I am interested in MNT Reform for a long time myself, though haven't pulled the trigger yet. The different architecture thing (= some inconveniences with software) and the question of whether it would handle Zoom calls (with an external webcam of course) are among good points to consider. One definitely would have to plan their productive use around this laptop if it were to become a daily driver. I'm used to doing my serious business computing on a desktop, but still.
Yes but the review could and should be within that mindset, while making clear that it differs from a mainstream consumer product. Instead this review is like 'I guess if you care about <mindset>, then you're fine with <subpar spec>', while never really reviewing <subpar spec> within the context of other comparable options.
Like why did they choose a Freescale quad A53, rather than say the hex-core RK3399 of the Pinebook Pro? I assume it's because the system-on-module makes it possible to upgrade. Explaining that in-mindset tradeoff would be valuable, but it's completely missing.
Furthermore there is a comparison of mindsets to be done. For example if you are concerned with servicability but not Free software or ARM, this probably isn't the machine for you.
FWIW personally I segregate my usage of modern bloatware to separate machines, rather than taking a clean trustable machine (that I'm paying for in other ways) and then polluting it with unknown blobs. Devices have become inexpensive ($1300 price tag on this notwithstanding), and it's easier to give proprietary bloatware the environment it expects rather than trying to swim upstream.
https://www.crowdsupply.com/mnt/reform
> Both SoC and memory chips sit on a System-on-Module (SoM) that we source from Boundary Devices, a US company that specializes in i.MX reference designs. We selected their "Nitrogen8M SOM" module for Reform because it is the only available module for which you can download the complete schematics and understand what every component does.
There's a known (and fixed) keyboard LPC power drain issue, which is likely what TFA described.
Meanwhile it sounds like the MNT has some real flaws (the battery discharging thing), but the context of that isn't really described - can the battery controller IC use much less power but the proper code hasn't been written, or is it a true design mistake, or what? In general open hardware involves some very hard tradeoffs, and this review just complains about that difficulty the whole time while pretending not to.