| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Boglenaut
Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Posts: 729
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 5:22 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Almost forgot....
If you buy from Dell On-Line, use Bing to get to the page. They have a 5% cash back promotion going on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was at Wal-Mart in Washington, Ill., today, so I thought I'd take my first look at Windows 7 laptops there. I looked only at ones with a numeric keypad, as the OP said it was a must. Here they are from least to most expensive:
1. Acer. 15.6-inch screen, AMD Athlon TF-20 processor (don't think this is dual core), 2 GB of RAM, 160 GB hard drive. Price: $348.
2. HP. 15.6-inch screen, AMD Sempron M1000 processor (don't think this is dual core), 3 GB of RAM, 250 GB hard drive. Display said 64-bit Windows. Price: $498.
3. HP. 16.5-inch screen, Intel Core2 Duo processor, 4 GB of RAM, 320 GB hard drive. Display said 64-bit Windows. Price: $698.
Almost any machine you get will have a trial version of antivirus software, probably McAfee. The first thing I'd do is get rid of it. In fact, there is free program called PC Decrapifier that will remove a lot of the crapware OEM machines come with. http://www.pcdecrapifier.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think any of those computers would work for what you've said you want to do. I wish I could answer your question about 64-bit vs. 32-bit issues. Maybe someone else can, or do some Googling.
You have gotten so much advice that you must be totally confused by now. That's just the way it is with computers and opinions. I can pretty much guarantee that the next time you buy a laptop, you'll have a better idea of what you find important.
Finally, if the need is not urgent, you might want to wait a few weeks to see what kind of holiday deals emerge. It seems that with laptops, someone is always popping something out there for $100 less. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Valuethinker
Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 10937
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi
Generally you should go for 64 bit over 32 bit, the only reason not to is if certain data or programmes are carried over from your previous machine.
64 bit allows the computer to address a far larger memory space (32 bit Windows XP only can use up to 3.5GB of memory, 64 bit can use something like up to 60GB).
The bits is the length of the 'postal code' of any memory location-- more bits, more possible postal addresses. Kind of like when the US post office added those extra digits for business addresses.
As software gets bigger (and it will!) eventually all applications will be written for 64 bit. Will take a few years, but it will happen.
I like the look of the ASUS above by spec, but have never used an ASUS machine.
As ever with laptops, look and feel is important (although you can always buy a plug in USB keyboard). If you don't like the display (again, you could use your old desktop display, most likely) or keyboard, or it's too heavy, etc. you are basically sunk.
Caution would tilt me towards the HP.
For the applications you are intending, these machines would probably do the job. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stratton
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 6216
Location: Puget Sound
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Normally a 32-bit application in Windowx gets 2 GB of address space and the OS reserves the other 2 GB for itself. A 32-bit application like Photoshop will check to see if they are running on a 64-bit OS and can use a full 4 GB address space when that happens.
Where 64-bit comes in handy is a free app like paint.net can run 3x or 4x as fast because it doesn't have to resort tricks like compression to shoehorn images into a 32-bit address space.
Paul |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
celia
Joined: 09 Mar 2008
Posts: 588
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
If this is for "on the go", be sure it is lightweight and has a long battery life.
Also, since it will be for "on the go", what do you have in mind to keep it from walking off on its own? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OAG
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 79
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Either one of those will fully do the job as you outlined (and should have enough power and be quite fine IMO). You can get cheaper ones but they may or may not be as satisfactory to you. Personally, of the two, I would go with the Acer (had bad luck with a Toshiba in the past; but that is just me). If you purchase Office 2007 with the computer you should be able to get it at a discount (should be about $99; for the Home and Student version). If you are military you should be able to get Office 2007 cheaper at a local military exchange. BTW Office 2010 should be out in the first quarter of 2010; probably not worth waiting, but Open Office is free and could be used in the interim and is fully compatible with Office 2007. Also if you go to the MS site and download MS Security Essentials which is free and is a adequate security suite (negating the need for other Anti-Virus software). Good luck.
_________________
OAG=Old Army Guy. Retired from USA (US Army) in 1979. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triple digit golfer
Joined: 18 May 2009
Posts: 800
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Eureka,
Thanks for those articles. I appreciate your input.
Valuethinker,
I would like to go with the ASUS 4GB machine. I've heard that ASUS makes the absolute best motherboards out there, and makes motherboards for over 1/3 of all the computers out there now. Supposedly their quality is unmatched (or so says the IT guys at work).
What happens if I'm using software that's a couple years old that says "Requires Windows 2000 or XP 32 bit versions?" Will those run on Windows 7 64 bit?
From what I understand, any computer with Windows 32 bit could only be upgraded to a maximum of 4GB. But could Windows 64 run properly on less than 4 GB?
I am really thinking of going with the HP 3GB or ASUS 4GB with Windows 64 bit, but if I could save a few bucks and go with the Toshiba 3GB with Windows 32 bit, I may. So it's between those three and I'm stuck on this 32 vs. 64 bit thing.
And yes, before anybody mentions it, I'm worse than Brett Favre on that commercial  I've always been this way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
OAG
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 79
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have some software that is older than 2 years and it works fine with Win7 64 bit. Generally speaking almost anything that worked with XP or VISTA will work with W7 (BTW the W7 Pro version has an XP mode built in; just in case). The requirements for W7 64 bit are available at the MS site but generally memory-wise it needs at least 2 GB. W7 32 bit will only "use" a maximum of 4 GB (actually uses a bit less) - 64 Bit will use some really large amount of memory (more than you usually can get into a Desktop much less a Notebook).
_________________
OAG=Old Army Guy. Retired from USA (US Army) in 1979. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bearwolf
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 634
Location: Oklahoma
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| azxcvbnm321 wrote: | | I echo the netbook suggestion. For what you're going to use the portable for, you don't need a lot of processing power. Besides cost, netbooks have a huge advantage in that they are very light and easy to carry around. That's something not usually discussed and missing from the processor/RAM/etc. lists and is a good reason why I think netbooks will replace notebooks in the future. The only people who will use notebooks will be the people who are forced to need processing power on the road. Otherwise people will have a desktop that is unmatched in power vs. other formats and a netbook that is unmatched in ease of portability for when they are not at home or when they don't need processing power. |
I tried the netbook for a while as a travel laptop. I have the Acer Aspire 1. It is OK, but I can't say I really like it. The screen is just a little small and the trackpad/buttons really are difficult to use. That is why I went ahead and went with the Macbook Air. It is a true pleasure to travel with.
BearWolf |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pochax
Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 162
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 4:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Triple digit golfer wrote: | Eureka,
Thanks for those articles. I appreciate your input.
Valuethinker,
I would like to go with the ASUS 4GB machine. I've heard that ASUS makes the absolute best motherboards out there, and makes motherboards for over 1/3 of all the computers out there now. Supposedly their quality is unmatched (or so says the IT guys at work).
What happens if I'm using software that's a couple years old that says "Requires Windows 2000 or XP 32 bit versions?" Will those run on Windows 7 64 bit?
From what I understand, any computer with Windows 32 bit could only be upgraded to a maximum of 4GB. But could Windows 64 run properly on less than 4 GB?
I am really thinking of going with the HP 3GB or ASUS 4GB with Windows 64 bit, but if I could save a few bucks and go with the Toshiba 3GB with Windows 32 bit, I may. So it's between those three and I'm stuck on this 32 vs. 64 bit thing.
And yes, before anybody mentions it, I'm worse than Brett Favre on that commercial I've always been this way. |
i have a desktop with a 64-bit (albeit Vista) and a laptop with 32-bit (Vista). i feel like the 64-bit is cleaner, smoother, nicer....but then again my desktop is the more powerful system. nevertheless, my bias would be to spend the extra and get the 64-bit FWIW. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nonnie
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 485
Location: Near SF
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triple digit golfer
Joined: 18 May 2009
Posts: 800
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 4:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't see anything wrong with it. Looks like a good deal. A quick Google search shows this is probably a dual-core processor. Can anyone confirm that?
It is a 17-incher, though. If portability is a big factor, you might find it a bit unwieldy. Laptops that size are sometimes referred to as "desktop replacements."
According to Wikipedia, Acer (based in Taiwan) is the largest manufacturer of laptop computers. In past years, I think it concentrated mostly on making computers that then were rebranded for other companies. Acer had a fairly small line of Acer-branded laptops, and they were mostly low-end, but usually at very good prices.
In recent years, the company appears to be producing a more extensive line of computers with its own brand name. It has really made a name in the netbook market, where it is a pioneer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triple digit golfer
Joined: 18 May 2009
Posts: 800
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am leaning toward this HP:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/HP....merreviews
I chose that one because I like the number pad, which I use a ton. It feels more like a regular keyboard to me. The Asus isn't quite as comfortable to use and the Acer seems too big for me. The Toshiba runs on 32 bit Windows 7 and I want to go with the 64. Plus, everyone seems to have nothing but positive things to say about HP. Maybe I could do better, but with an HP, I don't see myself being disappointed.
With the laptop, a router, wireless printer, printer cable, and sales tax, it comes to $626. I'm gonna hold off and see what kind of specials pop up between now and just after Thanksgiving. Hopefully if nothing better pops up, Best Buy will still be offering this one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Triple digit golfer wrote: | I am leaning toward this HP:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/HP....merreviews
I chose that one because I like the number pad, which I use a ton. It feels more like a regular keyboard to me. The Asus isn't quite as comfortable to use and the Acer seems too big for me. The Toshiba runs on 32 bit Windows 7 and I want to go with the 64. Plus, everyone seems to have nothing but positive things to say about HP. Maybe I could do better, but with an HP, I don't see myself being disappointed.
With the laptop, a router, wireless printer, printer cable, and sales tax, it comes to $626. I'm gonna hold off and see what kind of specials pop up between now and just after Thanksgiving. Hopefully if nothing better pops up, Best Buy will still be offering this one. |
A few comments:
Too bad it doesn't come with a recovery CD. I needed my recovery CD not too long ago. You might be able to get one from HP, but I don't know.
It's also quite possible that you can create your own recovery CD or DVD with the software included in the system. My brother had an HP with no recovery CD that allowed that. I think it took about seven CDs.
What you need to do -- regardless of whether you have a recovery CD -- is get some backup software and an external hard drive and start making routine disk images. There are some free imaging programs, but I haven't found them to be reliable. The only piece of imaging software I'm comfortable recommending at the moment is Acronis True Image Home Edition. I haven't used the 2010 edition (first to support Windows 7), but I have used Version 2009 and the previous version. You're not likely to find it cheaper than NewEgg at $38.99.: http://www.newegg.com/Product/....6832200013
I used to use Norton Ghost, but none of the versions that run in Windows are worth a darn.
Regarding battery size of this computer, I wonder if a larger one is available should you find that you want more untethered battery capacity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TJAJ9
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Posts: 374
Location: Philadelphia, PA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Toshiba laptop I bought didn't come with any recovery discs, but it did have a program loaded which allowed you to create recovery discs with CD's or DVD's. An image is stored in full on a separate partition.
BTW, I'd recommend getting a cordless USB mouse for your laptop. I'm not sure about anyone else, but I must use a mouse--I can't stand the touch pads, etc. that laptops have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TJAJ9 wrote: | The Toshiba laptop I bought didn't come with any recovery discs, but it did have a program loaded which allowed you to create recovery discs with CD's or DVD's. An image is stored in full on a separate partition.
BTW, I'd recommend getting a cordless USB mouse for your laptop. I'm not sure about anyone else, but I must use a mouse--I can't stand the touch pads, etc. that laptops have. |
It's always important to remember that if the hard drive fails mechanically, the recovery partition will go with it.
I agree on the USB cordless mouse. Some people seem to do fine with just the touch pad, though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TJAJ9
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Posts: 374
Location: Philadelphia, PA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 1:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Eureka wrote: | | It's always important to remember that if the hard drive fails mechanically, the recovery partition will go with it. |
Of course, but the whole point of making the recovery discs is to copy the partition to the CD's or DVD's.
The computer comes with an image that is stored on a separate partition. You then make copies of the partition to the recovery discs with the program that is already pre-loaded on the hard drive, so if anything happens to the hard drive, you can reload everything from the discs themselves.
I probably wasn't specific enough in my last post. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TJAJ9 wrote: | | Eureka wrote: | | It's always important to remember that if the hard drive fails mechanically, the recovery partition will go with it. |
Of course, but the whole point of making the recovery discs is to copy the partition to the CD's or DVD's.
The computer comes with an image that is stored on a separate partition. You then make copies of the partition to the recovery discs with the program that is already pre-loaded on the hard drive, so if anything happens to the hard drive, you can reload everything from the discs themselves.
I probably wasn't specific enough in my last post. |
I knew exactly what you meant. I think people see the recovery partition as some magical restoration device, and I wanted to counter that. It's important to test the recovery CDs/DVDs you make, too. I have seen them fail on disk 6. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TJAJ9
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Posts: 374
Location: Philadelphia, PA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 1:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Eureka wrote: | | I knew exactly what you meant. I think people see the recovery partition as some magical restoration device, and I wanted to counter that. It's important to test the recovery CDs/DVDs you make, too. I have seen them fail on disk 6. |
Ok. 
I wasn't specific enough with that post anyway. People who aren't computer-savvy might have had a problem understanding it.
I agree--you can't rely on the recovery partition alone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pochax
Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 162
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Triple digit golfer wrote: | I am leaning toward this HP:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/HP....merreviews
I chose that one because I like the number pad, which I use a ton. It feels more like a regular keyboard to me. The Asus isn't quite as comfortable to use and the Acer seems too big for me. The Toshiba runs on 32 bit Windows 7 and I want to go with the 64. Plus, everyone seems to have nothing but positive things to say about HP. Maybe I could do better, but with an HP, I don't see myself being disappointed.
With the laptop, a router, wireless printer, printer cable, and sales tax, it comes to $626. I'm gonna hold off and see what kind of specials pop up between now and just after Thanksgiving. Hopefully if nothing better pops up, Best Buy will still be offering this one. |
consider this one as well:
http://www.officedepot.com/a/p....:13ddq0u44
you'll get a better CPU (Core2Duo), WiFi-N, and an HDMI input as well as a graphics card installed for less than the HP. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Never had heard of MSI before. Apparently, they've been making boards and cards for a while: http://www.msicomputer.com/ind....bout_intro
I like the Draft N Wi-Fi in this machine. Kind of surprised everyone isn't putting it in laptops by now. The Wi-Fi Alliance keeps dragging its feet on the final standard.
Can't tell if it's 64-bit Windows. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pochax
Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 162
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Eureka wrote: | Never had heard of MSI before. Apparently, they've been making boards and cards for a while: http://www.msicomputer.com/ind....bout_intro
I like the Draft N Wi-Fi in this machine. Kind of surprised everyone isn't putting it in laptops by now. The Wi-Fi Alliance keeps dragging its feet on the final standard.
Can't tell if it's 64-bit Windows. |
found out that's the kicker - 32-bit comes installed. if you have a W7-64 upgrade to do a clean install, then i am sure you could do it, but it won't come with it.
also, cannot order online (thus no extra 10% off with Bing cashback)...must buy in stores. STILL, it is a nice deal (black-friday-ish). plus...if you register online, you get a 3-year warranty as opposed to most laptops getting only a 1-year warranty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
G-Money
Joined: 09 Dec 2007
Posts: 472
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Valuethinker
Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 10937
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Triple digit golfer wrote: | Eureka,
Thanks for those articles. I appreciate your input.
Valuethinker,
I would like to go with the ASUS 4GB machine. I've heard that ASUS makes the absolute best motherboards out there, and makes motherboards for over 1/3 of all the computers out there now. Supposedly their quality is unmatched (or so says the IT guys at work).
What happens if I'm using software that's a couple years old that says "Requires Windows 2000 or XP 32 bit versions?" Will those run on Windows 7 64 bit?
|
AFAIK yes if the upgrade has been issued by the manufacturer.
The problem is the other way, 64 bit applications (and all future apps will be 64 bit will NOT work on 32 bit).
| Quote: |
From what I understand, any computer with Windows 32 bit could only be upgraded to a maximum of 4GB. But could Windows 64 run properly on less than 4 GB?
|
Yes. It's more a Vista/ Windows 7 thing than anything-- they are memory hogs. 2GB is really the feasible minimum.
| Quote: |
I am really thinking of going with the HP 3GB or ASUS 4GB with Windows 64 bit, but if I could save a few bucks and go with the Toshiba 3GB with Windows 32 bit, I may. So it's between those three and I'm stuck on this 32 vs. 64 bit thing.
And yes, before anybody mentions it, I'm worse than Brett Favre on that commercial I've always been this way. |
Go for 64 bit if you can. In the long run, that is where software will go. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triple digit golfer
Joined: 18 May 2009
Posts: 800
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am leaning toward an HP. I talked to both IT guys at work and a friend who is a computer genius, and all three said try to go with an HP, that they're the best out there for laptops.
I built my own on HP.com and included a printer and wireless router. After shipping and tax and a $20 off coupon, it came to $664. So that's not too bad. Dual core processor, 3GB ram, 160 GB hard drive (plenty, I checked my machine now and I'm only using 19GB!). So I am leaning toward that one and unless something better pops up, that should be the winner. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jasonc
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nokia is coming out with something they call the "booklet 3g" seems to be a good netbook, ships with Windows 7 too...But it's a netbook so it's very small, a bit on the heavy side concerning the price too....But it does all what you mentioned in your post of the thngs you need.
But most laptops you can buy right now can do that... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's a $300 HP laptop with Windows 7 64-bit. I haven't actually been able to find it on Wal-Mart's Web site, but Kim Komando talked about it today. Gives you an idea of the deals probably ahead this month:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/1....-detailed/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bc3x
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 121
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
$298 HP laptop @Walmart
The difference between the G60-535 and the G60-519 seems to be that the 519 has a Celeron processor, 250 gb on the hard drive and probably no webcam. It does have a 56k internal modem, for times when you're out in the boonies and can't get high speed internet. Most of the less expensive laptops don't have the 56k modem. The 519 has a 60 days trial of MS Office, to tie you over when it becomes open source in 2010. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
magellan
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
Posts: 683
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Triple digit golfer wrote: | | Lots of people are saying <$500 should do the trick, but I'm having a hard time finding anything that cheap after including MS Office and tax. |
Do you already have a current version of MS Office that you could transfer onto your new machine?
That's what I did when I retired my thinkpad and replaced it with a new dell laptop. I removed office from the old laptop then installed it on the new one and it just worked. The Installer made some noise about doing a "genuine ms software check" then it said I was good to go. I was expecting to have to call support or something but it just worked. I did use my original MS office install disks.
Anyhow, just a thought...
Jim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
magellan
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
Posts: 683
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bc3x wrote: | $298 HP laptop @Walmart
The difference between the G60-535 and the G60-519 seems to be that the 519 has a Celeron processor, 250 gb on the hard drive and probably no webcam.[/url]. |
The Celeron has a smaller cpu cache and this causes the entire computer to run slower. With a celeron, the cpu clock speed becomes less important, since the cpu often has to fetch needed data from ram (at 800 mhz or less).
Here's a good chart with some cpu benchmark numbers. The $298 HP walmart machine referenced above with the 2.2 ghz celeron 900 has a cpu benchmark score of 745 vs a score of 1299 for the $499 staples machine.
Not sure if that helps or just confuses things, but IMO, Celeron machines usually run a lot slower than other cpus with similar clock spped due to their smaller cache size. In this case, it looks like the $500 machine runs almost twice as fast (on benchmarks) as the $300 machine.
So I guess in this case you get what you pay for and it's just a question of what you want or need. Hope this helps rather than confuse things more...
Jim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eureka
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 582
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| magellan wrote: | Not sure if that helps or just confuses things, but IMO, Celeron machines usually run a lot slower than other cpus with similar clock spped due to their smaller cache size. In this case, it looks like the $500 machine runs almost twice as fast (on benchmarks) as the $300 machine.
Jim |
Yes, but it's $300! I have had mixed results with Celerons. My mom had one in a 1999 model Dell low-end desktop running Windows 98, and it always seemed slow, even after I doubled the RAM. This 2005 Toshiba notebook with a Celeron M, 512 MB of RAM and XP has always been pretty snappy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TJAJ9
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Posts: 374
Location: Philadelphia, PA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Toshiba laptop that I bought in August has a Celeron 2.2GHz with 2GB of RAM. It runs very nicely, even with games -- it's not slow at all. As long as you're not doing any high-end gaming, I would definitely recommend a similar 2.2GHz Celeron.
They just had this laptop on sale for only $349.99. The sale must've just ended a few hours ago.  http://www.bestbuy.com/site/To....Id=9553896 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triple digit golfer
Joined: 18 May 2009
Posts: 800
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triple digit golfer
Joined: 18 May 2009
Posts: 800
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Can anybody answer this?
If the computer says 802.11 b + g, is that internet connection going to be slower than if I get an N wireless card? Or does it not really matter?
I'm going to be using an N router. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wander
Joined: 04 Oct 2008
Posts: 118
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Triple digit golfer wrote: | Can anybody answer this?
If the computer says 802.11 b + g, is that internet connection going to be slower than if I get an N wireless card? Or does it not really matter?
I'm going to be using an N router. |
Yes, b+g will be slower than N wireless card if you have a N router. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
superlight
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 1033
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My meta-advice is to watch the site called www.techbargains.com for a month, and you'll be an expert.
If I were shopping right now, I might see if I could be happy with this (from that site), IF I could get it with a Win7 upgrade coupon:
| Quote: | Dell Small Business has the Dell Vostro A860 Intel Core 2 Duo T5870 15" Notebook Computer for a low $399.00. Shipping $25. Tax in most.
5.4lbs; 15.6" 1366x768; Intel Core 2 Duo T5870 @ 2.06GHz; 2GB RAM; 250GB HDD; DVD burner; 802.11b/g + bluetooth; Vista Home Basic; 6-cell battery; 1yr warranty |
I try to see "how low can I go" since I have a tendency to over-buy bigger iron than I need.
_________________
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jebmke
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 397
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wander wrote: | | Triple digit golfer wrote: | Can anybody answer this?
If the computer says 802.11 b + g, is that internet connection going to be slower than if I get an N wireless card? Or does it not really matter?
I'm going to be using an N router. |
Yes, b+g will be slower than N wireless card if you have a N router. |
Unless you are moving a lot of data withing your local network (not internet) it is unlikely that you would notice the difference between G and N.
_________________
When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
superlight
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 1033
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Really weird. For the time being Dell seems to be using Win7 as an up-sell on that model. I might wait them out.
_________________
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wander
Joined: 04 Oct 2008
Posts: 118
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jebmke wrote: | | wander wrote: | | Triple digit golfer wrote: | Can anybody answer this?
If the computer says 802.11 b + g, is that internet connection going to be slower than if I get an N wireless card? Or does it not really matter?
I'm going to be using an N router. |
Yes, b+g will be slower than N wireless card if you have a N router. |
Unless you are moving a lot of data withing your local network (not internet) it is unlikely that you would notice the difference between G and N. |
If you have only one computer, 802.11b is good enough for internet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triple digit golfer
Joined: 18 May 2009
Posts: 800
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DSInvestor
Joined: 04 Oct 2008
Posts: 1711
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TGD, I think you'll be OK with the PC and the router. The only issue is the potentially high cost for consumbles for the inkjet printer. If you don't need color printing, laser printers are a little more expensive to buy but you'll only need to buy toner cartridges once a year instead of ink cartridges every month. The cost of of one set ink cartridges is about the same as a laser toner cartridge but has 1/10th the life. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boater07
Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Posts: 89
Location: Northwest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I skimmed most of the posts and didn't see any mention of the new
touchscreen. I agree, cordless mouse a must but touch screen might be nice
However, the one in my car for GPS and radio always looks messy when
not on. I wonder if the new screens can be cleaned easily? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
magellan
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
Posts: 683
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Triple digit golfer wrote: | Can anybody answer this?
If the computer says 802.11 b + g, is that internet connection going to be slower than if I get an N wireless card? Or does it not really matter?
I'm going to be using an N router. |
IMO, as others have said, the difference in connection speed between 802.11g and 802.11n is unlikely to impact your Internet access speed, since your Internet connection is so much slower than the wifi connection.
However, a more important consideration is range and radio robustness. In this respect, n wins hands down.
The estimated range for n is nearly twice that of 802.11g.
Having an n based router will help some with older clients, but for the best reliability and range, both the client and the router have to be running in n mode.
Jim
edited to fix typo
Last edited by magellan on Sun Nov 08, 2009 8:08 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
buhockey
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 6:29 pm Post subject: Re: Laptop computer advice |
|
|
| I'm a big fan of any of the Samsung netbooks. Nice sized keyboard, 3 USB ports, light as a feather, Wireless N, AND even upgradeable to 2 gb of RAM. Great deal at Newegg on a few of them. Plus, Windows 7 works fantastic on them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Triple digit golfer
Joined: 18 May 2009
Posts: 800
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DS,
I thought about the printer, but I print so rarely at home that I just decided to get the cheap-o for $29.99. I might print five pages a week, if that. I do most of my printing at work at their expense. 
By the way, the wireless G router is working perfectly. Throughout the entire house (3 BR, 2 BR ranch) I have anywhere from a good to excellent signal. In a bigger house maybe it would be fair or poor, I'm not sure. But the G router is great for my purposes. Internet is blazing fast, too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gekko
Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 2903
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jebmke wrote: | | wander wrote: | | Triple digit golfer wrote: | Can anybody answer this?
If the computer says 802.11 b + g, is that internet connection going to be slower than if I get an N wireless card? Or does it not really matter?
I'm going to be using an N router. |
Yes, b+g will be slower than N wireless card if you have a N router. |
Unless you are moving a lot of data withing your local network (not internet) it is unlikely that you would notice the difference between G and N. |
i find the quick connect time and reliability of an N to N WIFI connection to be far superior to B or G. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Wiki
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
