Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (
More info?)
Richard Grossman wrote:
> Quaoar wrote:
>> I think you are mistaken about a P4 having greater longevity than a
>> P-M. Given that the P4s tend to run hotter than the P-M, that alone
>> says that the P-M has potentially longer life.
>
> I *think* he was referring to lifetime of usage, ie, that the P4 would
> remain in the target performance band as chips and the software for
> them progress.
>
>> No, there is little chance that any laptop
>> video card (chip, really) can be upgraded in the future, even if you
>> could find the parts and even if the GPU is socketed (which is very
>> unlikely). Neither vendor sells laptop GPUs outside the OEM market.
>
> Your information is out of date. This was the case up until a year
> or so ago, but there are several laptops with upgradeable video being
> advertised and sold today.
>
>> The Hitachi 7K60 is a very good 7200 rpm drive,
>
> Second that. I have one, and it is quiet, cool, and fast.
>
>> Otherwise, there have been reports of reliability problems with the
>> Qosmio in its early release (Google Groups). Frankly, Toshiba has
>> slipped, again IMO, in its overall quality. I think you can do just
>> as well, possibly less expensively, with other vendors.
>
> Toshiba is the low-cost vendor among major name brands, especially if
> you are a smart shopper. I got my P25 in August 2003 for 1400 bucks
> at Circuit City (after rebates). It's amazing how much cheaper they
> are than Dell, for example. Toshiba no longer manufactures their own
> brand in their own factories, but who does? Buy the 3-year support
> which is *very* reasonable from Toshiba, and *only* take your system
> to Authorized Premier Toshiba repair centers, even if you have to
> drive or ship it there.
>
>> If you have not had experience with widescreen LCDs, you should be
>> aware of the differences in a 16:9 widescreen compared to a standard
>> 4:3 screen, particularly in gaming and photo/video work. The height
>> of the screen in both cases governs the rendition of a 4:3 game or
>> photo display. A 15 inch widescreen will display a 4:3 frame
>> equivalently to a 12 inch standard display.
>
> I get your point, but your triginometry is off a bit - the adjustment
> is not as severe as you say. When showing a 4:3 *source*, a 15" 16:9
> is equivalent to a 12.3" 4:3.
>
> Widescreens however are generally 15.4" or 17" diagonal. When
> showing a 4:3 *source*, a 15.4" widescreen is equivalent to a 12.6"
> 4:3 screen.
> HOWEVER, the widescreen will still have free space on each side of the
> image. That is usable work space.
>
> For photo/video editing, you get more work space for toolbars, so the
> wide form factor works really, really well, and gives you much more
> *usable* space than the 4:3 form factor.
>
> And on the 4:3, in real life, you would have to shrink the image in
> order to see menubars and toolbars, so the advantage in the end goes
> to the widescreen.
>
> Of course, I have a 17" widescreen, which displays the same size 4:3
> source material as a 13.9" 4:3 screen, plus as I said, it still would
> have free space around the image to place tools and other windows.
>
> I don't do pc gaming, so I don't know if any use a widescreen
> movie-style format, but even in games I imagine you have toolbars or
> other control interfaces that can be placed on the side of the main
> graphic display.
Thanks for your comments. I wholeheartedly disagree, though, with your
comments on the replacement for a GPU. Yes, some boards have video
daughter cards or socketed GPUs, but I challenge you to supply examples
wherein the GPU can be upgraded even in these systems.
Q