I’m considering buying a laptop for work/play sometime in the next four months. The last time I bought a computer, the latest and greatest was always about 8 months away. While I don’t need top of the line now, I still want to make sure I don’t do something stupid like buy a computer two weeks before quantum desktop PCs hit the market. So, is anything up and coming, or am I safe in assuming that I won’t go obsolete anytime soon?
The only thing ramping up now are 64-bit processors. And you don’t need that for a laptop so forget you even heard about them.
Don’t ever think in terms of “but will it be obsolete in a year” since the answer is always yes.
But a new computer when your hate for your old one exceeds your mental restraint on your wallet.
I got an Apple iBook, and I’m really happy with it.
I recommend Apple for laptops…
Ha. good advice. I’m running a system that is about 3-4 years ‘out of date’. 1200 Mhz athlon and a Geforce II video card. But it is good enough for what i do.
You have to consider if you actually need an up to date computer. Unless you are playing the newest, best games out there it won’t matter much if your CPU isn’t 4 Ghz and your video card isn’t top of the line.
The number of transistors per square inch of microchip doubles approximately every 18 months (Moore’s Law). So the top of the line computer you buy right now will be significantly less powerful than the top of the line model you can buy next year for Christmas. I wouldn’t say half as powerful, because there are a lot of complexities involved, but the difference is noticeable. On the other hand, in 18 months today’s cutting edge PC will be a lot cheaper. So my advice to you is, buy the best computer you can afford so it will last a good while. You can get incremental upgrades to prolong its life, but you won’t be able to do that forever.
At the verge of venturing into IMHO territory, I disagree. Because the performance of a $1500 computer will not be better than that of a $750 computer, I think you should buy a cheaper computer - as long as you are prepared to buy another newer, better (and cheap) one in about 3 years.
Re: OP, I know of no earth-shattering technology that’s about to hit…
:smack:
What I meant to say is that the performance of a $1500 computer will not be twice as good as that of a $750 machine.
As others have suggested, if you keep waiting and waiting because you’re worried that something better and/or cheaper will come out, you’ll never buy any piece of technology, because they’re nearly always getting better.
I just bought a new desktop, which should be delivered in the next few days. It will replace my current computer, which is about 3 1/2 years old, and is showing its age. By the time the new one is three years old, it will no longer be anywhere near state-of-the-art, but as long as it does what i need it to do, that won’t matter.
Moved to IMHO.
-xash
General Questions Moderator
Well, you haven’t really told us what you want to do with it aside from the none too specific “work/play”. Just about any computer you buy these days is more than adequate for Word or Excel, email, surfing the Internet, listening to digital music and watching movies. So unless you plan on playing a lot of first person shooters, doing some CAD, 3-D rendering or movie encoding, horsepower is not an issue.
I mostly agree with what neuroman said about buying the cheapest laptop you can find. No great technological advances make a $3000 laptop that much better than than a $799 one. Although the more expensive ones will surely have faster processors and\or bigger hard drives as neuroman said, they don’t often justify their high price tag. In fact, most of the difference between a $3000 and $799 laptop will be in the form factor. You’ll find that $799 laptops are about the same size as laptops of two or three years ago and that $3000 ones are super-slim and weigh a fraction of their $799 cousins. If you’re a road warrior constantly lugging a laptop through an airport, this might justify the expense. For me, it wouldn’t.
Having said all that, none of the above applies to desktops. 64-bit processors, Serial ATA drives and PCI Express are just a few of the big changes coming to mainstream desktops by this time next year (actually, some will be here before Christmas).
Hahaha, great advice. I have a friend that hasn’t upgraded her 386 machine - it does everything she wants it to, so why change it?
On the other hand, I love the latest and greatest games, so I find myself in the market every six months or so 
-Lixi
I would have to disagree, cheap laptops are, well, cheap. They are built flimsily, prone to breaking down and often have many annoying design quirks. They often also take many shortcuts such as using desktop processors which means what you effectively have is a really small, integrated desktop that could just stand a 30 minute power outage but can’t be practically used in any mobile situation.
With laptops, the main things you should be looking for are:
- Size
- Battery Life
- Keyboard feel/layout
- Reliabilty/sturdiness
IBM is generally considered to be the Mercedes of laptops, highest quality. Other brands I would consider are Apple, Dell, Toshiba.
Of course, you can get an Athlon64 in your laptop if you want too - they are no more expensive then comparable Pentium4 & Pentium M laptops. In case you are wondering, the Athlon64s run current 32 bit code just as fast as the best Intel can come out with, and get a significant speed boost when running in 64 bit mode; of course, right now for 64 bit mode you have to use Linux; the 64bit version of WindowsXP is still in beta.
I doubt you will want a 64 bit processor in a laptop - they suck power and emit heat something awful, and I doubt there are going to be mobile versions of real 64 bit processors anytime soon.
They’re great for addressing more memory, and running some compute intensive jobs faster, but are not going to be that great for home use.
BTW, Moore’s law has slowed temporarily, but because of market conditions, not technology. 130 nanometer technology is now old hat, 95 nm is here, but 65 has taken a bit longer than people expected.
The next thing is not 64 bit processors - it is dual core processors - two (or more) processors on one chip. Sun pioneered this, and Intel has trashed a lot of its roadmap to do this. Design is a lot faster, and this will actually help you, since a lot of the background work your processor is doing now can be dumped to another one. I’ve used this in workstations (dual chips, not dual processors on a chip) and it works really well.
Don’t hold your breath though - this is going to take a while.
The Athlon64-M, has a similar power/heat profile as the Pentium 4-M. Of course, if you want a low power consumption/low heat laptop, you want to go with an Centrino.
As for dual-core processors, both AMD and Intel are going to be producing them sometime in 2005, so don’t wait for them.
I know that. I think that buying the $1500 computer is a more cost effective move in the long run, if you can afford it and if you do more than just read the Straight Dope and print out the occasional document. The $700 computer will probably have less expansion slots, less drive bays, integrated components that you can’t swap out (video cards and CD drives are common in this regard), and less maximum memory capacity. More RAM is often the easiest upgrade to make, but if your motherboard is capped at 512 MB or 1 GB you’re gonna feel it in a couple years.
I bought a high end Gateway about 5 years ago, and it served well until last October when I built my own system. I spent several hundred on upgrades over the years: a second hard drive here, a CD-RW there, a new video card, etc. If I had just bought a new computer a couple years ago, I would have paid more to get the things I wanted, and got stuck with a few things I didn’t want.
But if you don’t want to mess with all the components, your best bet may be to get a midrange computer every few years. If you like to play the latest games, don’t bother with a cheapie computer because it’s not gonna cut it. Most games will run on midrange computers, but you will have to lower graphic detail and such. Also, stay the hell away from eMachines. They use a lot of integrated hardware, you have to get drivers from them but they don’t update as often as they should, and they install a lot of weird software that supposedly lets them support your system better, but really just gunks up the works.
I just bought a new laptop a few weeks ago, and it replaced a 5 year old desktop system that finally bit the dust.
My MO is that once I buy a piece of computer technology, I IMMMEDIATELY stop looking at ads. Because sure as shit something will be on sale for cheaper or will have faster/bigger components.
You just can’t sit on your hands, because as others have said, you’ll never buy. But you do need to get a rational grasp on what YOU need, not what would be awesome to have.
Thanks for the advice. I’m not going to hold out, and I know that the technology is always on the move, but I just wanted to be sure I wasn’t oblivious to something really major looming on the horizon.
I plan on using the computer for audio production mostly. So, speed and memory will be important, as will plentiful firewire/usb interfaces.
This is something I’ve been wondering about lately. In 1998 I bought a $750 computer, and it was so out-dated (64mb of RAM that couldn’t be upgraded!)that I bought another one for $900 just a little over 2 years later. I still have the replacement one, but…It’s only got a 700mhz processor, can’t read dvds, can’t have more than 512mb of RAM and so on, so I’m looking to replace it in the next six months.
If a computer is only going to be appropriate for my needs for a couple-three years, am I really better off buying something fairly expensive?I want an alienware, but unless I win the lottery, that’ll never happen. I mean, I could get another HP for $700-1000+ and maybe have it for four years (the one I use now is an HP, and it’s given me less trouble than…anything) before I grudgingly admit it’s out-dated, or I could buy an e-machine or Compaq for half the price and replace it in a couple of years. Are e-machines and compaqs really so terrible they won’t hold out for a couple of years?
Like I said before, cheaper computers tend to have weirder, “easier” configurations. If you know more than a little about computers, you will get frustrated at all the limitations. But they work for basic computing needs.