8 ms·

Laptops have reached weights and dimensions that, at least for my personal case, don't offset the downsides - I prefer without any doubt a 1.4kg laptop, with go

Laptops have reached weights and dimensions that, at least for my personal case, don't offset the downsides - I prefer without any doubt a 1.4kg laptop, with good repairability/performance/usability (including: cooling), than an unrepairable/poorly usable 1kg one. I hope that the Framework will gain popularity.

tomComb 4y ago
Request for Ever thinner laptops does seem silly, but weight is quite a different thing - it really does matter IMO.
- Kerrick 4y ago
  If you don't hit certain density targets, electronics begin to feel flimsy and poorly produced.
- diffeomorphism 4y ago
  Food for thought: Thinkpad X1 vs Macbook Pro and X1 Nano vs Air. Same sizes but about 70% of the weight and more durable. Yet, people feel that aluminium feels more "premium" than carbon fiber + titanium and magnesium. From a material sciences standpoint you can argue that people are just "wrong", just like a knife of solid gold would be a very stupid material choice. However, if people want to buy gold, you better offer that.
pdpi 4y ago
I really want to like the Framework, and the internal design definitely appealing to me, but the connectivity is just rage-inducing. It's fundamentally a previous-gen macbook pro with 4 USB-C ports (USB4, in this case), but the ports are buried deep in the chassis and you absolutely 100% need dongles to expose them, to the point you literally need a USB-C to USB-C dongle as a spacer!
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  Sure, but how else would you have done it to make it better? USB-C is the only universal multi-purpose connector that can carry almost any type of high speed digital and analog signal without going to some proprietary connector. It literally was their only option.
  - pdpi 4y ago
    I'd have chosen to embrace that rather than hiding the USB ports behind the dongles. That would allow them to reclaim the wasted space, either internally for better expansibility, or externally for a smaller chassis.
- mixmastamyk 4y ago
  Of the issues with the Framework, it’s interchangeable ports are not one.

tomComb 4y ago

Request for Ever thinner laptops does seem silly, but weight is quite a different thing - it really does matter IMO.

Kerrick 4y ago
If you don't hit certain density targets, electronics begin to feel flimsy and poorly produced.
diffeomorphism 4y ago
Food for thought: Thinkpad X1 vs Macbook Pro and X1 Nano vs Air. Same sizes but about 70% of the weight and more durable. Yet, people feel that aluminium feels more "premium" than carbon fiber + titanium and magnesium. From a material sciences standpoint you can argue that people are just "wrong", just like a knife of solid gold would be a very stupid material choice. However, if people want to buy gold, you better offer that.

pdpi 4y ago

I really want to like the Framework, and the internal design definitely appealing to me, but the connectivity is just rage-inducing. It's fundamentally a previous-gen macbook pro with 4 USB-C ports (USB4, in this case), but the ports are buried deep in the chassis and you absolutely 100% need dongles to expose them, to the point you literally need a USB-C to USB-C dongle as a spacer!

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
Sure, but how else would you have done it to make it better? USB-C is the only universal multi-purpose connector that can carry almost any type of high speed digital and analog signal without going to some proprietary connector. It literally was their only option.
- pdpi 4y ago
  I'd have chosen to embrace that rather than hiding the USB ports behind the dongles. That would allow them to reclaim the wasted space, either internally for better expansibility, or externally for a smaller chassis.
mixmastamyk 4y ago
Of the issues with the Framework, it’s interchangeable ports are not one.