The announced F12 touchscreen device has made me very uncomfortable with Framework’s apparently unclear strategic plan. Why introduce another brand new seemingly substantially duplicated new hardware platform ie the F12, when F13 (& F16) already exist and when both would benefit from the option to have a mid hinge touchscreen option (a la Surface Studio) thus making the F12 almost entirely redundant?
Why the new product rather than further investment in the existing platforms? This seems to fly in the face of the repair/reuse/sustainability mantra and forcing anyone who needs a touch screen into a smaller separate device just seems like a huge mis-step by Framework and not a vote of support for the loyal fans who have previously purchased F13/F16?
The F12 seems to be targeting a more budget market - it was originally designed with high schoolers in mind, apparently. Hence the plastic chassis, reduced mainboard capabilities (single ram slot, lower end processor), etc. So there’s a reason for it to be separate from the 13 - Granted, that all depends a lot on how much it actually ends up costing.
That said, I definitely would have liked to have seen the touchscreen as an option on the 13. Maybe that’s in the works, maybe there’s some reason they can’t/won’t do it, I can’t say for sure.
Yes, I’ve wondered if there was a technical reason for no touchscreen on F13/16 too but I can’t think of a reason why that would be the case. I suspect retro fitting a 360 yoga style hinge might be harder, especially for F16 with full expansion bay in place but the mid screen hinge seems trivial to do, same as surface studio and others and would be ideal for creatives as the mid hinge allows for flat and angled use for drawing etc. BTW I hope my comments here are seen as constructive and supportive, I’m a huge Framework fan, just can’t work out the strategy to overlook touchscreens here and as for ‘budget’ we shall see how the F12 cost compares to a base F13 etc.
I wouldn’t be too surprised if they eventually have touch-screen options for the FW13, and maybe even 16. But I also don’t have an issue with Framework selling a separate, 2-in-1 device. I guess I don’t see why repairable/sustainable has to mean one, universal device for all people and all situations. Unfortunately, no one device, even with a giant set of various conversion parts for different situations, is going to please everyone. Sure, having part interoperability saves manufacturing cost and reduces the number of sku’s that have to be maintained in inventory. But as long as all devices are repairable and supported with parts for a long time, I don’t see why it’s a problem.
Don’t get me wrong. There’s nothing wrong with wanting/wishing for a conversion case/display to turn the FW13 into a 2-in-1 (however that was made to happen). But I think that’s a separate issue. As long as the FW 13 continues to be supported and continues to receive updates (which it still is so far), and as long as this new FW12 gets the same, long-term support, then I don’t see anything against Framework’s mission here.
Framework has previously noted I believe they tend to use monitors that have already been designed by other companies, as paying for the design is expensive. To my understanding there are a limited number of 13.5 inch monitors with a 3:2 aspect ratio, and one of the reasons the 2.8k monitor for instance had rounded corners was because it was the choice of the company who designed it rather than framework, and it was the best available option for a higher resolution monitor. Of course the 2.8k monitor did seem to come with touchscreen version for the Lenovo 13x g4 I believe, so perhaps there is a technical limitation of some sort why that particular version wasn’t utilized.
Although during the presentation I thought it was mentioned the FW12 monitor was custom made (or something like that), which makes me wonder if they did design the monitor for the FW12 themselves this time (or is it custom in that they had to deal with a tech issue of some sort?).
Yeah, that confused me a bit too. ‘Budget Laptop’ and ‘Custom Designed Display Panel’ seem at odds with one another if they’ve already been using premade panels for their expensive machines - but we’ll have to wait and see the actual price.
“But as long as all devices are repairable and supported with parts for a long time, I don’t see why it’s a problem”. Yes I can see your good point that there may seemingly be little downside to adding to the ecosystem but the case against that is: 1. lots of FW owners are waiting for a touchscreen - Framework have now finally released a touchscreen but none of us can use it on our existing chasis’ without buying a whole new device. That’s not a good ‘re-use’ vibe 2. the size difference between the F12 and F13 is not decisive (unlike the clearly different use case of F16) and so if you had both F12 and F13 devices you would be juggling between two very similar devices which doesn’t seem clean from a logical/strategic design point of view 3. unless there is some significant as yet undisclosed technical or commercial impediment to putting a touch screen on F13/16 it seems the obvious and logical approach.
Perhaps Framework can be more transparent with owners/fans and explain their reasoning? Does Framework for example want to be responsive to what it’s user base wants or would it prefer to just produce products and see if the market adopts them? My personal guess is that an ARM motherboard and retrofit touchscreens for F13/F16 would be amongst the highest priorites/wishlists for many existing Framework fans and probably well ahead of a desktop PC or F12 or incremental motherboard spec bumps? I think if ‘right to repair’ fans are going to continue to support Framework commercially then there needs to be greater Community involvement in the strategic choices Framework is making. “Give the people what they want”. As mentioned, I don’t want to be too hard on Framework but there was a lot of buzz generated prior to this 2025 event and personally, the hardware releases that I need or was hoping for were not addressed, the website queuing wasn’t a good look and I suspect these critiques are echoed by many F13/F16 owners who may not have troubled to express themselves on social media or forums yet. I was going to pre-order the desktop but the website queued me and since all DIY desktops are right to repair anyway I just couldn’t help thinking that the strategic direction Framework is choosing is missing the mark? Happy to be wrong, so let me have it if you disagree : )
I would argue that they are actually quite different. For me personally, the extra bit of screen space with a 13 inch display is significant (although the 12 inch displays I’ve used have been 16:9 and it looks like the FW12 display is 3:2).
Also, they’re quite clearly targeted for different uses. As much as people have expressed interest in the 12, it was not built for them, it was built for students. On the other hand the 13 and 16 are professional devices.
I think they likely have a philosophy of not sharing something until they’re absolutely sure it’s going to happen. I’ve seen how more transparency has been detrimental to the communities relationship with other companies, and as much as I value transparency, it’s probably a good choice for them to only make promises they’ve already fulfilled.
At least in this year (given the announced products), it seems like they will be doing neither of those, but instead looking at what spaces exist in the market and trying to move into them. There is, for example, a market for a small, performant, and long-lived device to be used in education. As for the second bit - I don’t think they have the existing user base as the highest priority on the roadmap (As in, what new things are planned. I don’t think they are planning to abandon existing users). I think the goal may be to expand and reach more people, and I think for that purpose, keeping the 13 current and releasing a device aimed at students make sense.
The “expand and reach more people” idea you mention is very much lined up with Framework’s purported missions. I’m all for it. I wish there were some publicly-disclosed FW16 upgrades on the horizon, but I’m 1. happy as hell with my FW16 as-is and 2. fully in support of Framework reaching more people in more markets. The bigger their footprint becomes, the better.
Also: Nirav mentioning the intention of a long future for the FW16 assuaged most of my background wondering. Onwards!
Here is my completely uninformed guess about the lack of touchscreen as a FW13 owner. A touchscreen without a 360 degree hinge would be nice, but not dramatic. It’s not going to make or break many people’s experiences with the machine. So it makes perfect sense that a touchscreen would not be a high enough priority for anyone to actually work on unless they also intend to create a 360 degree hinge. And when I look at the bottom of my FW13, which with a 360 degree hinge would be folded against the top, it’s not at all flat. It’s at an angle where the speakers are. It has rubber bits that stick out quite a bit. That geometry is not going to work, even if a 360 degree hinge could be designed. There are also vents on the bottom for the cooling system. If the top were folded against the bottom, there would presumably be thermal issues. The FW13 was not designed to ever be a 2-in-1, and I don’t think it ever will be. Given that, the choice to create a whole new slightly smaller device to be the 2-in-1 makes sense.
That said, I imagine I will want to move to the 2-in-1 when it is available. I was a dedicated 2-in-1 user before I came to framework. But after investing in the FW13 ecosystem for 2 years, getting all the components just the way I want them, it is disappointing to have to give all that up to get a 2-in-1 framework.
I wouldn’t mind a 340 degree hinge, As long as I can mostly open the device.
The bottom cover seems to go for about a 100 dollars, it wouldn’t be that bad to buy a new bottom cover with the hinge. Imagine it as a second gen chassi with the same internals and keyboard deck.
I guess the differences in perspective discussed here are why a broad and general disclosure of Framework’s ‘priorities’ and product roadmap would be really helpful for loyal owners of F13/F16? For example, if Framework has, say, no intention of ever producing a mid screen hinge touchscreen for F13/F16 because it is never going to be viable for some reason, then this is information that existing Framework owners would appreciate having ASAP so that they can be informed whether to remain supportive, patient & excited vs moving to other hardware options for their touchscreen needs. Opaque strategic planning is fair enough if customers are just commercial units. If on the other hand Framework seeks committed brand loyalty and buy in from it’s customers then being more collaborative, consultative with it’s ‘community’ and working with the people who will be the future buyers of their products would seem logical and win-win. Once again I echo the “happy as hell” comments in this thread but at the same time we need to know going forward whether Framework is willing to work in partnership with the Community or whether, as appears to have happened at this Event, Framework just apparently randomly presents a desktop and an F12 to the Community when I think a good number of existing F13/F16 customers were really hoping for further extensions of their existing devices via an ARM motherboard or retrofit touchscreens. So I think better and closer strategic communication between Framework and it’s Community might help prevent disappointments, provide better ‘expectations management’ and prevent ‘confusion’ about what Framework’s strategic goals are? Yes we love Framework 13/16, yes new products are interesting but most of all I think the Community wants to feel that there is alignment between it’s expectations and Framework’s product release plans and this needs better collaboration and communication. It’s all very well to generate excitement around a media event with mystery emojis but perhaps customers would prefer a more certain product release plan rather than apparently random, if both disappointing and quite pleasant, surprises? What’s the strategic plan for F13/F16?