On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Christofer C. Bell [email protected] wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Jason D. Clinton [email protected] wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 13:46, Christofer C. Bell [email protected] wrote:
While there may or may not be better supported hardware from a driver perspective in other laptops, the design and construction of PC laptops compared to Macs is embarrassing. I can only assume the reason people continue to buy such garbage is that there are simply no alternatives available. Even Lenovo machines are awful these days (based on the selection at MicroCenter).
That's just not true. If you want *form*, there's the HP Envy 14. If you want *function*, there's Lenovo ThinkPad (but not IdeaPad). Both are cheaper.
Both are 16x9 which is painful to use. I don't have to care about cost so I get to buy the best. I don't have to settle for cheap plastic garbage PC laptops because they're less expensive. Every single appeal I've seen to the worth of the PC laptop centers on cost. I do not care about cost, at all. It is absolutely not a consideration when I am buying a machine.
I am with you on the 16:9 thing. It's getting harder and harder to find even desktop displays at 16:10. Is this because manufacturers can sell more if the box says '1080' or 'HD'?
Anecdotally, last year I was 'upgraded' at work to 2 x 22" 16:9 displays to replace a single 24" 16:10 display. On paper it sounded like an upgrade, but after a couple weeks it became clear that the squashed displays and extraneous horizontal real estate were causing neck strain and fairly noticeable loss in productivity. I now have a 25" primary 16:10 and a secondary, but smaller 16:10 (at both work and at home).
Apologies for drifting somewhat off-topic, but I think Chris is making a good point about the importance of aspect ratio in selecting a laptop; especially if you're 'producing' content (coding, writing, etc) as opposed to merely consuming it (browsing, watching videos, etc).