answer 