3 ms·
It's not the battery size which is the issue here, but how much power the hardware uses. The capacity of the battery of the Framework is 55W, while the capacity
by Dunedan 5y ago
It's not the battery size which is the issue here, but how much power the hardware uses. The capacity of the battery of the Framework is 55W, while the capacity of the battery of the M1 MacBook Air is 49,9Wh. So apparently Framework managed to fit a larger battery in a equally large case, without the need to glue it in.
- noirbot 5y agoTo my point above, I'm pretty sure the Framework case is quite a bit larger in volume than the MBA case, so it's not really apples to apples there. Perhaps it's just that the Intel processor in the Framework is a massive energy hog (likely), but even my old Intel Macbook had easily 2x the battery life. In the end, I wasn't even trying to say that the battery size mattered. If anything, the fact that it's a bigger battery almost makes it worse. They crammed more battery in and it's still a drastically worse user experience when it comes to everything about the battery. Some of this is definitely because they're having to buy worse parts to try to make sure they're replaceable, and maybe that would improve if more places made parts for it. Maybe I could upgrade to a more efficient CPU/Mobo in the future, or a better battery, but then what do I do with the old one? I'm still contributing to e-waste.
- tjoff 5y agoWell, you'd have almost twice the battery-life, if you used Windows. And you can get comparable results in Linux, but you need to tweak it yourself at the moment.
- noirbot 5y agoI'm using Linux and Windows. I regret to inform you that neither helps all that much. I've even spent a decent amount of time shoving values into config files to try to improve things on Linux.
- mixmastamyk 5y agoThe comparison begins and ends with M1 vs Intel chip. Linux is the second factor unfortunately.
- noirbot 5y agoI like that everyone just assumes I'm using Linux. But even my 2017 Macbook on Intel was doing better than this, and the issues I'm seeing with Framework occur on Fedora and Windows essentially equally.
- goosedragons 5y agoThe 2017 MacBook MacBook with just 1 port and a battery 8/10ths the size of Framework but with a CPU that is under a quarter the wattage in TDP? (7 vs. 28W?). And has a lower screen resolution (yes it matters) and has a manufacturer custom tweaked OS?
- noirbot 5y agoCorrect? And yet, with all of that, that old Macbook was a more capable laptop in almost every way than the Framework I have now. It doesn't matter that the Framework has a better CPU or monitor if it dies halfway through even a short flight. And all the extra resolution only helps so much if both Linux and Windows barely handle the resolution/aspect ratio well. The ports are great - I love that about the Framework, but having an HDMI port only matters so much if the battery is so bad you can't even show a fully movie on a TV with it not plugged in to power (and with a fairly beefy power transformer at that.) I'm not arguing the Framework isn't more powerful on paper, but functionally, I just can barely use it. I was on a trip the other month and walked to a coffee shop in the morning to do some work and lost 20% of my battery charge on the way to the shop with it just in my backpack. Every minute using it I'm aware of how fast it's discharging in a way that literally no other electronic device I've owned in a decade has made me think about it.
- goosedragons 5y agoI've heard the HDMI expansion in the framework can draw 1W doing nothing. Heard similar things about other framework expansions.