No, but you are demonstrating one of the reasons why MBPs sell as well as they do.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
What has happened to PC laptops?
- Thread starter chx
- Start date
No, but you are demonstrating one of the reasons why MBPs sell as well as they do.
I don't even believe in polymer weaponry. Please, cut the condescending crap. It exists and does as well as it does because it exudes quality. It sells itself. Nothing more or less. If you want plastic, you have a good time with it.
My point is that a metal or plastic case may or may not indicate the quality of the construction and the durability of the laptop. I would rather have any ThinkPad than any MBP if I want quality and durability. My issue was with your quote, which was "vs plastic, it is better," which is not necessarily true. But if you want to believe that a laptop with a metal case is better than a laptop with a plastic case in every instance, you have a good time with that.
Last edited:
HUh??? My laptop is made by Sager and it will absolutely blow away so many of your desktops. I do not get what the point of this question is?
Umm HP DELL etc... all fucking suck. They went downhill and the little guys like Sager, MSI, Clevo, etc... all came up and stomp them in absolute performance.
Umm HP DELL etc... all fucking suck. They went downhill and the little guys like Sager, MSI, Clevo, etc... all came up and stomp them in absolute performance.
A lot of people don't buy laptops for absolute performance though, so I don't think I would say Dell and HP suck.
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
I owned a Clevo whitebook for a while. It was terribly put together; the screen hinges broke and the backlight was dead within a year and a half. Performance wise it was impressive, but I would not purchase another of their products without seeing reviews and long term tests showing better durability. I was very careful with that machine, it was simply weak.
So you would argue that a Lorcin 9mm is better than a Glock 17 because it's metal and the Glock has a polymer frame? I've got news for you, the metal casing hides tape, glue, and electronics that aren't any better than those found in other notebooks.
maboblivion
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2011
- Messages
- 1,586
It's a scientific fact that glossy white is faster than old pc beige. Well that's what all my friends tell me.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Yeah, getting to Dan's point this is a good one. The classic business class ThinkPad's have plastic shells and the design is pretty old, but they do have magnesium chassis. For durability MBPs really aren't going to beat business class ThinkPads. Indeed business class devices are SO much better than consumer stuff in retail but the prices are higher. The PC industry has gotten itself into a Catch 22. There's lots of quality products but there volume in the business would drop dramatically if everything cost what Macs do.
Consumers do benefit from lesser quality and lower prices of PC, there's never going to be a $300 MacBook. But then those devices are the ones in retail that get compared against $1000 Macs. Hell if the Macs didn't look better and weren't more appealing that'd be pretty sad.
Hey I own a polymer Ruger LCP as one of my EDC items and guess what ... it will get the job done just like a metal .380acp.
Although I prefer my all metal Kimber, 1911 I will not fret at the performance of a plastic glock or S&W.....
Wait this is about computers sigh .. okay .. plastic laptops are fine in my opinion unless you plan on running a touchdown with it instead of the ball. Get real people.
Although I prefer my all metal Kimber, 1911 I will not fret at the performance of a plastic glock or S&W.....
Wait this is about computers sigh .. okay .. plastic laptops are fine in my opinion unless you plan on running a touchdown with it instead of the ball. Get real people.
eBay actually, and there were quite a few bids for it. This is the norm. You'll find when the market isn't flooded with cheap shit and only a single line of machines, they hold value well.
Who cares why it retains its value? It does, and anything else is pointless. It means when I decide to buy a new laptop, I'll probably end up spending less than the guy who bought the ass ugly plastic windows laptop because it had 10% more performance than the macbook, which is now essentially worthless and has to buy a new one straight up.
Laptops, and all computers for that matter, stopped being about specs about 4 years ago. Unless you're doing something heavy like 4k video editing or photoshop with a shit ton of layers or gaming, there is no reason to worry about computers that have maybe 10-20% more performance. It's now about design, which is why every computer OEM and their mother is copying the macbook's style.
LMAO. Back at my old job, I would take the suction cup off of the open/closed sign just so I could take the glass off of iMacs lol.
This is opinion only. It may appear leaning but with proper reasoning.
1. The modern understanding is called "Stand behind your products"
2. If you want to evaluate laptop, in the context of this particular thread, you want to start with those "by default, this laptop comes with 3 year warranty and the pricing reflects that as well"
The manufacturer expects the models to last more than 3 years. The pricing incorporates that expectation, and it is in the best interest of manufacturer these models last more than three years because else if the failure percentage is too high within warranty period, it will be difficult for both the users and manufacturer's bottom line as well.
To explain the leaning part, many Dell latitude models. However, I am sure other tier-1 / tier-2 vendors also have default-3-year-warranty level of laptops.
This is for users with certain expectation. I use an analogy below to illustrate certain concept.
1. Tablet and traditional laptop (early comparison) - when you are out of power, irrespective of how useful of you laptop, you cannot use it. Hence there are many occasions where 10-hour tablet has advantage over 4-hour laptop.
2. Similar concept - when the laptop broke down, irrespective of how fancy/great/powerful/beautiful/whatever of your laptop, you cannot use it. Hence there are many occasions where you want a laptop model that the vendor will stand behind it. Obviously in the current iteration, the vendor has certain expectation from user as well.
I see a lot of fancy machines over the web these two years. However, many only want to give standard one-year warranty. It really depends on users willingness either to stay with that or pay extra to extend warranty duration. However, if you bring Apple into this thread, then this is relatively valid per the circumstances.
1. The modern understanding is called "Stand behind your products"
2. If you want to evaluate laptop, in the context of this particular thread, you want to start with those "by default, this laptop comes with 3 year warranty and the pricing reflects that as well"
The manufacturer expects the models to last more than 3 years. The pricing incorporates that expectation, and it is in the best interest of manufacturer these models last more than three years because else if the failure percentage is too high within warranty period, it will be difficult for both the users and manufacturer's bottom line as well.
To explain the leaning part, many Dell latitude models. However, I am sure other tier-1 / tier-2 vendors also have default-3-year-warranty level of laptops.
This is for users with certain expectation. I use an analogy below to illustrate certain concept.
1. Tablet and traditional laptop (early comparison) - when you are out of power, irrespective of how useful of you laptop, you cannot use it. Hence there are many occasions where 10-hour tablet has advantage over 4-hour laptop.
2. Similar concept - when the laptop broke down, irrespective of how fancy/great/powerful/beautiful/whatever of your laptop, you cannot use it. Hence there are many occasions where you want a laptop model that the vendor will stand behind it. Obviously in the current iteration, the vendor has certain expectation from user as well.
I see a lot of fancy machines over the web these two years. However, many only want to give standard one-year warranty. It really depends on users willingness either to stay with that or pay extra to extend warranty duration. However, if you bring Apple into this thread, then this is relatively valid per the circumstances.
This is absolutely true about macbooks. I bought one in 2007 for 1k, sold it in 2011 for 450. I just took it to the mac store and the replaced the old white plastic and made it look new for free. Ive heard of people buying old macbooks with cosmetic issues and doing that to make money. I could of sold it for more, I had 3 replies in the first two hours on craigslist.
Ever seen a MBP that took a nice hit? Bad, bad, bad. Metal is not a good choice for a laptop when it comes to durability, thus reliability.
BigJayDogg3
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2009
- Messages
- 1,678
Disagree.
I have a laptop that was purchased in the 2007, 2008 timeframe. I have a class mate that has a 2010 MBP.
We both have issues with the performance of our machines. They are usable, but their time to shine has passed. His is probably better than mine if for no other reason than the fact that it is 2 years newer.
My computer is almost completely solid. The hinge is looser than I'd like it to be, the media buttons on the front are just starting to look worn, and there are a couple spots that look like something got dropped and it started to melt the plastic, but otherwise, the computer looks new.
My classmate's MBP looks beat to shit.
They weigh about the same, and his battery life is longer by about 2-3 hours.
My laptop is specced lower than his. But build quality wise, my Dell is just as solid (if not more so) than his Apple.
Most real use MBP's do after a short time.
If you're smart you keep your MBP in a shell, or at least in a sleeve when you put it in your bookbag. I figure a $20-30 investment now will buy me at least $100 in two years when I get a new one.
Any laptop is going to look like crap if you treat it like crap. Cracks, dents, scrapes, paint peeling off...Nothing survives under 30lbs of textbooks in your backpack if you're not careful.
Any laptop is going to look like crap if you treat it like crap. Cracks, dents, scrapes, paint peeling off...Nothing survives under 30lbs of textbooks in your backpack if you're not careful.
School != Real Work.
Sleeves, skins etc do not stop metal from getting smashed in accidentally, and falls are another story. Metal bends and cracks, it does not rebound. Even with the best care a working MBP gets all beat up in short order.
Nobody drops their laptop on the floor where I work.
OK.
Doesn't matter. Plastic doesn't dent the way metal does. It can be scarred or cracked, just as metal can be scratched. But the metal casing of a Macbook dents easily. Damage that a PC laptop would shrug off shows more so on the Macbook. They both scratch about as easily, but scratched on Macbooks are particularly noticable due to their light coloring. I'd wager Macbooks dent more easily than a plastic housing on a PC cracks. And even if they were the same, repairs aren't. Anyone can superglue plastic back together or use some kind of polystyrene bonding agent to structurally repair the machine.
Body work tools are a bit more expensive and difficult to master.
Yeah, I believe that. In the company's history no one has ever dropped a laptop or dropped one out of your line of sight, failing to inform you of such an occurrence. Company start up last week or something?
Not denying that at all. That's why I said it's best to keep them in a shell, or in a case when you're not using it. I've seen plenty of Macs for sale with dings and dents (even in the 'thick' bottom part).
Laptops = spills. Maybe everyone is just careful with their machines? I'm careful when I hold anything that costs $1000 or $2000 - laptop or not.
Then again some people can't go 2 months without destroying their cell phone either.
wabbitseason
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,511
16:10. /thread
This is a non-issue for 95% of consumers. Still, there's virtually no PCs left with 16:10 while all the Apple laptops still have 16:10.
The PC makers in 2010 said that they were switching to 16:9 due to supply reasons or something like that (that was Lenovo's excuse for switching to 16:9 on the Thinkpads). Lies. It's 2012 and Apple still sources 16:10 panels just fine.
wabbitseason
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,511
16:10 is a huge issue for anyone who wants to do work on their laptop. By a remarkable coincidence those are the very same people willing to spend the most on a laptop.
Yea! I hate Mac laptops.
I hope that was sarcasm, because those also weigh 15 lbs, put out enough heat for a 4,000 square foot home, and the battery life lasts 12 minutes. Also try to sell a Clevo to someone, they're going to ask what the hell that thing is and why you're asking so much for it and buy a known brand with known support. It's not fair to compare desktop replacements to consumer and business laptops.
So you are comparing a laptop that is twice as heavy and more then twice as thick? The graphic card is also worse. Any company can put hardware in a big, plastic case.
When it comes to a laptop i wouldnt leave the MPB for now, since its trackpad, looks, and the feel about it is just so much better then anything else, and i like OSX. For a stationary on the other hand, i would never go Mac, no reason for it really.
It seems like most companies nowdays have no eye for design nor making the laptop feel like a good, solid piece in your hand.
Guess the haters are gonna jump on me for saying anything good about apple now. Cant belive grown up people can "hate" things, thought that was something you did when you were 12-13. No one forces you to buy apple stuff, but they sure help the technology go forward.
I don't hate apple, I just dislike many things about them.
But what I really ABHOR is the fact that no other computer company, whether OEM or boutique, can make a computer that has their build quality but runs windows.
For example, the old MBPs from yesteryear started out at 1" thick. The new retina models are now 0.71" thick. I honestly don't care about a 0.25" difference. Hell, make it 1.25" thick for all I care. What I do care about is how apple is able to fit in a GT650 at 0.71" but no other company can throw in a GTX670 or 680 at something more than 2x as thick.
All I'm asking is for someone to make a 14"/15" screen at 1200p (16:10 please) with ivy bridge and top of the line gaming, no optical, and less than 1.5" thick. Oh, and hey, put some thought into the design. Is that too hard to ask for?
So buy a better laptop. You want high end? Sager is a good choice. I dropped about $2200 on a 17" laptop with two HDDs, a DVD, upgraded screen, quad Ivy Bridge, 7970M and so on. I love the thing. Heck you can go higher end than that with things like Dell Precision Mobile Workstations.
You have all kinds of choice in laptops. You can get everything from a $300 netbook with bare bones hardware up to a $4000 mobile workstation with top of the line graphcs and CPU and everything else in between.
You have all kinds of choice in laptops. You can get everything from a $300 netbook with bare bones hardware up to a $4000 mobile workstation with top of the line graphcs and CPU and everything else in between.
Money isn't the problem, it's the competition. If I wanted a MBPR type laptop, well, I couldn't find one. Apple is kicking everyone's ass in finding ways to pack power into small size. The MBPR has the best screen, best size, and best graphics.
As I said, I'll sacrifice some size for some power. The market for a thin and light gaming laptop is huge, and yet only Apple has filled it. Strange, since it's a bit harder to game on a Mac.
I'll edit this and say that the closest thing you can get is the Razer Blade. And even then, they royally screwed up. Apple was able to make the MBPR thinner, smaller, and shove a graphics card that had an increase of 10-15 watts in TDP.
And yes, I'm going to use thickness:graphics TDP as the new benchmark, much like gearheads use horsepower:liter. Apple with the MBPR has set the benchmark at 63.38 watts/inch. The Razer Blade was at 39.77 watts/inch. According to this metric, the most powerful graphics card out today, a GTX 680m that has a TDP of 100 watts should be able to fit in a laptop that is 1.57" thick. In this case, there is only ONE laptop that fits this bill, and that's the Sager NP9150/Clevo P150EM. Sadly, it has the aesthetics of something made in the 90's.
All I ask is that someone make a P150EM WITHOUT a bay drive. That should free up space for 1) better cooling and 2) larger battery. Hell, they could probably remove some of that horizontal space from the vertical and make the laptop even thinner. With the advent of usb3.0/thunderbolt, external drives are pretty much moot. I understood back when USB1.0 and then even 2.0 you were limited by cable bandwidth, and thus burning a cd or watching a DVD was pretty horrid. But external drives today, I don't believe, maximize the bandwidth of usb3.0 nor thunderbolt. Why not use the space for something else. I mean, when was the last time you used optical media?
Last edited:
Monday. I use them fairly frequently for various things. I could live without one in a laptop but I like having it, and I need one in my desktop.
Look man if you want a Mac get a Mac. Seriously though this crying is silly to me. There are lots n' lots of options out there, including Macs, get what you want. Me? I dislike a whole lot about their laptops, including many of the tradeoffs they use to make them thin (soldered on components, low voltage components, non-removable batteries, etc). There's no reason we can't all have different things.
If the ultimate thing for you is thin then yes, Apple is for you. They are fetishists about it and go after it to the exclusion of other things. Personally I'll take a thicker laptop to get what I want.
No matter what you talk about in life there are tradeoffs. You can't have it all. Decide what is important, prioritize, and get what you like the best.
That's the thing, I DON'T want a Mac. I don't particularly like OSX. Sure it looks pretty, but I don't know where anything is, or how to do anything. I grew up with Windows, and every computer I've owned has been a PC.
What I want is the combination of style, build quality, and performance. If you take away the OS from that, my argument is that the best choice would be Apple. I'm looking for another computer manufacture that can rival them, and what I'm sad/upset about is how there isn't one.
So to answer the question posted in the thread title, What has happened to PC laptops?, my answer directly stems from the realization that Apple makes the best computer.
I don't want to settle. I hate settling. I will agree that in life there are tradeoffs, but you CAN have it all. Just make sure what you can't have isn't a priority.
In my situation, I want thin, sleek, built well, and powerful. What's my tradeoff? Money. And yet, there's nothing that satisfies those 4 requirements.
FoxhoundOp
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2003
- Messages
- 1,129
That simply isn't true.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
Not true by a long shot. Apple makes very good upper mid-range consumer products and definitely has probably the best screens available for laptops and tablets with the Retina displays, but there are certainly more powerful, better built and more flexible computers in the PC world.
More powerful? Yes, there are. You could completely trick out an Alienware m18x, or even get an EON17-X, but how is that practical? How is that even a "laptop" anymore? When it comes to actual usable power, a fully spec'ed out MBPR is pretty decent, albeit expensive.
As far as more power goes, that's one of the arguments I make. I want a no-holds-barred gaming laptop, that 1) doesn't look like something from The Fast and the Furious and 2) doesn't skimp on quality. As I previously mentioned, the only company I know that does this is Sager/Clevo. They only have ONE product in the 15" market to fill that gap.
Better built? I'm currently typing this on a Dell Precision M90 laptop, and I have a Thinkpad T61p as well as an X41 Tablet. All three of these laptops are well made. The M90 especially due to it's age, as well as the X41 tablet as it stood up to the abuse I gave it during college. But, I do think that Apple laptops, specifically the MBPs are just as durable and well built. I will concede that a wholly internal battery is a letdown, but that's their trick to keep it thin.
More flexible? Along with the internal battery, Apple also uses a bunch of non-removable/replaceable parts. On the new MBPR, the RAM is locked in, the CPU is locked in, and finally the GPU is locked in. Once you choose your options, you're set. Yes, this is a huge downfall, but from Apple's business model it makes perfect sense. This is one of many things I hate about them. They lock you in everything, and then next year they release a SLIGHTLY better version with SLIGHTLY more power or whatever, and if you want to upgrade, 9/10 times you have to buy a new system. But, as far as flexibility of usage goes, it's one of the best. The MBPR is thin and light, making it an excellent travel computer. You can get it with the top of the line (not unlocked) i7, 16gigs of ram, 768gigs of solid state memory AND a GT650. That's a lot of power for it's size. Very few people, if they used a computer like this for work, would be lacking.
In summary, Apple makes the most usable, well-built, aesthetically pleasing, powerful laptop. A car analogy would be that the MBPR is like a Bugatti Veryon. Very expensive, very fast, very good looking, and very easy to drive. Yes, there are cars that are more expensive, faster, look better, and are easier to drive. But as a single well-rounded product, I personally think it's the gold standard.
The problem is, unlike the car industry, where you have Ferrari, Mclaren, Koenigsegg, Aston Martin, etc competing against Bugatti; in the laptop market no-one clearly has a strong product competing with Apple. THAT is what I'm most upset about.
Last edited: