laptop audio
in [Laptops]
|
From: Stewart on 3 Nov 2009 05:42 The answers have certainly given me plenty to think about. I shall take a "tinny" cd along to the store and ask to hear it played. If the sound is not too bad then I think that I shall stick with the Acer. I have speakers that I use with my present laptop but that is clumsy; they are powered from mains; I see that some nowadays are powered from a usb slot. Thanks again. "Richard Bonner" <ak621(a)chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message news:hch86p$er5$1(a)Kil-nws-1.UCIS.Dal.Ca... > Stewart (him(a)invalid.supanet.co.uk) wrote: >> I want to buy a new 15" laptop and one of the main criteria is that it >> should produce reasonable quality sound when we are listening to the bbc >> iplayer, dvds etc.. > > (Snip) >> The Acer laptops are shown as having dolby sound but I am not sure if >> this makes a difference. it is not easy to try them out in a store >> otherwise I would take along a cd and listen to that. > > *** I would think that any salesperson would allow customers to try > out audio if it means a sale. > > >> Does anyone know of a brand that has reasonable sound output? My price >> range is between �450 and �550. > > *** The likelihood today of getting decent sound in anything in that > price range is low. They make them as cheaply as possible. If you want to > get a pro model, they might sound better but will cost you considerably > more. > > I think the suggestions here regarding external speakers may end up > being your best solution as far as sound goes, but would reduce > portability, and would extend the set-up time. )-: > > -- > Richard Bonner > http://www.chebucto.ca/~ak621/DOS/
From: BillW50 on 3 Nov 2009 22:11 me/2 wrote on Tue, 03 Nov 2009 18:22:39 -0700: > On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:54:40 -0500, Barry Watzman > <WatzmanNOSPAM(a)neo.rr.com> wrote: > > [snipped] > > :>What's sad is that this stuff is just plain dumb. There is no reason > :>for it, it doesn't really save anything, but "that's the way they are". > :> > :>For no apparent reason. > > Not to sound cynical but to me there is a very apparent reason. Built > that way they will, in most cases, work fine until the end of the > usual 1 year warranty period. Once it's no longer the manufacturer's > problem they would just as soon you buy a new unit than pay to have > one repaired. For example, that's why in quite a few cases the cost to > have a display or system board replaced is greater than the original > cost of the notebook. One thing I did notice in my 10+ years of > working exclusively on Toshiba is that the "business class" notebooks > that typically came with a 3 year warranty tended to have much fewer > hardware issues than the "consumer class" notebooks that typically > came with a 1 year warranty. Also the business class systems were the > last to get turned over to the ODMs at which time the standard > warranty dropped to 1 year on quite a few of them. > > BTW, I'm still using a 7 year old Toshiba 5205 that still works as > good as new except for 1 speaker failing. It has a 2.4ghz mobile P4, > 1gb RAM and a 1600x1200 WXGA display. Other than having to use the > standard vga driver it runs the windows 7 rc about as good as it ran > the original windows xp pro. There is no windows 7 support for some of > the proprietary stuff like the SD card slot, the bluetooth module, the > select bay card reader or the select bay tv tuner so eventually the > factory software will be going back on. > > me/2 I have been purchasing laptops since '84. And all except one are doing just fine (except for the original batteries). So while I believe there are some makes and models which doesn't last, there are many makes and models that just keeps on going and shows no signs of ever dying. It isn't the after warranty failure that seems to get me. But rather it is the advancing technology which makes them obsolete to me. So I continue to purchase newer and newer models. I usually get 3 to 6 years out of a machine before I replace it with newer technology. It was the 90's which seems to have turned out the most unreliable hardware IMHO. Some of those in the 80's wasn't too hot either. The modern day hardware I have, I still see lasting over 25 years from now. Although I don't think I'll still be using them for everyday use for that long. But heck, you never know. As I am not that impressed with Vista and Windows 7. And I probably won't be with Windows 8 and 9 either. ;-) -- Bill Asus EEE PC 702G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC Xandros Linux (build 2007-10-19 13:03)
From: Barry Watzman on 4 Nov 2009 00:12 Re: "Not to sound cynical but to me there is a very apparent reason. Built that way they will, in most cases, work fine until the end of the usual 1 year warranty period" Having worked for multiple PC mfgrs., I can tell you that manufacturers do not think that way. It does not make for repeat customers; sure, it gets the customer to buy a new PC, but if yours failed "too soon", it's more likely to be replaced with another brand (and it also makes for bad reliability reviews in "consumers reports" and other publications and surveys). The nice thing about PCs, from a manufacturers perspective, is that they are self-obsoleting, even without actual failure. A 3 year old PC is obsolete, even if it still works perfectly. Add to that the OS upgrade cycle (most people will not upgrade a PC from Windows X to Windows X+1, they will replace the PC). And, finally, a very real reality is that most people will even replace a PC rather than just reinstall Windows. All it takes is a bad or corrupted hard drive, a bad virus/malware infection or even just the routine "registry bloat" in a PC more than 2 to 3 years old, and you have a customer in the market for a replacement laptop. However, if the previous one had poor hardware reliability ... the replacement is more likely to be another brand. As for older PCs, however, I make a small part-time business out of refurbing and selling 1410/15 and 2410/15 laptops. They are still very usable, and I get $175 - $225 for them, on E-Bay and sometimes locally.
From: Richard Bonner on 13 Nov 2009 08:32
> Richard Bonner wrote: > > *** I have a couple of friends in, or associated with, the laptop repair > > business. Their general consensus is that the majority of today's laptops > > are much more poorly built than older models, with components that are > > underspecified or are not tested for value accuracy. Barry Watzman (WatzmanNOSPAM(a)neo.rr.com) wrote: > I have worked for laptop manufacturers, service laptops and teach IT > (specifically A+ certification and networking courses) at a local college. > I disagree with the part of your post which stated "components that are > underspecified or are not tested for value accuracy"; but I do agree > with "today's laptops are much more poorly built than older models". (Snip) *** I mispoke there. I should have typed "just specified". That is, the components just meet the requirements or have less headroom than they once did. As for the "not tested", I meant at the laptop end. Components are tested and graded at the manufacturing plant, but it costs the laptop manufacturers time and money to retest them. So I believe fewer do it, instead trusting the manufacturers to properly grade them, and that the components have not changed value between making and installing. -- Richard Bonner http://www.chebucto.ca/~ak621/DOS/ |