I assume that at least initially there will be only one screen option and it will have the display size / bezels will be as shown in the photos we have seen so far?
From the pictures shown the display looks to have a very large bottom bezel.
I come from a development, business use, light gaming perspective. For me the laptop performance will very likely be ‘good enough’ for all needs, so the primary requirements now become screen and keyboard.
As a developer, the other display attributes are secondary to size - every extra line of code I can see is a win.
This means that for me screen real estate is key, so a bezel this big would likely mean that I would reluctantly go for another laptop. (Most comparable laptops have much smaller bezels - the best have tiny bezels on all sides).
Note from a resolution perspective 2K is fine at this screen size.
The amount of code you can see is more down to text size
As regards the bezel, it is not the issue, it is the screen size. So when looking for another laptop only the screen size matters as to how many lines of code you can see with a particular screen.
Once you have a satisfactory screen the bezel only takes up space.
Of course, but once I have the minimum text size that I am happy with (A function of my eyesight more than anything else) then the number of lines of code is exactly proportional to the vertical screen size.
True, but the point of a laptop for me is to be portable, so the bezel is making the laptop physically bigger for every millimeter.
When choosing a laptop I first pick the size that I am prepared to lug around and then say ‘what is the maximum productivity I can get from this size?’. For today’s fast-enough machines that productivity is mostly down to how much code / information I can see,
To be honest, now every time I use a device with big bezels I just get annoyed every time I need to scroll a window to see something just off the edge.
(Knowing that I could have picked a virtually bezeless device)
I am quite prepared to admit that this might just be me though.
A custom size screen to fill it out would be probably be prohibitively expensive for a small company like Framework. They mention the extreme cost of custom screens in their display deep dive blog post.
+1 for a lightweight laptop with a large display. Like the OP, these days I use my laptop mostly for work while away from home or office (where the desktops are), so the keywords are portability and reliability. framework’s modularity can give better reliability (simply replace the failing component) and portability (hoping for battery options &c), plus the possibility (!) of a decent keyboard layout (navigation keys for numpad). To me, the numbers that matter are productivity/gram (including power brick) and performance/Watt – so 15W CPU please!
Perhaps a better solution would be to create two bodies, one like the current one with an expansion bay, and another designed for maximum portability (still with 16"/17" screen and keyboard options).
Unfortunately this is a flaw, but it is technically not feasible to do it otherwise I assume (unless you have Microsoft-like resources and tell people to build another surface book and they just reinvent the whole thing ;).
So yes, it is true that FW16 laptop has to compete with XPS 17, Razer Blade 16 & 18, etc.
Based on the pictures Framework has shown I estimate that a 13.6" x 9" display (maybe slightly larger) could fit in the space available.
Unfortunately afaik there is no existing display currently being produced with exactly those dimensions and Framework isn’t yet large enough for it to be reasonable for them to get a completely custom display made.
The largest existing display that I’m aware of that can fit there is the display on the HUAWEI MateBook 16s. That display is 13.3" x 8.9", however it is dimmer, lower refresh rate, and supports a smaller color space than the display Framework is using.
However if you go a bit smaller to 13.6" x 8.5" that is actually a common display size. A lot of 16 inch laptops use 13.6" x 8.5" displays and the manufacturer of the Framework 13’s display already produces a bunch of 13.6" x 8.5" displays. So by stepping down to 13.6" x 8.5" Framework is able to easily source a display with mostly the specs they want.
Edit: To clarify, that last option is what Framework went with.
Yea, I switched around the numbers.
13.3" x 8.9" is taller, but also be narrower. Smaller bezels top / bottom but larger bezels on the sides. Overall, you don’t gain much as far as trying to reduce the size of bezels you have to look at, which seems to be what the OP is after.
Agreed, although I think 13.3" x 8.9" would result in a more even distribution of bezels which I think is less noticable than just a large bottom bezel. And while an extra 2.7% screen area isn’t much it is nice.
Although IMO those benefits are not worth the reduced brightness, color space, and refresh rate of the Matebook 16s’s panel compared to the panel Framework is using. Also, it seems easier for Framework to get their Framework 16 displays from BOE since BOE already supplies the Framework 13 panels and BOE already produces a bunch of high end 13.6" x 8.5" panels.
Since the OP says “every extra line of code I can see is a win.” it seems to me that vertical space is what the OP is after.
I’m expecting to run mine lid down off external peripherals more often than not. The internal screen is occasionally essential, such as when traveling, but my real work is done off external peripherals… where you could use either a massive screen or a swiveling business monitor for a portrait viewing angle.
Presumably OP realises that, so the importance of extra coding space from a laptop on the go may be a niche use case?
Hiya. I do not consider extra coding space whilst ‘on the move’ to be a niche use case for me at least. I do a lot of travel and commuting, so I have a lot of time for work on the move.
When I am at home I have a desktop PC with a 49 inch monitor, so a laptop is only for ‘on the move’ work.
(Of course this might not be true for others, especially for those who plan to use the laptop for all activities).
One new observation I do have is that I think it likely that in the future I will start using AR glasses such as the XREAL Air whilst travelling. I tried them for a few minutes and they look to be nearly good enough for evelopment work. I think as products of this type improve likely they will become my default ‘laptop display’. At that point I will probably switch to a more portable 13 inch laptop form factor, as for me the larger size was really only to get a larger display.
a new display option may not be feasible in the short/medium term, but how about a new lighter & smaller chassis using the same system board and display? i understand that the plug-in GPU/ssd/etc option is a big deal for some people, but for me this is just unnecessary extra weight and bulk. also, by limiting the total power draw (via software/BIOS), one can cool the whole thing passively and trim some more weight+volume. c’mon framework, a 16" work laptop should not weigh more than 1600g …
on this being “niche”, i suspect that people who need a large-screen portable laptop for work are naturally less vocal than hobbyists …
I think the bottom half of the laptop is resulting in a large bezel, rather than the bezel resulting in a longer laptop. Judging from images of the 16, the bottom bezel lines up pretty nicely with the size of the black area with the air vents and power button/fingerprint sensor.
Plus, the fact that the 16’s screen has a 16:10 ratio means it already has more vertical space than most laptops this size (as they usually have a 16:9 ratio).
One reason you’d want the big bezel at the bottom is for ergonomics. Typically you want the monitor to start higher so you don’t have to hunch over to read.
Notebooks are particularly bad in this regard, so every little bit helps.