StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Skgoa wrote:Yep, it's the german QWERTZ layout. And yes, we are talking about uncommonly used characters, i.e. "novelty" characters.

Just for the record, as I C programmer I can tell you that \,/ and | are probably among the most common characters I use. More common than most letters even. Just ask any programmer and they will say the same thing. And unless apple computers don't work with C or its derivatives I can say that they are definitively not novelty characters by any count. Now, before we start discussing just what definition of novelty we want to use I would like to say that this is not the point I am making.

So, what than is my point with this? Well, my point is that as far as keyboard layouts go convenience tends to be a subjective rather than an objective quantity. Depending on what characters you use commonly or what layout feels better to you the answer will be different. So keyboard layout can't really be used as an argument one way or the other.

Things we should be talking about is value for money, upgrade and maintenance costs etc. That, and the way this is going we might need a new thread.

I would suggest getting a Lenovo or an Asus if you're looking for a good under $600 laptop. ASUS has some of the best 3 year failure rates out of all laptops [study].

The laptops I've noted that you should avoid are HP, eMachines, and in my opinion Dells. HP's have the worst failure rates and overheat like mad. I had a personal experience of bad emachines, the keys on mine broke and the backlight died after 2 years in 2 emachines.

(I really really want to join in on Apple bashing)

Purple wrote:

Skgoa wrote:Yep, it's the german QWERTZ layout. And yes, we are talking about uncommonly used characters, i.e. "novelty" characters.

Just for the record, as I C programmer I can tell you that \,/ and | are probably among the most common characters I use. More common than most letters even. Just ask any programmer and they will say the same thing. And unless apple computers don't work with C or its derivatives I can say that they are definitively not novelty characters by any count. Now, before we start discussing just what definition of novelty we want to use I would like to say that this is not the point I am making.

So, what than is my point with this? Well, my point is that as far as keyboard layouts go convenience tends to be a subjective rather than an objective quantity. Depending on what characters you use commonly or what layout feels better to you the answer will be different. So keyboard layout can't really be used as an argument one way or the other.

I agree but I want to point out that I program a lot, too.

Purple wrote:Things we should be talking about is value for money, upgrade and maintenance costs etc. That, and the way this is going we might need a new thread.

The problem is that people value things differently. There can never be a definite answer to the question "what is better: Apple or non-Apple", because that question itself is entirely meaningless. In such a thread you would either a) get a list of objective reasons not to buy an Apple product, like one could give for any other company out there, - and Apple users would go "yup, but those aren't things I care about"... or b) it devolves into flamewar almost instantly.

Sure, there can never be an answer to "which is better" because that's too open-ended of a question. There can certainly be an answer to "which will give me the best hardware for the least amount of money" though, and that does not favor Apple products.

From the list of requirements, sounds like you want a 15 inch machine with a full-sized keyboard and discrete graphics.

I'm currently running a Toshiba Satellite A665 that I got last summer on sale for $799. It's quite powerful, and the only real complaint I have is that the battery life is rather short and it gets a bit warm while running Skyrim and Modern Warfare 3.

Dell and Asus make good products. If you are in university, you can get an extra discount at Dell. Of course sometimes their educational discounts are no better than their regular ones, but sometimes they are.

Try this: Dell Inspiron 15R

Hawkwings wrote:Sure, there can never be an answer to "which is better" because that's too open-ended of a question. There can certainly be an answer to "which will give me the best hardware for the least amount of money" though, and that does not favor Apple products.

Actually, it does. Because what the "best hardware" for you is, is also highly subjective. To me, a great display, keyboard and touchpad are more important than a CPU that is a little faster. I simply don't need higher hardware specs for the work I do. So I actually get much more value by buying Apple.
As I have said before and will continue to say: if higher CPU/GPU/RAM specs are more important to you, then a Mac is not the product I would recommend. But the fact remains that a blanket "you get less hardware for a higher price" is bullshit.


edit: Note how neither I nor any other Apple-apologist here recommended an Apple product. We wouldn't even be talking about Apple if people did not continue to make claims that simply don't hold up to scrutiny.

@Kingmaker: It is not a new laptop, but you may also want to try a linux distribution on the laptop you have already, for the kinds of uses you want linux very easily beats any other OS. Lighter linux OSs do wonders on aging computers.

Puppy linux is my favourite one, ludicrously lightweight but can do what you asked for just out of the box and much more, for free. Its interface is not exactly like windows, but it's not a steep learning curve.
Can also boot and sit on a USB drive, making yours any computer where the BIOS allows booting from USB and isn't locked down by paranoid users.

Skgoa wrote:

someone_else wrote: then you have OSX that looks cool and has multitouch and similar pointless crap but you can install only a limited amount of stuff on it.

And that's the point were I have to jump in and say: "bullshit."

Maybe I was getting a bit too emotional.
For "weird apple-only stuff" I was referring to internal components that required different kernel modules to work. When the mobo or the processor is of a kind only apple computers use, you cannot multiboot even fucking linux (only specific distros made for it worked). But it is something that stopped being an issue somewhere around 2004 I think.
Modern apple computers use more common stuff so windows or linux work on them. (Apple marketed this change as a nice feature back then, btw)

And the fact that mac has a way more limited choice of programs or pheriperals you can run isn't exactly breaking news. Mah friend and his collegues had to multiboot windows 7 on gazillions of macs for multiple (fashion conshious) customers because their company's data secutrity softwares didn't run on OSX, and/or they had to connect those to funky custom machinery (from biomedical machinery to industral assembly line stuff) where of course OSX went WTF?!.

I'm not talking of keyboard or graphic user interface. Those can be learned in a couple weeks unless you are a fucking screaming monkey.
All arguments based on interface I've seen in this thread are retarded.

I'm just talking of capabilities, and OSX shows limits outside the "big netbook" or "multimedia handling and editing" kinds of use (there are badass mac-only video and audio editing softwares that blew my mind away some time ago).

And again I'm not saying OSX is crap nor that you shouldn't buy it. It is a much better OS than Win XP was, its only issue is that it has not ascended to world-wide standard to the degree of Windows. So you find significantly less stuff made for it (viruses too of course, so it's not that bad). And this alone is enough to make something so-so if taken alone like windows look better than anything else in my eyes.

I just added that I dislike them for that and their no-tinkering-permitted attitude, and the inflated price for better looks, which is a respectable personal opinion.
I managed to scrape together and sell on ebay more than one good laptop or desktop from a bunch of trashed ones I gathered, doing so with Apple stuff is basically impossible (anything but the HDD is soldered to the board).

So why do people go out of their way to hate one particular computer company?

Apple's marketing relies heavily on creating a cult-like fanbase of (usually) really snub people. Apple products aren't sold because they are better than others (they are more or less on par hardware-wise, while software-wise they are worse) nor because they are cheaper (most definetly not, keeping the price high is part of the marketing plan).
They sell because they managed to establish themselves as a status symbol. No other company does it at a degree anywhere close to Apple.

This generally tends to enrage nerds and tinkerers.

In such a thread you would either a) get a list of objective reasons not to buy an Apple product, like one could give for any other company out there, - and Apple users would go "yup, but those aren't things I care about"... or b) it devolves into flamewar almost instantly.

Assuming we can keep it clean from flames, the could also ve c) Everyone tells why they like/hate Apple stuff without calling out each other on how stupid is to type some random symbol with apple or windows.

That would be useful, so everyone can learn something.

To me, a great display, keyboard and touchpad are more important than a CPU that is a little faster.

I'm pretty sure that plenty of (far) cheaper laptops have good screens, keyboards and touchpads without being Macs.
Unless you are really into the multitouch (only apple does it in a way it makes sense to enable it), that is.

But the fact remains that a blanket "you get less hardware for a higher price" is bullshit.

Yeah, I would have said "you get more or less the same hardware apart some cool features but your OS is specialized, so it blows anything away in a few areas and sucks in the rest at a price that is far too high for the specs alone".

Kingmaker wrote:Target price range is <$600 dollars, though I'm willing to go above for a good machine. I don't care so much about battery life, as long as it's more than 30 minutes. Since I'm probably going to be staring at this thing for hours on end, either at a word processor or a video, I'd rather not end up with something that has a tiny screen, but I don't really need a gigantic one either.

Going back to this original post, a nice little portable machine might be a Thinkpad x130e, due 20 December. Starting price will be $469. It's smaller, yes, but it'll be light and have good battery life.

---

someone_else wrote:@Kingmaker: It is not a new laptop, but you may also want to try a linux distribution on the laptop you have already, for the kinds of uses you want linux very easily beats any other OS. Lighter linux OSs do wonders on aging computers.

Dude, he wants to get work done with a minimum of hassle. Linux is not it.

For "weird apple-only stuff" I was referring to internal components that required different kernel modules to work. When the mobo or the processor is of a kind only apple computers use, you cannot multiboot even fucking linux (only specific distros made for it worked). But it is something that stopped being an issue somewhere around 2004 I think.

Seriously, so what? Everyone knew that Apple's PPC/OpenFirmware systems weren't like x86/BIOS. Oh no! You have to go the extra mile if you want to install Linux (which Yellow Dog already made available, anyways!)

I'm just talking of capabilities, and OSX shows limits outside the "big netbook" or "multimedia handling and editing" kinds of use (there are badass mac-only video and audio editing softwares that blew my mind away some time ago).

What limits?

I managed to scrape together and sell on ebay more than one good laptop or desktop from a bunch of trashed ones I gathered, doing so with Apple stuff is basically impossible (anything but the HDD is soldered to the board).

That also means you get a lighter and smaller machine (and it helps Apple's supply chain to reduce the number of components)

They sell because they managed to establish themselves as a status symbol. No other company does it at a degree anywhere close to Apple.

This generally tends to enrage nerds and tinkerers.

It shouldn't enrage "nerds and tinkerers" since there's plenty of alternatives on the market. Apple products don't just sell because they're a status symbol, either (e.g. in a facility of hardcore CS where I work people at least half the machines are Macs - the other half ThinkPads or EliteBooks). Apple products tend to be well thought-out and designed and thus get sales.

Yeah, I would have said "you get more or less the same hardware apart some cool features but your OS is specialized, so it blows anything away in a few areas and sucks in the rest at a price that is far too high for the specs alone".

Specs don't define price or value.

TronPaul wrote:The laptops I've noted that you should avoid are HP, eMachines, and in my opinion Dells. HP's have the worst failure rates and overheat like mad. I had a personal experience of bad emachines, the keys on mine broke and the backlight died after 2 years in 2 emachines.

I've worked on and used quite a few Dell laptops over the years and I'm going to have to disagree with the opinion to avoid them. My only issue was with the way Dell handled their batteries for the Lattitudes a few years back. They were shit to begin with and replacements were hideously expensive. After the massive amount of negative feedback, they corrected the issue. But they were pretty slow to do so. There are better laptops, like IBM Thinkpads, but you pay for them.

Skgoa wrote:It's still a meaningless comparison. A sports car is bad at hauling furniture. Does that mean it has "less functionality [than a truck} at a higher price"? No. There are pros and cons for each product.

How the fuck did I miss this the first time through? What "functionality" does a sports car have that isn't either A. trying to get you laid or B. acting like an ass on the road?

Skgoa wrote:Yep, it's the german QWERTZ layout. And yes, we are talking about uncommonly used characters, i.e. "novelty" characters. His criticism was that that character wasn't printed on the keyboard and required a "ridiculous" key combination. I showed that a) it doesn't need to be printed on, because b) Mac keyboards have extremely logical rules for how to produce the character you want.

Yeah, great job here buddy. Need to learn rules as to how the keyboard work is somewhat better than just looking at the keyboard itself?

Skgoa wrote:The problem is that people value things differently. There can never be a definite answer to the question "what is better: Apple or non-Apple", because that question itself is entirely meaningless. In such a thread you would either a) get a list of objective reasons not to buy an Apple product, like one could give for any other company out there, - and Apple users would go "yup, but those aren't things I care about"... or b) it devolves into flamewar almost instantly.

Well you would not be able to get an absolute answer but you would be able to get a definitive one. That is to say, you would be able to get a more or less definitive list of pros and cons for both types of machines as well as a list of applications and which machine fits them better.