Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Friday December 02 2016, @08:39PM   Printer-friendly
from the price-is-no-object dept.

Ars Technica has an editorial on what they'd want in a laptop in 2017. Inspired by this, I figured to make my own list and ask SN for input. I'm not looking for a laptop, but it's fun to think about specs, right?

Anyway, I do think use case is important. My use case: working and travelling daily with laptop, sometimes to various institutes to give presentations. This already leads to some important requirements:

  • Lightweight (I frequently take the laptop somewhere)
  • Not needing a plethora of dongles. (I've forgotten the power supply more than once already, I'm sure forgetting a dongle or two will happen more frequently).

Thinking about it more, most of the things the Ars Editor loves are things I honestly don't use, or actively do not want (touch screen).

With that in mind, I'd arrive at:

  • No touchscreen - it adds weight while I don't use its features
  • 13 inch screen seems to balance portability and screen size well.
  • 1920x1080 resolution - higher will drain the battery faster, and is not needed on 13 inch
  • VGA port - almost all presentation places I come across need converters (dongles) for anything else.
  • USB 2 and 3 ports - again, for compatibility
  • 512 GB SDD
  • 10GB or more memory
  • Dual boot compatible with Ubuntu (I use Ubuntu, but for the occasional gadget that can get updates via your computer, you'll still need Windows or MacOS)
  • Preferably with regular ethernet port - there are still hotels where wired is free, but wifi is paid.

Other than that I'd go for modern iterations of specs for things like ethernet, wifi, CPU, etc. So Kaby Lake processor, things like that. GPU is not a big issue, so probably the integrated Intel thing on a modern Intel CPU will be sufficient.

Anything I missed? Anything you'd do radically different? If so: why?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Celestial on Friday December 02 2016, @08:52PM

    by Celestial (4891) on Friday December 02 2016, @08:52PM (#436203) Journal

    I agree with the "no touchscreen." Completely useless on a proper computer. However, I'd much prefer a 15 inch screen to a 13 inch screen. Like Goldilocks, 17" is too big, 13" is too small, and 15" is just right. I'd also up the RAM to at least 16 GB. Personal preference, but if you're going to dual boot I'd use two separate 256 GB SSDs.

    The big one, for me, is that I'd add a real GPU. Intel integrated graphics just don't cut it for me, but I also play video games.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 02 2016, @11:30PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 02 2016, @11:30PM (#436311)

    Like Goldilocks, 17" is too big, 13" is too small, and 15" is just right.

    O_O Those requirements....

    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 03 2016, @05:20AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 03 2016, @05:20AM (#436410)

      We are still talking screen sizes, right? Right?

  • (Score: 1) by aim on Tuesday December 06 2016, @09:00AM

    by aim (6322) on Tuesday December 06 2016, @09:00AM (#437588)

    I agree with the "no touchscreen." Completely useless on a proper computer. However, I'd much prefer a 15 inch screen to a 13 inch screen. Like Goldilocks, 17" is too big, 13" is too small, and 15" is just right. I'd also up the RAM to at least 16 GB. Personal preference, but if you're going to dual boot I'd use two separate 256 GB SSDs.

    The big one, for me, is that I'd add a real GPU. Intel integrated graphics just don't cut it for me, but I also play video games.

    Agreed on 13" being a tad small, while 17" is too big to lug around (got one, mostly stationary use). I'd add that high res is overrated, I (in my mid-40ies with by now declining vision) actually prefer my lower-res 1680x1050 22" desktop screen to the 17" full HD on the laptop. I am also extremely averse to "mirror" (aka glare) screens, and absolutely require a matte one - quite hard to find, more so if you want the colors to be more or less correctly shown.

    Be careful with the VGA ports, they may offer limited resolution - on my 17" i7 from 2014, VGA is limited to 1024x768, no such low limit on the HDMI port.

    Apropos graphics, mine came with Optimum, i.e. choice of NVidia vs. Intel integrated. I tend to use Intel only, but then I'm not a gamer.

    Another criterium for me was to be able to get the laptop without MS Windows license, as I'd put a FOSS operating system on - I actually found one preloaded with FreeDOS and OpenGEM, OS I replaced with Kubuntu.

    Not least, make sure the keyboard is usable, or get yourself a decent separate keyboard to add when on your desk. Same for touchpad/mouse.

    I'm less sure about the dual drive thing, not many laptops will even allow for that option. Although, I still have a DVD burner in mine, that might be replaced by another SSD...