I’m curious to know why Framework developed an entirely new platform for the 12 instead of using the existing 13 mainboard and developing a new chassis for it. For the 16, they wanted to use more powerful processors and therefore needed a better cooling system as well as more board space, etc., and therefore needed a new form factor to accommodate a larger board and cooling system, so that makes sense. However the 12 is just shrunken down with even more compromises.
One compromise, for instance, is that it appears the 12 only has space for a 2230 NVME; while this is a trend in small/thin laptops, I don’t like it. 2280 NVMEs have much more room and thus are larger in capacity and can have DRAM, which is lacking on most if not all 2230 NVMEs.
That said, I will end up buying one as I’ve wanted a repairable/upgradable tablet for a while and this fits the bill. I just wish it wasn’t yet another form factor/platform.
My guess is price. As the 12 is being marketed as an entry level laptop, they have done absolutely everything they can to reduce the cost of the mainboard as the 13 mainboard was just too expensive. The LTT video says the Framework 12 will “definitely start for under $1000”, but let’s hope they can do a lot better than that with the savings they have made on the mainboard.
Also, the screen on the Framework 12 has been custom designed by Framework, unlike the screens for the 13, which I believe were all designed by others. I hope that all that work creating a custom display for the Framework 12 will make the custom touchscreen for the Framework 13 a much quicker process, maybe coming at the same time as a new body with 360 hinges. Maybe next year though?
Maybe, but given the pricing of the mainboards my assumption would be the majority of the cost is the processor, and since they’re using lower powered processors in the 12, my assumption would be that those are cheaper than the ones normally used in the 13, and therefore the board would be cheaper overall. Even if there was something else expensive on the 13 mainboard, that could be reengineered as well; it’s just a PCB after all.
It seems to me that would make it more expensive, and if they’re custom designing a screen for the 12, then surely they could have done that with the 13 as well.
On the repairable note, a touchscreen is also going to be less repairable than a regular screen. For every other framework model I can just go find a replacement panel from anywhere and use that; the only additional thing I might need is the metal strips with the screw holes on them, but if I’m in a pinch then double sided tape would also get the job done. Removing those from the old display is also an option which I’ve done with other laptops. But, now with a digitizer on top, unless it’s removable then Framework is going to realistically be the only source for the display. If the digitizer is removable, then you’re going to have parallax problems like old touchscreens had as the digitizer is going to be significantly above the screen itself, leaving a gap for dirt, bugs, etc. to get into.
Like I said though, I’ll still buy one, as IMO it’s better than any other convertible tablet on the market today, but I’m still unhappy that it’s yet another form factor.
P.S. I forgot to mention, one thing that the 12 has that the 13 and 16 don’t have that I would love to have is the ability to “lock” the expansion cards in with a screw the way that you can with the 12. I have a set of expansion cards that I like and don’t change them out, ever, and basically just use them as sacrificial ports that I can change out should they ever become damaged or worn out, so the ability to just lock them in there “permanently” would be amazing. If I do need to use another expansion card for something, I just use it like a dongle and stick it into one of the USB-C ports.
I think it’s easy for all of us to forget that the FW13 is a niche enthusiast product; its price to performance is outclassed by most laptops on the market. Not enough people care about repairability/upgradeability yet to sustain the business longterm.
Framework is currently more focused on expanding their customer base rather than focusing more on existing customers. You can see how they focused on sales growth at the launch event; Nirav also calls attention to the fact that a massive number of companies don’t make it. The FW12 was designed to expand their product line by making a much cheaper device aimed at schools. This is the perfect space to grow brand recognition and show off their expertise in repairability where it’s needed the most (kids are rough).
Expanding their business not only ensures the longevity of the company, but also gives them enough capital to take risks on more premium products such as a FW13 with touchscreen/stylus. We’ve seen many companies focused on repairability/modularity/upgradeability crash and burn because they spent all their RND on niche enthusiast products before breaking into mainstream. Framework are playing it smart and safe, breaking the cycle.
I also - as many others - do not get, why they implemented a complete new platform, but I guess they will let us know at some point of time (in April, when it is officially announced?).
Wouldn’t it have been possible to reuse the old mainboard design / form factor, but only include one RAM slot, add the 13th gen Intel CPU etc. to keep costs low? With that, Framework would have given us a whole new set of configuration options. Think of:
Entry-Level Framework 13 with lower internal specs, but a solid aluminium case: Would have been the perfect device for my parents.
Top-Level Framework 12 that is portable, robust and has a touchscreen, but is also capable of video editing, coding/compiling etc…: Would have been my choice.
I totally see the market for the new form factor - but why limit it to budget use cases?
As some one who has been looking to use the Framework 13 mainboard in a much smaller enclosure (UMPC) I can tell you that it is not really super ideal for such applications. In order to enable the USB Expansion cards you need space on the left and right of the mainboard. This controls the minimum width of your device. Without a board shrink, they could have only shrunk in 2 dimensions, and that would not have been very helpful.
Like this though we have 3 different size mainboards that can be pulled from. This empowers creatives to really do some impressive things. On top of that, this new form factor allowed for some cost savings to help drive down the cost of the laptop that is supposed to be their most affordable.
While I think commonality of parts and such is a good thing, I also think there should be a limit to trying to make one device work for everyone and every application. Taking the FW 13 and putting a cheaper mainboard in a CNC aluminum chassis would limit how much cost reduction they could achieve. Designing an all-new, plastic chassis to fit the FW 13 mainboard also comes with its own challenges and limitations.
From their own information, Framework has been designing the FW 12 for two years. It’s a product that was designed from the ground up to be an inexpensive, durable, versatile, and repairable device for the masses. I think it makes sense for that to be its own product, designed to purpose.
Yes but my complaint about the smaller board is that it’s in effect forcing them to make such limitations. I don’t remember the exact processors they said they were going to include, but taking a middle of the road 13th Gen U-series processor, the 1335U, it takes dual-channel memory up to 96GB just like the P-series processors. Having only a single channel came down to board space.
Similarly with the SSD, in the new form factor there’s only room for a 2230.
Had they reused the 13’s board and made a new 13-inch chassis and 16:10 touchscreen, it would have only been an inch larger but would have been able to use the same mainboard, and therefore wouldn’t have to have those limitations. You’d be able to use the lower cost U-series boards, or the more expensive P-series boards.
They made significant cost cuttings by making the FW12 mostly plastic, which wouldn’t have been possible with the FW13. RAM slots and other components on the mainboard PCB only costs cents to a few dollars; downgrading the device then adding a touch/stylus screen which wouldn’t move FW13 into the budget student laptop market. The cost of a downgraded touch version of the FW13 might’ve even been equal or more than the base version; imagine the outrage.
More importantly, I think it’s much easier to market a completely new product with performance compromises than to try and sell a downgraded FW13.
That makes it sound like a smaller mainboard was chosen, then other things are a consequence of that.
It would be the other way around. They are not directly choosing to make a smaller mainboard. It’s just a consequence of the form factor, market, price they are targeting.
Also, many seem to fail to notice or ignore a couple rather significant improvements they’ve made over the current FW13 backwards compatible mainboards. 1) The battery connector is the much better durable blade style rather than the FWL13 one that is awkward to plug in and uses tiny pins that can be damaged, resulting in an unusable mainboard if you don’t have the eyesight, dexterity or general skill to fix the pins. I recall people posting that it’s happen to them. 2) The keyboard will use a pogo pin connection, which should also be much better than the FWL13’s current design. Several people have accidentally damaged their FWL13 keyboard cable causing a tear at the bend or had damage or general troubles with the connectors at either end. I think FW mentioned that a pogo pin connector is a slightly more expensive design, but it’s well worth it imo, and especially for the market they seem to be targeting. I’m sure FW will bring similar improvements to the FWL13, but currently they probably do not want to break backwards compatibility. I assume they would want to hold off, until the number of things to improve, total improvement gained, and time passed is all enough to warrant some kind of backwards compatibility breaking platform refresh.
Also, if one finds elements they really dislike about the FWL12, it’s good to consider that most of us very likely won’t be who this particular platform is targeting. It can still advance FW’s mission and goals that do apply to us by bringing in sales, which equals greater money and resources for FW. And the FWL12 may accomplish this specifically by not fitting well for us, instead targeting other markets as of yet untapped by FW.
Sure, but I’d also argue that the battery and mainboard on the 13 are oriented such that this could be introduced in the 13 as well. Yes, it would tie new motherboards to new batteries but we already have some things like that already, like the new AI 9 HX 370 cpu requiring the 2.8K display (though this could just be an ordering limitation). Or even, if framework starts stocking the BE200 wifi chips, those will only work with Intel mainboards.
I would argue this is trading one devil for another. Sure it might prevent you from damaging it when you remove and install the cover, however pogo pins are a moving part that can wear out over time; they will also move constantly while using the computer due to the system flexing when typing or interacting with the computer. So I’d expect that, over time, we’ll start to see intermittent keyboard issues with this design.