10 replies to this topic

[marko]

Over the previous few years, it's became more and more common for people to have multiple devices for internet access, even when away from home. It used to be a case that if we wanted internet access, we would have to wait till we were in our homes, but with the innovation of netbooks, laptops and all manner of mobile devices now stringing us up to the net it's much easier to have constant web access, even when on the move!.

Do you see the advantage or these devices, or in some circumstances the disadvantages?. Are you thinking of buying a portable device to connect to the net on the move?.

Personally, I always hated moblile devices, they were just another means of disruption to my personal life - but I've already given in to be honest and purchased an iPhone a while ago. For me, it allows access to the site when I'm away from home, it's great for emergencies too but as I say, there is a slight sacrifice to it all - are we embracing technology at the cost of our peace and quiet?.

[FreeWareFan]

Marko, you forgot tablets.
Also what difference between laptop and notebook?

[marko]

LOL, it should have been "netbook" rather than notebook, I'll change this a little later and possibly add the option for a tablet device too

[CraftyBill]

I have never owned a factory new computer. Until last year I only had a second hand desktop (I trade up to somebody's late model trade in every 2 - 3 years) Last year I traded a motorcycle for a bunch of power tools and an old but functioning laptop. It has its limited uses, but I don't consider it a primary unit. (it's my garage computer).

[innkeeper]

I have built and repaired my own desktops for years now and although we have three laptops in the house the only time I have anything to do with them is to fix software problems. I will use a desktop anytime rather than a laptop.

[BigB]

I have a desktop which I live at. My wife has a really slow atom based netbook and the kids have a celery powered laptop. I know which one I'd rather work on all day. When I'm out and about I tend to forget about all things computer and IT so I don't see the need for a smart phone or tablet.

[Ralph C.]

Only recently have I started to use both a notebook and a tablet. I have mostly been chained to a desktop. Don't misunderstand, I loved my Dell desktop, but I must say the laptop has allowed me to be with the family while I check email, in any room of the house. I just can't trash a perfectly good desktop just yet, I mail use it for my backup storage as it has 2 hard drives and serves that purpose well. I also back up to a portable HD just in case. I would not however buy another desktop, laptops offer so much more.

[Scottar]

I use to buy desktops that i would custom build, actually it was a tower. I wanted something robust as a graphics work station. But the software package i built it for was no current in taking advantage of the hardware. I also like desktops as they are easily upgradable if you have the case you want.

But since I have been under employed since the recession and can't afford to even run the beast I got a refurbished laptop at 25% of the original cost. Laptops have improved greatly since 2005 and they are economical to run. If I can get the money I may get an updated software package and then look at what hardware it supports before I upgrade the tower. But I need to also dump the old CRT and replace it with a LCD monitor as I can no longer squint at the fuzzy CRT monitor letters and whatnot. Maybe my eyesight has deteriorated but LCD text is very sharp.

What is really needed is a laptop case with a detachable monitor where you could conveniently plug in a LCD monitor behind the case. But one thing about some laptops is the keyboard are ergonomically terrible. But you can plugin a keyboard if they would provide enough USB ports. Otherwise you have to get an expander.

On thing I hate about the new stuff is they all seem to want to go wireless. Last time I had a wireless trackball it was always losing contact and and the batteries would go dead after a month. Give me a choice! I also hate the new laptop screen sizes which is why I would want to rip the damn attached display off and use a stand alone LCD monitor.

I don't care for the smart phones as I can't focus on the small screens. Maybe some bright inventor will comeup with a way to rig display glasses to the phone so that the stuff is in front of your face. Just don't try to walk around with that interface.

[dstrout]

The first computer I ever used regularly was technically a laptop. However, it was extremely old and chunky (over 1" thick), and the screen had literally broken off. It had an external monitor attached to it, so it pretty much functioned as a desktop. Other than that, all my primary PCs have been desktops. I must say I just love the power, better screen size, and full keyboard that I find in desktops. My current desktop I custom built in September with a quad-core 3.2Ghz Phenom, 8GB memory, a good discrete graphics card, and USB and SATA 3, with a 7200RPM drive. By recycling some parts, it cost me only $300! To get a laptop this powerful would cost well into the thousands of dollars, money I just don't have. So, I much prefer desktops, which isn't surprising seeing as how I don't travel much. I do have a secondhand laptop, and I think it's getting ready to bite the dust. But, it does still work, and it's usable for the times when I do travel (like now, actually).

I do agree, though, that it is getting harder and harder to "get away from it all". I live in New England, and as some may know, we were hit by an early snow storm on Sunday. This wouldn't have been a problem, but it being early, all the leaves were still on the trees. When the heavy snow fell on the leaf-laden trees, they all went to pieces, cutting power in 6 states, including ours. One would think this would cause a forced exit from technology, but the next morning, out came the iPhones to connect to 3G networks. The only time I've really been somewhere where I couldn't access the Internet at all was in a remote area of Maine, where even 3G connections couldn't reach. The only thing that worked was the GPS, which works off satellite. Once there is practical satellite-based connectivity, then we will always be connected, all over the globe. Do we really want that? Hmmm...

On a related note: Internet in high places.

[marko]

To be honest, I find the entire "3G" experience a bit of a joke ... some years ago we were responsible for rolling out a few thousand new laptops for the sales team at a large drinks distributor and they were all to have 3G cards from Vodafone installed. These worked relatively OK in the cities and built up areas, but as many ventured outwith these area's and into the quieter parts of the country they began to complain they could barely get a signal and downloading or responding to emails became a task in itself. Obviously there wasn't much we could do other than provide the feedback to the company and let them take up the issue with Vodafone, although having made a couple of coastal trips myself in the past few years I've found it incredibly difficult to keep my 3G connection on my iPhone which just confirms the technology behind these things, whilst fantastic, is seriously flawed with little to no connectivity being available outwith the major cities.

We can expect this initially as technology develops, but all these years later and we're still having the same issues??!!.

From what I can see, it's like the whole ISP issue .. they offer speeds of up to 20, 30, 50 or even 100Mbps - everyone jumps on the bandwagon and so the services become over-subscribed meaning that once fast 50Mb connection has now decreased in performance severely because the rest of the street are on the same cable line as you and are all either watching streamed content, youtube, etc or are furiously downloading as many P2P movies as their line (and mine) can handle!. As more and more people subscribe to the services, the situation becomes even worse and more resources have to be poured into the service to simply maintain it. Meanwhile, other area's are neglected because the service either hasn't reached them yet or there are not as many people subscribed in that area. For me, this is what's happening with 3G too .. they're concentrating too much on cities and built-up areas where there are an endless supply of hotspots, etc, which kinda defeats the purpose of concentrating heavily on 3G whilst further out in the sticks the service is apparently "not needed". In other words, if it's not clawing in millions of pounds in turnover, sod it, we don't really care

dstrout, on 03 November 2011 - 11:05 AM, said:

On a related note: Internet in high places.

Good news, however, for those of us planning a trip to Mount Everest .. they now have a 3G service mounted at the base camp for the mountain!!