Dell Widescreen 15.4 inch Laptop

[MacCoaster]

Ignorance...

Originally posted by Eckslusive
ugh, i hate Apple copy-cats. And wahts even worse, its a PC!

So how's putting HDTV resolution on a laptop screen copying Apple? Apple hasn't even achieved that.

Widescreen wasn't Apple's idea at all, widescreen format has been in theaters for a long time. 🙄

 

[etoiles]

Re: Re: Re: 10.3 feature

Originally posted by hacurio1
Please explain!!!! If you have a PC, it's CISC.

I think like in 'Acorn RiscPC'...(used to be a really cool British computer running on an ARM risc chip, great OS)

http://home.in.tum.de/~atterer/acorn.html

 

[JSRockit]

Re: Ignorance...

Originally posted by MacCoaster
So how's putting HDTV resolution on a laptop screen copying Apple? Apple hasn't even achieved that.

Widescreen wasn't Apple's idea at all, widescreen format has been in theaters for a long time. 🙄

Yes...but apple brought the wide screen ratio to the laptop first...now Dell upped the ante...in screen res that is.

 

[john123]

Re: Re: Re: Dell 8500 vs. PowerBook 15inch

Originally posted by scem0
An mac user who is thinking clearly about PCs! Amazing. 😀 😀

PCs are totally under-rated on Mac sites. 🙄 😛

I used to be flagrantly anti-PC. Wouldn't use the things out of principle.

And then this past year, I had to. If you manage a database that you're storing locally on your machine and isn't being run off of a remote server, you're using a PC (or you're a moron).

And I learned about the advantages that PCs have -- and I grew to understand the disadvantages as well.

So after all this -- using a PC consistently, a decade of using Mac OS 6 through 9, and my increasing experience with Mac OS X (which I dislike as it's got too much of that which I dislike about Windows) -- I've grown to appreciate what each platform offers. In fact, in contrast to many of the self-proclaimed switchers, my experience with the PC world has caused me to LIKE OS 9 more and DISLIKE OS X more. Go figure!

Anyway, this is mildly off-topic, but I think that all the people ranting against the Dell, sight unseen, ought to use PCs consistently for a half year or so before making premature judgements.

 

[JSRockit]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Dell 8500 vs. PowerBook 15inch

Originally posted by john123


Anyway, this is mildly off-topic, but I think that all the people ranting against the Dell, sight unseen, ought to use PCs consistently for a half year or so before making premature judgements.

Most people HAVE to use PCs at work...so you will find that people in these forums are used to using PCs...but of course some just hear things and spread the plague.

 

[caboosemoose]

I think the fact that some people are getting so nasty about this Dell notebook is because, although its less than beautiful, it does highlight the fact that even Apple's most competitive lines (its portables) have fairly obvious shortcomings. Being super-light, wonderfully well made and ultra thin doesn't make any of the PB's any more useful. Having a fast CPU & video chipset and a super high resolution screen certainly is useful, and the Dell offers all of these and the apple, for all its merits, none of these.

I'm glad someone was honest enough to say that both platforms have pros and cons -anyone who has used XP extnesively can tell you that its a pretty solid and user friendly platform, especially by M$'s low standards.

I hope to buy one these Dells fairly soon, my current notebook has a 1600x1200 panel and having even more screen real estate to play with is very attractive.

 

[scem0]

Yeah, XP is definitely very crash proof. But it dims in comparison
to Mac OS X - all operating systems do... That, IMO, is the best
thing about macs, OS X.

 

[Foucault]

This is about the ugliest laptop I have ever seen. It looks clunky, chaotic, and poorly designed. I have fisher-price toys that look sharper and sexier than this piece of crap. Seeing this makes me feel better that I invested my money in a Powerbook...

 

[scem0]

It is one of the ugliest laptops I have ever seen...

 

[MacCoaster]

Re: Re: Ignorance...

Originally posted by JSRockit
Yes...but apple brought the wide screen ratio to the laptop first...now Dell upped the ante...in screen res that is.

Apple didn't even bring the wide-screen ratio to the laptop first, not even close.

1996: Sharp WideNote. [source]

 

[JSRockit]

Re: Re: Re: Ignorance...

Originally posted by MacCoaster
Apple didn't even bring the wide-screen ratio to the laptop first, not even close.

1996: Sharp WideNote. [source]

True...but at a respectable size...12"-es and above...Apple was first no?

 

[MacCoaster]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Ignorance...

Originally posted by JSRockit
True...but at a respectable size...12"-es and above...Apple was first no?

Maybe, I haven't looked at it like that.

I think that if I were you, I'd have said that "Apple was the first to bring wide screen laptops which had major emphasis on how the customers want laptops."

Of course, it might be because Apple is a singular company and one would notice things from Apple, and yet in the PC world, there are gazillions of laptop manufacturers that one could careless who that wide screen laptop came from.

Come on, 15.4" w/ HDTV resolution PowerBook!

 

[hacurio1]

Originally posted by caboosemoose
I think the fact that some people are getting so nasty about this Dell notebook is because, although its less than beautiful, it does highlight the fact that even Apple's most competitive lines (its portables) have fairly obvious shortcomings. Being super-light, wonderfully well made and ultra thin doesn't make any of the PB's any more useful. Having a fast CPU & video chipset and a super high resolution screen certainly is useful, and the Dell offers all of these and the apple, for all its merits, none of these.

I'm glad someone was honest enough to say that both platforms have pros and cons -anyone who has used XP extnesively can tell you that its a pretty solid and user friendly platform, especially by M$'s low standards.

I hope to buy one these Dells fairly soon, my current notebook has a 1600x1200 panel and having even more screen real estate to play with is very attractive.

I respect your opinion but you are not talking from experience. You think this way because you’ve never had a Dell Laptop. I had two, and now I’m left with one. How useful is it to have the fastest CPU and video card if your computer is poorly design? The poor design voids the original purpose of a portable and the speed of the machine. My first Dell was a Latitude LS. It was a very expensive machine. Today it has 265Mb of RAM, 30Gb of storage, and a 500 MHz PIII and a video card with only 4mb. The machine had decent specs when I bough it, although it was not the fastest, + it was supposed to be an ultra portable. In paper, everything looked Ok, but the poor design of the machine obligated me to carry around a DVD drive and a Floppy. To carry those two items is a hassle and that design flaw voided the original purpose of an ultra portable. After that bad experience I went and bought Dell latitude C600. This machine was more of a desktop replacement and it was supposed to be pretty fast for it’s time. It had a big display and at the beginning everything was not as good as I expected but it was OK. The poor design of the computer kept making it progressively annoying. The computer was very hot, and a couple of months after I bough it, the fan broke. It was located on the back of the computer and the problem was that it was poorly protected. Guess what happened? Yes, I toasted the computer. It was partially my fault because I should’ve had it fixed. I was all upset because after only three months the computer was useless. After that I was left with the Latitude LS for a year. Trying to type with that machine is a nightmare. Have you ever tried to type on a Dell? After those personal experiences I will tell you that design does matter. I recognize the advantages of both platforms but Dell simply has bad quality products. If you want to be productive get a high quality computer; if you want to get a PC, fine, get an IBM, a Sony, or a Sharp portable. Quality and design do matter more than speed in a portable, because they are supposed to be good at that, “being portables!” Easy to type, comfortable to work on, small, light, and relatively fast, not the fastest! If you what speed, then get a desktop. Today I’m very happy with me recently bought PB. It is everything a portable should be.

 

[JSRockit]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ignorance...

Originally posted by MacCoaster


I think that if I were you, I'd have said that "Apple was the first to bring wide screen laptops which had major emphasis on how the customers want laptops."

This is a forum...I don't that much thought into my blubs. That Sharp probably sold about 10 units overall. What is the first mainstream modern laptop to have a widescreen?

 

[caboosemoose]

Originally posted by hacurio1
I respect your opinion but you are not talking from experience. You think this way because you’ve never had a Dell Laptop. I had two, and now I’m left with one. How useful is it to have the fastest CPU and video card if your computer is poorly design? The poor design voids the original purpose of a portable and the speed of the machine. My first Dell was a Latitude LS. It was a very expensive machine. Today it has 265Mb of RAM, 30Gb of storage, and a 500 MHz PIII and a video card with only 4mb. The machine had decent specs when I bough it, although it was not the fastest, + it was supposed to be an ultra portable. In paper, everything looked Ok, but the poor design of the machine obligated me to carry around a DVD drive and a Floppy. To carry those two items is a hassle and that design flaw voided the original purpose of an ultra portable. After that bad experience I went and bought Dell latitude C600. This machine was more of a desktop replacement and it was supposed to be pretty fast for it’s time. It had a big display and at the beginning everything was not as good as I expected but it was OK. The poor design of the computer kept making it progressively annoying. The computer was very hot, and a couple of months after I bough it, the fan broke. It was located on the back of the computer and the problem was that it was poorly protected. Guess what happened? Yes, I toasted the computer. It was partially my fault because I should’ve had it fixed. I was all upset because after only three months the computer was useless. After that I was left with the Latitude LS for a year. Trying to type with that machine is a nightmare. Have you ever tried to type on a Dell? After those personal experiences I will tell you that design does matter. I recognize the advantages of both platforms but Dell simply has bad quality products. If you want to be productive get a high quality computer; if you want to get a PC, fine, get an IBM, a Sony, or a Sharp portable. Quality and design do matter more than speed in a portable, because they are supposed to be good at that, “being portables!” Easy to type, comfortable to work on, small, light, and relatively fast, not the fastest! If you what speed, then get a desktop. Today I’m very happy with me recently bought PB. It is everything a portable should be.

I hate to break this to you but I am currently typing on my inspiron 8100, which I have owned for exactly one year. My last notebook was an Inspiron 4000. Check out the new latitude D800 and D600, they are pretty decent looking by PC standards.

Why should I buy a desktop if I want speed when I can buy a very fast notebook that will beat the krap out of year old PC's and even alot of current G4 desktop powermacs for pure grunt?

I agree that the quality of my Dell dont even come close to Apple portables, but I've only had one fault in two years which was swiftly remedied by Dell. HAving a rather cheap and plasticy case doesnt actually affect usability.

 

[JSRockit]

Originally posted by caboosemoose
I hate to break this to you but I am currently typing on my inspiron 8100, which I have owned for exactly one year. My last notebook was an Inspiron 4000. Check out the new latitude D800 and D600, they are pretty decent looking by PC standards.

Why should I buy a desktop if I want speed when I can buy a very fast notebook that will beat the krap out of year old PC's and even alot of current G4 desktop powermacs for pure grunt?

I agree that the quality of my Dell dont even come close to Apple portables, but I've only had one fault in two years which was swiftly remedied by Dell. HAving a rather cheap and plasticy case doesnt actually affect usability.

The new inspiron 600m looks like a decent notebook...and it has intels new stuff....which I'm not sure is a good or a bad thing yet.

 

[JSRockit]

Originally posted by JSRockit
The new inspiron 600m looks like a decent notebook...and it has intels new stuff....which I'm not sure is a good or a bad thing yet.

The new inspiron 600m looks like a decent notebook...and it has intels new stuff....which I'm not sure is a good or a bad thing yet. The D600 looks ok, but the D800 is the same as the Dell everyone is bitching about in this thread.

 

[shadowfax]

Originally posted by caboosemoose
I hate to break this to you but I am currently typing on my inspiron 8100, which I have owned for exactly one year. My last notebook was an Inspiron 4000. Check out the new latitude D800 and D600, they are pretty decent looking by PC standards.

Why should I buy a desktop if I want speed when I can buy a very fast notebook that will beat the krap out of year old PC's and even alot of current G4 desktop powermacs for pure grunt?

I agree that the quality of my Dell dont even come close to Apple portables, but I've only had one fault in two years which was swiftly remedied by Dell. HAving a rather cheap and plasticy case doesnt actually affect usability.

It's good you haven't had a bad experience yet. i had an old inspiron with a pentium 166 in it about ?5? years ago, and i had no severe complaints, except that it was outrageously slow even for the time. my dad's had what i would call an "OK" experience with his dell work laptop. that is, it doesn't eat him. it's stable enough, of course... but he works for Dell, and he never tells me about his laptop problems (because he knows it's fuel for my fire 😛)...

on the other hand, i have a friend in college who has a "decent" inspiron decked out with XP and all, and my god, that thing is UGLY, and i don't mean it looks bad. the hinges are totally loose, the keys are kinda nasty--it's not overly well-kempt. but she doesn't beat it up much. i don't know how it got the way it is. it crashes ALL the time--i've reformatted and started her from scratch 2 times in 5 months, and it's still just gone back to crashing and crashing. i don't know why, but it's just the worst thing i've ever seen. i would never buy one if i could avoid it.

 

[hacurio1]

Originally posted by caboosemoose
I hate to break this to you but I am currently typing on my inspiron 8100, which I have owned for exactly one year. My last notebook was an Inspiron 4000. Check out the new latitude D800 and D600, they are pretty decent looking by PC standards.

Why should I buy a desktop if I want speed when I can buy a very fast notebook that will beat the krap out of year old PC's and even alot of current G4 desktop powermacs for pure grunt?

I agree that the quality of my Dell dont even come close to Apple portables, but I've only had one fault in two years which was swiftly remedied by Dell. HAving a rather cheap and plasticy case doesnt actually affect usability.

Yep…and that’s why you don’t know any better. I’m all for speed, but why leave quality and design apart? Design, quality, and functionality are the most important factors for a portable. Like I said, If you’ve had Dells for the past two years, you don’t know what you have been missing. The design and functionality of portables advanced a lot since then. There are great companies that emphasize on design. Companies like Samsung, Sony, IBM, Apple, have high quality portables with great design. And if you need a P4 or a centrino Intel then get and IBM, a Samsung, or a Sony. If you need battery life, then get an Apple or a Samsung with a Centrino. If you need DVD burners, then get an Apple, or a Sony. Every individual has different needs, but again I will ask you, why sacrifice functionality and design if there is no need to? And if you tell me that Dell has high quality products then I’m sorry, but you are a lost case!!! And yes, a cheap plastic box does affect usability. Poor designs have poor results, “How ever you see it.” If your computer doesn’t have enough battery life, how can you be more productive? If your computer has a low quality keyboard, how can you be more productive? If the computer case is big and bulky, and it gets tremendously hot, how can you be more productive? Do your self a favor and go to any CompUSA and compare the keyboard an quality of the Dells and the Keyboard and quality of decent brands. You will hopefully realize the differences and come to your sense.

 

[JSRockit]

Originally posted by hacurio1
Companies like Samsung, Sony, IBM, Apple, have high quality portables with great design. And if you need a P4 or a centrino Intel then get and IBM, a Samsung, or a Sony.

Don't forget Fujitsu...they are making some of the best portables at this time.