I am going to have to go with the crowd that is all for the ssd. It makes things so much faster, and it's really worth it. The start up time is amazing. I wouldn't buy a computer with out one these days, and if I did I would for sure upgrade it just to have one. Speaking for ram for me 8 gb ram works on my laptop, but I for sure love having the access to the 16 I do on my desktop. The things I do on my desktop make that extra 8 gb needed for sure. I have been even thinking about adding another 16 gb of ram there, but I think it will be much more fun to put together another machine.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On 10/17/20, Norman <lists@thekingstech.com> wrote: Hello.
I'd say both viewpoints being expressed in this thread are correct given the perspective they are coming from.
Having people think before posting on social media would be a very good thing. However, arguing that a slower computer might make that more likely seems a little suspect to me given that most social media posting is done off phones and tablets.
> But I don't think it is relevant that you can't know what it is like to use an SSD drive
O yes it is. I would have said the same thing years ago but the difference in over all performance is very noticeable.
> I'm saying that I wouldn't spend fifty dollars or more for something I don't care about and that wouldn't affect, in any meaningful way, how I use my computer.
That's your oppinion, and you have a right to that oppinion. However, my oppinion is the exact opposite, i will and have spent an extra 50 dollars to have my ssd.
With that having been said, we all have a right to use our computers as we see fit and spend whatever amount of money on them we want to. We also have a right to make recommendations to others on how we would build a computer for them or what they should get. You can make your recommendation for the cheaper route and i can make mine for the more expensive one. In the end it's up to the person who asked the question as to which person's recommendations he wants to follow.
HTH.
On 10/17/2020 9:41 AM, Gene wrote:
Even if I used Windows 10, that has nothing to do with drives unless I get a computer with a drive. But I don't think it is relevant that you can't know what it is like to use an SSD drive until you do I except that if you know, you will have the experience to help base your choice on. If I can have that experience, without spending a significant amount of money to have it, fine. I don't know what the expense is now and if it is small, then it may not matter. I'm saying that I wouldn't spend fifty dollars or more for something I don't care about and that wouldn't affect, in any meaningful way, how I use my computer.
Also, in some cases, maybe a little slowness maybe an advantage. People rush so quickly from one article or post in social media to another that they may not have time to think properly about what they read. They may be so involved in rushing and reading that they get a certain rush. It is a cliché today, but a true one to discuss the lessening of attention spans. Maybe having a slower computer, as I used for awhile, gives them more time to relax and think. I'm not taking a pro or con position on that. I'm simply pointing out that the unquestioned assumption that the more speed is better should be questioned.
Even if I had the experience of using an SSD drive, I would still use a mechanical drive if there was a significant cost difference. What I do, most of the time, surfing, listening to streams, e-mail, occasionally working on a document in a word processor, none of these things are cases where a few seconds matter and the activity itself takes up almost all of the time while doing it. If someone wants the emotional satisfaction of having an almost instant response, fine. Most people don't know the emotional feeling of driving a race car. That doesn't mean they shouldn't have a typical car. They don't need to know the feelingg to make a decision based on how they will use it.
The drive question has nothing to do with Windows version, it has to do with speed.
Also, the reason I discuss this topic when it comes up is so that others will see different opinions and be able to decide which arguments they think make more sense. Of course, the individual will decide, but arguments and discussion may be important in some people making a decision.
Gene -----Original Message----- From: chris judge Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 11:21 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] 5g and me
I find it amusing that this topic pops up every so often. We kick it around for a week or so, then it just dies out with no resolution. Personally I have no interest in what others spend their money on. I don't drive and never will, thus I have none of the expenses a driver has. Every three or four years I treat myself to a new computer, and I usually buy a fairly powerful beast. Last year I chose an i10 processor with 16 gig of ram and a 512 sshd, as well as a 2 TB mechanical drive for data. Did I need all that? As N adult the only person who can, and should be answering that question is me. I would also like to state in closing that those who still believe there is no significant difference between a solid state drive and a mechanical one simply doesn't know what he/she is talking about, because if you have ever experienced the difference you would know, and while windows 10 runs find with 8 gig of ram even while running a screen reader, it runs better with 16. I know because I have both. Gene, I find you like to quote other sources when forming your opinion on things. Since you are still on windows 7, don't you think it's time to join the majority of us and update your technology experiences?
Chris Judge
-----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io <main@TechTalk.groups.io> On Behalf Of Carolyn Arnold Sent: October 16, 2020 6:59 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] 5g and me
It sounds like we have different computer needs and purposes, and so we get what suits us. One does not work for all, which is why there is a variety.
-----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io [mailto:main@TechTalk.groups.io] On Behalf Of enes saribas Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 5:22 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] 5g and me
It isn't like highway racing Its like buying a 50 dollar work chair instead of a much more comfortable 500 dollar one or so, which you will sit in for 10 hours. You will curse yourself for the few hundred you didn't spend because of the annoying lags, absence of features etc that are standard on premium machines.
On 10/16/2020 6:44 AM, Gene wrote:
If you aren't an ordinary user and your comments may not apply to them that should be specified in your comments. Also, if these defects are so terrible, please explain the favorable reviews I found. I simply don't believe that chincy, fall apart, or severely defective products are generally produced. That's an excellent way to alienate a lot of users and get a bad reputation that may taint the whole line, including more expensive computers among users.
I can't comment on your individual experiences but at the same time, logic dicctates, as well as the large number of favorable reviews that can be found for machines in the six to seven hundred dollar range and the occasional chea[per machine, that your generalizations are incorrect.
Three or four hundred dollars is a lot of money for a lot of people and buying a thousand dollar or more machine for a lot of people is like buying a racing car when you will be doing mostly highway driving and neighborhood driving.
We'll see what other people have to say.
Gene -----Original Message----- From: enes sarıbaş Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 6:11 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] 5g and me
Hi Gene,
I am not an ordinary user. When I purchase a computer, I will not settle for anything less than the best. This system, while still able to run browsers and regular websites ok, struggles and crashes freezes when running large websites. The difference in processor technology reached a critically dramatic point when I thhought replacing this was a good option. Every component on my new machine should at least provide a 100% improvement or more, even ram speeds, 1600 vs 3200.
Flaws on laptops on that price range are usually intolerable. A cheap case will not cool properly, and will bend or warp easily. For example, my laptop's plastic yields under the DVD drive. Cooling isn't fixable with a cooling pad. Unfortunately with the focus on portability cooling is taking a back seat with laptops. If fans are too small for the thermals, or if vents are too small, that throttles down the processor. For sighted people, the screens of such machines are terrible in quality. And a USB keyboard adds unneeded bulk to laptops. Look at a list of best laptops on any sight, and you won't see any machines in your price range that make those lists. Here is an article which describes why it makes sense to pay for a better laptop.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/dont-be-so-cheap-five-reasons- you-should-spend-more-on-your-next-laptop/
On 10/16/2020 5:53 AM, Gene wrote:
Few ports won't matter with hubs available and many people may well not need more than the ports offered. Keyboards, I don't know how serious a problem that is. My lapptop, I don't know if it is in the minority, as a very nice keyboard with large keys and a nice feel. While a keyboard that is more difficult or unpleasant to use than it should be would be an annoyance, at least when used at home, and laptops these days often replace desktops, its easy enough to use a USB keyboard. If this is a problem with many laptops, it is hardly a major flaw and hardly rises to the level justifying spending hundreds of dollars more to solve unless you use the laptop portably some or much of the time and you can't find a portable keyboard that satisfies your needs. Cooling? If you are talking about laptops, the person can use a cooling pad. Not a serious problem at all.
I don't know what problems you are referring to by material design. I'll look at the page, but the objections you have discussed don't justify spending more on a machine unless you want to use the laptop while away from home and a solution to a flaw makes its use unreasonably inconvenient, something I think won't happen with most of the flaws you have discussed. Then, too, people who live anywhere near a computer store or Walmart or Best Buy or other such stores can inspect computers in person. And there are always user reviews and reviews in computer magazines such as the best laptops for 2020 and other reviews such as the best laptops for 2020 costing under this or that amount of money. And there are lists like this, good places to ask what machines people are using and for evaluations or to ask about a specific machine or machines you are interested in.
In short, you can pick the flaw that either won't matter to you or will be easy to work around, given how you use the computer or you can try to find one without such flaws and I would think some computers without them perhaps many, if you look, can be found.
While your objection is interesting because it leads to a discussion of the ways to find a good computer, it doesn't justify spending more money for the majority of users.
Gene -----Original Message----- From: enes sarıbaş Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 3:10 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] 5g and me
Hi Gene,
Systems in that price range today have major flaws, iether few ports, cooling, keyboard, mouse, material design. You can view notebookcheck and similar technology sites, and read reviews for systems in different price brackets, and all of those systems will have their flaws mentioned. Whether these flaws matter though depends on the flaw or person.
On 10/15/2020 9:04 PM, Gene wrote:
And so are laptops. Your information is wrong. I bought a laptop about nine years ago, and certainly you would get more power for the same price now, for about 480 dollars. It has worked very well. It is not compromised. It doesn't have defects.
And no one said a 500 dollar computer is good for everyone. I'm not talking about gamers or power users. I'm talking about the majority of Internet users who stream, surf, use a word processor, record audio, and do other tasks that are not particularly demanding.
Gene -----Original Message----- From: enes sarıbaş Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 8:44 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] 5g and me
Just because you may consider a system adequate for your own needs doesn't mean it is for is for everyone. A system like that would have major compremises. For clerification, I am talking about laptop prices, desktops in that price range may in fact be midrange. What I am saying is a minimum system for anyone should have a 6 core or so CPU, 8 gb or 16 gb of dual channel ram, an I5processor etc.
On 10/15/2020 7:08 PM, Monte Single wrote:
Hi list, : enes sarıbaş thinks a 500 dollar computer/laptop is less than adequate for the average user. He is not the first person on the list to express such thoughts. The one time I spent more than that for a computer was for the first one I purchased; that was in the last millennium. If I spent 500 u s dollars on a computer today, it would be built with quality parts and be more than adequate for the average computer user's needs. : enes sarıbaş go forth and conquer, spend the big bucks. Hopefully it will stimulate the economy.
-----Original Message----- From: main@TechTalk.groups.io <main@TechTalk.groups.io> On Behalf Of Gene Sent: October 15, 2020 5:29 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] 5g and me
That simply is not true. A lot of people have machines in the five hundred dollar range and they work fine.
And five hundred dollar machines aren't just barely competent machines.
Gene -----Original Message----- From: enes sarıbaş Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 4:14 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] 5g and me
No, I would not buy a 500 dollar machine. In fact, I would exclude machines below a certain build quality as a matter of principle. Is saving every little penny really worth it for a device people use 12 hours a day or more? possibly? Those machines usually have more than one major flaw, and have barebone specs. I think a power user should get a pc above the 1000 dollar range, and a regular user, if they can aford it should go around 700-800. The difference between an entry level, and even midrange computer is very apparent in build quality, as well as components. A midrange system will probably have one or two important flaws, but a budget system will have three or more, iether bad keyboard, cheap material, poor cooling, etc.
On 10/15/2020 7:15 AM, Gene wrote:
And I suspect you spent over a thousand dollars to do what a five hundred dollar computer can do, less if on sale ormanufacturer refurbished. I don't know enough technically to discuss some of your technical points, but I'll say the following: The advice I see from computer advisors is that for the majority of people, purchasing a machine somewhere in the five hundred dollar range will meet their needs. And even if memory requirements have gone up for some programs, they haven't gone up nearly enough that more than 8GB of ram is recommended for the majority of users. That is the recommendation and it has been for years.
A little money here, a little money there, a more powerful processor, and pretty soon, you are spending five hundred dollars or more than you need to and gambling that your machine will last far longer than the generally agreed on length for reliable service, five years. I think it is a very bad gamble, not because the machine won't last longer, it may well do so, but you are spending a lot more money now for performance parameters that will be much less expensive when you replace the computer. And the typical user, buying a machine around the five hundred dollar range today, unless their uses change radically, won't have problems that will require a new machine probably for the life of the current one.
And what about technological changes itself? If you bought a machine in the Windows 7 days that was future proofed, in your opinion at that time, it might not run Windows 10 now. My understanding is, and if I'm wrong, I'm sure I will be corrected, that a lot of Windows 7 machines won't run Windows 10 because Microsoft now requires that different processors be used.
While I don't think that sort of thing will happen if one buys a machine now for use seven or ten years into the future and are attempting to future proof it, you are again gambling that newer technologies wohn't come along that will render your computer less useable, no matter how you future proof it now.
Gene. -----Original Message----- From: enes sarıbaş Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 6:27 AM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] 5g and me
This isn't correct. Browsers, and other day to day applications even, dramatically have increased ram usage, as well as CPU power. For example, Zoom will only let you blur the background of video if you have a quad core processor. If you buy a dual core as opposed to a quad core processor for example, it will struggle at even the most basic of tasks, and in 5 years, or even in a few years, programas even screen readers will begin to lag. This happened with my core I5 4200M. I thought a dual core was ok, though this was a system gifted to me. Had I been choosing my own system then, I would've gone for an I7, and now, this dual core is not even good enough for browsing. Large websites will freeze it and even when I had it, intensive apps like finereader will lag significantly independant of ram. This is exactly I future proofed my next laptop, with a 1tb SSD, 32 gb of ram, and an r7 4800H processor from AMD, with a 4.2 GHZ boost across all cores. This should be powerful enough to run anything conceivable in the next 5 or so years, except maybe AI workloads. On 10/15/2020 6:07 AM, Gene wrote:
I've seen others, and I believe you, too, make the future proof argument for buying a more powerful computer than the person's anticipated needs because it will be useful longer because you never know when your needs will change. I've always thought such arguments were not good ones. For one thing, a lot of people will continue to use computers in about the same ways as now and if they do use them in more demanding ways, those will not likely tax the computer if they buy a computer that isn't just barely powerful enough to do what they want.
Also, technology continues to become more powerful and cost less. So, in five years, the projected reliable life of a computer, you will be able to buy one to meet your needs then for less money than you are paying now. In addition, though it’s a gamble, many computers last more than five years, many significantly more. Every dollar you overspend to be future proofed that you didn't need because your needs didn't change and all the extra power of your computer remains unused is increasingly wasted, the longer your computer lasts.
It makes much more sense to buy a computer that is powerful enough to meet your current needs well if you don't anticipate major changes in how you will use your computer and are reasonably confident that you won't do things in future that will exceed the ability of the computer.
Spending one-thousand dollars to future proof a machine, just in case, maybe you use your machine much differently in the future, when you could spend five hundred dollars today and three hundred dollars in fived or seven or eight years for another machine that you would probably use in similar ways as you do now or not much, is a bad idea.
Gene -----Original Message----- From: enes sarıbaş Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 9:27 PM To: main@TechTalk.groups.io Subject: Re: [TechTalk] 5g and me
Hi Brian,
Just for clerification, I have confirmed 5g signals do exist in my area for my network. Even without the massive bandwidth, the lower latency itself will probably result in better quality improvements. Also, all versions of the IPhone by default include 5g.
On 10/14/2020 9:18 PM, Brian Vogel wrote: On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 10:11 PM, enes sarıbaş wrote: One reason, future proofing, I want to get the highest end version of the IPhone 12, though 5g isn't very wiedespread now, it will be in three years or so.- I am at a loss as to how doing this, now, squares with your own earlier assertion, "I think 5g is more significant for fixed wireless than smartphones."
Going to a 5G device now, when it is obscenely expensive, and where the ability to exploit 5G is limited to a very few locations, seems to me to be a supreme waste.
And 3 years is an eternity in the world of technology, and smartphones in particular, and what's Apple's flagship now, will be mid-range in 3 years, and much cheaper.
Going to a 5G smartphone now, unless you live in a major metropolitan area, is locking your money up in a frozen asset you cannot even use for its intended purpose.
-- Lenron Brown Cell: 985-271-2832 Skype: ron.brown762
|