+1 on Mac being dependable. Yep, you just keep re-installing the OS every few months and they just keep going and going and going and going.
Laptop help please!
- Thread starter eddieyourdj
- Start date
+1 on Mac being dependable. Yep, you just keep re-installing the OS every few months and they just keep going and going and going and going.
I'm afraid this is just going to turn into a bigger pi--ing match than it already is, and that wasn't the point of this threat, I'm sure. All I'll say is this:
Steve has it right on the money. Well almost. I can't say I agree with Dell also making the *best* computers out there, but there are definitely options on the high and low options, and most people tend to choose the low end. This is where most people go wrong.
I will take a $900 Lenovo with the same cpu/memory/hard drive specs as a $500 Dell, ANY DAY. There is no comparison. That's a bit like comparing a 12MP point and shoot camera to an 8MP DSLR camera. Which would you choose? You can't get into the number game, without considering build-quality and design.
Mac has much better quality control; they don't make lower quality junk just to hit a price point. BUT, that's not to say that they don't crash, or don't have problems. We work on PLENTY of mac's here. True, they don't really have issues (so far anyway) with viruses/spyware. I think we can all agree on that. But no one can say they don't crash, don't lock up, and don't have hardware problems, because from personal experience repairing and working on hundreds of computers, they DO. Not necessarily more or less than a Windows computer, but probably remarkably close in percentage, come to think of it.
Everyone has their preference. Neither side is going to completely convince the other of much of anything. But neither is perfect.
Steve has it right on the money. Well almost. I can't say I agree with Dell also making the *best* computers out there, but there are definitely options on the high and low options, and most people tend to choose the low end. This is where most people go wrong.
I will take a $900 Lenovo with the same cpu/memory/hard drive specs as a $500 Dell, ANY DAY. There is no comparison. That's a bit like comparing a 12MP point and shoot camera to an 8MP DSLR camera. Which would you choose? You can't get into the number game, without considering build-quality and design.
Mac has much better quality control; they don't make lower quality junk just to hit a price point. BUT, that's not to say that they don't crash, or don't have problems. We work on PLENTY of mac's here. True, they don't really have issues (so far anyway) with viruses/spyware. I think we can all agree on that. But no one can say they don't crash, don't lock up, and don't have hardware problems, because from personal experience repairing and working on hundreds of computers, they DO. Not necessarily more or less than a Windows computer, but probably remarkably close in percentage, come to think of it.
Everyone has their preference. Neither side is going to completely convince the other of much of anything. But neither is perfect.
hehe
Currently running it for our web/email server, and like it for the most part. We have a Windows server as well, which I can't say I love the idea of, but management is definitely more straight-forward, unless you totally grew up in CL linux.
Both have advantages
Currently running it for our web/email server, and like it for the most part. We have a Windows server as well, which I can't say I love the idea of, but management is definitely more straight-forward, unless you totally grew up in CL linux.
Both have advantages
That's correct -- you get to look at my picture (and Faith's) when you click the credits
lol @ rick
That's correct -- you get to look at my picture (and Faith's) when you click the credits
Would that be considered a software bug (glitch) or a feature (easter egg)?
:tribiggrin:
Now I'm scared
I am on the verge of buying a lappy, only for emergencies and ceremonies...'
and I was really concentrating on RAM and Dual Core processors.
Also, I was planning on using the USB audio interfaces.
Since I am not using this as my MAIN gig unit...
will I have a problem if I go with Dual Core and 2 gigs of RAM?
If you want to do it the easy way (and probably correct way) -- buy two identical lappys. Build one to your spec, then clone it to the other. The only thing different, will be the Windows activation code.
Keep them synced, and then you have no problems using either machine, for any purpose
BTW, my dual core lappy (Core 2 Duo), is slightly faster than my Core i5 machine, which has 4 virtual cores. Don't read too much into that dual versus quad thing -- most of the time, the additional cores sit idle, because the software was compiled using older compilers...
I already have a fully functioning mp3 controller and two mirrored external HD's
that I love working with
not enough cash for TWO lappys...
as i said, just need one for ceremonies and/or an emergency backup.
but thanks for the "core lesson", I feel better about that.
as for the video/sound/graphics cards...
does the quality of these matter, if I use the Behringer audio interfaces?
does the sound bypass the computers soundcard by using them?
that I love working with
not enough cash for TWO lappys...
as i said, just need one for ceremonies and/or an emergency backup.
but thanks for the "core lesson", I feel better about that.
as for the video/sound/graphics cards...
does the quality of these matter, if I use the Behringer audio interfaces?
does the sound bypass the computers soundcard by using them?
Video card is the number one thing to consider -- Windows is a GUI (Graphical User Interface). The quality and speed of the video card, will make the biggest single difference in how robust your machine is (even when not playing videos).
You should have a dedicated video card, with a minimum of 512 MB of memory -- 1 GB is typical these days. Don't buy a machine with an Intel Integrated HD Crappy Whatever in it, unless it is strictly a backup machine!
Sound card, yeah -- whatever you plug in will mean you are bypassing the onboard stuff. In most (but not all) cases, they will sound much better than the onboard crapola. Then you want to get a nice interconnect cable between the sound card and mixer -- don't spend $150 on a sound card, and then use Radio Shack interconnects -- it's a waste of your money for the sound card
BTW, I love the Behringers -- clean, flat sound -- not a tone control. If you want pre-amped, really loud sound, get a different card -- but you can't go wrong with the Berrys...
Occasionally, these laptops lose the backlight, which basically lights up the screen.
Would it be possible for you to plug your laptop into an external display to see if it boots correctly on the external display? You only need to plug in the display and turn it on.
If it boots, it is most likely your backlight. The fix is common and rather inexpensive.
My best,
Scott
Would it be possible for you to plug your laptop into an external display to see if it boots correctly on the external display? You only need to plug in the display and turn it on.
If it boots, it is most likely your backlight. The fix is common and rather inexpensive.
My best,
Scott
Sorry Rick, have to disagree a bit. Video cards don't matter that much -- to the point that it's about the LAST thing I'd worry about. Then again, with most computers I have to re-install Vista or 7 on, I'll disable all of the extra graphics crap and make it relatively basic. Works great.
However, if you insist on leaving graphics turned up high, full transparency with window titles, etc. and run anything newer than XP; yes, graphics are going to me more important.
And I'll disagree back at ya...
Here's my reasoning as a programmer:
Take Machine A, with Intel Integrated Graphics, Machine B with NVidia or Radeon dedicated video card.
Display a list of some sort -- could be text based, graphic based, doesn't matter.
The processing before display will take the same time on a comparable machine -- BUT, the display to screen will be much faster with a dedicated video card. The screen refresh rate will be the deciding factor, as the sort and walking the list will take the same amount of time.
The user sees a much quicker machine, and everything is more robust. Even though they are internally working at the same speed, the external user interface has been sped up -- which is the weakest point (slowest part).
Windows (since Vista), is intelligent enough to know when it can offload graphics stuff to the external GPU. If it can, it will -- thereby alleviating stress on the CPU.
Rick is right in a way and so are you from another. Rick is right because by having a better graphics processor, it takes the job away from the CPU. By not having the graphics processor, the CPU does ALL the work.
You could leave all this on with an advanced graphics processor - all the hard work is handed to the AGP - and see no difference in performance. Without the AGP, the system now has to work that much harder.