Asus Laptop - Which One Would You Choose

[pumper]

amazing the different usages we all have.

i have my 21" dell CRT at 1024x768 occasionally I go to higher & always go back & use same same for my 19" phillips CRT for my laptop

my nivida card goes to the 1990x1440 @ 60hz not sure my monitor can handle that but will try that SOON! just to see how small print can be.

the reason i have not gone to an LCD is the high 'native resolution' .. never low enough for me.

[Firefoxx]

Laptops vs desktops, the neverending feud.

There is always the argument of "anything is fast enough these days" popping up. Yes, CPUs have come a long way, but so have applications. Let's run, say, DOS on a typical low-cost laptop today, and it's pretty darn fast. Thing is, is anyone really still using only DOS? How about movies? Before, anything that could play a VCD well was considered fine, and the high-end machines needed for playing DVDs were considered frivolous. Now where are we? Most computers can play DVDs well, but HD-DVD movies will bring them to their knees. What kind of pictures were we looking at in the past? 320x200 size. Now it's typically 3200x2000 that our digicams are taking. Would the 8086 CPUs of the past have handled today's high res pics? Look even at the progression of OS's. They get more power hungry and slower with each fancy upgrade. Yes, you're not "forced" to use them, but most use them eventually. Will the entry-level CPU and 512MB ram you buy now run Vista? Probably, but you won't be enjoying the experience.

Let me tell you this: I have many many (more than 2 dozen) computers of varying power. I absolutely HATE working on ANYTHING (and that includes simple office tasks) on the computers that are, say, around 20k baht. They're FREAKISHLY slow whenever I push them even the slightest. 512MB is enough? No freakin way. Entry level CPU is OK? NO. Yes, there are the patient people who will wait and wait and put up with all the pauses, but a computer is supposed to help you, not hinder you.

As for resolutions, my Samsung CRT (yes, CRT) 17" monitor is nearly a decade old. It can do 1920x1200 quite happily. My friend's 17" Sony laptop (really stretching the meaning of the word) can also do 1920x1200, and is gorgeous. He's not using it anymore since it weighs a ton. "Portable" and "big, gorgeous screen" don't really mix together, unless you add in "aching back". Just the power adapter alone weighs more than most notebooks. He paid more than 100k for it, when he could have bought some equivalent (and even more powerful) desktop for half that.

Laptops will soon outsell PCs (I think they just did, according to some report). It's just the way things are. Laptops look nice, are portable, and project a sense of class. They're also becoming cheaper by the moment. One thing that's remained the same is their expandability... no changing of the VGA, CPU, keyboard, and screen. The components also have a limited choice, and if you venture into the high-end market, you're going *really* high end in terms of cost (but never as good as a desktop in terms of performance). You'd better make a good decision since you're gonna be stuck with it, and going to have to buy a new one a lot more often than a desktop. Laptops are still a compromise, and if you want raw power you still can't beat a desktop. However, the compromise is a lot less painful and expensive than it used to be.

[Simmo]

my nivida card goes to the 1990x1440 @ 60hz not sure my monitor can handle that but will try that SOON! just to see how small print can be.

the reason i have not gone to an LCD is the high 'native resolution' .. never low enough for me.

Vista has a good font scaling DPI feature. Makes text and icons easily readable on large LCD displays.

[gharknes]

Laptops vs desktops, the neverending feud.

There is always the argument of "anything is fast enough these days" popping up. Yes, CPUs have come a long way, but so have applications. Let's run, say, DOS on a typical low-cost laptop today, and it's pretty darn fast. Thing is, is anyone really still using only DOS? How about movies? Before, anything that could play a VCD well was considered fine, and the high-end machines needed for playing DVDs were considered frivolous. Now where are we? Most computers can play DVDs well, but HD-DVD movies will bring them to their knees. What kind of pictures were we looking at in the past? 320x200 size. Now it's typically 3200x2000 that our digicams are taking. Would the 8086 CPUs of the past have handled today's high res pics? Look even at the progression of OS's. They get more power hungry and slower with each fancy upgrade. Yes, you're not "forced" to use them, but most use them eventually. Will the entry-level CPU and 512MB ram you buy now run Vista? Probably, but you won't be enjoying the experience.

Let me tell you this: I have many many (more than 2 dozen) computers of varying power. I absolutely HATE working on ANYTHING (and that includes simple office tasks) on the computers that are, say, around 20k baht. They're FREAKISHLY slow whenever I push them even the slightest. 512MB is enough? No freakin way. Entry level CPU is OK? NO. Yes, there are the patient people who will wait and wait and put up with all the pauses, but a computer is supposed to help you, not hinder you.

As for resolutions, my Samsung CRT (yes, CRT) 17" monitor is nearly a decade old. It can do 1920x1200 quite happily. My friend's 17" Sony laptop (really stretching the meaning of the word) can also do 1920x1200, and is gorgeous. He's not using it anymore since it weighs a ton. "Portable" and "big, gorgeous screen" don't really mix together, unless you add in "aching back". Just the power adapter alone weighs more than most notebooks. He paid more than 100k for it, when he could have bought some equivalent (and even more powerful) desktop for half that.

Laptops will soon outsell PCs (I think they just did, according to some report). It's just the way things are. Laptops look nice, are portable, and project a sense of class. They're also becoming cheaper by the moment. One thing that's remained the same is their expandability... no changing of the VGA, CPU, keyboard, and screen. The components also have a limited choice, and if you venture into the high-end market, you're going *really* high end in terms of cost (but never as good as a desktop in terms of performance). You'd better make a good decision since you're gonna be stuck with it, and going to have to buy a new one a lot more often than a desktop. Laptops are still a compromise, and if you want raw power you still can't beat a desktop. However, the compromise is a lot less painful and expensive than it used to be.

great post and very very true, only thing I would comment on is that modern laptops are quite upgradable, take a look at the Dell XPS 1710, my next machine when I can afford the 1k sterling price tag, and yes the 1900/1200 UXGA laptop screen is very impressive. Here;s a nice article............................ http://www.pcper.com/article.php?type=expert&aid=270 a very very nice bit of kit

[Firefoxx]

The upgradeable laptops are the exception, not the rule. Yes, there are a handful of expensive laptops where you can change the vga and some where you can even change the CPU, but the majority can't. For the vast majority, it's still impossible to change the VGA, CPU, mainboard, keyboard and screen.