Why can no laptop manufacturer even make this an option?
I've not had to configure anything to make this work for a number of years now in Plasma. Though I've been running Linux on Macbooks for a long time, so maybe it's about specific hardware support.
I own an nc8430 and a ZBook 15 first generation. I use the lower row of three mouse buttons as left, middle and right click. Those touchpads don't move and don't bend. I disabled tap to click as buttons are much better and never move accidentally the pointer by design. Palm detection works very well, basically no issues. I use two finger scroll and pan. Several gestures work but I don't really like them. I disabled everything. I rather use keyboard shortcuts. I defined some of my own especially to navigate among virtual desktops.
There is still one ZBook Fury model with buttons, every other model lost them.
There is this for Linux but I've never tried it:
How are they slower/impossible?
Not sure if it's a hardware (Dell) or software (Ubuntu) improvement, but thank god.
Don't think any one x86 laptop manufacturer can fix it.
Could you do the "press harder" part with, e.g. a thumb in an other region of the touchpad instead of the finger that did the navigation?
But ok, what about just dragging a long distance where you would normally lift the mouse or finger? Is there some hidden gesture for this? Maybe once your initial drag finger hits the edge you need to use two more to do a move gesture? But I've seen that trigger scroll and/or pinch-to-zoom.
This is why you set Trackpad speed to "fastest", and take advantage of the aggressive trackpad acceleration. When you move your finger quickly you'll easily reach the far side of the screen before your finger reaches the edge of the pad, and slow finger movements will still be precise
As far as I know touchpad implementations just report finger locations and its up to software to interpret what a combination of these gestures means.
https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/p/laptops/thinkpad/thinkpadp/th...
Someone should scoop up the niche market of anguished ThinkPad devotees, with a TrackPoint and a good, non-chiclet keyboard. Maybe Framework, leveraging its modular system. Maybe a Framework-compatible third-party.
I wonder what the set intersection is, between people who want TrackPoint sticks, and people who don't want TrackPoint buttons.
ThinkPad industrial design the last several years seems focused on looking thin and sleek -- like an Apple product, only in matte black, with a red accent in the middle of the keyboard -- but some of the human factors changes aren't intuitive to me.
There's a few that are close, but still not close enough. Also, Mac slightly changed their default settings (regarding the physical click behavior), I never recall what it is but only that I change it back when starting out on a new machine.
The type that doesn’t move at all and simulates a click with haptics on the other hand I find just fine. MacBooks do this of course but there’s also a few x86 laptops equipped with pads like that.
So in my opinion, mechanical clickpads should disappear entirely and laptops should offer two options: a static haptic clickpad and traditional trackpad with buttons.
Which isn't to say I don't use the click functionality at all. I will subconciously use it in some scenarios, but not in others, but if it were missing I would adapt very quickly, since I use the gesture alternatives so often, that I would automatically fall back to them.
I suppose I need the click for some obscure interactions like right click drag, but honestly except in games I've almost never seen that used. My surface laptop as currently configured literally wouldn't even allow some other rare ones like hold button and scroll (I'd need to turn on right side scroll-wheel for that) and I've never even noticed the absence of that ability until I tried it just now.
I don't think I can rely on laptop manufacturers to buck the clickpad trend any time soon, so I'll do it myself.
Because it’s a variation of both the case and the internals that brings a higher failure rate, more dust ingress, more moving parts, and, most importantly, would rarely be chosen.
> They are so much slower,
They are objectively faster because you can click anywhere rather than moving a finger to a button or keeping one finger always on the button.
I have no problem with the current trackpad (and prefer it), but when I used a trackpad with dedicated buttons, i'd use my index finger to track and my thumb to click, so I wouldn't have to move my fingers around at all.
Regardless, why do we feel the need to argue with people's personal preferences? You don't have to agree with someone on this. It's fine. People can prefer other things.
How might we go about registering the quantity of that demand?
But only because they are all worse than Apple's version. What you really want isn't a touchpad with buttons, is a "clickpad" that doesn't suck. And as far as I know only Apple makes them.
[0] https://frame.work/products/framework-laptop-13-mainboard-ki...
The beefier business line models are still decent though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing_stick#Naming_and_bran...
> Something that we hear over and over again across our entire product lineup is that people want pointing sticks. You might know it as trackpoint from other brands. The little nubs that you can use as a mouse. Obviously, if you're a ThinkPad user, former ThinkPad user, that might be something that you're very familiar and comfortable with. And so, it is something that actually on all of our products several times over the last 5 years, we have tried to prototype and make work. The big challenge on this actually is just that there's very, very little space here. That the Zstack here is incredibly thin.
> And for a keyboard, it works because the keys are compliant. If there's force that's put on the lid, like let's say you're got your laptop in a backpack with a book or something, it's just being pressed on like that, the screen is going to touch the keys and the keys are going to give way because they're just on these uh on these scissor mechanisms and the screen will be okay and you may get a little smudge you have to wipe off. You've got like finger grease on there.
> A pointing stick though is not compliant. Not compliant in that way. So, you've got this like sharp point basically sticking out from the keyboard. And if there's pressure placed on the lid, that's going to go right onto that point on the tracking stick and end up damaging screen or have a high likelihood of damaging the screen.
> And so, we've just kept over and over, we've kept trying this and seeing if we could get a low enough profile pointing stick solution to make that work, not risk the screen at all. And so far, that doesn't exist. That is something that we keep going into the supply base to try to find.
> Hopefully we that is something we find in the future because of course with this input module system on framework laptop 16, it would end up being relatively straightforward for us to just make an input module a keyboard that you can swap in that's got that pointing stick unlike uh you know even our other laptops where you'd have to have an entirely new input cover to get that kind of functionality.
I am thinking that something with a nub on a 2-axis slider as opposed to rocker switches could be an option, but that would potentially have drift issues. Not to mention the Framework keyboards themselves are probably mostly a COTS solution, where something like I'm thinking would require custom R&D an likely be limited release. If Framework, Dell and Lenovo could work together, they could probably come up with a good solution... though Lenovo likes the Fn button in the corner, where most others prefer Ctrl then Fn.
We just have to let go. A haptic trackpad is miles better now.
Would u consider setting up an assembly plant outside the US to sell to to customers internationally? I’m in Australia.
And if not, could you elaborate?
It would also be a huge benefit to use a replaced mainboard as a homelab base WITH ECC support in the future.
Same goes for the Framework Desktop, which features Strix Halo without ECC support, whereas ECC IS possible with Ryzen AI MAX+ 395+ PRO (e.g. HP Z2 Mini G1a).
Likely mostly down to resources/time as to the lack of official support.
Is the firmware identical for the models that ship with Windows and those that ship with Linux?
How well does Linux work out of the box? What kind of small glitches can a Linux user expect?
For the new generation, we'll list those as we get closer to shipments.
- Bazzite takes community contributions; whereas, SteamOS is packaged and distributed by Valve, and
- Bazzite is based on Fedora, so the work to support Fedora should bubble over to Bazzite.
I'm curious though, is there a big difference in functionality for SteamOS vs Bazzite. Are there things that work in Bazzite that wouldn't in pure SteamOS?
Yes. The firmware upgrade processes can differ, but there's no difference in firmware, and you can buy a Framework kit with no OS provided.
The only reason for me going with the Dell Premium 16 instead of framework, is that I need my 1920px screen width at 200% scaling.
Such a shame, the Framework is better in so many other ways.
Are you coming out with another coolermaster case for the 16 mainboard?
I want to make a custom dock with fans to force more cooling over the radiators. Could it be possible to "unlock" the 100W TDP of the 5070 in firmware or are there other hardware limitations like the interconnect?
Was adding the USB C power input on the GPU necessary to get full power? I see in the specs on github that VADP_GPU can take 100W into the mainboard and VSYS_GPU can supply 240W to the GPU. Are there any tradeoffs powering the system from the back ports vs the GPU?
Was the previous version of the AMD GPU not sending the display signal directly to the panel via the edp mux but instead via the igpu? If not is that something you can update in firmware? Can you publish how this was done so someone can make an oculink expansion board with displayport input?
Thanks to everyone at Framework for making such awesome hackable products!
https://frame.work/ro/en/marketplace?compatibility%5B%5D=lap...
Agreed that it would be great if the submission link was updated to be frame.work/laptop16 instead though.
This link may work better for you: https://frame.work/laptop16
I have tried several laptops, and nothing has even comes close in the last ten or so years.
I am hoping you might have some unique insight into this!
PS: Framework Laptop 16 looks great, will order one later this year and then get a GPU with more vram whenever available in future.
https://www.gitclear.com/blog/linux_touchpad_update_december...
Is there an ongoing effort on solving this?
It even crashes firefox itself, and the android UI.
Unfortunately I am unwilling to give further details except that it is firefox on a very reasonable Android device.
Where's the best places to go for troubleshooting, user guides, etc? I've played with all the bios and framework settings I can find, so I'm guessing it's hardware related, if that changes the resource recommendations.
I guess general "laptop maintenance" guides should be good enough? Guides that mention things like "Clean out all the dust/vent-junk once every X months/years" (if you have pets, you can't do this often enough it seems) and "redoing the thermal paste each X year".
What OS are you on? Also try opening it up, there just be some dust stuck in there or something
- Framework community forums: https://community.frame.work/
- Framework guides: https://guides.frame.work/c/Root
Here is the default link (US): https://frame.work/laptop16?tab=whats-new
I wish Framework would actually find out what their customers are using, maybe with a survey, because I'd be highly surprised if it was less than 2/3rds Linux (or other FOSS).
NVIDIA's 5070 is current gen, Radeon RX 7700S is RDNA3, whereas much improved RDNA4 exists.
There's also mention of gsync support on the screen. What about FreeSync with AMD?
It would be cutting out a massive chunk of Framework's potential customers to not even offer Nvidia GPUs.
I don't like Nvidia at all, they're a scummy company. But just offering their products as an option is not "openly hostile and offensive" to Linux users. That's a bizarre take.
Until modern times, Intel was the largest GPU manufacture, unless you include phones, then it was Qualcomm.
Now it's AMD, between computers, consoles, and the datacenter.
DGPUs for the desktop aren't really all that relevant for either AMD and NV's bottom lines, they're not major sellers. Switch sales also aren't enough to compete with combined Xbox/Playstation sales.
A lot of claims of NV's superiority is just marketing smoke and mirrors.
For things that are hyperoptimized for a specific vendor, it is usually for AMD, not Nvidia, because most of that time spent optimizing is not done for enterprise compute (as _very little_ optimization is done, companies just buy more GPUs instead of writing better software, under the mistaken belief that developer time is more expensive than GPU TCO) but for game engines.
Game engines that are highly optimized for hardware are doing it for the consoles, both of which are AMD.
The only thing superior about NV is their marketing department.
Yes, technically they make many by volume. But they are very limited integrated GPUs. Fine for basic encoding/decoding operations, not really practical outside of browsing and e-mail checking.
AMD has been doing fantastic in the mobile and console space, I admit that. Their products are decently energy efficient and powerful for what they are. But they're struggling to keep up with the leading edge and their market share is tanking because of it.
Nvidia has a 92% market share in the discrete GPU market, with AMD holding 8% and Intel 0%.
That is not a healthy spread.
Nobody cares if Nvidia sells lots of DGPUs if ye average Fortune 500 company isn't deploying devices with DGPUs in them and the app they're paying a million dollars a year for suddenly breaks on Intel.
People need to remember that there is an entire world of computing outside of datacenters and high performance desktops.
The new open source drivers that replace Novaeu aren't ready yet, and the closed source drivers had relentless drama over, first, refusal to support Wayland (after the head of Xorg, Keith Packard, officially announced the end of X development, and, second, how all future development will be for Wayland), and then trying to hijack the process with their unwanted EGLstreams API until finally relenting and supporting GBM.
I run Xorg, though. I guess Wayland is a sticking point.
Write them and ask if you could get the rebate. The times I've had this happened to me when shopping from small/medium-sized businesses they've been nice enough to either give me a refund for the difference, or at least a coupon for future purchases.
The specification targets on them are always chronically low.
I'm not sure the type-c (200-230w) would be sufficient to run these cards at their reccomended TGP (150w) + CPU (50w) + charge - not that most 16" productivity-oriented notebooks do (70-115W).
Gaming/productivity laptops of similar size ship with 300W power bricks now (e.g. MSI Vector 16 HX AI with RTX5090 ships with a 330W adapter to satisfy its 240W system power). It's also why most still use their own connector (ASUS decided to use their own connector due to conversion efficiency and heat issues with USB-C at high wattage).
Still, 330W pales in comparison of the TGP of a desktop-class RTX5070 (requires 250W). Nevermind the RTX5090's requirements (575W).
That doesn't matter much for most people though. The actual benefit is that the integrated GPU is very beefy.
I guess we could do an apples-to-apples comparison (Linux or Windows performance on Macs that have it). Not sure how that works out, though.
It was surprisingly not as expensive as I thought it would be. There are also 3rd party options that will swap in parts for you or try to repair things.
It’s not as satisfying as ordering the parts and changing it out yourself but at this point I don’t prioritize repairs or failures in my buying decisions any more.
It depends on what you want.
About a week ago I got a new 15" laptop with a Ryzen 7 6800H (8 cores / 16 threads) | Radeon 680M | 32 GB of RAM | 1 TB SSD | 1080p IPS panel for $570 USD. That 680m is an integrated GPU that can use up to 8 GB of your system RAM for its VRAM.
I put Arch Linux on it and it's quite nice. Things are very snappy.
A Macbook Air is almost 4x the price with the same memory / storage or 2x if you're ok with 16 GB of memory and a 256 GB SSD. No doubt the Air is going to be lighter, have better battery life and be quieter but this other one isn't too bad. Sure it has fans and sure it weighs 4.5 pounds but it's not a deal breaker.
I'm very happy with my framework!
If you spilled your drink on your Framework keyboard from your 13" system that you bought 5 years ago and you bought a replacement from Framework, you'd be getting a better and improved model of the keyboard. Same deal with issues like cracked screens, webcams, and batteries - since the original Framework came out, the company has upgraded those parts, and makes them available to people who bought the original system.
AliExpress 3rd party battery replacements are basically never as good as OEM.
That level of support is is unique and you are trying to downplay it as something that other OEM offers, and I think that's a little bit facetious.
Additionally, and non-trivially, the laptop's battery life is not good, and it drains very quickly on suspend. I have taken to leaving it plugged in when not in use. This may be a Linux issue, but still.
I agree with you: the idea is a good one, but my experience with the company has been not good.
1 - https://guides.frame.work/Guide/RTC+Battery+Substitution+on+...
This is awesome though, and exactly the sort of thing one buys a Framework for.
> the laptop's battery life is not good
Mine is great, I share a single USB-C cord among all my laptops (of which I have despairingly too many) and I often use my Framework all day while forgetting it's not plugged in. (Fedora, if the OS matters.)
It is certainly awesome for those that can, of course!
No, it's not awesome. Upgrading ram and disk or replacing a motherboard, screen or battery is great. Repairing a badly designed motherboard with a soldering iron is not great. In fact, it's bad. I think there's a good argument that it violates (warranty) law. If a car company sells to you based on "right to repair" and then it turns out there was a design defect in the engine, is it "awesome" if they tell you you need to pull the engine and rebuild it?
Glad your battery life is good. I notice you didn't mention it losing power when suspended. Curious.
Are you using a kernel > 6.8? It got (much) better.
`nvme.noacpi=1` should be on, too, for all kernels.
(all derived from the nixos-hardware repo; I use that)
Drain on suspend in particular has largely been resolved on newer mainboards, firmware, and kernel updates, though I don't have an 11th-gen Intel and haven't run Ubuntu for a long time.
Kernel updates fixed this on my 12th-gen, firmware updates fixed it on my 7040, and my Ultra 7 155H never experienced this issue.
Buying a brand new Framework tend to be more expensive then a ~ Chinese Laptop.
*New vs Upgrade*
In general, you can sell a second hand laptop at around 50% of the original price, about 2 years down the line (assuming you did not damage it).
So a new upgrade will be 50% cheaper. For that you tend to get (depending on the generation jump), more storage, more memory, potential better screen, faster CPU.
While a Framework upgrade may mean you gain a new Motherbord+CPU for the price of that equivalent laptop. But here you run into another economic issue. Sure, you can transplant your 2100mhz memory but what if 2660 is the standard. So you CPU upgrade is going to get throttled.
*Changes*
What if memory changed with a inner generational. So now that memory you had before is useless. You can recover some value, but are still forced to buy the generation memory.
That wifi card, 5e ... great, but now your getting maybe 6 standard in a new laptop.
Also do not forget, your laptop will have more wear and tear vs a new device. Keyboard may become a issue. Your oled screen may have reduced coloring after 1 or 2 generation of usage (oleds suffer from high screen brightness, and laptop are more often in locations like outdoors that run at 100% brightness).
*Compatibility*
What about compatibility? Maybe you had a Intel based Framework laptop, with a intel wifi card. The problem is, some intel wifi cards need specific intel instructions onboard the CPU. So now you upgraded to AMD but your wifi card becomes useless.
Yes, a new laptop is rolling the dice regarding defects or other issues. But so is upgrading a framework. The problem is, your getting all the not so fun parts of a desktop's upgradability, without the cost saving potential of a desktop.
*Resell issue*
Selling your framework memory, wifi card etc will not be a big issue. But the moment you want to sell a older part, now what? Great that you upgraded from 1080p screen to 4k by yourself, but who is going to buy your 1080p screen? Your at best looking at a small market of framework owners, and a even smaller market of framework owners that need a new screen (maybe to replace a damaged one).
What about the bezel changes? What about the keyboard? What is your buyers market. Sure, maybe you can sell your old MB/CPU but even that is a VERY specialized market of people, who maybe need one to repair their framework, or want a custom nas (cheaper to just buy a mini-pc from the dozens of Chinese brands) or the few people who run a very old framework mb, and upgrade (what about their selling 2+ generation old MB/CPU combo).
*Buyers*
Framework really is for people who do not like to change laptops / get used to new ones, and who have no issue taking in the extra costs of those upgrade potential. But then again, i see people running macbooks M1's still (darm good laptops), for 5 years. They did not need the upgrade path.
It really depends on you, what you really value. But from a economic point of view, your not going to be cheaper in the long run with a framework, and that is not the selling point also.
Plus, I suspect System76 would want to have a lot of control over the design that they would end up on the hook for.
If you want PopOS and/or System76 support, they're right there. You can just buy and use their kit.
Maybe Framework could be another System76 ODM, though.
In the end, I think the Framework is worth it if you have a desire to support the company and the mission, but I think most people should go refurbished if they only care about value.
I want something that can run an Linux, IDE and some tooling that I can stick in my bag and not care too much about it so I buy refurbs. Often there isn't much wrong with them other than minor cosmetic damage.
I always go for Dell Business or Lenovo Thinkpads. There are plenty of spare parts available online. They typically work well with Linux & BSDs. I can get a laptop that was a flag ship a few years ago for like 1/3rd the price and often it is more than good enough.
Weird phrasing. The #1 rule if you're getting hardware to run Linux is: don't by Nvidia.
Outside of Apple, there doesn't seem to be many good fanless laptops. I'd love to see Framework come up with something.
Is there any plans or similar for a 14in GPU enabled (with a decent TGP) laptop? I got a 14in laptop recently and find it very good for a power/perforamnce tradeoff (ASUS G14 or Razer Blade 14). Not to mention the amazing battery life.
My ASUS ROG Strix cost me $1500 back when the 3080's were new and has a 3080. Have prices risen that much?
So its more expensive but not $1500 vs $4000 expensive.
This was comparing the lowest end model ROG because that's the only one with a 5070. It was also 100% like-for-like, such as paying for windows, something I personally wouldn't do with a framework.
Mobile users suffer more problems then people with dedicated desktop GPUs, but it still gotten a lot better.
The one thing to be careful about AMD GPUs is that for most GPU OEMs AMD is just a after thought. So they get sub-par QA and heatsinks compared to their more popular Nvidia models.
It is best to go with card makers that only sell AMD GPUs, like Sapphire, PowerColor, and XFX. I am partial to Sapphire.
But the user-space portions are probably more significant for performance than the kernel drivers. Here we have:
- r300 and r600 (open source OpenGL backend for older hardware, sits on top of the radeon kernel driver, not much development happening)
- radeonsi (open source OpenGL backend for newer hardware, sits on top of either the radeon or amdgpu kernel drivers depending on hardware version and kernel configuration)
- fglrx (closed source OpenGL driver on top of the fglrx kernel driver, both obsolete now)
- radv (open source Vulkan driver on top of amdgpu)
- amgpu-pro (closed source Vulkan driver on top of amdgpu) - not sure if there is also still a proprietary OpenGL driver but if there is no one should care since radeonsi works well enough
- amdvlk (open source dumps of amdgpu-pro without proprietary shader compiler on top of amdgpu)
Then you have different shader compilers which also significantly affect both shader compile time and runtime performance:
- internal compiler used by r600
- LLVM (used by radeonsi and amdvlk)
- ACO (used by radv and possibly radeonsi these days)
- AMD's proprietary compiler (used by fglrx and amdgpu-pro)
And for X.org you also have different display drivers (fglrx, radeon, modesetting).
Once the rewritten "amdgpu" driver came out, things got much better. The first few cards created after that (IIRC the Polaris GPUs, RX 400's), the situation reversed. I still have had occasional issues with various Nvidia cards (normally driver updates breaking things), but for almost a decade now, I have not had issues with AMD GPUs under Linux.
[0] Except for pro features while using workstation cards. You need to use a proprietary driver for those, but even those share a lot of code with the open source driver.
Even Sea Islands/Southern Islands were much better with amdgpu (but you have to use a module parameter to enable support).
Not completely true either, it eventually supported most of the normal 3d primitives but gaming performance was never a priority because there were few developers and they weren't employed by AMD/ATI -- which also meant that some cards would only reach full feature support after their EOL, sadly.
The amdgpu also driver benefits from a lot of the groundwork that has been done since. The radeon driver is older than kernel features like KMS (kernel modesetting) and GEM (graphics execution manager), and the LLVM-based shader compiler in mesa (userspace). I'd say that the radeon driver was actually the proving ground for many of these features, because it was the most capable open source 3d driver: The Intel 845/915 hardware barely supported 3d operations, and the only 3d-capable open source driver for Nvidia was the reverse-engineered nouveau driver.
Luckily, many people working on the amdgpu driver are actually on AMD's payroll these days.
I forgot that name "fglrx", probably a mental self-defense mechanism. Those were some bad times, trying to get different display outputs to work at the same time, guessing and testing values in xorg.conf, so on. There was some community utility someone wrote to try and help with installation, reinstallation, configuration and reconfiguration, but the name eludes me now.
I would edit my post to correct it, but it seems the edit window has passed.
Ah and hardware video decoding never ever worked again.
So much for the so called advantages of an open source driver.
So it is both driver changes and architectural changes.
There is also AMDGPU-PRO, which is the proprietary version based on AMDGPU. Used to be you'd need it for ROCm, but that hasn't been true for a while not. There really isn't any reason to use the "pro" version anymore, unless you have a some special proprietary app that requires it.
Open source GPU drivers are based on Mesa stack. So they share a common code base and support for things like Vulkan.
So it is sorta similar to how DirectX works. With old-school OpenGL drivers each stack was proprietary to the GPU manufacturer so there was lots of quirks and extensions that applied to only one or another GPU. That is one of the reasons DirectX displaced OpenGL in gaming... Microsoft 'owned' DirectX/Direct3d stack.
Well the open source equivalent to that is Mesa. Mesa provides APi support in software and it is then ported to each GPU with "dri drivers".
For gaming things have improved tremendously with "Proton", which is essentially Wine with vastly improved Direct3D support.
This is accomplished with "DXVK", which is a Direct3D to Vulkan translator.
This way Linux essentially gets close to "native windows speed" for most games that support proton in one way or another.
Which means that most games run on Linux now. Probably over 75% that are available on Steam, although "running" doesn't mean it is perfect.
One of the biggest problems faced with Linux gaming nowadays is anti-cheat features for competitive online games. Most of the software anti-piracy and anti-cheating features games use can technically work on Linux, but it is really up to the game manufacturer to make it work and support it. Linux gamers can sometimes make it work, but also they get flagged and booted and even accounts locked for being suspected of cheating.
The only issues you may run into if you distro doesn't include the firmware. e.g. This was the case with Debian 11 and you had to enable the non-free repo.
The only other problem you can conceivably have is card isn't supported by the kernel because it is too new. This can be fixed by upgrading the kernel. In Debian you can use a backports kernel, I am sure there are similar options in other distros.
When I was using my old 1080Ti, I had constant issues with the NVIDIA drivers. Acceleration didn't work on the second screen sometimes. There was some magic setting that would unset itself.
The days of Nvidia proprietary drivers being a safe bet is long gone. Especially for any sort of Wayland desktop, but it still applies to X11.
Intel drivers should be good as well, since they use the same Mesa code base.
With the ROCm stuff no longer depending on AMD Pro then there is not going to be any reason to step away from the default GPU drivers provided by your distro, provided they are relatively new.
While I am sure that there are still going to be professional-grade proprietary apps that recommend Nvidia... for most of us the only reason to actually go and choose Nvidia on Linux is because of CUDA. And, personally, I would rather lease time on the cloud or have a second GPU work horse PC separate from my desktop for that.
Unfortunately Nvidia is, by far, the most popular option for Windows users. Over 4:1 ratio according to Steam statistics.
So most new Linux users are still going to have to suffer through dealing with their GPU drivers.
They use the same front end but that says very little about the quality of the overall driver. Performance is mostly determined by the shader compiler and other hardware-specific parts which obviously differ between Intel and AMD.
There's a reason why a lot of us sat on the sidelines and were looking forward to the 16". There is no slippery slope here, the differentiated product lines 100% make sense.
Edit: there is another class I could see making sense - desktop replacement. Those chassis' tend to be pretty chunky because they put desktop parts into a laptop. Think 10 lb laptop with a battery that lasts 20-30 minutes. But I'm not sure if the market is large enough for them to pursue it.
E.g sockets and chipsets change and will force incompatible changes, no matter how much framework would like to keep things stable.
Framework does work with ODMs (Compal, I believe, is their main one?) to design mainboards for their chassis, which are designed specifically for Framework. It's not like they just take an off-the-shelf design and build it without any modifications.
And yes, chipsets change. (A "socket" changing isn't really a thing when we're talking about a laptop where the CPU/SoC is soldered in.) Generally this isn't a problem, though: as long as you can design something that physically fits in the chassis and supports the features you want, you're fine.
I believe the framework CEO himself mentioned in an interview how the chipset and socket are kinda at the core of designing the whole laptop, because it necessitates the placement of the cooling and all other components. I sadly didn't bookmark that YouTube video, so I cannot provide a link however
And fwiw, Apple is the only company that could make their laptops fully compatible and upgradeable, because they've got the relevant stack under their own control. Sadly, they're not interested in reducing ewaste, as that would mean less profit for them
Unless you already have the Ryzen AI 300 motherboard - in which case you're up to date - you can upgrade your motherboard right now:
https://frame.work/marketplace?compatibility%5B%5D=amd_ryzen...
You can hardly expect Framework to reconfigure the physical structure of your laptop to support a new GPU card when the device didn't have one to begin with.
You seem to be looking for something to complain about.
I've upgraded my Framework 13 a bunch already since I bought it in 2022, and will hopefully continue to do so for years.
You assume Framework will just abandon models willy nilly and make slight model line changes to break compatibility like moving from 16” to 17”, but in reality they have no track record of doing that.
The original 13” model has been around for 5+ years and it’s been 100% forward and backward compatible through multiple iterations of parts. Framework has never discontinued a product line.
Obviously we can’t predict the future.
On the OP page, it says:
> Pick up all these upgrades from our Marketplace to extend the life of your existing Framework Laptop 16.
I'd be more concerned about what I'd be able to do with an older 16-inch mainboard, as the 13-inch has the Cooler Master case options.
Still rocking the Intel Tiger Lake 13-inch here, mixed Windows / Ubuntu workflow, loads of RAM.
Now that I have it working I see random glitches here and there that I can't pin down. Some Electron apps I have to turn off GPU acceleration or they won't get any windows showing up - they launch, the process exists, they're in the dock as active, but the window doesn't appear at all.
Getting a new laptop from work to replace this one and I'm really hoping it won't have nvidia hardware - or at least, if it does I can disable it and the Intel GPU will work fine also.
I've been trying for weeks to get ComfyUI to not explode without success.
Compared to AMD and Intel, NVIDIA is very much not an 'out of the box', or stable experience.
Anyway, in case someone was interested it seems the code itself is cited as MIT, however it has a "when it becomes a Linux .ko it becomes GPLv2" clause https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-kernel-modules/blob/580.7... and they do go out of their way to say "lol, needs binary blobs" https://github.com/NVIDIA/open-gpu-kernel-modules/blob/580.7...
That XFree86.run has always struck me as "you're gonna what*?"
Given both Framework and NVIDIA's checkered histories around Linux driver support, I see no reason to revisit that, but it is interesting to see the voices in this thread with positive NVIDIA experience.
Maybe its just a problem with older Nvidia gpu's, but its not a gamble I want to take
From a value proposition, it seems good. Our group definitely goes through keyboards and mainboards from spilled tea at least annually it seems, but AppleCare is just a no-brainer, and away we go.
I still drive on my original M1 at home without complaint, and use my M3 at work. Anyone have the early Frameworks still in daily use? How are they?
Honestly it'll probably last me another 5 years before I need to switch out the mainboard. I don't do anything intense like gaming.
Went and installed Slimbook Battery and left it at default settings and got several more hours of battery life without having to close everything. Had to reinstall later and just installed TLP and left it at default settings and still getting far better battery life.
Not sure why Ubuntu is so cripplingly bad out of the box when it's so easy to fix, but if you haven't tried that it might be worth checking out.
I'm happy with my framework 13 four years later. I might switch to the stiffer hinge and/or a matte screen in the future. Might try one of the AMD mainboards in a few generations when they're cheaper and put my current mainboard into another case...
Edit: FWIW I bought a macbook air M1 a year after getting the framework 13, and ended up selling it. The battery life on the macbook air was significantly better, but I can still spend an entire workday in the park with the glossy framework 13 without needing to recharge so the extra battery life from the M1 didn't really have a ton of value for me.
This was some seriously infuriating bullshit. I remember them blaming it on intel on the forums, even though no other laptop had the issue.
In my case, replacing the battery with a random aliexpress ine fixed the issue, and they could have just said so.
Really made me lose trust in the company.
Unfortunately I do not think anyone comes remotely close to Apple in the battery life department. I have an M2 Air that I really adore, but after driving Linux on my workstation for the last 2 years I want to explore Linux laptops. All my research has concluded that if you care about longevity, a Mac is the only way to go.
The MacBook has a better trackpad, stronger case, better battery life, far better display. But the ThinkPad has NixOS running perfectly (I had Asahi on my Mac Studio, but with the lack of Thunderbolt and not so great battery life I don't want to run it on a MacBook). At any rate, the Mac is going to be better, but I have to sacrifice a bit for tech-feudalism-free computing (Mac is slowly becoming more and more closed).
The battery life is good enough that I never worry/think about it. The keyboard is fantastic. The trackpad is meh, not terrible but not MacBook great—use a mouse or vim :)
When I first got a 12th-gen Intel mainboard FW13 with the original 55Wh battery running stock Ubuntu, the battery life at best was <6 hours. Since moving to the 7040 AMD mainboard, the upgraded 61Wh battery, and Fedora, I've not run out of battery in an 8-hour workday. I've also got an Ultra 7 155H mainboard with the same work performance with respect to battery life.
I can't speak to the FW16s with 85Wh batteries, but I also don't consider them as being designed with either work or battery life as priorities.
Framework doesn't provide official optimized Linux power management profiles. Community profiles make up some of the difference, but if untuned battery life out of the box is a priority to you, and if you also don't care about the process of replacing its battery, just get a Mac. If Linux is an additional priority to you, get an old M1 or M2 MBP with a low battery cycle count and run Fedora Asahi Remix on it.
Is this difficult? Would it not behoove them to do this and get better work-hour scores? I would imagine it would be part of making sure the screen can dim, touch pad works, etc in terms of "building a quality product".
I dont mean this in a snarky way, I just figure if you're making it and know the products in it, couldn't you optimise a power profile for it? Or perhaps they "know" it has an AMD/Intel processor in it, but that isn't enough to really do a worthwhile job and it's more on AMD/Intel to do it?
I can easily do 10-12 hours on my M4 MBP. My framework AMD 13 can do maybe half that if I have it on power save mode and I don't do anything heavy.
The keyboard is good, speakers are meh, track pad is not as good as Mac. Form factor is good.
Build quality of the MBP is better. The machine feels more solid. The battery life is better, although to be fair, I run Linux on the Framework so the hardware itself isn't the only difference.
The Framework 16 wins hands-down when it comes to ports, one of my biggest pain points with any Apple laptop in the last 10 years. It has six of them and I can mostly arrange them according to my needs. In the rare cases where I plug it into an external monitor, I swap out one of the USB ports for an HDMI port. If I'm using more older devices than normal, I replace the USB-C ports with USB-A ports. I say "mostly" here because not all ports work in all positions.
The repairability and openness of the Framework laptop were the big draws for me and it delivered well on both counts. I'm happy with it.
Framework has pretty minimal keyboard deck flex and other measures of build quality that actually impact usage. I think it fares better than a good chunk of PC competitors like the ThinkPad T14.
The only thing Framework really needs is a haptic trackpad and it'd be pretty much there in terms of the build feel. I also like how Apple puts the air intakes on the side rather than the bottom where they're frequently blocked by a lap or a soft surface.
We sorely need more competition in the 2in1 segment, there aren't many good options. Either gaming laptops (no long commitment, bad build quality) or Lenovo Yogas (bad value, limited/weak hw options).
They’ve even mentioned in another video I watched that their fastest growing segment is business customers.
Their systems have unique features and value proposition nobody else is offering so they can charge more than competitors.
Let’s also not forget that the gaming market does have a high end segment that is definitely in this price range. This costs less than a Razer Blade 16 with the same GPU. If you’re trying to compare a Framework to throwaway MSI trash with horrendous longevity that just isn’t an equivalent product.
Might as well be saying “why buy a Toyota RAV4 when a Dodge Hornet is cheaper?” Well, one of those is priced higher because it’s a better long-term buy.
But that also puts them out of the market of users where those unique features would be a selling point but are not required which is probably much bigger.
It could certainly be called a niche but they have been doing quite well for themselves in that space.
I would honestly buy one and load it up with nixOS.
My journey to exit the Apple wall has almost come to an end.
I’m not “doing AI” locally on my laptop, are those AMD processors of any use to me?
I’m familiar with traditional X86_64 CPU architectures, I just don’t understand what (if any) extra bells and whistles the “AI” chips offer.
Something more niche is that I also enjoy the mouse buttons above the trackpad, I can move with the thumb and click with a finger.
The gaps let you use the the function keys by feel rather than looking at them. They tend to be mapped in debuggers so hitting the wrong key is a big deal.
I actually don't mind the smaller arrow keys as again, they make it easier to drive by feel rather than by looking.
I'm typing this comment on a first gen framework 16 keyboard. It's the same layout as the second gen in OP, where PgUp/PgDown are bound to fn+KeyUp fn+KeyDown and Home/End are bound to fn+KeyLeft fn+KeyRight.
I actually prefer the bindings over dedicated buttons since if I need to use home/end, I'm probably also going to need to go to the previous/next line with the up/down keys.
Still on the lookout for anything that’s not chiclet based, but they literally don’t exist.
https://dell.alienwarearena.com/alienware-debuts-the-worlds-...
And here's an example of someone making a custom keyboard: https://blog.perprogramming.com/posts/framework-ortholinear-... - it looks pretty awesome, and I'm fairly sure this is the first time I've ever seen a laptop with an ergo keyboard like that.
Framework 16 is a collection of modules, so I think complaining about the modules is fair game, but it could also be seen as a basis/standard that isn't expected to fit everyone's needs, but fit maybe 90% and allow other people to make the customizations they need easier, in which case complaining about they arrow keys on a single component does feel a bit trivial.
Bad keyboards fit 0% to the point of injuring x%. Now try to trivialize this more realistic number
Also, asking for more is very rarely a form of altruism: no one asks for more to avoid (others) “decades of rsi-health-dangerously poor manufacturing quality”, it’s generally for one’s own benefit, nothing more.
Well then, back to standard answer then: pick another laptop.
I really thought for a moment we were discussing the general crowd and why they should/could/must insist on ergonomic keyboards in general, but we misunderstood each other it seems.
> back to standard answer then This is not an answer to any of the questions. But you're right, standards of conversations are just as bad as those of hardware manufacturers
> I really thought for a moment we were discussing the general crowd
I was, but then you've made up a world where no one cares about anyone else, so tried to wipe that reality off your conceptual map.
Speaking of categorically false... How would you even know if you if you've been stuck with the default bad layout on 13 inch?
With a good layout your laptop would have keys laid out in a way that is even more comfortable than those of a standard standalone numpad (which ignores the difference in finger length), so your claim that worse layout is magically massively faster is just categorically implausible.
You're just likely confused because you compare numpad to the unergonomic horizontal 1234567890 number layer, but no, you'll have a bumps numpad layer at your fingertips, so count moving your hands right to a separate module and returning back left into typing speed as well...
This is such a lame response to valid criticism.
Key remapping is not a feature that you need hardware support for and neither are macros - both can be done in the OS and/or user-space software. Different prints on key caps are also not important at all since you shouldn't need them in the first place and hardly a response to someone being unhappy with the physical keyboard layout. So basically you're saying that because Framework already provides the easy parts that the user could already do in software now no one is allowed to complain about the physical layout that users cannot alter.
> numpad input module
You can literally add a physical numpad if you want: https://frame.work/gb/en/products/16-numpad?v=FRAKDM0001
Think about it... Replacement hinges that separate the upper and lower shell by an extra 1/8-1/4" plus a thicker bezel to fill that gap. Suddenly (at the cost of a thicker laptop, for those of us who don't mind) you have extra space under the screen for longer key throw, contoured key caps, trackpoint, arrow keys that overlap the lower deck to allow a proper inverted-T layout, etc. Maybe even possible to retrofit old ThinkPad keyboards in there.
Hey, I can dream, can't I?
This logic is why I like the tiny arrow keys. I find it pretty easy to move my pinky over and tap one of those keys. With full size keys, I find that doesn't really work.
> We were the first laptop maker to ship a USB-C 180W adapter with the original Framework Laptop 16, and somehow nearly two years later, we may be the first to ship with 240W too!
That is truly wild. When I first discovered that heavy gaming drains the battery in the FW16 I went out to search for a more powerful USB-C power supply. No results. Best I could find was a paltry 140W one. Definitely upgrading this part.
How so? I can't think of a single thing that shoving a cellular antenna inside the laptop will add.
This is both hilarious and so perfect, because they're still external adaptors, they're frickin' USB-C dongles! They just fit them within the bounding box of the laptop.
Such a simple, effective solution (if you're willing to sacrifice some volume)
Erm, yeah, external means outside of something. This is a perfectly valid thing to say. Are PCIe cards "external" because you can plug them in? Obviously not.
1200$ https://www.bestbuy.com/product/gigabyte-aero-x16-copilot-pc...
I literally can buy 2 of the Gigabyte laptops for the same price.
Even if I can swap out some parts, odds are it's still easier( and cheaper) to just buy a new competing laptop ever 3 years.
If your motivation is "the environment" you can always just donate your old laptop , give it to a friend, etc. "Gaming" laptop might as well be for code for cheaper , but it has RGB and your co-workers might look at you weird.
I'm typing on this laptop right now. I brought it for 450 USD on sale. https://www.bestbuy.com/product/asus-vivobook-s-14-14-oled-l...
Aside from Linux driver issues, shame on our community for downplaying this, it's an amazing computer. I swapped in a 2TB SDD, and I'll be using it for years.
If I drop it or do something stupid, I'm out 450$. Even a decent Macbook is only going to be about 1500$.
At 3000 Euro, 3500 USD I'd be afraid to take it out of the house, at which point a desktop is going to be significantly cheaper, better, easier to fix and less accident prone.
I wouldn't repeat this on purpose obviously, but I came away with the impression that Framework builds are not particularly brittle.
If you care about environment make regulator force companies to make repairable and upgradeable hardware. That could actually have an impact.
Putting burden on consumer choices is one of the biggest hoaxes of modern capitalism.
Both are wear parts.
Batteries are harder because the race to reduce thickness and weight means that they are usually optimized for that rather than being some standard format you can find replacements for.
The new Surface 12 is in the same boat.
I'm not a big fan of regulation, but it would be nice to see OEMs offer professional battery replacement at a reasonable price.
100$ would be fair.
A lot of really stupid stuff can happen if you try to replace a battery.
Modding and upgrade story is more compiling and worth paying a premium in special cases, but their upgrade story is weak. They lag behind HW releases and they don't even support the strongest CPU chip available on the market right now (Ryzen 395), they just sell it as that silly desktop brick. Meanwhile Asus has it in a 14 inch tablet form factor at a better price.
It feels like this mobile chip has been hijacked for a bunch of mini desktops, a single ASUS tablet that you can’t use with a keyboard without a desk to stand it on, and a single HP laptop that (while actually the only real mobile computer) is priced insanely for even the low RAM variants.
What a waste.
Although from what I've read 8GB of VRAM seems insufficiently near-future proof, so I've always been eyeing 5070ti+ laptops. I wonder if there's any technical blocker that prevents offering 5070ti or the amd equivalent.
rjzzleep•5mo ago
nrp•5mo ago
criddell•5mo ago
SirHumphrey•5mo ago
robotnikman•5mo ago
KyleBerezin•5mo ago
jcotton42•5mo ago
okucu•5mo ago
KyleBerezin•5mo ago