Framework's software and firmware have been a mess, but it's working on them
arstechnica.comWe are taking both the article and the comments here and elsewhere to heart. Our entire focus is on building products that get better over time through repair, upgrade, and overall design for longevity, and software is a necessary part of that. We recognize that we have fallen short of where we need to be, and are making the needed investments to resolve this.
Last week, we published the final release for the Windows version of 12th Gen along with more context around what has stalled the Linux updater: https://knowledgebase.frame.work/framework-laptop-bios-and-d...
Early this week, we'll be releasing final Framework Laptop 13 and Framework Laptop 16 AMD BIOS and Driver updates that have been in Community Beta testing over the last 10 days.
A few months ago, we released an 11th Gen BIOS update for Windows: https://knowledgebase.frame.work/framework-laptop-bios-relea...
With each of these complete, we've resolved both infrastructure and process issues that make it faster for us to iterate on BIOS and driver updates on each platform. Obviously, our words here are not enough. We need to and commit to demonstrating this by actually improving both our iteration speed on software updates and our communication processes so that you both know the status and are aware when we have releases.
Thank you for the willingness to listen to and act on feedback!
Hmm, feedback should not be required to realize firmware needs more frequent than >yearly/once releases. (Not to mention security issues that should be fixed a lot more quickly.)
> Framework will need to step up its game, especially if it wants to sell more laptops to businesses—a lucrative slice of the PC industry that Framework is actively courting.
This line really resonated with me. I own a 12th-gen Framework laptop personally, and have enjoyed using it enough that I wanted to have one at work as my existing machine is aging out. Like many businesses, my org requires some paperwork ("telecom approval") in order to buy computing hardware, which is basically a short questionnaire that I assume to check off some "we're not actively trying to backdoor you" boxes. I've had vendors get this turned around in <24 hours. Framework, however, has not been able to do this. Their reasoning is basically, per the article,
> [..] interspersed with not-untrue but unsatisfying responses from Framework employees (some version of "we're a small company" is one of the most common)
claiming their B2B lead is "swamped". Unfortunately, they've been that way since I started that approval request (with repeated follow-ups) 6 months ago, and can't even give me a timeline for when they might even be able to review it. I'm trying to get approval for an org with high-four-figures employees; not Google-size, but not exactly a small business either.
The initial execution on their laptops has been good, and I'm hoping that it continues. But at least to me, it definitely feels like there's a lot of maturing to do for the company on the process for product support and customer experience.
Hi, we agree that the response time on this is unacceptable. I've dug into it and we've now completed and replied with the form. Posting a comment on HN certainly shouldn't be the path to getting a response on an ask from us, whether for business or consumer support. On the business side of this, we're building a Customer Success team whose sole responsibility is making sure that our business customers have a dedicated and responsive point of contact to work with. The first job req for this team is currently live.
Just want to follow up on this thread to say that Framework (directly via nrp) did follow up with my org and me, and was able to get the aforementioned paperwork back to us.
It's encouraging to see that they've taken this kind of feedback so seriously, and I'm hoping that the organizational steps outlined above will help to make this process smoother for other groups in a similar position looking to buy from Framework moving forward.
> Like many businesses, my org requires some paperwork ("telecom approval") in order to buy computing hardware, which is basically a short questionnaire that I assume to check off some "we're not actively trying to backdoor you" boxes. I've had vendors get this turned around in <24 hours. Framework, however, has not been able to do this.
I'm not in this industry but do sell into regulated industries with vendor diligence practices.
I would check your assumption that it's just "checking off some boxes" -- often questionnaires can be hundreds of pages long, and require you to sometimes get esoteric certifications or attestations. The questions are often very sophisticated meaning that not just anyone can fill them out. Big companies have dedicated roles for this type of thing (a lot of CISO at SME is filling out these papers) where the person is specialized in filling out these papers. Also, there is a knack to these types of forms -- you have to be able to hold two opposing ideas in your mind to do this effectively, A) this is important to do quickly and well to enable us to make sales to this company, and B) this paperwork is bullshit and you should focus on checking the boxes versus worrying about, e.g., truly enforcing a floppy disk security policy at your firm (yes, most of these questionnaires get added to over the years and never pared down, so you often have to answer questions about comically obsolete or irrelevant technologies). There's a big catch because often someone skilled enough to answer these questions would be better served actually doing things, e.g. writing code, and the people who can fill out these questions but not skilled enough to do the actual things are a weird middle-ground of mediocre that is hard to find.
Really big companies often solve this by just paying overskilled people to do this for a few years, which is expensive and soul-destroying for the skilled person (I had a CTO quit in large part because of having to do paperwork). And after a vendor is already established with a company, the requirements for updating it year over year are really light, so it's actually not as hard for established companies to maintain versus new vendors.
> There's a big catch because often someone skilled enough to answer these questions would be better served actually doing things, e.g. writing code, and the people who can fill out these questions but not skilled enough to do the actual things are a weird middle-ground of mediocre that is hard to find. Really big companies often solve this by just paying overskilled people to do this for a few years, which is expensive and soul-destroying for the skilled person.
This is a really insightful comment, how do companies get around this issue (apart from paying overskilled people until they burnout)?
I do a lot of these myself (technical founder, willing to do dirty work) but there comes a point where it's not a good use of my time for all but the biggest opportunities, because these things are so time intensive and I need to wear many hats. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if that's what's going on at Framework now.
I would love to hear if anyone has different suggestions. For reference, we already employ outsourced ciso/cyber vendors (think of vanta, strikegraph) but, while they can help draft responses to these things, they can't do the last mile of certifying and submitting on your behalf, so in practice we still need some skilled internal resources to accomplish these
I'm not sure businesses would be interested in a modular laptop, I always assumed they prefer to just buy new ones when the time comes rather than having someone spending the time to service them for the needed uogrades. Currently, they don't even bother trying to reinstall Windows, which I think it would solve most of the performance problems that surface after about 3 years of operation of a laptop (assuming it's used for office work).
My company has been lengthening replacement intervals with every budget cut. In the 1990s it made sense to replace computers as often as every 2 years - the new one would be twice as fast. Around 2000 that slowed down though, and so 3 years made sense. Today computers are expected to last 5 years. If the most common things to break are easy to repair it might make sense for a company to not replace computers are all anymore, just keep the important spare parts on hand. (they still need to keep new ones for weird accidents)
Actually modular ones would be GREAT for repairablity in fleets. I could ship them to my tier 1 guys and have them swap out a part rather than going back to Lenovo or Dell and taking weeks.
A lot of the IT depts in medium to large size companies I've talked to routinely do repairs on their hardware, e.g. swapping out laptop motherboards, memory, drives, etc as part of maintenance (on and off warranty). Hardware explicitly designed for changing major components easier would probably save them time and money.
We've been getting a lot of interest and traction from SMBs, especially in the 50-200 person company range. What we're finding is that the strongest benefit to them isn't even the upgradeability (which they do like), but the reduction in employee downtime from being able to swap a part on the spot and get the employee up and running again.
Thinkpads are/were basically modular laptops for decades and I think they are as business, as business can get. I am pretty sure modern Thinkpads failing in modularity/repairability is on Lenovo cutting costs, not lack of demand. After all, some models are still fairly repairable/upgradable with good (video) documentation.
> we're not actively trying to backdoor you
What is there to backdoor? Why can't businesses just pay money and get product and not overcomplicate this?
The "not overcomplicate" way is to buy Microsoft, DELL or Lenovo. I'd assume it would need near 0 paperwork for that.
In most companies if you want to buy from a vendor that has no prior business relation you'll need to do the paperwork.
As a former founder and likely future founder, I'd just f it and buy whatever employees need to get their work done.
It could work very well until there is an employee that intentionally or unintentionally leaks trade secret or customer data, and the police track it down to a laptop without any screening at purchase or any security policy set up by IT (if there is an IT department).
Remind me never to buy anything from said company...
Because as companies get bigger they worry more and more about the long tail of risk.
They do this for many reasons, but generally predicting the risk of very low probability events is very difficult, so they don’t understand the risk vs cost tradeoff as well as they think.
I have bought two Framework 13 laptops, and have been happy with them overall.
I love their vision of a repairable laptop, and have replaced parts on them, without issue. That is a great achievement.
I have had issues with drivers, and specifically had to reinstall windows to reflash firmware to get a new touch pad to work in linux. Bummer, but I'm also running on the fringe a little, so I accept that.
Overall, the experience has been positive, but I can just imagine how much of a tidal wave of support they must be experiencing. That's not to give them a pass. I hope they improve, but they are trying to do an audacious thing.
Thanks. I'm happy to hear that it's been working well for you. I agree that we shouldn't be a given a pass. We're building $1000+ products that are pretty essential tools in peoples' lives. It's not enough for us to have the right philosophy, but to actually build products that live up to that philosophy.
My biggest gripe is that for something intended to be DIY upgradable, 2 years later, there is a complete lack of ecosystem and parts for it.
I was hoping for pluggable modules for {IMU, GPS, barometer, geiger counter, air quality sensor, software-defined radio, 5G cellular, RGB LEDs, power-over-ethernet charging, even a small motor module so the laptop can drag itself around on the table}. And what do we get? Some stupid 2nd hand USB-C passthrough and HDMI modules.
Not even a 2-USB-C module that the forums have been asking for ages.
Not even a Dvorak keyboard.
No e-Ink display option. No flush mount bezel option.
No multiple camera options. No depth camera. No LIDAR. No 4K webcam. No low-light StarVis webcam. No stereo cam. No infrared webcam.
No nothing. The ecosystem doesn't even exist.
I was hoping for this to be the Raspberry Pi of laptops with a huge pile of parts on SeeedStudio and AliExpress that you can plug into it.
For the Expansion Cards you noted, several have been created by members of the Framework Community, and a few folks have started to sell the modules they are creating: https://community.frame.work/c/developer-program/85
Josh Cook is probably the most prolific developer and has most of his designs available for preorder: https://community.frame.work/t/custom-framework-module-purch...
While I appreciate that this is happening, these projects are painfully difficult to discover as someone not active on the forums or Discord.
Are there plans to open the Framework marketplace to creators so that parts like Josh Cook's can be visible, or even sold, in the same storefront as Framework's own parts? Or regularly promoting community parts and designs on official channels outside of the forum?
Part of the reason is the compliance requirements. You need to pay quite a bit of money to USB-IF if you want to make anything USB and this is recurring as far as I know. There's also the other things like tests for EMC and ESD and whatnot. It either needs a big player to step up (you can use the same USB-IF membership for some tens of thousands of devices) or there should be a big enough market to support a smaller scale designer/manufacturer.
Just don't pay those idiots? I doubt most of the USB devices on Alibaba pay USB-IF.
I guess this means not that many people buy Framework laptops, or at least not enough Framework users are interested enough in tweaking the laptop. Compare this situation to >$300 ergonomic keyboard circle, you might think that is an extremely niche market, but sounds like there are more weird keyboards out there than DIY framework parts.
They need to sell millions before third parties will support them. When they do (and get firmware handled) they’ll be ready quickly.
If they ever do expand to China I'm sure this will come. I'm somewhat disappointed too, especially the lack of the long-promised 'creator-marketplace'.
Overall though, I'm still more than happy with my 11th gen. It's far better than any laptop I've had before and I have next to no complaints about it as a laptop.
I looked at a number of options when getting a new laptop earlier this year. Although I like the idea of modularized computers and support what Framework is doing, I cannot give them my money, because:
1. They are actually more expensive than something like ThinkPad X13/T14/T14s with the same specs (if you know how to find and use their "coupons"). It is definitely not as modularized (although that will also change in the next generation), but it is hard to justify spending more when you consider build quality and support. 2. There are still reliability issues, like what is mentioned in the article, and things like HDMI not working in certain conditions [0]. I knew that I need better than this.
I used to tinker with Android ROMs/root and different Linux distros a lot back as an undergrad student, but I very quickly realized that, even as a grad student, I need something that is reliable and works, and I need to focus on real productive work instead of figuring out how to fix things. Since then, I only use mainstream laptops/phones with a standard setup as my main devices, although I sometimes have spare/separate devices for trying things out.
[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/framework/comments/1biqwdm/laptop_l...
I'm excited for their improvements. It's got to be incredibly hard to start a company that does what they do. Not the repairability part, but anything with modern hardware, firmware, and software.
When I think of the other big names, they've all been around for quite some times and they were already established companies. I'm not excusing Framework, but I am excited for their future. My Framework 13 AMD has been running great for the last 6ish months. I've had a big where the screen won't come back on after a charged sleep twice now, but it's been a minute since that happened.
I have had to RMA my entire AMD laptop due to a BSOD issue, that lives on in the replacement device. It isn't a DIY config, using their charger, etc. I am 70% sure it's firmware, but no matter what the root cause is, I have little faith that the problem can be resolved due to lack of transparency or knowledge of the root cause.
Edit: I think this is why Dell/Apple end up winning in the end. Stability in a computer is critical.
We've found and resolved this issue. We'll be promoting the BIOS update that resolves it to stable later today, but you can pick up the release (3.05) early here: https://community.frame.work/t/framework-laptop-13-ryzen-704...
Oh thank god! Deploying it now. (Assuming you are referring to https://community.frame.work/t/random-hard-freezes-fw13-amd7... )
Thanks for the trust and the belief, and we know that we need to prove it and live up to it by actually delivering on the results of product longevity.
Big thanks to you and the entire Framework team. The work y'all are doing is incredible. I'm a very happy customer and I'm excited to see how Framework grows and I'm excited to continue to be a customer!
Most underrated framework machine is the Chromebook edition. Firmware is solid and loaded up with 2 TB NVME and 64GB DDR. It's x86 with hyper threaded cores and nested virtualization support. Runs android apps, and any distro you want via crostini. Supports docker, KVM (windows and macOS) from crostini. USB passthrough to crostini is super easy via ChromeOS settings panel.
Only thing I really miss is passing a PCI device to crostini like you can do with USB. In dev mode I have seen indications it may be possible but no luck yet. Passing the iGPU or a thunderbolt PCI device to crostini, then to a VM would be so awesome.
Nice specs. I feel ChromeOS, as a whole, is underrated. It's the best PHD (Push Here Dummy) OS out there, and updates are less painful than any other mainstream OS. One step further is Crostini, allowing a power user to fully deploy all of Linux, and do it in a secure manner that doesn't affect the underlying OS.
I see no reason to submit to google surveillance when the standard framework works well with fedora and mint etc.
The reason is much better security.
I'm genuinely concerned that launching the 16 will kill them. They were already stretched too thin just by supporting both Intel and AMD on the 13, and the gaming-focused target market for the 16 won't have the same patience.
I had the same thoughts. 16 has a bunch of things I didn’t ask for, meanwhile firmware is still vulnerable to logofail. First things first, people.
I've been pretty happy with my AMD Framework 13. There's been a couple of hiccups, but things have mostly worked well and I've gotten help, or at least explanations from the community forums for most issues I've hit. (Help getting the wifi working reliably in linux, an explanation for why the top of the touchpad isn't clickable, a workaround for charger incompatibility, etc.)
It sounds like the wifi issue has now been fixed upstream, and apparently the BIOS beta they just released improves charger compatibility.
So not perfect, but good and improving. I bought this thing to last a while, and I think they're on the right trajectory for that.
I've been pretty happy with my framework laptop so far, though it does run a bit hot particularly when trying to play games.
Still for a coding/web browsing machine I've had a decent experience, though I do regret not waiting another 6 months so I could have gotten the 16 inch version.
I'm still bullish on Framework but the quality control issues I have seen from the Framework 16 are unacceptable for a device that cost as much as it does. They have also reused elements from the older Framework laptops that they should not have, namely the smaller keyboard and the smaller trackpad. I hope they pull it together because I want them to succeed.
Note that both the keyboard and the touchpad are unique to the Framework Laptop 16. We reused the same keyswitch and keycap structure on the keyboard because the feedback we've gotten on those on Framework Laptop 13 have been almost universally positive. In Framework Laptop 16, we integrated them into a new module structure to enable Input Module swappability.
For the touchpad, similarly, we used the same controller chip because we've seen it work well on Framework Laptop 13, but the touchpad surface dimensions and overall structure are unique to Framework Laptop 16.
I have not used the 16 yet as I decided to hold off after seeing the QC issues but most of the feedback I've seen and from what I can tell looking at the laptop is the trackpad is too small and the keyboard is too cramped. My 13 inch Thinkpad appears to have a more spaced out keyboard than the Framework 16.
The key spacing is the standard 19mm key stride that we use on Framework Laptop 13 and which most (all?) 13"+ notebooks use.
I might not be explaining what I mean clearly. I'm talking about the Framework 16. The keyboard on the Framework 16 seems more cramped than my 13" laptop.
Ignorant question here, but I have been wondering if they keyboard/trackpad would be upgradable in the future? Still rough to release a laptop at such a high price-point with sub-par UX, but it seems possible that they could release better components for the 16 in the future, right?
They are replaceable and they could release a larger keyboard and trackpad in the future.
I actually really love my Framework 16 (which I'm writing this on), but the integration with Ubuntu (which is their supported Linux distro) was far less performant than I expected. I ended up installing Win11Pro on it, and since then I've been cherry (apart from being on Windows).
I really do hope they begin to offer more customization and expansion options soon; I'd love to support them some more, but there's not anything that I need from them, since I got a couple extra modules when I ordered it.
My biggest gripe is actually the LED array modules, because they don't have any convenient software to utilize them if I don't want to write python in my freetime. They're soliciting feedback on what people want out of them, but I definitely get the impression they're just planning to have users create the apps. Stuff like battery percentage or scrolling marquee should have been there from the get-go.
I expect this is largely a issue with the bleeding-edge AMD GPU and CPU which don't have great support yet. If you can, definitely try to get on the newest version of the kernel, I know a few people who've had success with that!
I seriously considered a Framework for a recent laptop purchase, but, ultimately, went with the venerable ThinkPad. That said, all is not rosy here either. BIOS updates to resolve issues still don't come out fast enough and there still are nagging firmware and driver issues that have not been resolved 6 months after the device was released.
Framework posted a response to this at https://frame.work/blog/enabling-software-longevity (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40054383)
It feels like a good response to me, similar to nrp's comments in this thread: it acknowledges the issue and explains what they're doing to address it.
I actually have no problem with this because Dell/Lenovo/HP software and firmware is a mess. I suspect the issue is that the underlying platform is shit and a mess and this is being reflected in the software.
At least Framework are trying, unlike Dell/Lenovo/HP.
Can't agree, at least Lenovo is trying:
https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/25/24081225/lenovo-thinkpad-...
Dell on the other hand...
Load of marketing crap. USB ports soldered onto the motherboard and have you ever tried buying parts from Lenovo?
Also my T14 gen 3 has several firmware problems.
Dude, I don't know what your expectations are, but you have to give credit where credit is due. Lenovo is never going to release a Framework-like product, nor will most of the PC manufacturers. Improving the repairability of devices, however little, is progress, and is much more than what the Apple Lord will ever want to give you. The ability to replace RAM modules is significant, as it is almost non-existent these days on premium, non-gaming 14in laptops. I am not a Lenovo fanboy or anything, and Lenovo has plenty to dislike, but they are doing great work and heading in the correct direction.
Why don't they open source it and allow people to contribute fixes?
It's Insyde (they outsource firmware dev), so it's proprietary as of right now. Hopefully they can switch to an open firmware like Coreboot in the future.
I must admit I'm honestly not impressed with my Framework. I'm sure it's decent for a Windows laptop - the repairability alone is certainly enough to set it apart there - but coming from a MacBook, everything's just.. worse.
Were MacBook upgrades not so expensive (all i want is 16GB!) and my love affair with NixOS, I'd probably have regretted buying one.
I have a Framework 16 pre-ordered and I've been waffling on whether to keep the preorder.
My daily driver is a MacBook and honestly... I'm not expecting that to change. So I guess I don't mind if the Framework is a worse experience than the MacBook. It just needs to do the few things that I need a Windows laptop for. (and maybe support some experiments using desktop Linux...)
This is horrible and very disappointing to read. But of course they cash in big time, selling themselves as the underdog and the good guys, all so caring about repairability for the super-duper premium price tag of course. But they can not pay people to keep up with software? Why is this kind of hardware even this complicated that the others need 14 and 13 bios updates? Seems like a shitty hardware choice in the first place for reliable laptops. Sound like they should have chosen more established and tested hardware, not some kind of new cutting edge shit or whatever this is that needs this much care and updates. Especially if they can not keep up with it.
June is also when Wayland nvidia gaming and application should be fixed by an nvidia beta driver with explicit sync support.
Year of the Linux desktop?!?!!!
For a product whose main draw is the ability to have whatever connectors you want, the lack of a plain SD card module (a standard feature on macbooks, so standard in fact that they TRIED to get rid of it and had to backpeddle; an extremely rare move for Apple) destroyed my confidence in this company. I don't trust them.
I don’t own a framework device as it’s not my kind of niche, but this seems like a really weird place to throw around the word “trust”.
That implies you believe they are doing something shady or nefarious by not making a sd card module - which they aren’t. This is just an old fashioned business decision where it’s not the financial priority right now.
What I think you mean to say is that it’s a feature required for you that they don’t have. In fact it looks like they’re making one soon: https://frame.work/products/sd-expansion-card
Honestly it is a trust issue. I almost bought a framework laptop last year. People pitched it as a seriously viable alternative to the MacBook and applied social pressure to give it serious consideration. I realize now that it would have been a serious waste of a large amount of money and time and yes, that is a trust issue.
And you can say “well that wasn’t the official framework org” but they’re kinda holding themselves out as a serious contender (marketing on LTT etc) yet apparently don’t have things as basic as working Linux drivers (in their officially supported choice of distro)! I think there is indeed a general belief among the public that you need to at least get that far before holding yourself out for public consumption, as a non-beta product, yeah. When you do those sorts of things it’s clearly not being held out as an enthusiast device for tinkering etc, and then people will have some (reasonable) expectations that it’s gonna actually work. If not, arguably it’s FTC time at that point.
It’s kinda the same as AMD graphics drivers on windows… having the fans repeatedly insist they’ve never had a driver issue for 10 years now (when Vega, rdna1, and rdna3 all had major issues that lasted a significant amount of time) does destroy trust among the public when they try it and see it’s not true. Nothing feels worse than recommending them to a friend based on seeming internet consensus and having them have problems over the advice I gave them. Spent a lot of time trying to debug remotely and get their 5700xt working etc, never did, they ended up selling and buying a 2060S that worked perfectly, and I’ve never trusted the fans again.
The boy who cried wolf is a cultural touchstone for a reason, we don’t like being called to action for something that turns out to be untrue. And spending a lot of money to learn that lesson generally does create a trust issue that turns people off with these brands.
> People pitched it as a seriously viable alternative to the MacBook and applied social pressure to give it serious consideration. I realize now that it would have been a serious waste
So let me get this straight: a bunch of your friends evangelized Framework to you, but you decided not to go with it, and later realized you made the right decision. And because of that, you don't "trust" Framework (the company). That's not only a weird overreaction, but also a weird place to assign blame. Maybe tell your friends to stop pressuring you to buy things that aren't your cup of tea? Or, hell, maybe tell your friends to stop pressuring you to buy things, period... cuz that's kinda an inappropriate thing for a supposed friend to do?
> apparently don’t have things as basic as working Linux drivers
Not sure what you mean; Linux runs fine on my Framework, with all hardware fully supported.
> I think there is indeed a general belief among the public that you need to at least get that far before holding yourself out for public consumption
I think the general belief among the public is, "Linux? what's that?" Most consumer laptops do not have official support for Linux, and many of them have various bits of hardware (looking at you, Dell, and the fingerprint sensor on my old laptop) that don't work on Linux at all. Yes, Framework has advertised some Linux support, but I think it's been pretty clear that Windows is their priority. And regardless... Linux works fine on Framework laptops. Also consider that "Linux" isn't just one thing: realistically Framework can only test one or two distros; if you want to run something else, you're quite reasonably on your own, and should try to repro issues while running the supported distros before blaming Framework.
They have an SD card module just not the one you want. That also makes no sense as a reason not to "trust" them. You can want more from them maybe, but trust makes no sense in this context.
Apple however makes a lot of sense to mistrust at pretty much every turn.
They also don't have vga, but that seems like a weird reason to mistrust a company.
Neither does the MacBook. Still has SD though.
I think it's a bit absurd to take something like "they don't make a full-size SD card reader module" and turn that into a trust issue. Unless, of course, they promised to design and sell one, and didn't follow through. Even then, seems a bit of an overreaction.
Meanwhile, my 12th-gen Intel Framework 13 has severe thermal throttling issues that support hasn't been able to resolve after more than a year of back and forth. While my confidence in the company is at an all-time low, I don't think this is a trust issue.
Anyway, they've already pre-announced a SD card module[0], and people can sign up to get updates about its development. They're even completely candid that it's not 100% certain they won't cancel the project. That sounds refreshingly trustworthy, over other companies that might promise it without disclosing the uncertainty, or even take pre-order money and hold onto it for who knows how long.
It does seem a little strange considering that they have a microSD module which is electrically almost exactly the same thing (the only difference is the mechanical write protect toggle).
Then again they have a miniscule engineering team but they have made two laptops with some pretty non-conventional design aspects and a bunch of modules including a swappable GPU and (one of?) the first 180W USB-C power supplies they're doing a pretty good job so far.
Considering the relative rarity of SD cards compared to microSD, other than photo- and videographers who aren't really a core demographic, welded as they often are into the Mac ecosystem, I can see why it's not the biggest priority and it certainly doesn't smell of dishonesty. I mean, why would they even be up to shenanigans over SD cards of all things?
Since they're on the case (ha, geddit?) anyway, you can get a $5 USB3 SD adapter today and buy the module when it comes out. Which is more than I can hope for with a recent ThinkPad!
> It does seem a little strange considering that they have a microSD module which is electrically almost exactly the same thing
I wouldn't be surprised if the internals of the module would need to be completely redesigned, with the circuit board layout redone, for a full-size SD card. The SD card itself likely would physically reside in a location where other components reside in the microSD reader expansion card.
> Considering the relative rarity of SD cards compared to microSD, other than photo- and videographers who aren't really a core demographic, welded as they often are into the Mac ecosystem, I can see why it's not the biggest priority and it certainly doesn't smell of dishonesty. I mean, why would they even be up to shenanigans over SD cards of all things?
I do wonder how true it is that the "put microSD cards in your computer" market is smaller than the "put SD cards in your computer" market.
If I think of the devices that I have microSD cards in (Nintendo Switch, Steam Deck, Windows tablet, phones), they're all devices where the microSD card just lives in the device and only gets removed when I'm upgrading the device. Or I guess there was the time I installed CFW on my 2DS XL.
On the other hand, I take the SD card in and out of my camera much more often, despite it getting less use than the aforementioned microSD using devices.
Not to mention most microSD cards are sold with a microSD -> SD adapter, so to me it feels like if you're going to do only one adapter, you'd do SD.
I think the SD module won't be able to have the card flush. SD cards are 32mm long, and you need some PCB space for the socket cage and the USB-C on the other side. The retrofit PCB outline they provide is only 26.9mm from front edge to back edge, so an SD card will stick out a little bit.
So perhaps they decided to first go for the one that lets users have the card flush for use like an expansion bay as well as for data transfer to/from devices.
https://github.com/FrameworkComputer/ExpansionCards/tree/mai...
> I do wonder how true it is that the "put microSD cards in your computer" market is smaller than the "put SD cards in your computer" market.
Just one single anecdotal data point, but: I'm not sure the last time I've even seen a full-size SD card, let alone used one. I don't use microSD a ton, but enough that I'm glad I have the expansion card for it.
I do think my DSLR takes a full-size SD card, but I (somewhat sadly) haven't touched it in years.
In the 3D printer market it has been pretty common to be moving micro SD cards around for that. A few printers use USB A, and there are mods to swap to full size SD cards/internet connectivity for getting your files to your printer, but micro SD was the standard until just recently.
"Destroyed My Confidence in This Company" sounds too much, but makes me think, is Panasonic Let's note what a car is to a faster horse for Framework customer base?
They have Intel 13th, 16GB onboard RAM, 3x USB-A, 2x TB4, VGA, HDMI, Ethernet, SD slot, 19V barrel jack input, removable battery, etc etc at $1999 starting. That should tick every major boxes that Framework 13 does except price. If by modularity people means SD and VGA and Framework modularity cannot accommodate that, that doesn't count.
Has this all been just a massively roundabout way of finding that out?
Doesn't Framework publish the schematics for building new modules? If so, I guess if there is a market for an SD card module, one will present itself...
Since when are apple users afraid of buying dongles? I thought that was their pastime.
Only the macbook pro and mac studio have an SD card reader; hardly a standard feature.
This is a weird reason to reject them. Not everybody uses SD card module.
From personal experience (I don't use SD cards often) I would rather have another USB A or C port instead of SD port. USB SD card readers are so much cheaper and smaller than Framework expansion cards, that having one in a bag takes less space, and you can carry them like USB flash drive.
Well, that's one of the Framework's value props: you can have both, and swap out the card reader module for a port module if you want to. And if you aren't sure, you can always carry the module with you, which is no worse than if you had to carry an external reader.
Eh, I personally never bothered about SD cards. But at least they are on it:
They are not competing with Apple.
Source?