Basically, asking which of the following poll options is closest to true
Made it a poll because polls are fun
They may include some pads for keyboard support in the future, but I’m guessing they won’t because I don’t see the issue on my device.
There’s a new BIOS undergoing testing that resolves some issues like the 2230 m.2 disconnecting.
Hardware is mostly set, however they may add some rubber pads (in addition to the ones that already exist) to reduce the amount that the keyboard flexes when typing.
However they have stated that if they do decide to do that they will offer the pads for free to people that already own the laptop.
Software/drivers have two issues that Framework has said they’re working on to fix some stability issues with the second SSD slot and with the MUX (the mux is the part that switches the system between the two GPUs).
Overall I selected the “Hardware is set for foreseeable future, software/driver improvements are being made” because the hardware that you get with the laptop is set (the additional pads are not a change but an addition, the aren’t significant, and will be freely available).
Well Framework was able to measure the issue on their devices when testing and determined it was significant enough to warrant fixing.
I agree that it isn’t a major issue in my experience, but some people seem to be more sensitive to it and on a laptop this expensive it shouldn’t be an issue.
As of 11 days ago Framework has a status update that sounded like they’re still planning on it:
“We shared an improvement in an earlier email which involves adding five additional rubber pads around the Mainboard to provide additional support to the keyboard. In parallel to our manufacturing partner completing qualification testing on this, we’ve started dogfooding it internally in Framework. If you’re not familiar with “dogfooding”, it comes from the idea of “eating your own dog food”, or making sure you’re testing what you’re making before others do. As we mentioned in the earlier email, once we complete testing, assuming the results are positive we will roll this into new production and share a form for existing Framework Laptop 16 owners to request a kit of pads.”
I wonder how close were getting these pads in new batches
I’m pretty sure they’re about to laugh a new webcam with Windows facial recognition, so that’s a thing.
what makes you say that
Daniel Schaefer’s talk at the linux dev conference (16:22 of Youtube video: “Framework: What It’s Like to Build an Open Repairable Laptop”) mentioned several potential upgrades which included a better camera, and Linus mentioned offhandedly in a video that he’s been daily driving a laptop with Windows Hello facial recognition. Is it deep speculation? Of course. But I suspect it’s correct. Timeframe is obviously anyone’s guess, but it’s been about a year since their last set of announcements.
Unless you have good reason to believe that, I doubt they’re planning to introduce that. Windows Hello face authentication requires a second camera that’s made for infrared. The FWL16 bezel has no spot for it. The molds required for injection molded plastic parts are very expensive. If they planned to add an IR camera option, I believe they would have added a window for it in the current bezel. The current bezels only have spots for the main camera & the ambient light sensor. The IR cameras I’ve seen for Windows face authentication also have high power IR LEDs.
Framework stopped doing transparent bezels because they discovered the yield is too low without creating a separate mold for it.
Yeah, that’s a fair point. I thought about that too, and I don’t know how they would have solved it. I do doubt that they’ll change the bezel, but one of the engineers stated in a live stream that they’re quite good about designing support into current products for future features, so I won’t be surprised if they’ve somehow accounted of it. One of the negatives in the original set of framework 11th gen reviews was the lack of Windows Hello, so there’s been plenty of time for them to consider that feedback and design a new module to support it. That said, I’m also happy to be wrong; I’m simply having fun speculating. I’ll happily give you a metaphorical high-five if you’re correct, but I’ll leave my flag where I left it in the sand (for all that that’s worth [not much, I admit]).
Just as speculation for fun, I expect that ambient light sensor spot could be used for a IR camera.
Thanks for the support for speculation for fun! Yeah, that seems plausible. (Again, happy to be wrong. I don’t particularly want to argue with anyone.)
The IR cameras I’ve seen for Windows hello face authentication also have high power IR LEDs. My Thinkpad has two LEDs, one right next to the IR camera, the 2nd offset to the side. All together, the window for it is 3cm long.
When I look up pictures of other Windows hello cameras, they all either have visible spots for LEDs or a “black” window large enough to hide them behind. I think an IR LED would be a requirement, since indoor lights these days don’t produce IR.
Looking at that picture, I suspect that during face recognition the two IR LEDs are operated alternately so that the camera effectively gets a 3D view of the face due to slightly different lighting angles. In this way they can be assured that the camera is viewing a real face and not a picture.
It would be interesting to see what the result is if someone tries to log in using a picture of themselves instead of a live face.
That’s what suspected as well. They do flash very rapidly when on. But it’s too fast for me to tell if they are in fact alternating. Not sure what other reason they’d have to flash rapidly.
