It started with notebooks, but that wasn’t the master plan.

    • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t understand why companies keep putting such small batteries in laptops. Especially in the 16" laptop, anything less than 90 is just not acceptable in something that actually costs real money and isn’t an ultra thin device. Cheap garbage? Fine. You get what you pay for. Starting at $1700 pre built? No.

      • Evotech@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not wanted by the market obviously. Most only need their laptop to last from the office on the commute

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s just not true. My laptop (MacBook Pro Intel) has atrocious battery life, and Apple made a big deal about battery life improvement with the M-series chips. It’s a very valid complaint at my office, and we routinely have people running back to their desks to grab a charger or someone when meetings go long.

          There’s obviously a trade-off there, but I’ve heard complaints about battery life for years now, but the market just hasn’t filled that need. I guess it’s kinda filled by massive external battery banks and plug-ins everywhere?

          But having a larger battery as an option would be welcome. Make a thicc chassy as an option at checkout on the 16" laptop.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Here’s the internals of the 13 with a 61Wh battery:

        https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/IMG_0054.jpeg

        And here’s the 16 with an 85Wh battery:

        https://images.prismic.io/frameworkmarketplace/0b001897-9e05-406e-8f50-af54ba76a723_Load+up+on+memory+and+storage.jpg?auto=compress,format

        Where would a larger battery fit?

        The real answer to your question is to wait 3-4 years for battery technology to get about 20% better (given historical trends of 5-8% improvements per year).

        • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’d obviously have to design the laptop around the battery and not just retrofit it in. Make it a bit thicker, make it a bit longer? The 16" already isn’t a small, thin, or light laptop so the little extra room needed wouldn’t make that much of a difference.

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Longer doesn’t work because it has to fit in existing bags people have. Thickening it won’t work because reviewers will then complain it’s too thick.

            I have a Toshiba laptop from around 2012 which has a slide-out optical drive. To me, it’s thick but not too thick; it’s just right. If we could return to that size, I think we’d be good. It’d also support better cooling (my Framework 13 with an i7-1280P gets hot, and there just isn’t enough space for a bigger cooler). Reviewers over the past 10 years have pushed for thinner and thinner, and we gave up too much in the meantime.

            Same goes for screen bezels and built in webcams. All else being equal, a cam with a bigger sensor is better because it can capture more light. Thin screen bezels force a small webcam, and thus your laptop has a shittier camera than a 10 year old smartphone.

            In both cases, I don’t think actual customers care all that much past a certain point. Reviewers have been deducting stars for a slightly thicker case or a slightly thicker bezel than other models on the market, and customers just go along with it.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t think people looking at Framework care too much about reviewers. They’re targeting DIY enthusiasts, which are also the type that’ll probably be reading the measurements and whatnot themselves.

              • frezik@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                The do have to source the same parts as the rest of the industry. This is why, for example, they can’t have a socketable laptop CPU. Those don’t exist anymore, and Framework is too small to afford a custom part from Intel or AMD.

                Same with batteries. A thicker laptop battery may not even exist.

                • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yup, but maybe they’ll get there. Valve was able to get a “custom” chip for their Steam Deck, so it’s possible Framework could get big enough to get socketable CPUs. But yeah, the priority there should be incredibly low, since replacing the entire motherboard is acceptable (at least to me).

                  I’m guessing batteries are a bit less expensive to order custom since there are so many slightly different form factors among various devices. If it was prohibitively expensive, I’d expect to see more standardization.

              • frezik@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Thick isn’t a problem for bags (up to a point). It’s reviewers complaining about it and deducting stars that’s the problem.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 year ago

      How about a repairable phone with a headphone jack?

      The Framework 16 notebook doesn’t even have a headphone jack, only a USB-C to jack adapter.

      • Nighed@sffa.community
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s one of the slot in ones though right? so it doesn’t really count - it effectively integrated.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It counts because the adapter slot cannot be used for something else. It is different with the smaller 13 inch model.

            • woelkchen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              let’s say they omitted a slot and just put a fixed-into-the-case headphone jack there.

              Or let’s not because that isn’t what happened in the 13 inch model.

              Point is: Placing hope into a Framework phone with a headphone jack is IMO misplaced based on Framework’s most recent track record. Not even Apple got rid of headphone jacks in MacBook Air.

              • turmacar@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                As someone with the 13, I would prefer the 6 slots on the 16 to the 4+headphone jack on the 13.

                The best part of the modular slots is you can swap the side the jack is on for whatever works best or have it on both. (Through the magic of buying two of them.) Also if something goes wrong with the jack it’s significantly easier to replace.

                • woelkchen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  As someone with the 13, I would prefer the 6 slots on the 16 to the 4+headphone jack on the 13.

                  If you think that getting rid of the headphone jack would result in more slots, you’re out of touch with reality. There would be an additional slot on the other side of the chassis where there is no headphone jack, so 5 overall. But there aren’t. The headphone jack has absolutely nothing to do with the number of slots. Audio output is a tiny component.

      • HEXN3T@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t even use built-in headphone jacks anymore. I use external DACs with 2.5, 4.4 and quarter inch. Good thing for me that I can get an extra port while others can use a headphone jack still.

    • nezbyte@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Modular ports would be great. I’d love to have two USB ports on a phone rather than a USB and headphone jack.

        • Billiam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          given that laptops don’t – that the phone would only be able to charge off one.

          My personal Framework 13 can charge from either the left or right side USB-C ports, and my work Lenovo Thinkpad can charge from either the dedicated USB-C slot, or the USB-C dock port. Point is, as USB-C gains more widespread adoption, limiting a device to only using one port for charging is becoming much less common.

          That said, Framework does point out that not all the expansion bays can deliver/receive the same amount of power and they recommend (at least for the 13) to only use the rear ports for charging.

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m pretty sure that a USB hub would work at least on Android, giving you as many ports as you want.

    • snekerpimp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Repairable, open phone, you can load whatever OS you want. A phone that is more akin to a computer than a smartphone. A pinephone, but better.

    • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why not just use type c headphones?

      The 3.5mm thing has always baffled me, it feels like complaining your pc doesn’t have a VGA port, except the thing you connect costs like a fiver

      • Empricorn@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Just replace my perfectly good $200 headphones that work in my (old) phone, my Switch, my 3DS, my laptop, my iPod, and my work phone.

        It’s so simple!

        Seriously, even if you don’t use it, why are you so against others having the choice? The headphone *jack was the standard for decades for a reason. If my phone is low on power, I’d like to be able to charge it without disconnecting my music/podcasts…

        • DrRatso@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          But like, 3.5 to usbc is a 10 buck conversion. Tbh i see merit in double usb c over usbc and headphone jack, might be more doable too, the DAC prolly takes more space than an additional usbc

            • DrRatso@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              I hear you, but a usb-c has more uses than one, the only real problem with a dongle is now is that occasionally you need to charge.

            • iopq@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s not a work-around, a headphone requires a DAC and an amp. In fact, my phone has a crap DAC causing artifacts in the sound. It’s actually not to my benefit to have the jack because I’d get better sound with the external DAC which is transparent.

              So the jack works, but the DAC you get can be whatever the manufacturer considers good enough.

              DACs I can hear issues in:

              My phone, my tablet, my desktop PC

              DACs that are transparent to me:

              My laptop, my $12 external DAC

              • Empricorn@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s great! But Framework also includes an audio jack built-in. As should everyone.

                • woelkchen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  But Framework also includes an audio jack built-in.

                  Nope, the new 16 inch does not. The older 13 does.

            • Bilb!@lem.monster
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              A dongle is a solution to the problem “I want to use my headphones with a device with only a USB-C port.”

      • 4am@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        At the time, there weren’t really many good options for replacement devices.

        Using the charging port means listening to music and charging at the same time wasn’t possible.

        Now we have split-cable dongles for power banks, and we have wireless charging when possible. It’s better but it’s not great; both have downsides, and accessories are more $.

        Do they make type C headphones with a powerbank in them? Do I want a lithium battery that large on my head?

        There aren’t many upsides for the consumer or the environment. Still seems to me like this isn’t even a lateral move. Internal components have gotten smaller and more efficient since, so that space could be reclaimed. I really don’t need my phone to be that thin, a phono jack next to the charging port would be just fine. The only real downside might be waterproofing but if you can make it work for the type C port…

    • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      A Framework phone with 2 modular Framework sockets would be amazing. I don’t care if it’s thick. Make it repairable and support Linux Phone OSes like postmarketOS and I would absolutely buy it.

        • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I would like a phone that has a removable battery, user replaceable screen, and expandable storage. I think Framework would do well to add one or two of their modular slots on the phone since phones already have USB-C support. I would also love to see a phone keyboard similar to the PinePhone keyboard case but using USB-C instead of I2C. Such a case could also incorporate a USB-C dock, providing more Framework module slots or at least additional USB ports, video outputs, an extended capacity battery (using USB-PD to charge itself as well as the phone), and of course also being a tiny keyboard clamshell that fits in your pocket. It could also be nice if the phone could easily detach from said case for taking calls, as the PinePhone keyboard replaces the back cover and does not separate easily when needed.

            • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I have some of those tiny keyboards, but the PinePhone keyboard case is far more convenient to use as a mini on the go PC than a separate keyboard. If such an all in one option existed for more powerful hardware it would be amazing. I love the idea of a phone that doubles as a true pocket laptop including connectivity options.

                • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I have seen the GPD devices before and if they were a bit smaller (phone sized) and had cell capability maybe that would be a good option. As is, they are not small enough to be in a separate category than the Steam Deck IMO, and I already have a Steam Deck. I also like the idea of the keyboard being detachable as sometimes the phone form factor is desirable, like when holding it up to your ear.

  • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d love to see them make other devices. But I want the company to actually be viable and entrenched before they spread themselves even more thinly.

    They’re already having trouble releasing firmware and driver updates in a timely manner, especially for Windows users who can’t rely on driver updates packaged in the kernel.

    But man I can think of a few cool Framework devices that I’d be into buying…

    • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      i see it as giving their industrial engineers something to do.

      when you have to design a chasis for reusability and backwards/fowards compatibility, you dont really have the flexibility to make that many changes. instead of just letting them sit there, its better for them to start designing other things in the meantime.

  • pastabatman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    1 year ago

    Surely they are aiming for a repairable and modular smartphone eventually. That’s going to be super hard to do. My guess is their next form factor will be a tablet.

        • Car@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I imagine the lack of voice support presents some compliance issues with emergency calls.

            • Car@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              More referring to selling a device classified as a mobile phone that might not be able to connect to emergency services without any tinkering. My google-fu is failing me now, but I’m trying to see what the actual requirements are, if they exist at all, to sell a mobile phone. All I’m seeing is that the radio shall connect to any available base stations during an emergency call regardless of subscriber status.

              I don’t know how the linux phone OS’s are handling these kind of interactions with their baseband processing, if at all.

              • Macros@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                This is handled in the modem Firmware. Linux just has to supply “User has dialed number x, go into emergency mode” and then route the audio.

                This is solved for all Linux phones as far as I know. From Openmoko over N900 till Librem 5.

            • bluewing@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              E911 is a thing in some places and not in others depending on what each county dispatch wants to do and pay for. It does require some call center upgrades as I recall when I was working EMS and fire. It was kind of sketchy when I was working. But, everything is a bit sketchy when working in a very rural area in public safety.

      • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        We can say that for any kind of drivers needed to run a mobile phone.\ Manufacturers of components are less and less providing any documentation, just throw a binary blob and say “put it in your Android build”.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Eh, Pinephone and Librem 5 made it work, but there’s still a fair amount of software limitations here, and I didn’t think Framework should be a software company. But the radios themselves probably aren’t the blocker you make them out to be.

        • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          They absolutely did not make it work. Go read any of the reviews and the complete unreliability of the cellular functions of both devices are chief among the criticisms.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            My understanding is that those issues are due to suspend to save battery life, which isn’t directly related to the radios. A more appropriate SOC (i.e. one designed for mobile use) would probably be more reliable with the same radios they selected when going on standby.

    • iopq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Tablet is almost free, just don’t have a hinge and have a touchscreen. Release as Chromebook, it will run Android applications

          • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Linux can run Android apps since we have Waydroid too and it’s universal, no need for single device - single OS nonsense.

            • iopq@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You can install Linux on their Chromebooks, so it would be good to have the choice. Some people will prefer a slightly more seamless Android experience and some people will prefer Waydroid

        • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          A reminder that if something can run Android or ChromeOS doesn’t mean drivers would be available for Linux. And usually they aren’t.

          • pastabatman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You can order that tablet with Ubuntu, mint, Manjaro, zorin, elementary, etc. There’s gotta be some kind of driver support to build on, no?

  • CriticalMiss@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    1 year ago

    Arm machines that are repairable to compete with Apple would be very cool in my opinion. Maybe team up with an integrator like sys76. Could be very cool. I’d personally line up to buy.

      • bitfucker@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, what is the difference between the current SoC and the soldered CPU? Sure you can save on upgrading RAM, but then what else? Especially if the SoC has PCIe. They can make a daughter board for the SoC to make it simpler to upgrade if they want, alà pi compute module.

        • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          its not that simple. high performamce parts are high performamce because the devices that need the fastest speeds have the shortest traces from CPU to said device. its for instance, why the ram slots, and the fastest m.2/slot as well as pci-e lanes are nearest to the cpu, else youd have to resort to adding a south bridge.

          the pi compute module works that way because the ram is already on board making it not a problem, and latency to whatever it gets mounted on isnt of highest priority for performance.

          its why sodimm for instance has hit a peak speed limit, while lpdde hasnt, and why dell pitched the camm form factor for ram. distance of components to the cpu and its stability is cruicial for performance.

          • bitfucker@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            What I am saying is that the current soldered CPU approach on laptop space is not that different from switching an ARM SoC on a daughter board. The only difference is that you cannot change RAM. Maybe that too will change as you said with CAMM standard. Next is that some SBC already supported PCIe for external M.2 storage, so you can theoretically hook up a removable GPU there.

            Now, what to do with the old SoC daughter board? The same as with the old framework motherboard. You can repurpose it as another computer.

            The point is, framework repairability comes not only from part swapping, but also the promise of providing schematic for board level repair. They can totally make ARM based laptops with SoC repairable if they wanted to. But I suspect they will not (at least in the near future) since there is a lot to do for them.

            • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              m.2 to gpu isn’t completely foreign nor new, but less practical than more recent standards like Occulink. the problem, specifically with the lower end model in particular, is using 4/8 pci-e lanes for a port that not everyone is going to use is a waste of the already limited amount of pci-e lanes available to the user because of the CPU choice. hence, it makes sense to keep 1 users with the side option to using usb4/thunderbolt gpu docks

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t see what’s non-modular about ARM. Most of the stuff that’s user-serviceable on a Framework laptop would be serviceable with ARM:

        • ports are all USB-C
        • drives are NVMe, SATA, or PCIe - Pine64 has boards with each (IIRC)
        • GPU is PCIe - again, Pine64 has that on their RockPro64

        The only difference is RAM, and theoretically they could design a socketable SOC to reuse existing boards (not sure what happened to Project Skybridge). The only difference is RAM, at least for the user, and I really don’t think that’ll be a deal-breaker. Modern x86 chips are already essentially SOCs anyway…

  • devilish666@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    As long as the company itself doesn’t become greedy and doesn’t change it’s mission & vision i always support it

  • seaQueue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m waiting for them to offer a chassis to convert their laptop parts into USFF PCs. Reusing old parts after an upgrade is pretty attractive. I think they mentioned this a while back, I’ve been waiting for it to happen.

    I’d also like to see a thunderbolt or oculink GPU bay part that would enable eGPU use with their machines.

    And if we’re wishlisting top facing speakers would be 🤌

  • IllNess@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Tomorrow, it wants to be a consumer electronics company, period.

    Patel won’t say — I only get the barest hints, no matter how many different ways I ask.

  • brenticus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m curious to see where they go next. A lot of modern consumer electronics have repairability and upgradeability problems, but I also wouldn’t expect they’d be able to crack into the phone market as easily as the laptop market, so presumably there’s some more niche target they have.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    That’s one of the biggest reasons it just raised another $18 million in funding — it wants to expand beyond the laptop into “additional product categories.”

    Framework CEO Nirav Patel tells me that has always been the plan and that the company originally had other viable ideas beyond laptops, too.

    Framework might choose an “equally difficult” category or might instead try something “a bit smaller and simpler to execute, streamlined now that we have all this infrastructure.”

    (Patel recently suggested to Jason Carman that Framework might adapt its marketing to reach more everyday audiences.)

    The company’s $9 million seed round paid for the original 13-inch laptop design, which has carried on for three generations of components.

    Today, Framework has about 50 employees, and it plans to expand to 60 before the end of the year, with “a bit of additional team growth” in 2025.


    The original article contains 653 words, the summary contains 144 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • xlash123@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m sure a Framework phone is at least an idea for them to produce. Definitely an extremely difficult challenge. It would be nice if it allowed for removable RAM, but it could be hard due to SODIMM being relatively large or due to RAM being put on SOCs. I imagine it shouldn’t be too much to ask for removable storage at least, given how small NVME drives can get. Upgradable SOC/motherboard is a must.