I know HDD is outdated and SSD is superior in many ways. But, HDD is a cheap way to store many things and I hope we can have Framework Laptop that support HDD and SSD side by side like Gigabyte/XMG A5 X1. Is that possible?
As it stands there isn’t nearly enough space in the Framework to fit an internal HDD. A USB-C external drive would be a good option for mass storage.
Maybe in the future if there’s a larger Framework chassis (15" or 17"), there may be support for an internal HDD, though I’d bet that more people would prefer to have more NVMe slots. Maybe they can borrow the removable CD drive idea from the Thinkpad. Back in the day I replaced my CD drive with a 2.5" HDD carrier, and that sort of modularity fits right in with Framework.
yes that high end laptop I mentioned is 15 inch laptop. Besides, it is good idea if there is an option to insert HDD because the price difference of HDD and SSD in the market and also it is nice secondary storage alongside SSD that plays as a primary OS storage.
I think for a bigger Laptop this surly migth be an option.
For a 13 inch one, but also for any other size, I think external storage and options like having a NAS or Cloud Storage are pretty wide spread by now. That is why I do not see a great need for something like that.
But I get your point and for a bigger version of the framework, maybe even with a dGPU, this migth be great way to have all the games with me on the go and not spend a fortune.
NAS or cloud storage is a nice idea but, for someone who live with unstable Internet connection, that is no good. So, somewhat decent and cheap additional local storage is quite nice.
The drawbacks of supporting 2.5" drives far outweigh the benefits. HDD’s/SSD’s can’t even saturate a 5/10 Gbps USB 3 connection, so it’s best to just get external ones, which are often cheaper than internal drives.
@taeyeon if you like messy wires and I am sure most people don’t
A local NAS relies on your local network, not your internet connection. Though you may have been talking primarily about cloud storage.
Personally, I would never want a large capacity, spinning drive for data storage on a mobile device now that SSD prices have come down so much. If I need to store that much data, I wouldn’t want it on a drive that could be damaged or destroyed if I bump the laptop too hard while the drive is being accessed.
I’d much rather have a decent amount of SSD storage internally, and if I needed bulk storage in addition to that, I’d far prefer a NAS or even just an external HDD I plug into my laptop when needed, or plug into my router to access over the network.
A 2TB, 2.5" SSD is pretty cheap, so I understand the draw. But I would never want one in a laptop these days.
Honestly, my solution to this was to setup a desktop+laptop system. My desktop acts as my primary storage (since I can easily upgrade to support arbitrary amounts of storage and combine different types of storage as required) and is accessible from outside my local network (over
ssh). My laptop can function on its own when required (a small subset of files is on my laptop), but can pull files from my desktop if necessary. It gives me the best of both worlds, since I can pull files to my laptop as needed (either before leaving my apartment if I know internet connection will be unstable/inaccessible or on an as-needed basis if I know internet connection will be even somewhat reliable) but don’t need an internet connection all the time as would be required for using my laptop as a dumb portal to remote storage.
I would like a dual NVMe setup. QLC flash drives are pretty cheap and offer similar performance to SATA in a smaller footprint.
@BigT NAS is useless if we want to use the laptop when we are on travelling (on plane etc). Personally, my laptop have 1 SSD (ntfs), 1 SSD (ext4) and 1 blank NTFS HDD. So, it would be nice if we have an additional local cheap storage (photos, videos etc) and that carelessness behaviour you mentioned is totally depend on the individual habits and usage style.
@David_Tan I agree that in principle, it would be nice to have more local storage options. The fact of the matter is that for many people, form factor trumps literally everything else. They want thin, light, and generally portable laptops. This has been exacerbated by the prevalence of server-side computing for intensive tasks anyway (which means that you can often offload computationally expensive operations onto a remote server/cluster/etc). And, for obvious business reasons, it makes sense for Framework to target that sector first (before potentially expanding into other sectors). This is why there is no dGPU. This is why storage is somewhat limited.
Speaking for myself, I’ve decided to move from a desktop-replacement laptop (thick, clunky, power-hungry) to a combination of a desktop and a light laptop. As someone who has recently switched, it’s so much better in almost every possible way:
- Thin-and-light laptops tend to be much more power-efficient, namely because they rely on an iGPU (among other reasons).
- Desktops are way easier to get better thermals on, which is important if you’re going to be regularly running intensive stuff on there.
- You can setup your desktop to be accessible from outside your local network so that you always have access to the full set of files. As for when you know you won’t have internet access, you can selectively transfer files over beforehand.
It’s not perfect, but it’s honestly way better than lugging a thicc laptop around.
I’ve just gotten used to carrying an external drive in my computer bag (previously an HDD, lately an SSD). It is tiny and I can plug it in if I happen to need access to photos or videos, etc. while traveling. I understand that I could have an internal HDD and still have an external drive, but I’d personally FAR prefer a second M.2 slot vs. a 2.5" drive bay with an HDD in it.
I’m not saying you’re wrong to want an internal HDD. Just adding my thoughts to the discussion.