Here’s one so easy that Framework literally has to do less than they’re currently doing to satisfy it: prebuilts that don’t come with a Windows license. Not even by default, just as a BTO option. Unless Microsoft is still threatening to pull Windows licensing entirely if they sell too many laptops without it preinstalled like they used to in the 1990s. Which I doubt would be a big deal to Framework’s audience, to be honest; if you’re so stubbornly against being forced to learn things that you resent being tasked to install your own OS I doubt you’re buying a laptop whose main selling point is opening it up and working with the internals.
1 Like
Bios Feature request: Lowest Battery Percentage at which charging begins
I have maximum Battery charge capacity settings in BIOS set to 80%. I am always plugged in, which causes the laptop to keep charging on and off as it is near 80%. I would like a bios settings where I can set the lowest battery charge percentage at which the charging can begin say 50%.
This will ensure that my battery is always between 50 to 80%. Also, I hope that with the ectool on linux I can change these settings from operating system so that I can be flexible if I need to charge despite being more than 50%
And why is that a problem? I have mine set to 78% and I don’t see an issue.
I don’t understnd your statment
- You want and extra feature
- I asked what problem you are having that you want this extra feature
- You say I don’t have to use it, what it ??
I use the feature that exists and why would I want to stop using it ??
Regarding any future feature as you mention why would I not want to use it ??
That I don’t have a problem in the present is not related to ant future so I don’t really care if other features are added.
But clearly you do care hence the ‘request’ so I was only asking why the current feature of only a max is an issue.
You say
Not really a cause but a function and what I don’t see why this is an issue as I have never noticed it.
It may be that I am missing something that you are aware of that makes the charging such as issue that you would like a ‘low’ level to be set to.
I think it a reasonable idea if there is a problem with a battery going from 79 to 80 every few minutes, but I can’t see the problem.
If a battery is repaetedly charging 1% and mine does a lot less than that as the 78% I use doesn’t change ~ so the very small amount of charge doesn’t realy heat the battery ‘causing’ any damage. However charging for 50% to 80% twice a day in my case would equate the best part of a whole cycle per day and would subject the battery to a max charge rate and a fair amount of heat.
So I see no reason to have a lower cut off as it would theoretically damage the battery more.
So sorry what is the issue you have? Have I missed or misunderstood something about battery charging ??
It’s been on my wish list as well:
And it’s definitely an issue seen by / experienced by / known to some users:
Don’t take me at my word, but my current understanding about battery degradation:
During the initial charge (AKA. formation that happens in the factory) an SEI layer is formed, that lets ions flow between the anode and the cathode material (but is not electrically conductive). During a charge/discharge cycle, and the expansion / contraction of some crystal lattices this SEI layer can & do break. The more change between the charge level, the more contraction / expansion, the more breaking.
Where the SEI breaks, it re-forms, and becomes thicker, blocking the flow of ions more and more (and more active material being tied up in the SEI as it gets thicker) ==> causing battery degradation
Based on this, charging / discharging a very small amount more often is much preferable to a deeper charge/discharge cycle from a battery health perspective => hysteresis should be as small as possible
There are some very smart people on this forum so if I’m wrong, please do correct me!
Also, my 11th gen motherboard never seems to switch between charge/discharge if it’s plugged in, I’d think the root cause (charge/discharge loop) should be investigated, instead of trying to handle the effect (battery charge method) in alternative ways
1 Like
That’s pretty much the way the storey goes. However the ‘clever’ people are just passing on what they hear, but I can’t argue with it.
So yeap! mines on 78% and stable.
However one of the joys of a laptop is having a battery so that it doesn’t ‘need’ to be plugged in.
And given a max of 6 hours a charge from 33 to 66% only gives 2 hours and is a ‘heavy’ charge.
So it’s all down to use case. If you don’t want to use it plugged in much then just charge between 10 and 90
That depends…
At some point, say 800 0.1% top-ups vs 4000 0.1% top-ups. Somewhere, charging once from 70% to 80% might be better than 4000 0.1% top-ups. There’s a switch over point somewhere.
(Also, note that the 0.1% is typically a result of some rounding value evaluation…where the actual drop could be less because the calculation is “less than” the stop charging threshold (but doesn’t state “how much less”.)
The additional complication with the Framework laptop is that the 60W brick is not able to fully support the load requirement of the laptop if the CPU goes into boost (in conjunction with power load needs of the memory, SSD…and other components)…which results in the battery used to supplement the additional power source need during boost.
See this note from Notebookcheck:
This means the battery change dropping (once charged to the threshold) can be due to actual battery load…as oppose to typically self-discharge.
In many other laptops, the power brick typically has sufficient wattage to fully supply the laptop with even when boosting, without causing a momentary discharge from the built-in battery. For my Framework Laptop, this isn’t the case.
Thanks for the info!
But if the >60W power requirement would be the issue , it would require an extremely heavy, spiked load to keep exceeding, and dropping below 60W to force a switch between charge / discharge. (also would require not hitting thermal throttling for a prolonged period of time). For me this feels like an extreme edge-case.
The “rounding issue” sounds to be a one-time phenomenon, once it charged above it, it should not happen again until a discharge could allow for the rounding issue to happen again. (am I missing something?)
Also, I’m not sure why would a very small amount of added charge be a problem even if it happens thousands of times. To my knowledge, this is how drip-charging a battery happens, when it’s close to max charge. Could you please elaborate on the reason, why this is bad?
In my view, this should all be handled by the charge controller, with full knowledge about exact details of the cell in use, and would be outside the responsibilities of the mainboard firmware (etc.)
1 Like
Launching applications can trigger 60W boost… Various productivity related workloads have the momentary burst of compute needs…render pages, emails, loading spreadsheets, creating charts, image layer processing…etc. It’s just that they may / may not show up as 60W boost due to the sampling frequency of the read outs.
…and it does get discharge…due to the repeated boost.
The scenario is different here…it’s not due to self-discharge where the battery management IC tries to maintain / top-up the charge level. It’s due to load discharge. That is, depending on the compute requirement use case, you may run into repeated discharge / charge cycles. As such, it’s different from how drip-charging got into the state where it requires a top-up…and also the frequency of charging is different here.
It can be partially mitigated by going with something like a 90W or 100W PD adapter.
The Stop Charging Threshold has been implemented via the EC.
The focus here is not on whether it damages the battery or not (for the Start Charging Threshold). But rather, having the control of whether the battery gets charged or not, without introducing physical plugging / unplugging / port wear and tear / manual procedure, especially for long-plugged-in units.
Other brands such as Dell, Lenovo have implemented it…there are use cases for it…whether someone on the individual level may / may not need it.
Coming from the What should we build next?, I repost my thougth:
I think, Frame.work should first stable the business to worldwide shipping and support inclusive B2B.
The laptop itself can still be improved: more processors (AMD!), more form factors, more screens, cameras, fair production and raw materials, etc.
It would be best to have a survey on what the community wants.
2 Likes
Really happy with the Laptop.
I want ECC RAM. !!!
3 Likes
To support all of the features listed below, a Thinkpad style chassis, or to get away from using brand names, a business/professional/light industrial chassis; Take inspiration from the T61 or the last era of classic Thinkpads from Lenovo with the IBM era style 7-row keyboard. This also includes a durable plastic exterior (in flat/matte black as an option please). Overall get away from Apple-inspired design for this chassis.
Most would term this a chunky/thicker case option than the stock chassis, which is technically true but those terms applied to laptops usually form a negative connotation, anyone requesting this just wants a chassis that has adequate room for all the features that come along with the request, and essentially it’s a call to ignore thickness/slim design as a major criterion for the total thickness of the design. As long as it’s no thicker than a 2010s ThinkPad, I think most asking for such a chassis would not have any complaints.
*Water/liquid drainage built into this new chassis would be awesome but not a dealbreaker/maker
- Downward-facing LED light on display bezel (Thinklight style) for document or other illumination needs
- Bezel-mounted status/activity lights
- Manual kill switch for WiFi & BlueTooth
- Physical webcam privacy cover
- Trackpoint style mouse input options WITH dedicated top trackpad PHYSICAL buttons
- A low-profile mechanical and/or Classic Thinkpad style 7-row keyboard
- Wacom or other pen stylus digitizer
- Matte/non-reflective screen
- Quick swap external battery (would also be awesome if this used 18650 or other off-the-shelf/industry standard-sized lithium cells)
- a dedicated GPU option (either gaming-oriented or workstation, both preferably)
1 Like
Since my original post of this went into the wrong thread, I’m fine posting it all here. Makes more sense.
->Expansion Cards: The fit is loose and lack good tolerances. Most importantly we are stuck with a laptop that can only have 3 ports 
given one is for charging. A separate charging port on the laptop so it doesn’t eat up one expansion port would be good, even if it was just for charging. I think it would have been better to make the left side full of all the needed ports, RJ45, SD, USB, USB-C, then on the right side have 2 expansion cards like what you have now. Best of both worlds without compromising on ports and needing dongles or extra card swapping. I’d love a laptop with both SD and mSD slots.
->Screen Options - glossy, matte, touch, 13.5" then do a 15" then a 14" then a 16". This is easy, you simply make new cases and lids. Same mainboard, just a side width extension for the thunderbolt ports. You could even have started with the same battery if you had to then offer bigger ones later. Choose a 16:10 screen format so there are lots of choices out to choose from. The 3:2 format is limited in panel choices and resolutions. There’s no reason you couldn’t offer a matte, heck the screen you have now comes in both matte and glossy. Look for screens with a wider color gamut so you can get professionals who do editing pictures and videos. Adobe RGB or DCIP3 will blow your socks off seeing those side by side with sRGB what most people are used to. Oh and keep the screens 400 or better 500 nits of brightness.
->I think the laptop may simply be too thin. A thicker laptop and you could have a bigger battery, kinda stuck now with what you have.
->A little bigger fan and you could have kept it quiet. Something everyone wants is a quiet laptop. The thermal capacity of the 12th gen is a lot, and there are plenty of complaints of fan noise. Thicker laptop could lead to a thicker fan.
->Heat pipes are a bit small, when comparing to what other manufacturers are using.
->offer U series chips. They are simply the best choice for laptops, especially thin ones. It shouldn’t be too hard change the mainboards, much easier than changing to AMD chips. I’m sure people think they want a P series, but offer the U if it isn’t too much work because they would surprise the community in what is actually capable of in real world use. Having a P series that’s thermally limited to a U doesn’t do much good, but eat up more battery life.
->I understand the choice you made for Intel, but you have a large number of customers asking for AMD… something to consider.
->Keyboard Choices, there’s no reason you can’t offer different keyboards with different travel and force. Your existing keyboard has good force but feels mushy, it’s not tactile like. You should make the ctrl and fn keys the same width, allow people to swap them physically and in the bios. Easy thing to do and opens more doors for people that want thinkpad/mac style. Easy to do.
->Color… offer it as a choice, and perhaps build your own identity. I think a dark gray would be ideal for a laptop… seriously, dark gray would look awesome with a black keyboard
->ruggedized case option, oh lots of people would love that. Think half way between a normal laptop and a Toughbook. But it has to have a handle on it like the Toughbook, I’m jealous of my friends have have Toughbooks because the handle is so nice.
->m.2 slot for 4G that could be used for a 2nd hard drive… but if you’re limited by pci lanes I understand why it wasn’t implemented. Keep the main SSD 4 lanes for sure.
->magnesium instead of aluminum housing option?
->different hinge design that fixes the wobble - please? Perhaps a hack that puts something into the hinge as hysteresis would help?
->oh and the little booklet you send with the laptop, how can anyone read that small of print? Please make it bigger.
These are all doable things and repeated many times by others. Let’s focus on what your customers are asking for and your business will grow.
Have you deleted the other copy 
I don’t know all the technical terms, or the specs, but I’m looking for a powerful creator laptop. I want at least 15-16 inch OLED screen, Core-i7 processor or similar, 16 to 32 GB RAM, 1-2 T DDR, massive battery life, really high refresh rate. You get the gist. Lots of ports. Separate graphics card.
Hi and welcome to the forum
This is just a user created topic which is fine if all you want is the general population to know what you want, but Framework have their own topic . . . see is If can find it
No! I think it may have been an email questionnaire for existing customers
Title pretty much says it all. My work just got me a Lenovo Yoga and it’s just so much nicer for my workflow to be able to flip the screen around and navigate and interact by touch. A bunch of apps I use for my day job, side gigs, and a few for entertainment work better with touch and as much as I love my Framework, I really miss being able to do those things on my own laptop. My one hope is that I could some day install a touchscreen on my Framework much more easily than I could probably so much as upgrade RAM on the Yoga (haven’t verified that, don’t quote me).
Would a mid-lid hinge like on the old Sony Vaio Flips or the Surface Studios be easier to implement with the current body design than a 360 style hinge? Or hell, just a touch interface with the current 4kg hinges would be an improvement.
2 Likes
Hi, there is some posibilities for dedicated gpu renaissance with framework?