Wow that's quite impressive. Serious customer service definitely.

Thanks for the feedback.

It's not user friendly at first and that's certainly why it doesn't get the love it deserved. But once you figure it out, you can build the launcher you want and never have to go back to the config anymore.

That would be another terrible story about a great idea turning into BS for profit only. Fingers crossed that it won't happen.

Right. I was more asking if the OP had any complaints, even minor. Or anything that makes framework standing out except the obvious unique aspects of repairability, extensibility, customization. I'm already clearly sold on that :D

I've been disappointed by them and as you can tell I'm not the kind of person to be married with a brand :D I may go back to them one day if there's really one machine I want. Until then I'll stay away from them. Also I really would like to support a company with a better philosophy (from my POV).

Thanks. TBH Purism is currently at the bottom (out) of my list based on what I've read but I've put it here to collect any feedback that would change my mind. A friend of mine has a not that good experience with Tuxedo hardware. But this is a sample 1 and I've read a lot of good stuff about them as well so...

Thanks but I've already limited my choice to Framework, Starlab, Purism, and System76 as mentioned beside the title of this post.

I didn't think about that. If the usual shipping delay is reasonable then I feel better.

If that's something usual I'll definitely avoid Framework. When I order a laptop it's because I need a replacement very quickly for work.

We're exactly on the same page: "the tool is not the goal". The only difference may be that I see chosing options for an app as options for a tool. If I want to cut wood or metal I need a different saw. Even though the tool is basically the same it doesn't serve the same purpose. Hence I configure options once and for all, like I would consider which hardware I need exactly in terms of use, ergonomic, power... before buying it.
I don't spend time tweaking the look of a tool because it's doesn't fit my approach of things anymore. As such I don't even use a DE. But I feel the need to build the right tool (i.e. system app) I need to perform a job as efficiently as possible while keeping the tool itself minimalist and as invisible as possible. On my daily use I have tools that I couldn't live without anymore but if you ask me a list I will either forgot them or put them at the bottom because I will not think about them right away since they became a second nature.

I certainly see the comfort of the out of the box approach and it can serve a lot of people. In my use case I just realize that - using the example above - it could be like using a wood saw on metal in some cases. It may work but not as good as you would expect to have the job done properly. Also, the fit them all approach means building an app with tons of options activated and I prefer to have available to me only the options I really need. The philosophy feels less bloated to me and I'm not overloading my system with stuff I'll never use. It's more time consuming at first to chose the right app but with time it became quick enough and it definitely save me way more time in the long run when I use my system.

Thanks for this feedback, it helps me feel a little bit less stupid :) With everything setup in NixOS documentation for neovim in appearance I thought really dumb to not be able to have it worked.

Using the approach proposed by @flashgnash (i.e. using lazy.vim) let me install neovim and all my plugins.