I’m holding out in case they make a 16:9 version sometime. I watch a lot of streaming / YouTube and it would bug me because I don’t think I’ve ever watched 16:10 content.
I doubt they will.
A normal keyboard with a numpad beside it and a decent sized trackpad beneath it happens to work out to an approximately 16:10 aspect ratio, which is why the Framework 16 uses a 16:10 display.
Similarly a normal keyboard (no numpad) and a decent sized trackpad beneath it is approximately a 3:2 aspect ratio, which is why the Framework 13 uses a 3:2 display.
Using a wider aspect ratio such as 16:9 results in either wasted space above/below the display, wasted space on either side of the keyboard, or a small trackpad. All of those can be annoying. This is why a lot of premium laptops use taller aspect ratios.
It would be nice if Framework did offer an option to get a 16:9 display, however as Framework has said they have a lot of different customers wanting lot of different parts options, and trying to create all the different parts that different people want would be a nightmare of logistics for Framework to keep in stock and available. So Framework has to pick and choose what is actually worth creating.
I doubt it is worth the effort for Framework to stock a 10% smaller display, bezels to go with that display, laptops equipped with those displays (since the display is one of the parts that is pre-installed on all laptops) just for the customers that want larger bezels and less usable screen space because it gives a better 16:9 content viewing experience.
That dock uses a DisplayLink chip.
A DisplayLink chip is essentially a tiny GPU that handles the final outputting to the display. When the DisplayLink chip is in use the laptop’s GPU still does 99% of the work, but the DisplayLink chip handles the final outputting to the display.
This has the major advantage of allowing it to work with a much wider selection of devices (almost anything with a USB port and a DisplsyLink driver available), however the additional complexity and drivers can lead to some finicky behavior and artifacting. Overall I suggest avoiding DisplayLink docks unless you actually need the benefits.
For the Framework Laptop most Thunderbolt 3/4 and USB4 docks should work, but not all.
USB4 supports two different methods for a dock to run multiple monitors. The computer can send multiple separate display signals to the dock or the computer can send a single (higher bandwidth) display signal that the dock can then split into multiple display signals.
From the end user’s perspective those are identical as long as they work, however AMD USB4 controllers (like the ones in the FW16) only work with the latter method (single display signal that is split) whereas MacOS works better with the first method.
Most USB4/Thunderbolt 3/4 docks use the method that works with AMD, however some docks that are marketd towards Mac users will not work. The most common docks that won’t work are Caldigit docks.
If you want a docking station that works with either the Framework or a MacBook then that may be a good reason to use a DisplayLink dock.