This is good news. But I’ll believe it when I see it –once the lead time is updated and accurate on the website.
I have a support request.
I need something to lean on so I don’t fall over after reading this news.
I’m not buying that (pun intended). To sound any close to convincing you’d need to:
- Talk numbers.
- Prominently explain your definition of “In Stock” where Lead Time > 0 (because the layman’s definition is that once an order for an “In Stock” item is placed, that item is just grabbed from the shelf and shipped).
- Explain why my L5 USA order (“In Stock” with Lead Time 90 days) has been awaiting shipment for 150 days now and counting.
Purism has already stated multiple times this won’t happen.
This actually is explained in the post, albeit in a somewhat convoluted way. Historically they have not kept enough stock to pre-configure the various OS’s a user might select nor ram/storage options and in turn even if they have all the parts on a shelf in their warehouse it still takes time for that final assembly based on the chosen configuration options. The change going forward should lead to having the most common configuration choices pre-assembled though it will be some time before this I’d the case.
This post is about stocking the Librem 14 and in turn has no bearing on the Librem 5 USA. 2 completely different products with 2 different supply chains and 2 different supply models based on this post advertising this change for the Librem 14 but not mentioning changing from JIT manufacturing for any of their other products.
Do the hinges crackle and snap?
And apparently 2 different definitions of “In Stock” as well — as the one you elaborated does not explain 90 days lead time, let alone 150.
Sure thing this topic is not about L5 USA. It is about why we supposedly should believe that whatever lead time for L14 is stated will be obeyed — notwithstanding how L5 USA lead time is. Different product after all, eh?
No, this post is about the improvement in lead time for the L14, now that stock will be maintained. You don’t have to be convinced of its veracity.
and I just placed for my order
we’ll see how things go. I appreciate how tricky it is, but also the work you’re doing to reduce these lead times! I’m hoping I won’t have to wait 8 weeks
There’s nothing to obey. Lead times are an estimate based on the best information we have at a particular point in time. That information includes when shipments of various parts, manufacturing runs, etc. are scheduled to arrive at different facilities, and all the complexities of supply chain logistics. It’s an attempt to predict the future. If the future changes, the prediction could end up being wrong. A delay in any link of the chain can ripple through and cause our previous best estimates to be wrong in the future.
We want our estimates to be as accurate as possible and make a best effort to provide accurate lead times and try to update them as quickly as we reasonably can whenever we get new information that changes things, whether good or bad. In particular the shop page for a particular product is the source of truth, and the lead time table we’ve had at the footer of various recent posts is another area we update at the same time.
In the case of the Librem 14, one of the big drivers for us to change how we approach our inventory is precisely so we avoid the kind of impacts delays in the supply chain can cause. With ample stock, even if a future manufacturing run gets a delay of a few weeks, there is some problem in shipping, or some other issue, it won’t impact our ability to deliver new orders.
We want to extend this approach to the rest of our product line as well, because we feel the same pain as our customers do with how challenging it’s been to keep things in stock, but we aren’t there yet. The Librem 14 is the first to get the benefit of this new approach but it won’t be the last.
Speaking estimations accuracy (and not L5 USA as such), are you saying the 90 days estimate for L5 USA is still the most accurate even though it’s over 150 days now in my case with no explanation why? Are you saying it is still accurate to label such a product “In Stock”?
Or are you saying you have different concepts of estimations accuracy and different “In Stock” definitions for different products?
A fair question. And one, having experienced a hinge issue myself, investigated as thoroughly as possible before purchasing again.
The hinges are performing as expected. Ask me again in a year. Things like this are just long term questions that are difficult to establish a priori. I’ve had similar issues with HP and Dell devices in my time. Sometimes manufacturers really do make bad batches.
That is contrary to my experience. My L13 had the hinges installed too tightly. This led to destruction of the plastic surrounding the hinge screw sockets. I loosened the hinge nuts and glued the screw sockets back down to fix the problem. Hinge is now too loose, but that is better than too tight.
There’s nothing to obey. Lead times are an estimate based on the best information we have at a particular point in time.
Regardless of how you are using the phrase “lead time” (which, in my opinion, doesn’t match a common sense reading of the phrase), this contradicts a response I got from a Purism support technician regarding the shipment of my Librem 5 USA (which is listed as being “in stock” and I ordered about a month ago):
The current lead time is in fact up to 90 days so we can guarantee we
will deliver your Librem 5 USA by early february.
We might be able to ship it earlier but we can’t guarantee it at the moment.
If “lead time” is just an estimate, how can this support technician “guarantee we will deliver your Librem 5 USA by early february,” particularly in light of the fact that some people have been told their Librem 5 USA will be shipped within 90 days and they’re still waiting LONG after that?
Guarantee might have not been the best word for them to use, since they can’t predict the future and sometimes things happen later, that affects lead time.
Regardless, I’m frustrated that this thread has been hijacked, yet again by “where’s my phone” support requests, despite the fact I explicitly asked everyone not to do so at the very beginning of my post. If you want to start a new thread debating/complaining/discussing Librem 5 or Librem 5 USA shipping schedules you are free to do so, but please keep this thread on topic, which is supposed to be a discussion thread about the linked blog post about the current approach to Librem 14 supply.
If we can’t keep the thread on topic I will either lock it or just start deleting off-topic comments, I haven’t decided which yet.
@Kyle_Rankin you may be right about comments being off topic. But this keeps happening (which I’ve noticed also) for a reason. Instead of working so hard to suppress people’s comments and right off their concerns by deleting comments, why not spend that time addressing these situations with Purism teams teams directly? You seem to already agree that what the reps are communicating to customers aren’t accurate so why not work to get the communication accurate and consistent?
Discussion forums are filled with people–not perfect robotic machines that put every comment in the perfect place. It’s only natural for people to comment on what a topic may be at the top of their minds, which isnt always directly related to original post.
I’m not writing off concerns, I’m simply saying that a discussion thread for this blog post about the Librem 14 is the wrong place for someone to complain about the delay in getting their Librem 5 USA. The purpose of these threads is to provide the community a place to discuss the topics in a particular blog post. I had to get stricter about keeping these discussions on topic because literally every one turned into a “where’s my phone?” post or a support request, regardless of topic, which drowned out any actual on-topic discussion, and members of the forum were (rightly) upset about it.
I’d rather not have a meta-conversation on why I want this thread to be on topic. Again, people are free to post their own topics to discuss what they want, and it’s not unreasonable for me to ask that people respect my wish that my own threads be on topic.
And the OP specifically said: Please keep your replies on topic.
(no doubt due to bitter past experience)
There are existing topics that are much more relevant to the L5 USA.
Keywords do not always indicate what is actually being talked about.
Once again, although my comments above do relate to the L5 USA, they are focused on the Purism’s terms and manners around maintaining stock, lead times, promises vs estimations etc. Which is directly on topic here as one of the main points of the title post is basically "Hey we’re maintaining stock now, go buy L14!" — to which I say “Sorry guys I can’t trust you as your words about maintaining stock in case of L5 USA prove to be false/misleading”. So the central issue here is how to trust such inconsistent terms/definitions/statements, not “where’s my phone” as some claim.
If you are concerned about Purism’s use of the term “in stock” or want to express your frustration about delays with your phone order, go start another thread.
This thread is essentially an announcement that Purism changed their approach to making the Librem 14, which obviously entails changes in “maintaining stock, lead times, promises vs estimations etc” - not merely a change in how they estimate things.
So when it comes to comparing phones and laptops, there is no inconsistency and there is no “central issue” because they are two different products with two different approaches to production.
If Purism had previously announced a similar change to phone manufacturing and failed to improve delivery times, I would understand the skepticism and distrust. But that isn’t the case. As far as I know, it’s the first time that Purism has significantly altered their manufacturing strategy (directly addressing the supply chain breakdown, which I believe was the primary cause of the order delays this past year).
That said, I’m all for Kyle deleting the off-topic posts on this thread - including this post - and if you want, we can go to another thread and argue the finer points of how a coherent argument is generally a better approach to making a point even if rhetoric is more effective at hijacking a discussion.