The State Of Portable Computing

[PGHammer]

For whatever reason, everything seems to be getting "bigger" in terms of portable computing - "phablets" (and outright larger tablets and smartphones) are replacing traditional tablets and smartphones, while even notebooks are seeing larger screens - the 17" screen is becoming commonplace, and even larger screens are beginning to appear.  What I am wondering is what are folks doing with the additional screen real-estate.

 

I actually got "gifted" with a rather gently-used HP Pavilion dv4 (which was replaced by a larger-screened i3-driven touch-screened Pavilion practically-a-laptop with a 17" screen).  Any portable with seventeen inches (or larger) worth of screen, despite the increase in battery life in such portables, still strikes me as being too big to be called a notebook.  It's not really a desktop replacement - not with an i3; a real "desktop replacement portable" should have an i5.

 

I'll be doing a mini-review of this new-to-me notebook (it's currently charging - Windows 10 build 10041 Enterprise is on it) over the weekend; I'm still adjusting to one particularly welcome surprise - Hyper-V support.

[beanboy89]

Huh? The trend for laptops is that they're getting smaller. Most PC manufacturers are scaling back on the production of larger-screen laptops (16+"). Apple dosn't make a 17" model anymore, HP only offers three 17" models, Dell two. In all practicality, it's really difficult to lug around anything larger than a 15" laptop, which is why Ultrabook and smaller laptop sales have skyrocketed. A lot of high-end 11-13" Ultrabooks have high-resolution (1920x1080 or greater) screens, Haswell-based i5 or i7 processors, and great battery life thanks to their super-efficient processors.

[tsupersonic]

Huh? The trend for laptops is that they're getting smaller. Most PC manufacturers are scaling back on the production of larger-screen laptops (16+"). Apple dosn't make a 17" model anymore, HP only offers three 17" models, Dell two. In all practicality, it's really difficult to lug around anything larger than a 15" laptop, which is why Ultrabook and smaller laptop sales have skyrocketed. A lot of high-end 11-13" Ultrabooks have high-resolution (1920x1080 or greater) screens, Haswell-based i5 or i7 processors, and great battery life thanks to their super-efficient processors.

Agreed - laptops are going smaller. 15-17" laptops used to be popular almost 10 years ago, and the smaller you went, the pricier it got. Today's common standard is 11-14", with fewer options in the 15-17" range. I would say the EEE PC was one of the most popular models that started the trend in smaller laptops.

 

However, like OP mentioned, phones are getting bigger, and there are a plethora of tablets ranging in screen size. It's nice to not only have choice in screen size, but device type! With laptops, I just enjoy a high resolution screen, and that allows me to multi-task. If I have a dual monitor setup, I end up watching TV on one monitor, or being productive with both screens.

[T3X4S]

FWIW - an HP is not a gift.  If someone gives you a non-printer that says HP on it - its because they hate it, or hate you - plain and simple.

[PGHammer]

FWIW - an HP is not a gift.  If someone gives you a non-printer that says HP on it - its because they hate it, or hate you - plain and simple.

Why such a poor opinion of HP portables (or desktops, for that matter)?  HP isn't Toshiba - however, they ARE better than Dell (in my opinion, based on how much I have worked on both brands - portables and desktops alike).  And even Toshiba has had lemons (certain AMD-CPU models in their Satellite line - which the Pavilion competes with).  However, a person typically has a poor opinion of a company's products for a reason - I'm merely asking about yours.  (In my case, my rather poor opinion of Dell has to do with certain rather bad choices they made in certain models in their Dimension AND OptiPlex lines, rendering the quality hit-and-miss; more so than HP - in fact, as far as either desktops OR portables go, I'm more comfortable with HP than Dell.)

 

In the case of BOTH HP notebooks, I am the only person that worked on either for their last owners before me (in the case of the Big Pavilion, it was the last two owners) - so I actually have a history with the notebooks in question.

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Agreed - laptops are going smaller. 15-17" laptops used to be popular almost 10 years ago, and the smaller you went, the pricier it got. Today's common standard is 11-14", with fewer options in the 15-17" range. I would say the EEE PC was one of the most popular models that started the trend in smaller laptops.

 

However, like OP mentioned, phones are getting bigger, and there are a plethora of tablets ranging in screen size. It's nice to not only have choice in screen size, but device type! With laptops, I just enjoy a high resolution screen, and that allows me to multi-task. If I have a dual monitor setup, I end up watching TV on one monitor, or being productive with both screens.

 

15 inch notebooks accounted for 69% of Windows laptop sales during the first half of 2014, 17 inch screens took another 12%. 

 

If anything, 15 inch notebooks strike the sweet spot of price, screen size and portability.

 

However, I do disagree with the OP as I don't see the trend in portable computers screen sizes getting bigger (phones are though).

[blerk]

I would quite like to see a 17" screen in a 15" laptop body - much like how the XPS 13 squeezes a 13" screen into a 11" body. 

[PGHammer]

My issue with tablets is NOT resolution - but lack of physical screen size.  Eleven inches (or smaller) and 1680x1050 (or greater) puts together a combination of high pixel density and physically small dpi.  It may be great for video, but it has, at least for me, major problems as far as any sort of texty-type work (mail, messaging, writing code/development) - in other words, you wind up squinting on tablets.  The tradeoff in physical screen size is NOT worth it if what you do computing-wise is mostly texty - as opposed to video.

[T3X4S]

Why such a poor opinion of HP portables (or desktops, for that matter)?  HP isn't Toshiba - however, they ARE better than Dell (in my opinion, based on how much I have worked on both brands - portables and desktops alike).  And even Toshiba has had lemons (certain AMD-CPU models in their Satellite line - which the Pavilion competes with).  However, a person typically has a poor opinion of a company's products for a reason - I'm merely asking about yours.  (In my case, my rather poor opinion of Dell has to do with certain rather bad choices they made in certain models in their Dimension AND OptiPlex lines, rendering the quality hit-and-miss; more so than HP - in fact, as far as either desktops OR portables go, I'm more comfortable with HP than Dell.)

 

In the case of BOTH HP notebooks, I am the only person that worked on either for their last owners before me (in the case of the Big Pavilion, it was the last two owners) - so I actually have a history with the notebooks in question.

after working on thousands and thousands of computers over the years - you see patterns emerge - and when you see that certain companies rate #1 in warranty repairs.... welll - they dont call them Hewlett CRAPard for no reason.

IMO - there is no difference between HP/Compaq/Acer/Toshiba - all junk and cheap in price for a reason

[PGHammer]

Huh? The trend for laptops is that they're getting smaller. Most PC manufacturers are scaling back on the production of larger-screen laptops (16+"). Apple dosn't make a 17" model anymore, HP only offers three 17" models, Dell two. In all practicality, it's really difficult to lug around anything larger than a 15" laptop, which is why Ultrabook and smaller laptop sales have skyrocketed. A lot of high-end 11-13" Ultrabooks have high-resolution (1920x1080 or greater) screens, Haswell-based i5 or i7 processors, and great battery life thanks to their super-efficient processors.

That is why I asked about what their portables are actually being used for - apparently I should have added tablets to the question.

 

For all the high resolutions screens (in terms of 13" or smaller modern portables - including tablets), note that video, not text, is a major touted feature in ads for these same hardware sizes.  For all the complaints about tablets being unsuitable for anything other than content consumption - what is driving those comments is NOT screen resolution - most tablets today have taller resolution than my Big Pavilion's 1440x900, but have, at most, three-fourths of the physical screen size.  It's the lack of physical screen size - at least for me - that is the big knock on tablets in general.

 

The other problem (all portables) is that due to the need or desire for extra storage, additional external peripherals (external pointing devices, keyboards, etc.), actually getting comfortable while computing on the move is akin to building a nest (or a foxhole) - by the time you get done, you could wind up using more space for that nest than a desktop would. (That is, in fact, at the heart of my complaints about trackpad/touchpad DRIVERS in Windows 8 and earlier - it's also why I would much rather run Windows 10 - despite it being a pre-beta at best - on a notebook, and especially a legacy notebook - trackpads are actually usable, as opposed to being an afterthought.)

 

There ARE tradeoffs in terms of lack of physical screen size - desktop-formfactors computers were the first, and most obvious example.  Why would that not be an issue with portable computing?

[PGHammer]

15 inch notebooks accounted for 69% of Windows laptop sales during the first half of 2014, 17 inch screens took another 12%. 

 

If anything, 15 inch notebooks strike the sweet spot of price, screen size and portability.

 

However, I do disagree with the OP as I don't see the trend in portable computers screen sizes getting bigger (phones are though).

jjkusaf - those numbers add up to greater than three-fourths of the laptop/notebook space - that isn't exactly insignificant.

Yes - there ARE trade-offs in terms of portability in terms of larger screens - I haven't said otherwise.

The trend toward physically larger screens (in terms of phones) and larger physical screen sizes (tablets and phablets) mirror the SAME trends originally seen in terms of desktop displays pre-flat-panel (when Mrs. Smith's Pie Company was a major player in CRT ODM supplier lists).  Think about what drove the trend in desktops - where it appeared first.  What makes the same trend ANY different when it comes to the smallest formfactors?

 

(No - the comment about Mrs. Smith's was not a joke - or a snark, either. Most CRTs during their heyday that were manufactured in North America - and a not-insignificant number of those made overseas - sourced toroidal chokes - a critical ingredient in CRTs - from this company far more known for mince and apple pies.)

[tsupersonic]

15 inch notebooks accounted for 69% of Windows laptop sales during the first half of 2014, 17 inch screens took another 12%. 

 

If anything, 15 inch notebooks strike the sweet spot of price, screen size and portability.

 

However, I do disagree with the OP as I don't see the trend in portable computers screen sizes getting bigger (phones are though).

Source on laptop screen size? It's definitely feasible as there are a bunch of low cost 15" laptops around $300-500 price bracket. After using 15" laptops back in the day for college, it was a pain in the ass to lug back and forth to class. Not to mention the at best 2 hour battery life, so you had to bring a power cord. I'd much rather lug a smaller piece of hardware (2-4 lbs), and battery life has generally improved. My SP2 has what I call an "all day battery life." It lasts about 6-8 hours depending on what I'm doing. 

[Jim K Global Moderator]

Source on laptop screen size? It's definitely feasible as there are a bunch of low cost 15" laptops around $300-500 price bracket. After using 15" laptops back in the day for college, it was a pain in the ass to lug back and forth to class. Not to mention the at best 2 hour battery life, so you had to bring a power cord. I'd much rather lug a smaller piece of hardware (2-4 lbs), and battery life has generally improved. My SP2 has what I call an "all day battery life." It lasts about 6-8 hours depending on what I'm doing. 

 

http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/11/5990695/chromebook-size-market-acer-c720-core-i3

 

Sorry, I took a marketing class and part of my focus was on the chromebook.  Had to pull out my old paper to check the source.

[HawkMan]

after working on thousands and thousands of computers over the years - you see patterns emerge - and when you see that certain companies rate #1 in warranty repairs.... welll - they dont call them Hewlett CRAPard for no reason.

IMO - there is no difference between HP/Compaq/Acer/Toshiba - all junk and cheap in price for a reason

 

Actually HP, before and After the issue where all heir laptops died because bad parts from a parts supplier(mobo/graphics cards died, well technically the graphics card but it tended to kill the mobo sometimes when it went to, giving different error symptoms when it died) where and are the company with one of the lowest scores of returns per 1000 units for service in 5 years.

 

of course the fact that this error was hard to diagnose and thus wasn't detected and given a service note (free service within 5 years) for a very long time, partly because it often took a very long time to happen. resulted in the issue being on laptops sold for years, and then, each laptop could get the error anything from after a few months to several years later. meaning that this bad production run of the consumer grade laptops, killed their rating for years(since the stats are recorded on a 5 year basis). In fact it's not long since they got out of the 5 year window that affected them so their rating is just now starting to go back to where it should be, despite the laptops with the issues not having been sold for 5-6 years now. 

 

also you may see more HP laptops because HP actually allows and licenses local service companies to fix their laptops, whereas Acer for example ONLY allows their own central service centers to fix their laptops, Asus only allows a limited amount of licensed service shops of the larger kind to do it. Apple... well yeah, same as Acer. 

 

So basically within warranty period and often even outside warranty period, HP laptops would be the only ones you get. 

[astropheed Veteran]

IMO - there is no difference between HP/Compaq/Acer/Toshiba - all junk and cheap in price for a reason

 

You're certainly right about the first two since Compaq is HP. I disagree with you about Acer and Toshiba quite strongly. I'd much sooner throw Dell (they make up for it with amazing customer support) into the HP-crap-wagon before either of those. Yes, Acer is cheap and not very good, but HP/Dell are on a league of their own for sheer volume of Laptops I see with issues. And not sure why you mention Toshiba as they're absolutely solid machines.

[tsupersonic]

You're certainly right about the first two since Compaq is HP. I disagree with you about Acer and Toshiba quite strongly. I'd much sooner throw Dell (they make up for it with amazing customer support) into the HP-crap-wagon before either of those. Yes, Acer is cheap and not very good, but HP/Dell are on a league of their own for sheer volume of Laptops I see with issues. And not sure why you mention Toshiba as they're absolutely solid machines.

Blech to Toshiba. If you take care of the machine, they'll last. I had a Compaq that still works to this day (9 years old), sure it is slow as ######, but it still works. My Toshiba laptop died 2 days before the warranty expired, and the tech support was unwilling to help. My backlight died on the laptop display, and they claimed I had a virus. The kicker was they were willing to "fix the virus" for $35 over the phone. I have friends who have had bad luck with Toshiba - they are pure and utter ###### in terms of build quality and support. I haven't used a consumer grade Dell, but business grade Dells are decent (what we use at work). 

 

http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/11/5990695/chromebook-size-market-acer-c720-core-i3

 

Sorry, I took a marketing class and part of my focus was on the chromebook.  Had to pull out my old paper to check the source.

Nice! 

[Nick H. Supervisor]

I guess it depends on your definition of portable computers. For me I buy a laptop with a 17" screen and a mobile with the largest screen I can get, and that sorts me because they are both portable.

I've never had a need for a netbook, nor a tablet. My two other machines cover both of those in-between ideas, while still maintaining portability.

[Mockingbird]

Why such a poor opinion of HP portables (or desktops, for that matter)?  HP isn't Toshiba - however, they ARE better than Dell (in my opinion, based on how much I have worked on both brands - portables and desktops alike).  And even Toshiba has had lemons (certain AMD-CPU models in their Satellite line - which the Pavilion competes with).  However, a person typically has a poor opinion of a company's products for a reason - I'm merely asking about yours.  (In my case, my rather poor opinion of Dell has to do with certain rather bad choices they made in certain models in their Dimension AND OptiPlex lines, rendering the quality hit-and-miss; more so than HP - in fact, as far as either desktops OR portables go, I'm more comfortable with HP than Dell.)

 

In the case of BOTH HP notebooks, I am the only person that worked on either for their last owners before me (in the case of the Big Pavilion, it was the last two owners) - so I actually have a history with the notebooks in question.

 

Aside from the Surface Pro 3 that my brother had bought last year, my family has been buying laptops from Dell since 2006.

 

We have never has never of them failed. They all worked perfectly to this day.

[T3X4S]

I guess Toshiba in AUS must be made from another planet - over here - they have been garbage for the last 6-7 years.

[HawkMan]

You're certainly right about the first two since Compaq is HP. I disagree with you about Acer and Toshiba quite strongly. I'd much sooner throw Dell (they make up for it with amazing customer support) into the HP-crap-wagon before either of those. Yes, Acer is cheap and not very good, but HP/Dell are on a league of their own for sheer volume of Laptops I see with issues. And not sure why you mention Toshiba as they're absolutely solid machines.

 

Correction, Toshiba makes solid machines yes, they used to ONLY make solid machines, but the last few years in order to stay competitive, they have also entered the cheap consumer laptop market. and those Toshibas really tarnish the name of Toshiba laptops as they're Acer quality in build and failure rate.step up a 100-150 dollars in price and you get back to their quality lines though, same as HP. 

 

basially, cheap is cheap no matter hat the brand and logo. 

 

on the other hand, as far as qualiy goes, you won't find much that competes with HP and Dells enterprise line laptops. well Maybe Lenovo's enterprise line. 

[Draconian Guppy]

I guess Toshiba in AUS must be made from another planet - over here - they have been garbage for the last 6-7 years.

I thought this was a well known fact, that companies would sell their A+ stock to countries with strict consumer guidelines  A- to so so  and B to whoever?

[HawkMan]

I thought this was a well known fact, that companies would sell their A+ stock to countries with strict consumer guidelines  A- to so so  and B to whoever?

 

It's also about what line of computers you buy, as I said before, if you buy cheap you get crap no matter the brand. well as long as the brand sells cheap(in the past Toshiba actually didn't have a cheap lineup) 

[tsupersonic]

It's also about what line of computers you buy, as I said before, if you buy cheap you get crap no matter the brand. well as long as the brand sells cheap(in the past Toshiba actually didn't have a cheap lineup) 

Sure they did - Satellite series. They started at $400 back in 2004. One of my friends got it at Best Buy on Black Friday. Ever since then, Black Friday has had cheap laptops.

[PGHammer]

That is my point exactly - no company is immune from lemon-dom.  (Note that I whacked the AMD-driven Toshiba Satellites; not their Intel-driven models in the same series.  Note that my complaint about Dell's OptiPlexes - and even the Dimensions (which are their consumer line) - are about quality consistency.  I had seen good and bad from both OptiPlex AND Dimension desktops - which naturally discolors the "business-focused is better" meme in terms of Dell.)

[PGHammer]

Agreed there, Nick - I find both netbooks AND tablets too lacking in terms of physical screen size.  As it is, Baby Pavilion is at the lower limit of where I am comfortable; what saves it is the support for Hyper-V (a feature that Big Pavilion lacks).  One advantage that portability gives (in general) is that I can take either notebook onto the deck in he rear of the house (off the breakfast nook, in fact) and work/play/whatever from there.  (In fact, I've entered both this post and two previous from that spot.  Only with MASSIVE difficulty can that be done with a desktop.)