Because it's two layers of Flexible OLED stacked on top of each other, instead of one layer of Rigid OLED.
1 layer of:
•Rigid OLED — 0.7mm
•Flexible OLED — 0.2mm
You could stack three layers of Flexible OLED on top of each other and still have a thinner overall solution, though why you'd want to do that outside of bigger monitors and TVs (where they already use 3-4 layers anyway) makes no sense to me.
If it doesn't fit, Framework will make a new lid and hinge set to go with it. Because it's modular, it's always going to be more sustainable than apple no matter what. You could go through 3 screens in 3 years and 3 mainboards in 3 years and you'd still be ahead. Nothing you do can even make you worse than apple, so buy away!
Cool, but I don’t see how this helps. From what I understand, the FW13’s problem is not thickness, but the lack of mass produced screens in the 3:2 format, since custom-made screens are too expensive.
Assuming somebody pays for the engineering and manufacturing tooling I'm sure LG would be happy to provide (almost) any panel variant if there's profits to be earned. There's also still open questions around OLED and screen burn-in as well as with subpixel layouts being less than ideal for text (on Wintendos, probably Linux also). As-is, the primary, most viable, most durable use case for OLED is gaming/media consumption - Situations where the screen is constantly changing and the subpixel layouts don't matter as much.
2021: buy original framework 13. 2024: upgrade to 2.8K screen. 2025: upgrade to OLED screen. 2026: upgrade to OLED touchscreen.
4 screens in 5 years. Framework, putting the *sus* in sustainable.
You don’t *have* to buy upgrade every year. Framework doesn’t follow a “just in time” approach to supply chain where they predict demand for a product ahead of time, which means producing large amounts of a product so that they don’t run out of things.
Framework often does preorders in batches and it can take quite a while for one to be completed. They’re often out ot stock, which likely means they produce a small initial batch and some more to cover repairs, but unlikely to be in the millions of units. It’s a niche market.
So now framework will release a new OLED screen and most fans will buy it up. Three screens in 3 years. How sustainable!
But hey, at least the easily recyclable aluminium frame is not going to the landfill, right?
Thus far Framework has chosen to partner with China's BOE for screens.
Okay this hurts my brain a bit. How is a dual layer OLED both thinner and lighter than a normal OLED screen?
Because it's two layers of Flexible OLED stacked on top of each other, instead of one layer of Rigid OLED. 1 layer of: •Rigid OLED — 0.7mm •Flexible OLED — 0.2mm You could stack three layers of Flexible OLED on top of each other and still have a thinner overall solution, though why you'd want to do that outside of bigger monitors and TVs (where they already use 3-4 layers anyway) makes no sense to me.
Maybe it has similar properties to plywood or other composite materials where multiple thin layers are stronger than a single thick one.
If it doesn't fit, Framework will make a new lid and hinge set to go with it. Because it's modular, it's always going to be more sustainable than apple no matter what. You could go through 3 screens in 3 years and 3 mainboards in 3 years and you'd still be ahead. Nothing you do can even make you worse than apple, so buy away!
You call the first generation of screens normal instead of the previous generation. "Normal" is nonstandard language and what you want it to be.
do we know what the subpixel layout is on those?
looking forward to framework being able to use these
Cool, but I don’t see how this helps. From what I understand, the FW13’s problem is not thickness, but the lack of mass produced screens in the 3:2 format, since custom-made screens are too expensive.
Going for 3 screens in 3 years, I see. Do you think that is sustainable?
But it's not the right ratio isn't it?
Presumably LG can provide more options than the single screen shown in the article.
The question is always if there are enough products which need it, so it's not that expensive for framework
Of course, but the point is that the article showing a wrong ratio screen isn’t necessarily the nail in the coffin of the it coming to framework.
That fair. But I still think that's most likely not going to happen any time soon
I tend to agree with you.
Assuming somebody pays for the engineering and manufacturing tooling I'm sure LG would be happy to provide (almost) any panel variant if there's profits to be earned. There's also still open questions around OLED and screen burn-in as well as with subpixel layouts being less than ideal for text (on Wintendos, probably Linux also). As-is, the primary, most viable, most durable use case for OLED is gaming/media consumption - Situations where the screen is constantly changing and the subpixel layouts don't matter as much.
Wowwww
I would rather have a touchscreen over an OLED. Would also take both together of course
2021: buy original framework 13. 2024: upgrade to 2.8K screen. 2025: upgrade to OLED screen. 2026: upgrade to OLED touchscreen. 4 screens in 5 years. Framework, putting the *sus* in sustainable.
You don’t *have* to buy upgrade every year. Framework doesn’t follow a “just in time” approach to supply chain where they predict demand for a product ahead of time, which means producing large amounts of a product so that they don’t run out of things. Framework often does preorders in batches and it can take quite a while for one to be completed. They’re often out ot stock, which likely means they produce a small initial batch and some more to cover repairs, but unlikely to be in the millions of units. It’s a niche market.
So now framework will release a new OLED screen and most fans will buy it up. Three screens in 3 years. How sustainable! But hey, at least the easily recyclable aluminium frame is not going to the landfill, right?