I agree - I would never personally buy a Windows computer unless it's from work where it's required.
Have you seen the laptop? Handled the laptop? The answer is no. Your feelings are based on nothing.
Yup, all the Neo haters came out and bashed it when it first was announced.
Seems like the same criticism lobbed at the NEO when it was released with comparisons to the Air and Pro. Bad screen, trackpad not good, not enough memory, no backlit keyboard, not enough ports, one port too slow, not future proof, not enough configurations, etc.
Software might do it. The Mac version of AutoCAD is an utter travesty of UX compared to the Windows version and there is still no Mac version of Revit.
Software is definitely one reason. The Windows version has more functionality than the Mac version.
I wasn’t comparing this machine to more expensive more functional machines, I was comparing it to the Neo. Of course the Neo has compromises. This HP machine has compromises when compared to its more expensive compatriots. But my point was that this HP machine is being compared to the Neo and it does not fare well. I certainly did not expect the Neo to be the same as an Air or Pro. What is important is the compromises made to achieve a certain price point and I feel the HP makes more unacceptable compromises than the Neo. I really could not care less about the other comments about the Neo and contrary to the point you make the comparison is both reasonable and fair.
In your opinion. The HP beats the Neo in other aspects, aspects you do not value as much as someone else may.
Correct and I would never say otherwise. All comments here are based on opinions. There are factual aspects concerning the HP that are better, much better, than the Neo but, as indicated, overall I find the HP to be the inferior product for the indicated aspects of the HP I did not care for.
Haven't tried this model so can't comment on the HW, but have been running Intel/AMD apps on ARM emulated is pretty fast on my Surface pro. Most standard apps (not games) you wouldn't know they are emulated.
OLED nits and LED/LCD nits are slightly different and can't be compared side by side specswise. A 300 nits OLED is quite similar to a 500 nits LED/LCD screeen.
Interesting. I had a couple of Windows Intel only DAW apps that ran very badly on ARM machines. The latency was awful, hit a key and there was a perceptible delay. Made them unusable. Also some of my favorite utilities just plain did not run. MS Office was supposed to be OK early on but now of course they have native ARM apps. But my biggest issue was running SQL Server which was a disaster.
Was that the first ARM machines that was released (surface X with SQ1) or later versions? The only issue I have had so far was an odd issue with the PaloAlto client, the non ARM version didn't work.
Anyone trying to run autocad and/or revit probably shouldn't be looking at base specs like the neo or this HP. I agree with your point overall, but I don't think it really applies to these types of machines.
I think it does compete, namely with first-time computer purchasers. A student looking for something cheap to do their online assignments and send emails might consider this HP and a neo, for example. I do think that the operating system is the major difference in the two machines and makes the neo the better device by miles.
