Mathematically you are correct but…didn’t I warn you against using logic? I promise you references abound using 2k and 1440p interchangeably
Same thing with RAM really, it’s advertised as running at 3200Mhz-I promise you it does not
It runs at 1600Mhz or 3200MT/s
Terminology is stupid
I took great delight in saying my old thinkpad was “WUXGA” because that’s way more impressive than saying FHD
Everyone is confusing themselves with incorrect info.
Note: above statement might be false.
Wow. It’s such a mess.
to be fair, at least we have a standard on the way we write these number on those sticks. it doesnt matter if it actually differ from reality
Just like how intel call their “improved 10nm” “intel 7”
And so as long as we agree on something, the world is in peace.
not necessarily. depends on what is the point of an e-ink display for you. like I listed in my previous post, the target audience for e-ink displays is quite broad.
the video you linked is 2 years old, e-ink displays have improved since then, there is BooxNote3 and NoteAir, I believe the guy in the video is reviewing BooxNote1.
Just looked up the specification on the display for the BooxNote3
It has a refresh rate of 2Hz…that’s not even remotely suitable for daily tasks
It’s good for reading and that’s about it-the whole display must be refreshed instead of just a few pixels
It works better as a concept that an actual product I’m afraid
Exactly. Imagine typing in Word, but your words do not appear immediately but instead on 0.5 second bursts
same goes to excel. imaging scrolling but seeing intermittent frames instead
That’s why they are best for E-readers, you can flip a page and not having to do anything until you finish the entire page.
you can refresh only a few pixels. However, if this is done long enough there might be ghosting or “burn-in”. That’s why some of the devices will “reset” the pixels before displaying a screen.
Just use them on E-readers.
HOWEVER, that said, it does not mean we couldn’t do some work on the E-reader so it can, say, act like a small screen (via HDMI, for example) so you can use your PC with it.
Already done-that tablet referenced in the video above supports that functionality, it’s super clunky I believe and I haven’t watched his series on that tablet in a while but I do remember him using it as a display
How about using a 4k OLED or true LED display, not a LED backlit LCD display?
1080P 240FPS will be awesome
Yes more display size options,especially larger with 4K resolution. Thus, more sizes of case.
Apparently laptops are gaining better support for multiple refresh rate/resolution combos, so 4k120 and 1080p60 are both possible on the same screen. No idea if it’d be reasonable for the first Framework laptop with dedicated graphics, but neat 
I think you got those backwards bud!
Oops - meant 4k120 and 1080p240
I assume you are referencing LTT and the ASUS prototype
Sorry, but it is a laptop… Why do you want a 4k on a 13.5’’ display? 200dpi (around that what we have with the current panel) is really enough with an adequate refresh rate.
Because 4K kewl. Naw but in all seriousness, I think most people want 4K with a larger screen and at 17" I can see that being useful. Personally I’m more into the display technology rather than resolution. These new QD-OLED displays look super freaking rad.
Okay on a 17’’ it makes sense… but… is that actually a laptop if you have full-size screen, full-size dedicated graphics to game 4k, full-size CPU to support that and full-size weight?
And…
Agree on that 
I am indeed
Yeah, this whole thread assumes 15" or larger and dedicated graphics to back it up.
…because it makes sense with integral scaling; the current resolution is too high for 1x (especially at a 13" size) and too low for 2x. 4k (or even 3000×2000) would be reasonable for 2x scaling. Also, higher resolution for text actually helps at small sizes.
Personally I’d prefer a lower resolution. 1080p, preferably 90 or 120Hz.
Removes the headaches with scaling and potentially brings better battery life. Both of those sound good to me.