Quote from XCNuse :

Well I dont have many choices for video cards, either its integrated, the ATi, or the Nvidia Go 7300, and the ATi X1400 is said to be much faster than the Nvidia.

This is a laptop, so gaming won't be happening to much.

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/898/3dmark2005xa4.jpg
There is a comparison chart, the Nvidia card gets 1600, while the X1400 gets 2200.

I mean, in every account I've read so far the X1400 seems to be incomparably faster than the Nvidia.

Ach,because you wrote above Geforce 7800 so I got confused by your decision to X1400.Now I get it.IF I would have an option I would go with something like Geforce 7600 GO but this would reduce battery time a lot thought.Hard to make a choice...I know

Oh I did you're right, sorry I meant the 7300.
If the 7600 was an option, yes I would take that, but sadly its not, but I have read that the 7600 is faster in leaps and bounds in comparison to the 7300, the 7300 is commonly referred to as a low end card, while the X1400 is a mid end card, and the 7600 is considered a high end card for laptops.

I could get the 7900 GS on the XPS 1710, but that laptop costs a whopping $2,299 so .. no thanks.

I just hate that the expensive laptops can come with XP while all the cheaper ones come with Vista whats with that?!

I might land up installing XP on the laptop if I have to.

I am not really notebook guru as I am more in desktop PCs but I heard that when comparing Vista and XP on notebook the battery with XP last much more.Already some notebook makers complaint to MS about this.

Maybe its bulshit but I read it somewhere.You might notice I really dont find anything usefull on Vistas now.

Yea I'm still reading comparisons, and it turns out, while XP is faster in majority cases, I have found out that 3dsmax 9 does work on Vista so that is good, but the downsides are OpenGL doesn't seem to work really at all in Vista, but I can't think of anything I run in OGL.
As for battery time, I've read thus far that it has a very small effect, most of which can be avoidable by closing out of junk I wont be using.

I think it'll take time, but one day Vista will overrule XP in performance.

Well, the attached image is what I'm getting, my uncle is keeping track of sales from Dell, so now I'm just waiting for the price to drop lower (although I don't believe it will drop all that much since its already $250 from 23rd Anniversary of Dell, and some deal with ATi which ends June 7th).

I decided to keep the 80GB hard drive since I don't even use much over 60GB on this computer's HD.

Holy cow, my uncle sent me an email, and he can get some serious discounts on dells, and so he sent me what I could do with an Inspiron 9400 (basically same thing as 1705), and the total sale on it with the coupons going on right now ends up being almost $400!
It is a 17" screen, but it also comes with XP rather than vista. And it only lands up costing $1,192.
Good deal or no do you think?

(Same specs as laptop posted in attachment above this post)

Okay well, when I get home today I'm buying a laptop.

At $1,060 it is a fantastic deal, with savings up to $180 (the 17" version had $400 savings, but landed up costing over $100 more [which to be honest I wouldn't mind paying]). But seeing that I'm using this for school, I doubt I would be able to talk my way into getting a laptop that large.

It would be nice, but now I'm wondering that if I'm only getting a 15.4" screen if I should just make it a cheap laptop and not so fast.

Okay I know I shouldn't be making a new thread on this, but I figured since I only have a few hours left before my decision, and seeing that majority of you here know more about computers than I do, and have more experience and all those who ha on all of it, I need to know which is a better deal.
(Also doing this so you guys don't have to respond but can just use the poll instead)

System Specs (what the poll is asking)

15.4"
Intel® Core™ DUO T2350 (2.0 GHz, 2MB L2 Cache, 667MHz FSB)
Windows XP Home
2GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHZ, 2 DIMM
80GB SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM)
256MB ATI MOBILITY™ RADEON® X1400 HyperMemory™
Final Price: $1,060

17"
Intel® Core™ DUO T2350 (1.86GHz, 2MB L2 Cache, 533MHz FSB)
Windows XP Pro
2GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 533MHz
120GB SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM)
256MB ATI MOBILITY™ RADEON® X1400 HyperMemory™
Final Price: $1,049

(everything in BLUE marks what is different)


Although the 17" is more preferable, which is a better buy; the increased .14 GHz and higher FSB speed, or the increased screen size and $10 less?

Keep in mind this will have to last me 4 years at the LEAST.

Quote from XCNuse :

Okay I know I shouldn't be making a new thread on this, but I figured

"... I would anyway"


You're getting as bad as jak and n00b and seem to be posting for the sheer hell of seeing your own name in posts.

in 4 years it WILL be outdated - imo i'd get the 15.4" model, unless you need more than 80 GB

EDIT - Thanks, Ian. Like i've said, countless times, find a pointless, off-topic, non-funny post and i WILL delete it. Considering lots of people bitch about me "spamming" i find it funny no-ones taken me up on this offer...

Laptops are always a compromise, but it depends how you want to compromise.

More horsepower will keep it feeling fresher for longer, but a bigger screen is a luxury that will pay off from day one. If there's the possibility you might be plugging it into a proper monitor for most of your "serious" work sessions then go with the 15.4", otherwise I'd have the 17".

If both have widescreens, then...

15-incher.

Reasons:
17-incher is no longer a laptop, it's a semi-portable slab of plastic. All laptop screens are more or less appaling in picture quality, so you'd be much happier with an external monitor if you demand more workspace. And external hard drives are the way to go, as laptop ones are slow (or burning hot if you pick up a 7200 RPM version). 15-incher has a faster processor and XP Pro is useless for 99% of humankind (whether are you that 1%, I do not know).

That's my opinion.

Thanks for being so forward Ian.

Anyways, I guess everyone here is going to pull for the 15" (by the way, yes both are widscreens).

Hard drive space isn't a problem for me, I wish I could drop the 17" down to 80GB hard drive and get 100$ out of it and get the 2ghz but I guess either way it would still be large and cumbersome. But hard drive space isn't much of a problem for me, I use just over 50GB at my home desktop.


Just to add on if anyone else has anything to say, I've read on many accounts the pros and cons of having a glossy screen. Does anyone here have a matte and glossy screen to compare, and if so what do you really recommend, I'm using a matte screen right now, but as we all know when you get at serious angles to it the colors invert and all sorts of unpretty things happen.

I am thinking about getting the glossy screen just because I've read so many positive things about it over the matte. And my experience with matte is that, if you're outdoors, you HAVE to be in a shady place if you want to see anything on the screen, otherwise on a sunny day all you see is just a bit specular glare on the screen.

I'm hoping that a store nearby sells laptops so I can see the difference, but I'm not totally sure if they do and do not want to drive way out of my way just to compare something that usually goes by word of mouth.

LCD screen's panel type determines its pros and cons, not whether it has glossy or matte finish. And most LCD screens are either some sort of PVA or TN design, which both similar pros and cons.

However, glossy finish does give you deeper colours and better blacks. But then again if you don't have a pretty face, you might get sick of seeing your coconut staring back at you when you're trying to get work done.

Merged threads, thanks everyone for your help, I'm just awaiting response from my uncle to get the final go on the 15.4" version, just hopefully he will respond soon (can't wait really), but if he doesn't respond in next 2 days the price will go up $250 so then its really not worth it.

Owell, thanks again guys.

Merged threads just for you Ian.

^^^ what spankmeyer said. its not the finish on the screen that determines what the images do at extreme angles, but the type of technology used in the screen.

the glossy finish does help with sharper images, and richer colors, but, it is highly reflective. so, if you are sitting outside on a sunny day, you won't have a huge glare on your screen...you will have a crisp, bright reflection of the scenery behind you. in either case, rendering the laptop almost unusable outside.

that said, if i was going to be working outside, or in an area with bright lighting, i personally would go with the matte finish, as i find it to be less intrusive than the glossy finish.

i'd say, try to find one of each type and test them out, to see which you prefer, but given your time frame, that might not be an option.

Quote from XCNuse :

Merged threads just for you Ian.

Everyone else is told to use the search feature, not to start new, repetitive threads.. why should you be any different? Hell.. you replied in your other thread only today too! Hardly a good example to be setting is it? or are you of the mindset of "don't do as I do, do as I say?"

IMO, you just wanted to feel important and add a poll (what this recent fixation is with people starting polls for just about anything is beyond me) and why many seem to have to ask the entire forum for an opinion for some things seems weird too.. can't anyone think for themselves these days? This seems to be very common when there's a serious lack of LFS progress and people just post anything for something to do.



Regards,

Ian

I guess it is beyond you then, I don't have money I can just spend everywhere like you seem to be able to.

Quote from XCNuse :

I guess it is beyond you then, I don't have money I can just spend everywhere like you seem to be able to.

How does creating a poll have anything to do with spending money?

Put it this way.. if I wasn't sure about a new box to buy, I'd ask a few friends "in the know" over IRC or down the pub for their opinions.. surely you have a few friends you could pose the question to too?

It's got nothing to do with money but about what's good for the goose and the gander.



Regards,

Ian

Its summer, everyone is gone, and no one I know knows much about laptops because we all have our desktops at home, and I don't know many people that are in college.

Plus, I've seen plenty of people around here talk about computers non stop, and I'm sure they know much more than my friends. Actually I could easily bet on everyone here knows much more than my friends do.

Hope you're satisfied now.

I'd go with the 15.4"

I have a 15.4" laptop here (Acer Ferrari 4005WLMi) and it suits me fine. Any larger and I'd not longer be able to fit in on my desk at home and still be able to use the mouse. And, for the record, you will always want to use your mouse. After a few months the buttons beside the touchpad will probably be rendered useless. No idea why since it pretty much only sits on my desk...

Do you know the native res of the monitors? I'm guessing the native res will be somewhere in the 1280 bracket, which should look just fine at 15.4". That's what a friend had on his laptop and it looked pretty nice compared to some other laptops I've seen. I've got a native res of a hefty 1680x1050 on my 15.4" screen. I must say it rivals most desktop pcs I've seen...

One thing to note; Dell likes to install a LOT of completely useless BS on their computers. I don't own one myself (and never will) so I may not be the best informant on the subject, but the first thing I'd do when I get the laptop is a complete reformat and re-install of Windows. With any luck, the cd Dell gives you for windows doesn't come with the bloatware built into it like some companies do, and you'll get a bare-bones install.

Yea, actually HP is worse when it comes to third party programs, I usually get rid of them right when I get it, but I've said no to everything I possibly can.

I still can't believe you actually bought one of those Ferrari Laptops, they are cool looking though.

They don't say what the native resolution is, but I do know that you can get a what dell calls "True Life" which increases the resolution, but its quite bothersome that they do not say what it is, it also costs $50 more. So you can't tell if its worth it or not because it doesn't say. I'll keep looking around for it though.

Okay here it is I found it on a review site. Native resolution is 1680 x 1050.
Sounds plenty for me, I still use 1024x768 on this desktop here.

the wife's widescreen dell (15.4) is 1440x900 res, so i'd guess that it would either be that res or 1680x1050. And all the dell crap programs are easy to uninstall. that's what i did back when she first got it.

Ive been looking at the HP 17" laptops myself.
I have a 19" monitor I use with my PC and I couldnt imagine going down to anything less than 17".
Studies have shown (cant remember where so I dont have proof, sorry) that adding screen space increases productivity for doing most things.
When I get it I will be hooking the 19" up to it to use both monitors for work
Ive not looked deeply into the prices of your stuff, but it does sound like you are getting a great deal there.
The HP I want isnt that cheap hmmm, seems I have more research to do.

I've had a bad experience with all HP hardware I use, from printers to even computers, I just don't really like HP that much. Be aware though, they do load up their computers with junk software. Also they seem to have not very good deals, well, the prices are good, but the prices don't give much for its power. A while back I got a desktop, probably around $500, it was I believe 2.5 GHz, 256mb ram, and no AGP slot (which, as far as I knew I've never heard of a non-AGP graphics card), after uninstalling about 30 programs and testing LFS, no matter what I did the integrated graphics would only get around 10 FPS at best. Got this dell 4600 system, somewhere around the same $500 range, and it's 2.8 GHz, came with 512mb ram (back in those days it 1gb was almost unheard of), and it came with a graphics card, I don't remember what it was but I got a better one right away. Noadays its not so great anymore, upgraded to 1.5GB of ram, and a once-was fast graphics card.

I guess my next computer (and everyone else's next computer) is going to make the computers of today look like car phones (if anyone remembers what those are.)