notebook questions

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Wow, so many questions. Ok here goes.
1) Typically, 7200 rpm drives use more power, but the latest from hitachi
7k60 series only decreases battery life by a significant amount.

2) Exactly. If the screen is xga, its max res is 1024x748. I think you may
have trouble finding a suitable notebook because of the screen requirements.

3)Yes, you can normally change the resolution to a lower one. WXGA refers to
1280x800, wsxga+ 1600x1050, wuxga is 1920x1080.

4) Rule of thumb when going from Pentium M to P4 is to add about 800mhz,
probably 900Mhz for the new dothan chip. If you're just working on office
tasks, general computing, a 1.4 will be more than enough. Don't forget, the
new chips have 2 meg L2 cache which makes everything faster (especially
windows)

5) The latitude line is of better quality, has better tech support, and is
also a bit more expensive. However, you will not be able to get the latest
technology (example video card) on a latitude series since they are geared
towards businesses.

Hope all this info helps. Let me know if you have any other questions!

"S. Reicher" <reicherzoom@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:EMOdnW-1d8O4aQPcRVn-3A@rogers.com...
> Hi,
>
> I have a few questions regarding notebooks. I'm planning on buying a
> notebook. I'll be using it for software development, surfing the
> web..etc...
> I would appreciate any help!
>
>
> 1) Most notebooks I see have either 4200 or 5400, very very rare to find
> 7200 RPM. Would 7200 use more power?
>
> 2) I currently own a desktop with a 19' monitor and use 1024x768
> resolution,
> any larger resolution makes everything small and hard to see. Now, in
> notebooks, does XGA mean I can't go higher than 1024x768?
>
> 3) Also, some notebooks have widescreens. WXGA, WSXGA+ and WUXGA. If I buy
> let's say a WSXGA+, will I be able to lower the resolution to something
> like
> 1024x768 equivalent for widescreens? and would it be clear? I read
> somewhere
> that changing the resolution for a notebook screen to a setting other than
> what it was meant to be at, wouldn't make it clear.
>
> 4) I'm planning on buying a Pentium M notebook. What is the equivalent
> speed
> for a 1.4 PM, 1.6PM and 1.7PM in regards to a Pentium 4 desktop? If I buy
> a
> 1.4PM would I be regretting it?
>
> 5) Regarding both dell D800 and 8600, I think both of these systems are
> the
> same. Do they differ in build quality? Which is better?
>
>
>
> Thank you!
>
>

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> 2) I currently own a desktop with a 19' monitor and use 1024x768
resolution,
> any larger resolution makes everything small and hard to see. Now, in
> notebooks, does XGA mean I can't go higher than 1024x768?

1400x1050 on 15" are very good to read.
TFT is much sharper than CRT

> 4) I'm planning on buying a Pentium M notebook. What is the equivalent
speed
> for a 1.4 PM, 1.6PM and 1.7PM in regards to a Pentium 4 desktop? If I buy
a
> 1.4PM would I be regretting it?

Simple multiple by 2.
Pentium-M 1.4 equals 2.8 P4


--
Roland Mösl - http://www.pege.org - http://notebook.pege.org
http://wds-internetwerbung.com Web Design startet an der Suchmaschine

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

John,

J. Clarke <jclarke@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
> Look, if you can see the artifacting and it's a problem for you then
> run your panel at whatever resolution you please. But don't tell me
> I'm doing wrong to do what works for me. And don't tell others not
> to try it--they should try it and see if the result is acceptable for
> their purposes rather than blindly obeying some online idealist.

LCDs, either laptop or desktop, should be run at their native resolution,
PERIOD!

If you find an XGA display running at SVGA "acceptable", then your visual
acuity is shot to hell.

Barry is right, you're wrong, now dismount that high-horse.

--
Regards,

James

Checkout the NEW Thinkpad Forums: http://forum.thinkpads.com

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

JHEM wrote:

> John,
>
> J. Clarke <jclarke@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Look, if you can see the artifacting and it's a problem for you then
>> run your panel at whatever resolution you please. But don't tell me
>> I'm doing wrong to do what works for me. And don't tell others not
>> to try it--they should try it and see if the result is acceptable for
>> their purposes rather than blindly obeying some online idealist.
>
> LCDs, either laptop or desktop, should be run at their native resolution,
> PERIOD!

In your opinion. When you have learned that your opinion and fact sometimes
differ you will have taken a large step down the road to wisdom.

> If you find an XGA display running at SVGA "acceptable", then your visual
> acuity is shot to hell.

(a) How about an SXGA display running at XGA?
(b) If my visual acuity _wasn't_ shot to Hell then I wouldn't need to run at
the lower resolution, now, would I? In case you are not aware of it,
everyone is not a young kid with 20:15 near and far. And you too will pay
this price unless you manage to die young.

> Barry is right, you're wrong, now dismount that high-horse.

Nope, Barry is opinionated, so am I. He is not right and I am not wrong and
you haven't given me any reason whatsoever to give a damn what _you_ say.

And I will mount or dismount whatever horse I please thank you very much.
Perhaps wherever you live you are entitled to have your edicts obeyed
solely on account of your sublime wonderfulness, but here in the US we
don't play that.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Hi,

I'm sorry about what I started here. I hope you guys relax and calm down. I
now understand what I need.

Thank you!




"JHEM" <James@ESAD_SPAMMERS.thinkpads.com> wrote in message
news:CgIod.6572$0k1.4162@trnddc08...
> John,
>
> J. Clarke <jclarke@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> > JHEM wrote:
> >>
> >> LCDs, either laptop or desktop, should be run at their native
> >> resolution, PERIOD!
> >
> > In your opinion. When you have learned that your opinion and fact
> > sometimes differ you will have taken a large step down the road to
> > wisdom.
>
> Sorry, that's a FACT and not an opinion, so perhaps it's YOU who needs to
> tread that road.
>
> >> If you find an XGA display running at SVGA "acceptable", then your
> >> visual acuity is shot to hell.
> >
> > (a) How about an SXGA display running at XGA?
>
> If you need an XGA sized display due to vision problems, then that's the
> display you should purchase with your laptop. QED.
>
> > (b) If my visual acuity _wasn't_ shot to Hell then I wouldn't need to
> > run at the lower resolution, now, would I? In case you are not aware
> > of it, everyone is not a young kid with 20:15 near and far. And you
> > too will pay this price unless you manage to die young.
>
> I have little doubt that I have enough miles under my keel to not worry
> about having young eyes, or in my particular case, one remaining working
> orb.
>
> And in what way are you doing your admittedly aged and infirm eyes a favor
> by taking a crystal clear and needle sharp SXGA+ display and running it in
> XGA resolution so that it's nice and fuzzy?
>
> I have laptops lying about with displays ranging from 14'1" XGA to 15"
> UXGA-IPS. Unless I feel like wearing my reading glasses all day, I tend to
> default to the 14.1" XGA unit. If I grab one of my SXGA+ units, then I'll
> have to resort to my glasses to be comfortable using it. Running the SXGA+
> display at XGA is _NOT_ an option due to interpolation.
>
> If you can't see the deterioration in quality when running an SXGA+
display
> at XGA resolution, then it's far past the time you broke down and got some
> new glasses.
>
> >> Barry is right, you're wrong, now dismount that high-horse.
> >
> > Nope, Barry is opinionated, so am I. He is not right and I am not
> > wrong and you haven't given me any reason whatsoever to give a damn
> > what _you_ say.
>
> I don't really care about YOUR opinion, I just don't want anyone reading
the
> NGs to take your insane reasoning about using laptop displays at other
than
> their native resolution to heart.
>
> If you have a choice between two laptops with the same sized display, one
> being XGA and one being SXGA+, and you purchase the SXGA+ one for more
money
> and then run it at XGA, WTH did you buy it to begin with?
>
> > And I will mount or dismount whatever horse I please thank you very
> > much. Perhaps wherever you live you are entitled to have your edicts
> > obeyed solely on account of your sublime wonderfulness, but here in
> > the US we don't play that.
>
> As you damn well know, or should after all these years in the NGs, we
share
> a geo-political locale.
>
> But, unlike the recently proven majority of our fellow countrymen, I don't
> believe that ignorant opinion, no matter how heartfelt, trumps facts!
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> James
>
> Checkout the NEW Thinkpad Forums: http://forum.thinkpads.com
>
>
>