I had one of those fujitsu’s in college. Also currently using a surface laptop studio, both designs can technically accommodate a larger rear than the screen physically can rotate around. But being possible and being reasonable are two things.
The point is, these aren’t easy to make hinge designs. The Fujitsu would require a complicated double rotating hinge mechanism that would likely cut into the space where the expansion bay sits. A SLS style hinge would require a ton of extra machining & tooling, and result in a much heavier top screen section. The prior devices were also incredibly expensive compared to normal laptops of their time.
I don’t see it as very realistic to expect Framework, with their current capabilities, would consider going down this very niche use-case at this time.
I wonder if the display could open 180 degrees (or a little less but similar). My current laptop can open to about 140 degrees and it’s not enough for me to work comfortably with laptop placed on my legs. I think I need 20 more degrees to be fully able to use it.
Turns out its not hard to make a modular laptop when you make it twice the size of a desktop! Need to make some expansion cards with built in dolly wheels.
The side profile look so square, somewhat like a alienware but even more square
it’s so square, I have a hard time imagining what else that come close. It look absolutely magnificent, though. And you would bet that it’s the engineers designed this.
It’s probably a very personal opinion about the 16" esthetics, but I‘m not really convinced by the black plastic material used for the keyboard, numpad and the space above them. Compared to the 13", which looks closer to a MacBook, it seems a bit cheaper to me.
But there is probably a reason behind this choice? Solidity, heat resistance, flexibility, weight, cost reduction… Does anyone has an idea? It’s not mentioned in the deep dive about enclosure.
At least, as the hinges seem to be attached to the magnesium bottom cover directly, we probably won’t have this kind of problem after thousands of openings.
that’s a fair point. But the chassis is full aluminum though.
Sort of like an old-gen Thinkpad, where the palmrest is multiple pieces and plastic, and the shell metallic and rigid.
But yeah, this Thinkpad (x230T) do not feel like they are $2000 dollar machines.
That is a metallic palmrest. But I think you know where the problem arises – threaded inserts.
The screw instead of going into the palmrest actually goes to a plastic part (via a threaded insert glued to the metal piece), so the machine pretend it’s a metal-chassis, without actually being a metal chassis.
Dell took it a step further and made the entire outside plastic.
I have had multiple failures of these type (hp 15-dw-10xx series), a Dell Inspiron 3511, and another hp, this time a m6-n015dx.
The fix for these is to, I joke you not – take it to a drill press (you want perfectly prependicular holes), put holes where the screw used to go, and bolt it down with bolts. The chassis-es and backplates are actually decently strong, but the inserts never.
Even the XPS 9360 have this problem, mildly. The screw goes into a metal mid-frame, which is glued to the “carbon fiber” palm rest. The solid aluminum bottom-plate actually provides substantial strength. But since I have run it without the structural back plate for a little while, the metal midframe is now slightly bent, and make a creaking sound when I press down on it.
By directing all the forces to a solid aluminum chassis (where the screws goes into dedicated threads), framework not only made it more serviceable, but also more rigid
