| 1 |
Apparently, though unproven, at 01:09 on Wednesday 08 September 2010, Paul |
| 2 |
Hartman did opine thusly: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 7:58 AM, John Blinka <john.blinka@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > Hi, all, |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > My trusty Inspiron 8200 is on death's door and so I'm looking for a |
| 8 |
> > new laptop - one that will run Gentoo straightforwardly, of course. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > I really liked the 1600x1200 display on this machine, which I greatly |
| 11 |
> > prefer to the 1600x900 display on the more modern Inspiron 1545 I own. |
| 12 |
> > Most of what I do now is through a web browser, and I can see much |
| 13 |
> > more of a web page with 1200 lines of display than I can with 900. |
| 14 |
> > And I dislike the massive width of the 1545 which makes it much less |
| 15 |
> > portable than the old 8200. I'd love to replace my 8200 with a |
| 16 |
> > machine of similar dimensions, but thinner and lighter. However, I |
| 17 |
> > cannot find any machine on Dell's website with a 4x3 aspect ratio - |
| 18 |
> > they all seem to be approximately 16x9 now. |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > So, is 16x9 all that's available now in laptops? |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Basically all laptops are widescreen (or shortscreen <g>) now, your |
| 23 |
> best bet is to try to find one that is 16:10 instead of 16:9, it will |
| 24 |
> at least give you a little bit more vertical screen space. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> If money is not an option: there is a 15.X" WUXGA which is 1920x1200, |
| 27 |
> 16:10 ratio. It will probably be very difficult to find one with this |
| 28 |
> screen and the laptop will probably cost a fortune (or be old). I |
| 29 |
> think Lenovo and Asus made laptops with this resolution screen at a |
| 30 |
> sub-17inch size. Maybe Apple, too. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Not old. Expensive yes. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Dell offer this in the Precision range in a 15.6" screen size. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Beware of the Precisions, they are great big ugly chunky square brutes that |
| 37 |
make Thinkpads look incredibly pretty. Put caterpillar tracks on 'em and you |
| 38 |
got a good simulation of a rocket-proof Army battle tank. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
And they are *heavy* - they're basically desktops with a few concessions to |
| 41 |
power consumption. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives