OT: Question about Computers

[The Less Blob]

I've had enough with fighting with my wife over the computer. She works full time and is pursuing a PhD and I take a lot of work home. Also, when she's on the computer I can't scan and list stuff on ebay and here, which is one of my big goals to do more of.

 

SO, I've decided to buy a laptop. I'm trying to do it on a budget. Basically, I need to have one with some sort of wireless so that I can connect to the internet via our desktop upstairs, I need to be able to run Word, and I need to be able to scan and upload images. I guess being able to have a bluetooth/wireless connection with my printer/scanner would be good too. I'm not a big game nut.

 

I see some of these Acer mini laptops well under $400. 120 GB hard drive, 2 GHz, etc... The ones under $300 seem too barebones.

 

Does anyone have something like this and are you able to do the things I'd like to do with it? My main concern is that scanning/uploading images is going to be very slow or is that more about my scanner and internet connection?

 

I'd also prefer to have something that isn't antiquated in 2 years. I bought almost top of the line for my desktop 5 years ago and I still feel like it is up to snuff for today's needs.

 

Also, I'm a bit surprised about CPU speeds. I have a Dell Dimension 4600 with a 3.06 GHZ pentium 4 I've owned for more than 5 years and it doesn't seem like the CPUs are any faster nowadays...I had expected the laptops to be way faster, and most are less. Or are those CPU speeds meaningless because everything else is faster nowadays?

[Fedoraman]

What OS were the laptops/PC's running on the new ones you have seen?

 

Vista is a resource PIG - but XP SP3 runs very smoothly.

[rodan57]

I swear by Macs for ease of use and lack of problems: twenty years on a Mac, no viruses and only one problem (ethernet card/covered under warranty). Seek out a second hand iBook on eBay.

[faster friends]

Get at least 2 gig of ram

[sckao]

There are plenty of notebooks in the $400-$500 range.

 

Do NOT get a Celeron. Get over 2 gigs of RAM. Run either Windows XP or wait for Windows 7.0

 

If all you need is a web browsing machine with minimal word processing capabilities (and you need it to be extremely portable), the Dell minis were only $199 a couple of weeks ago.

 

(I'm suggesting this in case this is all your wife needs... like mine.)

 

I.E. Don't buy yourself a new machine. Buy HER a nice small portable machine. She doesn't need to scan right?

 

 

 

 

 

[SilverRich]

I've recently switched to Mac and must agree I ain't never goin' back. I still have a Windows PC, but I've been using it much less. You can also run Windows on a Mac if you wish.

 

If you must stay with Windows, my opinion is that XP is better than Vista (which I can't stand and helped my decision to go to Mac), and as sckao said - get as much memory as you can. It makes a big difference.

 

You may also wind up with a "trial period" of MS Office, so you may have to purchase it. I'm not crazy about the latest version of that either.

 

Don't know much about them, but I'm not too sure about Acer.

 

Hope it works out for you, and at least look into Mac. It's great to work with. (thumbs u

[Drakeprimeone]

A 3.0 ghz processor back in the day was really good so its not surprising that it still holds its own today. My laptop is 5 years old and half of your computer resources (1.73ghz processor & 1 gig of RAM) and still works great.

 

Honestly for what you are looking for any laptop will fit the bill in your price range. Most laptops have 2 gigs of RAM or so with a dual core processor of sorts for about 5 bones. What will most directly effect your speed will be the RAM. Go for 2 gigs or more if you like for better multi tasking. Scanning performance will depend on your actual scanner. Upload speed will depend more on your network connection than the laptop itself. I'd hazard to guess that all new laptops come with a built in wireless card so that shouldnt be an issue either.

 

It will really come down to how much money you want to throw down. For what you want to use it for any laptop should suffice. As a second option, if you arent set on a laptop you can get a desktop with twice the resources for the same money.

[Drakeprimeone]

 

Hope it works out for you, and at least look into Mac. It's great to work with. (thumbs u

 

Mac = Wii of computers

[joe_collector]

I wouldn't buy a netbook as my main laptop, but if you want to maximize size, speed and functionality at a low cost, the Dell Vostro 1310 is an insane deal:

 

http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/vostronb_1310?c=us&l=en&s=bsd&cs=04

 

I bought a killer unit on intro-sale about a year ago, C2D 2.0 GHz, 2GB, GeForce 8400 graphics, 160GB HD, etc. for just over $500 CAD (when our exchange didn't suck) and I've been extremely impressed. Great LCD display (same as on XPS 13"), slot-loading DVD, super performance, light, good battery, and at 13", it's a nice compromise between a netbook and a standard 15.4" laptop.

 

Recommendations:

 

The Ultra-sharp LCD is required, as it's excellent and as above, the same as the expensive XPS, get matte screen (non-glossy) - call Dell if not offered online, get a Core 2 (not a Celeron), Bluetooth is a nice $20 upgrade, GeForce 8 graphics are standard now I think....

 

[The Less Blob]

seems like the vostro is a chunk more expensive now

 

macs are a bit beyond my budget

 

my wife is actually the one who needs more juice because she programs is some weird language, does a lot of database work and runs a lot of stats.

 

i guess what is going to result in me spending money is my desire for one of these batteries that lasts 6+ hours and the cheapies usually don't have that option.

 

i guess i was just assuming that in 5 years what was avaible in a cheap laptop would blow my desktop away, but that isn't the case. unfortunately, the desktop is beyond its warranty and will probably die in the next 6 months. already we're getting the occasional weird oddity and funny noises. so I was kindah hoping to save some money on the laptop because i'm going to have to buy a desktop soon too.

 

what ticks me off is that i had been bugging my wife to get her office to get her a laptop like some of her colleagues had gotten, but for office politics reasons she had not pushed that request through because she was angling for other things. now there's no money for her to get the laptop even if she really really wanted one and could show a real need. needless to say, there have been a few firings, and as one of the highest paid people around with her education level (she's in academia, so having a masters and being in the process of getting a PhD puts her low on the food chain, but her skillset has resulted in her getting paid more than some of the PhDs), she needs to be careful.

[The Less Blob]

what does a dual core processor mean? does that mean that 2 GHz runs faster than a non-dual core that days it's 2 GHz?

 

I'm guessing I need 2 GHz and at least 2 GB RAM. hard drive is actually not a big deal as I have 120 now and we're barely using 20% of it. (i don't have many games on there) I'm figuring whatever graphics card come standard with a Dell is sufficient, but I'm less certain about some of those cheapies.

 

i guess i'll decide on something within the next week.

[Drakeprimeone]

seems like the vostro is a chunk more expensive now

 

macs are a bit beyond my budget

 

my wife is actually the one who needs more juice because she programs is some weird language, does a lot of database work and runs a lot of stats.

 

i guess what is going to result in me spending money is my desire for one of these batteries that lasts 6+ hours and the cheapies usually don't have that option.

 

i guess i was just assuming that in 5 years what was avaible in a cheap laptop would blow my desktop away, but that isn't the case. unfortunately, the desktop is beyond its warranty and will probably die in the next 6 months. already we're getting the occasional weird oddity and funny noises. so I was kindah hoping to save some money on the laptop because i'm going to have to buy a desktop soon too.

 

what ticks me off is that i had been bugging my wife to get her office to get her a laptop like some of her colleagues had gotten, but for office politics reasons she had not pushed that request through because she was angling for other things. now there's no money for her to get the laptop even if she really really wanted one and could show a real need. needless to say, there have been a few firings, and as one of the highest paid people around with her education level (she's in academia, so having a masters and being in the process of getting a PhD puts her low on the food chain, but her skillset has resulted in her getting paid more than some of the PhDs), she needs to be careful.

 

Side by side desktops will usually have more power than a laptop for the same money. I built my desktop a few years ago and its still more powerful than many of todays laptops in the same price range.

[joe_collector]

seems like the vostro is a chunk more expensive now

 

Yeah, you definitely have to wait for a sale, but they come up regularly - I think I got a Dell.com email deal last week on the 1310. It also has a 9-cell/7-hour option for an additional $50.

 

I've used pretty well all brands and styles of laptops, from netbooks to Mac Airs, and this rates extremely high on bang-for-the-buck - the Ultra Sharp display is insane on a laptop at this range.

[joe_collector]

what does a dual core processor mean? does that mean that 2 GHz runs faster than a non-dual core that days it's 2 GHz?

 

It's exactly what it says, there are two processor cores on a dual-core, four on a quad-core, etc. The more physical processor cores on a processor package, the more processing threads it can handle, and the smoother your multi-tasking will be.

 

Here's my Task Manager, and it shows 8 simultaneous threads/processes on one processor.

[whisp]

Most laptops come with core 2 and wireless built in. There is a few out there that still have single core and is an easy way to cut a bit of cost since if all you are doing is scanning images and word and such you do not need a dual core processor and would just be overkill. Also if you get Vista then yes get 2 gig of ram but if you are going to be using just XP 1gig is more then fine.

 

If you do go for a dual core processor make sure that whatever ram you do get be it 1gig or 2gig that it is seperated into 2 sticks of ram. For example if you get 2 gigs , get two sticks of 1gig ram. If you get 1gig get 2x 512mb. If its a single core processor then it don't matter.

 

 

Video card doesn't really matter if you are not playing games.

 

Hard drive you dont need to worry since most have over 80gigs and you can expand easily these days with externals on the cheap.

 

As to having wireless scanner or printer they will work fine. Most of the wireless in laptops these days are 802.11n along with most laptops have bluetooth built in but make sure that you read the specs of the laptop first because bluetooth and such are extras and a way for them to cut costs on those cheap laptops.

 

Before you buy any laptop though look up reviews on it. This will tell you if it has a decent screen, how the battery holds up over time along with whatever else users have to say about it. These review will also tell how the wireless is since just because it may have 802.11n doesnt mean that it has a good network card in it or it may have problems.

 

When I buy a laptop my main concersn are battery life and the screen quality.

 

If you had the patience I would wait for windows 7 since 1. its better then Vista and 2. they are about to drop support on Windows XP.

[whisp]

what does a dual core processor mean? does that mean that 2 GHz runs faster than a non-dual core that days it's 2 GHz?

 

It's exactly what it says, there are two processor cores on a dual-core, four on a quad-core, etc. The more physical processor cores on a processor package, the more processing threads it can handle, and the smoother your multi-tasking will be.

 

Here's my Task Manager, and it shows 8 simultaneous threads/processes on one processor.

 

Overkill!!!!!

 

And btw that is two processors.

[Issa]

You should get the following Dell mini-laptop for $400:

 

http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/laptop-inspiron-10?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&~oid=us~en~29~laptop-inspiron-10_anav_1~~

 

But...I recommend checking http://www.slickdeals.net regularly (daily) as you can get a great deal with minimal effort.

 

I do this all the time for a living, for relatives, their homes, offices, etc.

 

-Issa

[joe_collector]

what does a dual core processor mean? does that mean that 2 GHz runs faster than a non-dual core that days it's 2 GHz?

 

It's exactly what it says, there are two processor cores on a dual-core, four on a quad-core, etc. The more physical processor cores on a processor package, the more processing threads it can handle, and the smoother your multi-tasking will be.

 

Here's my Task Manager, and it shows 8 simultaneous threads/processes on one processor.

 

Overkill!!!!!

 

And btw that is two processors.

 

Sure, it's overkill until you want to encode a 2 hour video file to DivX/AC3 in under 16 minutes.

 

And BTW, it's a single CPU.

[joe_collector]

You should get the following Dell mini-laptop for $400:

 

We have all the main netbooks here, Dell, Acer, MSI and HP, and there is not way in heII that I'd recommend one of these as a main laptop for scanning or work duties.

 

No optical drive, puny 1024x576 resolution (worse than an 8.9" model) that will cause many programs and webpages to not load, limited performance.

 

Don't get me wrong, we have 6 netbooks here, and I love 'em, but only in ADDITION to desktops and laptops, not as a replacement. These are little travel/student/kid's toys, nothing more.

[whisp]

what does a dual core processor mean? does that mean that 2 GHz runs faster than a non-dual core that days it's 2 GHz?

 

It's exactly what it says, there are two processor cores on a dual-core, four on a quad-core, etc. The more physical processor cores on a processor package, the more processing threads it can handle, and the smoother your multi-tasking will be.

 

Here's my Task Manager, and it shows 8 simultaneous threads/processes on one processor.

 

Overkill!!!!!

 

And btw that is two processors.

 

Sure, it's overkill until you want to encode a 2 hour video file to DivX/AC3 in under 16 minutes.

 

And BTW, it's a single CPU.

 

Really? What model cpu? What make computer is it and model #?