maybe i don’t know intel/amd terms and conditions but you could definitely put the chipset, cpu and ram slots on a card that basically has a pcie x16 slot, some power pins and use ribbon cables for usb4/thunderbolt. the card would be big compared to an mxm card. with this you could just change out that card and keep the motherboard and chassis reducing waste.
1 Like
That’s… just a motherboard. what use would whatever it’s connecting to be? You literally took everything that’s already on the replaceable mainboard, and just put it on a second replaceable mainboard attached to another PCB. What does this accomplish?
AMD doesn’t have support for thunderbolt (yet), cooling solutions would differ between CPU architectures so it would be difficult to mount a chassis-side cooling solution to adequately cool either one, while all of this would complexity that either sacrifices form-factor (thickness) or cost (more expensive) or both.
3 Likes
what i am trying to describe is something more similar to intel’s nuc compute element system or an altair 8800. the motherboard for the laptop would be mounted to the laptop chassis and contain vrms, external ports, pcie slots(in the form of m.2 and mxm), battery connection, internal display connectors, keyboard/trackpad connectors etc. the cpu card would contain the cpu, chipset and ramslots. the cpu card would plug into the motherboard through pcie, power etc. the cpu position would be standardized and so long as the motherboard you have can supply the power and the chassis the cooling you can use and cpu you want. just like on a desktop the same cooler would just use different mounting hardware so you don’t need different coolers. in this case the motherboard is basically a backplane with some extra i/o on it. it would mean that you don’t need to have the 15" be compatible with the 13" mobo or the 17" with the 15" and the 13" mobo. each size would have its own mobo and if you want to change you just swap over your cpu card.
don’t get me wrong this is a big change to how they are set up now but it would allow the same mobo/chassis to be used for 20+ years and still have up to date hardware.
Sorry, but that’s pure wishful thinking. Even on desktops, with socketed CPUs, a 20 year old motherboard can’t be used with a modern CPU. We’ve actually been spoiled lately with more-than-usual backwards compatibility; normally you can only realistically expect 2-3 generations of compatibility, and aside from people that like buying a new CPU every year or so, most people are going to need a new motherboard by the time they’re looking to upgrade their CPU.
2 Likes
20+ years may be a bit ridiculous but the reason you have to upgrade the mobo is the chipset. if the cpu had the chipset then the mobo wouldn’t have to be upgraded for a lot longer. and if pcie is used you could just run at lower speeds to keep compatibility. if the mobo used pcie 5.0 thats 1TB/s in each direction with an x16 slot which is plenty for a laptop. i am still using a 4790k in my main PC can pretty much play anything. so generational cpu improvements are slowing so using the same mobo with this system for 10 years is not unreasonable.
Not great example lol, although Alder Lake is supposed to be Intel getting its legs back
And while clock speeds haven’t advanced, core counts have
Is 14" screen in the picture? I don’t see any option for 14" screen.
3 Likes
And that’s why having a decently accessible BIOS (I’m ok with “secure tiano core setup” and the classic 320x240 resolution menu layout) is important because on all computers I had touched there is a setting that allow you to toggle this function.
Both Dell and Lenovo also have what they call “fn-lock”, so you can Fn + Esc to toggle this.
I think the entire argument behind a common CHASSIS (and reasonably similar motherboard design) is so you can put a brand new motherboard into your 3-year-old chassis.
And, again, I have to refer to the Dell 9343/9350/9360 lineup. You can see that they look identical, and that’s exactly right because the chassis are identical. What is different is what STUFF they put on the motherboard. And that could be a 4th gen i3 or a 8th gen i7. Everything else – the speakers, the battery, the fan, the card reader, the keyboard … is the SAME.
And this concept is quite good, since this means tremendous spare part supply and ease of manufacture (since no new assembly lines are needed). What is not good is that sometimes people want new designs and looks, which mostly require changing chassis.
However, this is not the end of the world as it apparently is possible to modify the looks without modifying the interior. Especially now that your ports are small modules instead.
1 Like
my hope is that they can get some niche expansion slot. Eg.a M.2 slot, they are not very long… but it does require some dedicated design…
I would love an mxm chip, would be nice if in 2022 they came out with a dedicated cooling option for the gpu. That would need a 17” screen. I would really appreciate a 65 whr battery. (I really loved my friend’s Aurous’ 99 whr battery, lasted for such a long time!)
1 Like
You have it now, it’s the 13" 
We need 15".
1 Like
If I’m being completely fair, I feel like the 13.5" 3:2 HiDPI Framework screen is just as good for productivity as any up-to FHD 16:9 15" screen I’ve daily driven, but that’s only based on an hour of tests with basically the same screen on a Surface Laptop 4 at Best Buy (I don’t have Framework yet)
Resolution might be similar, if they are all 2.5K or 2K screens.
2K 13.3 inch is the smallest I can take. 3K is just too small.
Yes, resolution is important. But if you rely on scaling interface up instead of having larger screens, you aren’t fitting as many things you can on a screen as possible.
I run all of my devices at 1x scaling, by comparison. I tried running my previous Dell XPS’s 13 inch 3K at 1x but can’t see anything. As a result I downgrade it to 1.5K (1600x900).
Had it been a 15 inch, I might see things easier and fit massively more on the screen.
On the other hand, even if you can’t put more things on the screen (e.g. 2K 13 inch and 15 inch) it does mean you can lean more back because things appear bigger. Thus you are protecting your eyesight and can have more comfortable postures (e.g. typing while laying back instead of hunching forward)
1 Like
Personally, I find 1920 wide or equivalent to be optimal for productivity. Given that fractional scaling is dodgy, that means what I really want is 4k. However, my current laptop is 3200×1800, which is definitely worse than 1920/3840 wide, but still usable. I think having a 3:2 aspect at about that resolution, i.e. 3200×2000 at 13.5", would be a really useful resolution.
Don’t underestimate DPI, either. I’ve been using a 4k recently for work, and after that, 1080p looks like trash; giant honking pixels everywhere, blocky text… higher DPI really does make it much more practical to read text at a smaller physical size.
Honestly, I’d really prefer 4k in a 15" or larger form factor.
1 Like
One huge option missing for me. I would like it to NOT be thin. There is no practical difference in terms of carrying a laptop 1cm or 3cm thick. There’s a big difference in how well thicker can work vs thinner one. Can I get a lightweight but thick/powerful with a good airflow laptop, please?
Another one would be trackpoint and NO touchpad. That would be super-awesome.
4 Likes
As someone who is quite fit and been an athlete their whole life, I’ll just respond that this is definitely highly subjective. In high school or college I’d have agreed with you, where I could walk with my laptop to wherever I needed to go for a couple miles, with no problem. That extra 3x weight makes a HUGE difference though, when you’ve been travelling back and forth for the last 2 weeks straight, lugging two extra computers for work. A slim 1" device is the difference between “I can easily slip this in my bag” versus “I can’t spare the space in my carry-on”
4 Likes
The weight and thickness can be different topics - I’m imagining a thicker laptop to get more airflow, which hopefully won’t be too much heavier than a thinner laptop. 1" thick might be a bit much, but I’m thinking “so thin it could snap in half if you pack your bag wrong” isn’t for me, despite what laptop manufacturers think.
2 Likes
See… I don’t, and it’s awesome. I can see all the things w/o having to lug a 15" around (which isn’t really all that bad) but if you’re like me, it’s a best-of-both-worlds productivity dream.
The problem with not scaling up with a small 3K is that you need to have very good eyesight. Even if I have perfect vision (5.0) I have lots of trouble seeing things on a 13.3 inch 3K.
A 2.5K would be nice. the 2256*1504 is … quite tall, in fact. compared to 1920*1080. not sure how to utilize it properly.
1 Like
I want it to be thin and have a decent battery and a larger display, perhaps 15.6" (which I put in the poll). I don’t want it to be a mobile workstation or gaming laptop.
That being said, I’m unlikely to purchase the larger size, since I am already purchasing the current laptop.
1 Like