131–140 of 595 posts
In the world of Javascript frameworks where you download and execute 100 MB for a web application?
In the world of desktop applications written in Javascript?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> enough Thinkpads on Earth to probably stretch end-to-end around the moon and back LD, average distance between Earth and Moon = 384,399,000 m [1] C = circumference of moon = 10,917,000 m R := approximate round trip distance = 2LD + 0.5*C = 774,256,500 m n = total number of thinkpads on earth Alas, T / R, the ratio of total thinkpad distance T to our lunar round trip distance R, is at most about 0.11 . This is with…
It won't get you to the moon, but you can squeeze out a little more distance by arranging them corner to corner.
https://www.reddit.com/r/thinkpad/comments/1hakly7/the_think...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Framework’s offerings are interesting, but after having gotten used to the solid rigidity of M-series MacBooks and X1 series Thinkpads, the level of flex in the Framework 13 is a major issue for me. It’s difficult to justify for the price, plus PCBs and repeated flex stress don’t mix nicely. I think it’s time for either Framework or a third party partner to sell a new chassis that’s compatible with the FW13’s mainboa…
My ThinkPad X1 extreme is still chugging along but gets hot etc. I am looking for a cooler machine with ThinkPad durability. I can't choose Framework because a) they don't ship where I am b) they won't honor warranty if I use forwarders c) none of their offerings have a comparably durable config. Maybe they should think about a FrameTough line.
Not clear to me if you mean always or that it changed. Do suggest to check the thermal paste, plus clear out dust in fans and heatsink fins.
The tightness of hardware integration isn't a bug, it's genuinely a feature; In fact, it's the defining feature that makes Apple hardware great. Socketed RAM, CPU, and Storage just weren't worth the tradeoffs, namely size, weight, cost, and performance. Including those modular interfaces just wasn't worth it when the internal interfaces would be obsolete within 5 years, and the average user was replacing sub-componen…
> A professional can still replace almost any component of a modern laptop, with a few thousand $ of specialized tools, and the battery, the only component with a fixed lifetime, can be easily replaced at home. Even if a professional can fix it, that expertise to be able to use those tools worth "a few thousand dollars" costs a lot too, likely pushing the price high enough that its worth thinking about buying a new d…
Realistically I don't know anyone with my specific kind of problem who's used their services before, so I don't really know their reputation. It's not like walking into a supermarket, or even getting a car repaired where you have some sense of the likelihood it will take as long as they say, cost as much as they say and actually succeed. There's much greater information asymmetry.
Of course, given how unattractive it is to get something repaired, more people will be inclined to just buy something new, resulting in less demand for repairs, resulting in less supply, less attractive repair market, etc.
Repairability (at home, by relative morons) also means more repair shops, because less repairability means death of a repairs market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
T14 Gen 5 AMD is perhaps the current best you can go for with non-soldered RAM.
I have a P14s Gen 5 AMD, which afaik is just a T14 with some certifications, and it's flimsy. The whole chassis is plastic and quite flexible. It's also currently at a Lenovo service center because the battery lasted a whole month before failing and claiming to be "non-genuine." ThinkPads ain't what they were. My x230 is still going.
The tightness of hardware integration isn't a bug, it's genuinely a feature; In fact, it's the defining feature that makes Apple hardware great. Socketed RAM, CPU, and Storage just weren't worth the tradeoffs, namely size, weight, cost, and performance. Including those modular interfaces just wasn't worth it when the internal interfaces would be obsolete within 5 years, and the average user was replacing sub-componen…
CUDIMM is changeable and fast.
> The user being able to swap parts easily is _neat_ but it's just not an required feature
Mostly because people seem to have forgotten that it was possible. Often laptops are slow to due either a too full disk and/or not enough memory. It used to be more common to upgrade those. But apparently that knowledge/skill is forgotten and it's now more custom to buy a new device.
Being able to change those saves money IMO.
I wish that Framework could attain the same lofty levels of "second hand market success" that ThinkPads enjoy. A lot of the "Thinkpad fans" I've talked to genuinely want them, or respect them for similar reasons they enjoy the ThinkPad legacy. ThinkPads are durable but every day they get older, slower and more difficult to source parts for as collectors entrench themselves and the requirements of operating systems (a…
Framework’s offerings are interesting, but after having gotten used to the solid rigidity of M-series MacBooks and X1 series Thinkpads, the level of flex in the Framework 13 is a major issue for me. It’s difficult to justify for the price, plus PCBs and repeated flex stress don’t mix nicely. I think it’s time for either Framework or a third party partner to sell a new chassis that’s compatible with the FW13’s mainboa…
Also on that I think they should do away with the modular port things anyway. They're a suboptimial use of space and limit the total number of ports you can have. The real problem is that the ports on most laptops are soldered directly to the motherboard which results in extreme expense if you kill one. Just give us some replaceable ones like the current MacBook line. They're on an easy to remove daughterboard and purchaseable online.
Looking after electronics, repairing stuff and treating it with respect is just part of my way. That one has an old Puppy Linux on it. Works fine.
The original sense of the word "materialism" is a respect for material things - it's a very positive word. But it changed in the 80s (probably after Madonna's "Material Girl" :) to mean something negative and shallow.)