New Laptop questions

[Ryan Pugatch-4]

Robert Krawitz wrote:
>
> One thing I don't like about Mac laptops is that the screens are
> fairly low resolution.  I'm used to UXGA on 15" screens and WUXGA on
> 17" screens; I simply can't get very much on the Mac screen.
> _______________________________________________


17" MBPs are WUXGA.


--
Ryan Pugatch
Systems Administrator, TripAdvisor
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Robert Krawitz-2]

   Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 13:17:30 -0400
   From: Ryan Pugatch <rpug@...>

   Robert Krawitz wrote:
   >
   > One thing I don't like about Mac laptops is that the screens are
   > fairly low resolution.  I'm used to UXGA on 15" screens and WUXGA on
   > 17" screens; I simply can't get very much on the Mac screen.
   > _______________________________________________

   17" MBPs are WUXGA.

And horrendously expensive.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Richard Pieri]

On Jun 19, 2009, at 12:56 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
> One thing I don't like about Mac laptops is that the screens are
> fairly low resolution.  I'm used to UXGA on 15" screens and WUXGA on
> 17" screens; I simply can't get very much on the Mac screen.

Both the previous and current generation 17" MBPs are 1920x1200.

--Rich P.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[darose]

Englander, Irvin wrote:
> BTW, the Best Buy website price on the particular Acer netbook I want is $105 ABOVE Acer's listed price. Best Buyer beware?

I'm not surprised.  Best Buy isn't the cheapest place to buy online by a
long shot.

Try comparing against NewEgg, ZipZoomFly, buy.com, TheGeeks, etc.

HTH,

DR
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Richard Pieri]

On Jun 19, 2009, at 1:19 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
> And horrendously expensive.


No more so than comparably configured Dell or HP notebooks.

--Rich P.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Jerry Feldman-2]

On 06/19/2009 11:42 AM, Richard Pieri wrote:
> Call me the heretic, but have you considered a MacBook Pro?  OS X is,  
> in my experience, the best desktop Unix out there, and you can get an  
> Apple refurbished 17" MBP for about $1800.
>  
A lot of hereitics come to BLU meetings, including Federico :-)
My daughter has a MacBook and loves it, The older one she had had a
flicker problem. She brought it back to Apple a few times, and then they
offered to replace it. She got the top of the line for about $300 more
and has had no problems that I know about.

--
Jerry Feldman <gaf@...>
Boston Linux and Unix
PGP key id: 537C5846
PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB  CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846



_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Robert Krawitz-2]

   From: Richard Pieri <richard.pieri@...>
   Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 13:57:31 -0400

   On Jun 19, 2009, at 1:19 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote:
   > And horrendously expensive.

   No more so than comparably configured Dell or HP notebooks.

I paid considerably less for my 9400 than I did later in the year for
my wife's MBP (same memory, marginally faster processor, 17" WUXGA on
the Dell vs. 15" WXGA for the Mac).  Both used.

--
Robert Krawitz                                     <rlk@...>

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf@...
Project lead for Gutenprint   --    http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Tom Metro-16]

Richard Pieri wrote:
> Robert Krawitz wrote:
>> And horrendously expensive.
>
> No more so than comparably configured Dell or HP notebooks.

Care to share some numbers? I've ran comparisons between approximately
equivalent Mac and PC laptops on several occasions, and the Macs always
end up having a substantial price premium.

  -Tom

--
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Tom Metro-16]

Englander, Irvin wrote:
> I'd like to hear from others on their Acer experiences, but mine has
> been that Acer produces an inexpensive, solid machine, with a high
> feature and construction to cost ratio. Comments from others?

I've been using an Acer Aspire 8930 (18" screen) as a desktop
replacement for about 6 months and I have no complains about the
hardware. At the time when I bought it, it offered the best mix of
features that were important to me.

It has been well supported by Ubuntu, with the exception of the sound,
which requires compiling the Alsa driver from source, and
hibernate/suspend doesn't work out of the box. (Wireless was solid under
8.10, but has become flaky under 9.04. Hopefully the new kernels will
resolve that. And technically there are other bits of hardware that
aren't immediately supports and I haven't tried to make them work, like
the multimedia buttons, the fingerprint reader, or the subwoofer.)

  -Tom

--
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Jack Coats at coats.org]

Real numbers from real life installations are always fun to see.  Vs the
FUD that M$ put out about how much more it cost to run Linux than M$
products some time ago.

I think most of us will concede that Mac costs more to acquire (initial and
software)
than PC based products.  But I have no clue how the continuing costs really
go.

Some friends have related horror stories about getting their Macs
maintained and failures, others think Apple walks on water.

Reality must be somewhere in between.

There is also a difference in costs related to commercial vs personal use.
Cost of
admins, amount of rack place, etc. ...

Hearing what any real differences are is an interesting issue!

><> ... Jack


On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 12:57 AM, Tom Metro <tmetro-blu@...> wrote:

> Richard Pieri wrote:
> > Robert Krawitz wrote:
> >> And horrendously expensive.
> >
> > No more so than comparably configured Dell or HP notebooks.
>
> Care to share some numbers? I've ran comparisons between approximately
> equivalent Mac and PC laptops on several occasions, and the Macs always
> end up having a substantial price premium.
>
>  -Tom
>
> --
> Tom Metro
> Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
> "Enterprise solutions through open source."
> Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@...
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Jarod Wilson]

On 06/20/2009 08:08 AM, Jack Coats wrote:
> Real numbers from real life installations are always fun to see.  Vs the
> FUD that M$ put out about how much more it cost to run Linux than M$
> products some time ago.
>
> I think most of us will concede that Mac costs more to acquire (initial and
> software) than PC based products.

I still disagree that its the huge gap people make it out to be, though
with caveats. A unibody aluminum MacBook Pro with an LED backlit screen
is NOT comparable to some random PC laptop with a flimsy, fugly plastic
case and a non-LED screen. If you actually try to spec out an attractive
PC laptop with similar features across the board, not just cpu/hard
drive/memory, there's really not all that much price difference. The
main difference is that you can buy really really cheap PC laptops,
while the bar is much higher for a Mac laptop.

Some examples:

The Dell Adamo, Dell's supposed answer to the MacBook Air, actually
costs *more* than the MacBook Air, last I looked, and that was before
Apple cut their prices down a few weeks ago. Features are pretty
comparable on the two.

The current Dell laptop I'd put on par with the 15.4" MacBook Pro is the
Studio XPS 16. Similarly decked out as the $1700 MBP, the XPS runs $1674
(though admittedly w/a slightly larger HD and screen, the screen being
of higher resolution).

The current Dell laptop I'd put on par with the 13" MacBook Pro is the
Studio XPS 13. $1300 for the MBP, $1174 for the XPS, so a bit of an
advantage for the Dell.

Oh, reasonably sure neither of the Dell XPS systems have backlit
keyboards w/ambient light sensors that light them up like the MBPs,
which, if you've used 'em, you *know* is a very cool feature.


> But I have no clue how the continuing costs really go.

The amount of money I've spent on repair, ongoing costs, whatever, for
my c.2004 PowerBook is less than $200. I bought a new hard drive for it
at one point (the original 80G got filled up) and upgraded the memory.

I'm sure others have contrary experiences, but in my personal
experience, cost of ownership for both my PowerBook and my ThinkPad are
pretty much identical. The PowerBook, despite being about four years
older, is still a much nicer looking machine, and has the backlit
keyboard spiffyness, while the ThinkPad has the "ThinkLight" (what a
joke)...


> Some friends have related horror stories about getting their Macs
> maintained and failures, others think Apple walks on water.
>
> Reality must be somewhere in between.

Yup. They have their flaws. Its a BITCH replacing the hard drive in a
PowerBook or a MacBook Pro. Its one screw in my ThinkPad.

--jarod
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[laymusic]

>>>>> "Jarod" == Jarod Wilson <jarod@...> writes:


    >> I think most of us will concede that Mac costs more to acquire
    >> (initial and software) than PC based products.

    Jarod> I still disagree that its the huge gap people make it out to
    Jarod> be, though with caveats.

I agree that it isn't a huge gap if you compare retail prices.  But I
assume none of us pays retail prices when we're spending our own money.  

So what should actually be compared is the sale prices at the big
discount retailers with the prices at the Apple refurb store (I don't
actually shop for Apple stuff very often, but when I have looked at
something, I've never found any place with significantly better discounts
than the Apple store.)

I think if you want the newest, shiniest PC hardware, it's not going to
cost less than the newest, shiniest Apples, and maybe more.  But if
you'll settle for the discounted and refurbed stuff from last year, I
think you can find a better deal on a PC.  My new desktop with 8G and 1
terrabyte and Blue Ray was $649 from ecost.com; I haven't ever seen a
deal like that on an Apple.  The cheapest desktop I see on the Mac store
is an iMac for 999 (this includes a monitor) with 2G, 320G and a
Superdrive.

--
Laura   (mailto:lconrad@... http://www.laymusic.org/ )
[phone] 233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139  

With all these books, as with any on the subject, do not expect to
turn yourself into an expert via the printed word alone.  You can
commit to memory everything Lichine has to say about Gevrey-Chambertin
and still have no idea whether you would like the wine.

Kingsley Amis, _On Drink_

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Richard Pieri]

On Jun 20, 2009, at 1:57 AM, Tom Metro wrote:
> Care to share some numbers? I've ran comparisons between  
> approximately equivalent Mac and PC laptops on several occasions,  
> and the Macs always end up having a substantial price premium.


A new 17" MBP, 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB disk: about $2500.

A new Dell Precision M6400, 17", 2.93GHz Core 2 Duo (closest match),  
320GB disk (largest available): about $2500.

--Rich P.

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Robert Krawitz-2]

   Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:00:48 -0400
   From: Jarod Wilson <jarod@...>

   On 06/20/2009 08:08 AM, Jack Coats wrote:
   > Real numbers from real life installations are always fun to see.  Vs the
   > FUD that M$ put out about how much more it cost to run Linux than M$
   > products some time ago.
   >
   > I think most of us will concede that Mac costs more to acquire (initial and
   > software) than PC based products.

   I still disagree that its the huge gap people make it out to be,
   though with caveats. A unibody aluminum MacBook Pro with an LED
   backlit screen is NOT comparable to some random PC laptop with a
   flimsy, fugly plastic case and a non-LED screen. If you actually
   try to spec out an attractive PC laptop with similar features
   across the board, not just cpu/hard drive/memory, there's really
   not all that much price difference. The main difference is that you
   can buy really really cheap PC laptops, while the bar is much
   higher for a Mac laptop.

The question is how important the LED backlit screen and the aluminum
case are.  I don't treat my laptops gently, but don't have problems
with them.  And I don't care about curb appeal.

   Some examples:

   The Dell Adamo, Dell's supposed answer to the MacBook Air, actually
   costs *more* than the MacBook Air, last I looked, and that was
   before Apple cut their prices down a few weeks ago. Features are
   pretty comparable on the two.

I'm not interested in smallest and lightest and thinnest.

   Oh, reasonably sure neither of the Dell XPS systems have backlit
   keyboards w/ambient light sensors that light them up like the MBPs,
   which, if you've used 'em, you *know* is a very cool feature.

My wife's MBP has that lighted keyboard.  If I could get it for $20 or
so I might, but it isn't something I'd lose any sleep over.

   I'm sure others have contrary experiences, but in my personal
   experience, cost of ownership for both my PowerBook and my ThinkPad
   are pretty much identical. The PowerBook, despite being about four
   years older, is still a much nicer looking machine, and has the
   backlit keyboard spiffyness, while the ThinkPad has the
   "ThinkLight" (what a joke)...

You're talking to someone who's owned Inspiron 8000's and 8200's, just
about the ugliest laptops anyone's ever built.  My 9400 has a nasty
ding on it where I removed the Designed for Windows sticker and then
used acetone to remove the sticky stuff that also removed some of the
paint.  The real joke is that I would care how a laptop looks.

   > Some friends have related horror stories about getting their Macs
   > maintained and failures, others think Apple walks on water.
   >
   > Reality must be somewhere in between.

   Yup. They have their flaws. Its a BITCH replacing the hard drive in a
   PowerBook or a MacBook Pro. Its one screw in my ThinkPad.

Since I've already upgraded the drive in my 9400 twice (lots of photos
and VirtualBox images does that to you), that *does* matter to me.

--
Robert Krawitz                                     <rlk@...>

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf@...
Project lead for Gutenprint   --    http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Robert Krawitz-2]

   From: Richard Pieri <richard.pieri@...>
   Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:11:33 -0400

   On Jun 20, 2009, at 1:57 AM, Tom Metro wrote:
   > Care to share some numbers? I've ran comparisons between  
   > approximately equivalent Mac and PC laptops on several occasions,  
   > and the Macs always end up having a substantial price premium.

   A new 17" MBP, 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB disk: about $2500.

   A new Dell Precision M6400, 17", 2.93GHz Core 2 Duo (closest match),  
   320GB disk (largest available): about $2500.

And a year or two from now, the MBP will hold its value and the Dell
won't.  Which is good for the Mac if you like the latest and greatest.
If you live a generation or two behind the times, which I do, the
value proposition is reversed.

--
Robert Krawitz                                     <rlk@...>

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf@...
Project lead for Gutenprint   --    http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Dan Ritter-2]

On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 01:21:23PM -0400, Robert Krawitz wrote:

>    From: Richard Pieri <richard.pieri@...>
>    Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:11:33 -0400
>
>    On Jun 20, 2009, at 1:57 AM, Tom Metro wrote:
>    > Care to share some numbers? I've ran comparisons between  
>    > approximately equivalent Mac and PC laptops on several occasions,  
>    > and the Macs always end up having a substantial price premium.
>
>    A new 17" MBP, 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB disk: about $2500.
>
>    A new Dell Precision M6400, 17", 2.93GHz Core 2 Duo (closest match),  
>    320GB disk (largest available): about $2500.
>
> And a year or two from now, the MBP will hold its value and the Dell
> won't.  Which is good for the Mac if you like the latest and greatest.
> If you live a generation or two behind the times, which I do, the
> value proposition is reversed.

Of course, if you don't tie your life to your fragile laptop,
you may discover that a $400 one serves pretty well. After two
years, it may be worth only $100 on Craig's List... but I'll bet
you the $300 depreciation in two years is much better than the
depreciation on either the Dell or the Apple, plus you saved
$2100 up front.

Buying expensive laptops is for people who either actually need
them (very few, I suspect) or for status symbols.

-dsr-


--
http://tao.merseine.nu/~dsr/eula.html is hereby incorporated by reference.

You can't defend freedom by getting rid of it.
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Robert Krawitz-2]

   Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:06:13 -0400
   From: Dan Ritter <dsr@...>

   On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 01:21:23PM -0400, Robert Krawitz wrote:
   >    From: Richard Pieri <richard.pieri@...>
   >    Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:11:33 -0400
   >
   >    On Jun 20, 2009, at 1:57 AM, Tom Metro wrote:
   >    > Care to share some numbers? I've ran comparisons between  
   >    > approximately equivalent Mac and PC laptops on several occasions,  
   >    > and the Macs always end up having a substantial price premium.
   >
   >    A new 17" MBP, 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB disk: about $2500.
   >
   >    A new Dell Precision M6400, 17", 2.93GHz Core 2 Duo (closest match),  
   >    320GB disk (largest available): about $2500.
   >
   > And a year or two from now, the MBP will hold its value and the Dell
   > won't.  Which is good for the Mac if you like the latest and greatest.
   > If you live a generation or two behind the times, which I do, the
   > value proposition is reversed.

   Of course, if you don't tie your life to your fragile laptop, you
   may discover that a $400 one serves pretty well. After two years,
   it may be worth only $100 on Craig's List... but I'll bet you the
   $300 depreciation in two years is much better than the depreciation
   on either the Dell or the Apple, plus you saved $2100 up front.

   Buying expensive laptops is for people who either actually need
   them (very few, I suspect) or for status symbols.

Again, it's a matter of what you're doing.  I use it at work, and I
really like having the big screen real estate (I can get 3 emacs
windows across, for example).  On vacation, it's very useful to have a
powerful laptop -- a wimpy laptop simply isn't much good at building a
panorama.

I buy them used, when they're already 50% off their original price.

--
Robert Krawitz                                     <rlk@...>

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf@...
Project lead for Gutenprint   --    http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Tom Metro-16]

Jarod Wilson wrote:
> A unibody aluminum MacBook Pro with an LED backlit screen is NOT
> comparable to some random PC laptop with a flimsy, fugly plastic case
> and a non-LED screen.

Agreed, and that's why I said "approximate" equivalent. Aside from these
features you mention, for which you may or may not be able to find an
equivalent on the PC side, I've noticed the Macs also tend to have CPU
speeds that don't exactly match up with anything available on the PC side.

Obviously the important question is whether any of these Mac-specific
features matter to you. If they do, then that says you need a Mac,
otherwise you go for the functionality that is relevant to your
practical needs.


Richard Pieri wrote:
> Tom Metro wrote:
>> Care to share some numbers?
>
> A new 17" MBP, 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB disk: about $2500.
>
> A new Dell Precision M6400, 17", 2.93GHz Core 2 Duo (closest match),  
> 320GB disk (largest available): about $2500.

One of the things that makes the PC vs. Mac comparison less
apples-to-apples is that there is a limited selection of Macs, so if you
need the RAM, disk, and display, but don't have a justifications for a
2.93 GHz CPU (which is obviously way outside the "sweet spot" for cost
effective), then you may find the Mac comparatively overpriced.

A search on NewEgg doesn't even show any models with a 2.93 GHz CPU, yet
they have two 2.66 GHz models that meet all the other specs you listed
for $1200 ~ $1300:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2034940032+1039323203+103980232+1041010743+104062589+1039446175&QksAutoSuggestion=&Configurator=&Subcategory=32&description=&Ntk=&CFG=&SpeTabStoreType=&srchInDesc=

If the other tangibles and intangibles that come with the Mac don't
matter to you, can you justify paying $1200 for a 0.27 GHz CPU increase?
(What else does that $1200 buy you that is of practical value to a
typical usr? Of course typical users don't pay over $1000 for laptops
these days, so you might need to replace "typical" with "power.")

When ever I've done a Mac vs. PC comparison, and optimized for needed
features, rather than trying to find the most exact match, the price
difference is easily $200+ if not $400+.


On a related note, ExpressHD (http://www.expresshd.com/) has released a
hardware gizmo that implements Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI),
needed to boot OS X, for any commodity x86 computer with a USB port. At
$240 it's a steep price to pay to have access to OS X, but if you
absolutely had to have OS X and didn't want to pay the premium for Apple
hardware, it'd pay for itself. (I suspect it will either get cheaper or
Apple will sue them out of existence.)


Dan Ritter wrote:
> Of course, if you don't tie your life to your fragile laptop,
> you may discover that a $400 one serves pretty well. After two
> years...

Somewhat off topic, but I agree. For the typical user, they're better
off buying a desktop or laptop that falls within the "sweet spot" of the
pricing range, and planning on replacing it every 2 to 3 years. After
about 3 years, they usually end up with a faster machine for the same or
less money than the person who overbought at the high-end to start with.

This is pretty much just a restatement of Moore's law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

  -Tom

--
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Robert Krawitz-2]

   Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 17:05:44 -0400
   From: Tom Metro <tmetro-blu@...>

   Richard Pieri wrote:
   > Tom Metro wrote:
   >> Care to share some numbers?
   >
   > A new 17" MBP, 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, 500GB disk: about $2500.
   >
   > A new Dell Precision M6400, 17", 2.93GHz Core 2 Duo (closest match),  
   > 320GB disk (largest available): about $2500.

   One of the things that makes the PC vs. Mac comparison less
   apples-to-apples is that there is a limited selection of Macs, so if you
   need the RAM, disk, and display, but don't have a justifications for a
   2.93 GHz CPU (which is obviously way outside the "sweet spot" for cost
   effective), then you may find the Mac comparatively overpriced.

   A search on NewEgg doesn't even show any models with a 2.93 GHz CPU, yet
   they have two 2.66 GHz models that meet all the other specs you listed
   for $1200 ~ $1300:

   http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2034940032+1039323203+103980232+1041010743+104062589+1039446175&QksAutoSuggestion=&Configurator=&Subcategory=32&description=&Ntk=&CFG=&SpeTabStoreType=&srchInDesc=

   If the other tangibles and intangibles that come with the Mac don't
   matter to you, can you justify paying $1200 for a 0.27 GHz CPU increase?
   (What else does that $1200 buy you that is of practical value to a
   typical usr? Of course typical users don't pay over $1000 for laptops
   these days, so you might need to replace "typical" with "power.")

Both of these are considerably lower resolution than WUXGA (one is
"WXGA+" and one is 1600x900 -- quite a bit less than 1920x1200).
However, this one hast *most* impressive specs for $1600:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16834152112

Core 2 Quad 2GHz
4 GB RAM
320 GB 7200 RPM drive
BD combo optical
ATI Radeon HD4850 w/512 MB
17" WUXGA

   Dan Ritter wrote:
   > Of course, if you don't tie your life to your fragile laptop,
   > you may discover that a $400 one serves pretty well. After two
   > years...

   Somewhat off topic, but I agree. For the typical user, they're
   better off buying a desktop or laptop that falls within the "sweet
   spot" of the pricing range, and planning on replacing it every 2 to
   3 years. After about 3 years, they usually end up with a faster
   machine for the same or less money than the person who overbought
   at the high-end to start with.

   This is pretty much just a restatement of Moore's law:
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

And that's why I like buying something where it's easy to replace
components, particularly the hard drive -- storage needs are always
increasing.

--
Robert Krawitz                                     <rlk@...>

Tall Clubs International  --  http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail lpf@...
Project lead for Gutenprint   --    http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net

"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
--Eric Crampton
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[Jarod Wilson]

On Jun 20, 2009, at 6:24 PM, Robert Krawitz <rlk@...> wrote:

> And that's why I like buying something where it's easy to replace
> components, particularly the hard drive -- storage needs are always
> increasing.

Amusingly, I got my thinkpad w/a stock 120G drive and then replaced it  
with a 250G drive and put the 120G drive in my ultrabay tray, not  
bothering with an optical, since I rarely have need for it. Then a few  
months ago, I started playing with solid-state drives. Now all I have  
in my thinkpad is an 80G Intel X25-M ssd. The speed, power savings and  
silence make it well worth it. But I'd like a MacBook Pro with this  
drive even more... ;)

--jarod

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@...
http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss