A64 laptop suggestions please

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bx.Cornwell
  • Start date Start date
| On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 11:31:08 -0400, "Jason Cothran"
|
| >
| >| >
| >|
| >| HP has a nice one available with a very high res screen option on
| >| http://www.hpshopping.com
| >|
| >| Look for "zv5000z" series.
| >|
| >
| >I almost bought that one, but it has a far inferior video card than my
m6809
| >and was more expensive configured similarly.
| >
| What about the Compaq Presario R3000Z series? They are similarly
| priced and in some cases less than the e-machines. The big difference
| i see between them is that the Compaq has bluetooth and 64 meg
| Geforece 4 togo Video. They also have a really nice 15 widescreen
| display that looks very sharp, and you can get the 12 volt battery
| that will give you extended battery life. This is the one i am leaning
| towards though the e-machines is nice too

Exactly why I didn't buy one. The GeForce MX 440 video is horrible (let
alone the 420) in comparison to the Radeon 9600. Of course if you will be
using no 3d apps, that won't be an issue. The eMachines also has the 15.4
inch widescreen. Configured the same (except of course the video), the
compaq is $120 cheaper before rebates. The Radeon 9600 was well worth that
$120 to me, but of course I put the 3d accelerator to use. After rebate
(m6809 purchased from Best Buy), the eMachines is $100 less, so I actually
got better video for less (after 6-8 weeks lol).
Click to expand...
I am not into the 3d so much in a laptop anyway, and for what i would
use it for the Gf 2go 440 would do fine. What i really liked about the
compaq was the look, the sharpness of the display, the keyboard feel,
and just the fact that is an all around solid laptop. This is the
first compaq i can honestly say i would not mind owning. This is
probably what i would buy, plus in my eyes e-machines still has that
stigmatism of, to put it bluntly, crap. I know they have really come
up in the world, but that is a hard thing to get past.

if i don't go this route, i will probably purchase a dell latitude
d600 series as it is a nice, light laptop. Doesn't have the power of
the 64bit athlon, but it is quick enough, nonetheless for what i want
one for.
 
I am not into the 3d so much in a laptop anyway, and for what i would
use it for the Gf 2go 440 would do fine. What i really liked about the
compaq was the look, the sharpness of the display, the keyboard feel,
and just the fact that is an all around solid laptop. This is the
first compaq i can honestly say i would not mind owning.
Click to expand...

I agree, Compaq has always made quality equipment. However, I think the
"Compaq" branded notebooks are short-lived, as the HP branded (often
with almost identical features, but slightly different chassis designs)
are the ones that will be around in the future. (I.e., when HP bought
out Compaq, many of the Compaq products "stayed", almost as if Compaq
bought HP, nevertheless, the HP branded products seem to have more of
a future). As such, the HP version of the 64-bit notebook might be
a better choice, but other than that it's probably a toss-up.
in my eyes e-machines still has that stigmatism of, to put it bluntly,
crap. I know they have really come up in the world, but that is a hard
thing to get past.
Click to expand...

Very true. Also, there is nothing in the current market dynamics to
indicate that E-Machines will even be alive 3 years from now, the
competitive economies of scale and pure volume/competition from IBM,
HP and Dell is crushing. 5-10 years ago, there were 15-20 PC manufacturers,
many of which made notebooks. Today there are very, very few and the
numbers are dwindling.

One thing I'd really like to see is a market spring up in notebook
motherboards and chassis like that seen with desktops and ATX form-factors.
It would be very, very nice if you could go down to Fry's (or you local
equivalent) and pick out a notebook case, display panel, drive, motherboard
and battery like you can with desktops for very low cost. The problem is,
building a strong, reliable notebook case is far more difficult than
conventional desktop chassis. Getting numerous vendors to agree on a
single size chassis is probably even harder.
 
| I am not into the 3d so much in a laptop anyway, and for what i would
| use it for the Gf 2go 440 would do fine. What i really liked about the
| compaq was the look, the sharpness of the display, the keyboard feel,
| and just the fact that is an all around solid laptop. This is the
| first compaq i can honestly say i would not mind owning. This is
| probably what i would buy, plus in my eyes e-machines still has that
| stigmatism of, to put it bluntly, crap. I know they have really come
| up in the world, but that is a hard thing to get past.

I guess that is the advatage I have in working on PCs every day insteading
of paying more for less just because "it's cooler looking". I look for
function, not form. However, if The Compaq line is what you are leaning
towards, I would highly recommend the HP version instead. The Compaq is just
as "plasticky" as the eMachines. The HP's chasis seems a bit more robust.

And for the record, I have also worked on far more HP/Compaq PCs than
eMachines, but I presume that is because the early eMachines were pretty
much disposable <wink>.
 
FYI

There are far fewer laptop manufactures than laptop brands. Check out the
list at:
http://www.amdboard.com/athlon_64_notebook.html

IMHO
All things considered (i.e. most laptops are really manufactured by a few
Taiwanese manufactures and rebranded) I decided to ignore the brand
entirely and bought a feature rich EMachines M6809 at a good price. To
cover any future problems (inevitable with any laptop) I purchased Best
Buys optional warranty.
So far so good. I am successfully using both 32 bit (Win XP and Win 2000),
as well as, 64 bit (Win XP 64 bit and Fedora Linux) OSes.

Good Luck with your decision

[quoted text muted]
Click to expand...

I agree, Compaq has always made quality equipment. However, I think the
"Compaq" branded notebooks are short-lived, as the HP branded (often
with almost identical features, but slightly different chassis designs)
are the ones that will be around in the future. (I.e., when HP bought
out Compaq, many of the Compaq products "stayed", almost as if Compaq
bought HP, nevertheless, the HP branded products seem to have more of
a future). As such, the HP version of the 64-bit notebook might be
a better choice, but other than that it's probably a toss-up.
[quoted text muted]
Click to expand...

Very true. Also, there is nothing in the current market dynamics to
indicate that E-Machines will even be alive 3 years from now, the
competitive economies of scale and pure volume/competition from IBM,
HP and Dell is crushing. 5-10 years ago, there were 15-20 PC manufacturers,
many of which made notebooks. Today there are very, very few and the
numbers are dwindling.

One thing I'd really like to see is a market spring up in notebook
motherboards and chassis like that seen with desktops and ATX form-factors.
It would be very, very nice if you could go down to Fry's (or you local
equivalent) and pick out a notebook case, display panel, drive, motherboard
and battery like you can with desktops for very low cost. The problem is,
building a strong, reliable notebook case is far more difficult than
conventional desktop chassis. Getting numerous vendors to agree on a
single size chassis is probably even harder.
Click to expand...
 
| FYI
|
| There are far fewer laptop manufactures than laptop brands. Check out the
| list at:
| http://www.amdboard.com/athlon_64_notebook.html
|
| IMHO
| All things considered (i.e. most laptops are really manufactured by a few
| Taiwanese manufactures and rebranded) I decided to ignore the brand
| entirely and bought a feature rich EMachines M6809 at a good price. To
| cover any future problems (inevitable with any laptop) I purchased Best
| Buys optional warranty.
| So far so good. I am successfully using both 32 bit (Win XP and Win 2000),
| as well as, 64 bit (Win XP 64 bit and Fedora Linux) OSes.
|

Have you found any Xp 64-bit or Fedora drivers for the wireless card?
 
| I am not into the 3d so much in a laptop anyway, and for what i would
| use it for the Gf 2go 440 would do fine. What i really liked about the
| compaq was the look, the sharpness of the display, the keyboard feel,
| and just the fact that is an all around solid laptop. This is the
| first compaq i can honestly say i would not mind owning. This is
| probably what i would buy, plus in my eyes e-machines still has that
| stigmatism of, to put it bluntly, crap. I know they have really come
| up in the world, but that is a hard thing to get past.

I guess that is the advatage I have in working on PCs every day insteading
of paying more for less just because "it's cooler looking". I look for
function, not form. However, if The Compaq line is what you are leaning
towards, I would highly recommend the HP version instead. The Compaq is just
as "plasticky" as the eMachines. The HP's chasis seems a bit more robust.

And for the record, I have also worked on far more HP/Compaq PCs than
eMachines, but I presume that is because the early eMachines were pretty
much disposable <wink>.
Click to expand...


I work with them everyday as well (service tech and user), and i have
worked on compaq, hp, dell, gateway, and e-machines. In saying that,
if Dell came out with an Athlon 64 laptop, even if it was higher
priced, then that is where i would go. I know what i get with
HP/Compaq and i have concerns there as well, but for long term use, i
would still pick them over e-machines.
 
| On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 08:36:52 -0400, "Jason Cothran"
|
| >
| >| >
| >| I am not into the 3d so much in a laptop anyway, and for what i would
| >| use it for the Gf 2go 440 would do fine. What i really liked about the
| >| compaq was the look, the sharpness of the display, the keyboard feel,
| >| and just the fact that is an all around solid laptop. This is the
| >| first compaq i can honestly say i would not mind owning. This is
| >| probably what i would buy, plus in my eyes e-machines still has that
| >| stigmatism of, to put it bluntly, crap. I know they have really come
| >| up in the world, but that is a hard thing to get past.
| >
| >I guess that is the advatage I have in working on PCs every day
insteading
| >of paying more for less just because "it's cooler looking". I look for
| >function, not form. However, if The Compaq line is what you are leaning
| >towards, I would highly recommend the HP version instead. The Compaq is
just
| >as "plasticky" as the eMachines. The HP's chasis seems a bit more robust.
| >
| >And for the record, I have also worked on far more HP/Compaq PCs than
| >eMachines, but I presume that is because the early eMachines were pretty
| >much disposable <wink>.
| >
|
|
| I work with them everyday as well (service tech and user), and i have
| worked on compaq, hp, dell, gateway, and e-machines. In saying that,
| if Dell came out with an Athlon 64 laptop, even if it was higher
| priced, then that is where i would go. I know what i get with
| HP/Compaq and i have concerns there as well, but for long term use, i
| would still pick them over e-machines.

If eMachines made it, I couldn't agree more. However, it just has an
eMachine sticker on an Arima. I would likely choose a Dell also over a
eMachines (or Arima), but would not put them near the top of my list due to
the ones I have had to fix.
 
NoneOfBusiness said:
[quoted text muted] insteading
[quoted text muted] just
[quoted text muted]
Click to expand...

If eMachines made it, I couldn't agree more. However, it just has an
eMachine sticker on an Arima. I would likely choose a Dell also over a
eMachines (or Arima), but would not put them near the top of my list due to
the ones I have had to fix.
Click to expand...

As a professional developer for International software I have owned and
tested just about every brand. I even went to Taiwan and Japan to do
extensive on site testing on laptops and desktops (there are some weird
desktops in Japan). Personally I prefer high end IBM and Sony laptops
since they are both major technology innovators and tend to push the
envelope but neither currently makes 64 bit laptops.
Neither Dell nor Compaq have ever impressed me with any cutting edge
hardware worthy of a premium. (I think Dell just rebrands) However, they
do both have good reputations for service in the U.S. and if I was looking
to recommend a workhorse laptop for the technically clueless they would be
near the top of my list.

In short if you need hand holding go with the Compaq/HP. If you can handle
most software problems yourself save your money and go with the
Arima/eMachines but be prepared to surf the newsgroups and spend "quality
time" at www.planetamd64.com etc (i.e. don't expect any useful help from
eMachines).

Developer
 
Developer said:
[quoted text muted]
Click to expand...

Have you found any Xp 64-bit or Fedora drivers for the wireless card?
Click to expand...

Short answer NO
I don't have a wireless router anyway although I have used it while
travelling using one of the 32 bit OSes.

For Fedora Linux try these sites:
http://bellsouthpwp.net/s/e/sedlabs1/m6807.html
claims to have a long and complicated method of getting the wireless
working on an M6807 using a customized 2.6.4 or 2.6.5rc2 kernel update to
Fedora Core 1.

http://www.ckloiber.com4
Is an "unoffical" site run by a Red Hat employee who uses Fedora Core 2
on an eMachines M680x. He posts his custom kernels and installation
instructions but has not been able to get the builtin BroadCom card to
work. He suggests using a Linux compatible Wireless-B PCMCIA card instead.

Developer
 
NoneOfBusiness said:
[quoted text muted] insteading
[quoted text muted] just
[quoted text muted]
Click to expand...

If eMachines made it, I couldn't agree more. However, it just has an
eMachine sticker on an Arima. I would likely choose a Dell also over a
eMachines (or Arima), but would not put them near the top of my list due to
the ones I have had to fix.
Click to expand...

As a professional developer for International software I have owned and
tested just about every brand. I even went to Taiwan and Japan to do
extensive on site testing on laptops and desktops (there are some weird
desktops in Japan). Personally I prefer high end IBM and Sony laptops
since they are both major technology innovators and tend to push the
envelope but neither currently makes 64 bit laptops.
Neither Dell nor Compaq have ever impressed me with any cutting edge
hardware worthy of a premium. (I think Dell just rebrands) However, they
do both have good reputations for service in the U.S. and if I was looking
to recommend a workhorse laptop for the technically clueless they would be
near the top of my list.

In short if you need hand holding go with the Compaq/HP. If you can handle
most software problems yourself save your money and go with the
Arima/eMachines but be prepared to surf the newsgroups and spend "quality
time" at www.planetamd64.com etc (i.e. don't expect any useful help from
eMachines).

Developer
Click to expand...

Dell's business model does not allow for cutting edge equipment. They
usually tend to wait a while before introducing technology. This
allows them to keeps prices reasonable for their customers.
 
Which Fedora Linux do you use?
I installed Fedora Core 2 Linux on EMachines M6807 successfully.
However, I can log in only with the fail safe session/terminal.
All the linux directories and commands are there.
When I log in with the default GUI session, after typing in the userid
and password and press <return> key, the computer hangs.
What is wrong?
 
Which Fedora Linux do you use?
I installed Fedora Core 2 Linux on EMachines M6807 successfully.
However, I can log in only with the fail safe session/terminal.
All the linux directories and commands are there.
When I log in with the default GUI session, after typing in the userid
and password and press <return> key, the computer hangs.
What is wrong?
Click to expand...
Sounds like your X video driver is at fault. I'm not familiar with RH
Fedora but it should have something like the below list to configure the
video system and test it.

SEE ALSO
X(7x), Xserver(1), xdm(1), xinit(1), XF86Config(5x), xf86config(1),
xf86cfg(1), xvidtune(1), apm(4x), ati(4x), chips(4x), cirrus(4x),
cyrix(4x), fbdev(4x), glide(4x), glint(4x), i128(4x), i740(4x),
i810(4x), imstt(4x), mga(4x), neomagic(4x), nsc(4x), nv(4x), r128(4x),
rendition(4x), s3virge(4x), siliconmotion(4x), sis(4x), sunbw2(4x),
suncg14(4x), suncg3(4x), suncg6(4x), sunffb(4x), sunleo(4x),
suntcx(4x), tdfx(4x), tga(4x), trident(4x), tseng(4x), v4l(4x),
vesa(4x), vga(4x), vmware(4x),
README <http://www.xfree86.org/current/README.html>,
RELNOTES <http://www.xfree86.org/current/RELNOTES.html>,
README.mouse <http://www.xfree86.org/current/mouse.html>,
README.DRI <http://www.xfree86.org/current/DRI.html>,
Status <http://www.xfree86.org/current/Status.html>,
Install <http://www.xfree86.org/current/Install.html>.
 
Which Fedora Linux do you use?
I installed Fedora Core 2 Linux on EMachines M6807 successfully.
However, I can log in only with the fail safe session/terminal.
All the linux directories and commands are there.
When I log in with the default GUI session, after typing in the userid
and password and press <return> key, the computer hangs.
What is wrong?
Click to expand...

With apologies to Linux haters ....

Short answer:
boot: linux noapic pci=noacpi,usepirqmask

Longer Answer:

---------------------------
For Fedora Core 2 check out www.ckloiber.com. This is an "unofficial"
support site for eMachines M680x users run by a Red Hat employee. He
posts instructions and kernel updates and xorg.conf configuration file to
run the X.org X server in 1280x800.

--------------------------
I am using Fedora Core 1 which uses the X server from XFree86.org Fedora
Core 2 uses the X server from X.org. I had to update
the X server with the latest from XFree86
http://ftp/xfree86.org/pub/XFree86/4.40/binaries/Linux-amd64-glibc22/
(being careful to backup the old X especially the xinitrc file in
/etc/X11/xinit which nees to be restored to retain the RedHat menus).


In either case you need to set the right kernel switches in grub.conf.
(especially: noapic pci=noacpi)

Developer
Developer said:
[quoted text muted]
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
[quoted text muted]
Click to expand...

Short answer NO
I don't have a wireless router anyway although I have used it while
travelling using one of the 32 bit OSes.
Click to expand...

A brief update. I talked with Microsoft and AMD representatives earlier
this week at a 64 bit conference. They were both aware of the slow
migration of WiFi drivers. AMD in particular appears to be leading the
effort to get the drivers ported. I was less than impressed with
Microsofts support of the x86-64 platform. They seem more wedded to the
Intel Itanium architecture on the Server and dubious of 64 bit on the
desktop.

Developer
 
| On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 07:53:52 +0000, Developer wrote:
|
| > On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 01:59:35 -0400, Jason Cothran wrote:
| >
| >> [quoted text muted]
| >
| > Short answer NO
| > I don't have a wireless router anyway although I have used it while
| > travelling using one of the 32 bit OSes.
| >
|
| A brief update. I talked with Microsoft and AMD representatives earlier
| this week at a 64 bit conference. They were both aware of the slow
| migration of WiFi drivers. AMD in particular appears to be leading the
| effort to get the drivers ported. I was less than impressed with
| Microsofts support of the x86-64 platform. They seem more wedded to the
| Intel Itanium architecture on the Server and dubious of 64 bit on the
| desktop.
|
I recently read an article (can't remember where ...techrepublic???) that
said MS had pretty much halted x86-64 development to concentrate fully on
getting SP2 of XP out. I am sure they are still working on it some, but the
article led one to believe they had shifted the majority of the focus from
it.
 
Jason Cothran said:
| On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 07:53:52 +0000, Developer wrote:
|
| > On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 01:59:35 -0400, Jason Cothran wrote:
| >
| >> [quoted text muted]
| >
| > Short answer NO
| > I don't have a wireless router anyway although I have used it while
| > travelling using one of the 32 bit OSes.
| >
|
| A brief update. I talked with Microsoft and AMD representatives earlier
| this week at a 64 bit conference. They were both aware of the slow
| migration of WiFi drivers. AMD in particular appears to be leading the
| effort to get the drivers ported. I was less than impressed with
| Microsofts support of the x86-64 platform. They seem more wedded to the
| Intel Itanium architecture on the Server and dubious of 64 bit on the
| desktop.
|
I recently read an article (can't remember where ...techrepublic???) that
said MS had pretty much halted x86-64 development to concentrate fully on
getting SP2 of XP out. I am sure they are still working on it some, but the
article led one to believe they had shifted the majority of the focus from
it.
Click to expand...

strange... wasn't it MS that told Intel that they needed to put the x86-64
instruction set into their IA-64 processors? i thought i heard something to
that effect a while back...
 
|
| | >
| > | > | On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 07:53:52 +0000, Developer wrote:
| > |
| > | > On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 01:59:35 -0400, Jason Cothran wrote:
| > | >
| > | >> [quoted text muted]
| > | >
| > | > Short answer NO
| > | > I don't have a wireless router anyway although I have used it while
| > | > travelling using one of the 32 bit OSes.
| > | >
| > |
| > | A brief update. I talked with Microsoft and AMD representatives
earlier
| > | this week at a 64 bit conference. They were both aware of the slow
| > | migration of WiFi drivers. AMD in particular appears to be leading the
| > | effort to get the drivers ported. I was less than impressed with
| > | Microsofts support of the x86-64 platform. They seem more wedded to
the
| > | Intel Itanium architecture on the Server and dubious of 64 bit on the
| > | desktop.
| > |
| > I recently read an article (can't remember where ...techrepublic???)
that
| > said MS had pretty much halted x86-64 development to concentrate fully
on
| > getting SP2 of XP out. I am sure they are still working on it some, but
| the
| > article led one to believe they had shifted the majority of the focus
from
| > it.
| >
| >
|
| strange... wasn't it MS that told Intel that they needed to put the x86-64
| instruction set into their IA-64 processors? i thought i heard something
to
| that effect a while back...
|

I'm not sure, but it sounds plausible. It would really save everyone a lot
of heartache.
 
The method in www.ckloiber.com requires an USB keyboard which I don't
have.
Is there a method which do not use an USB keyboard to install Fedora
Core 2 Linux on EMachines M6807?

Developer said:
Which Fedora Linux do you use?
I installed Fedora Core 2 Linux on EMachines M6807 successfully.
However, I can log in only with the fail safe session/terminal.
All the linux directories and commands are there.
When I log in with the default GUI session, after typing in the userid
and password and press <return> key, the computer hangs.
What is wrong?
Click to expand...

With apologies to Linux haters ....

Short answer:
boot: linux noapic pci=noacpi,usepirqmask

Longer Answer:

---------------------------
For Fedora Core 2 check out www.ckloiber.com. This is an "unofficial"
support site for eMachines M680x users run by a Red Hat employee. He
posts instructions and kernel updates and xorg.conf configuration file to
run the X.org X server in 1280x800.

--------------------------
I am using Fedora Core 1 which uses the X server from XFree86.org Fedora
Core 2 uses the X server from X.org. I had to update
the X server with the latest from XFree86
http://ftp/xfree86.org/pub/XFree86/4.40/binaries/Linux-amd64-glibc22/
(being careful to backup the old X especially the xinitrc file in
/etc/X11/xinit which nees to be restored to retain the RedHat menus).


In either case you need to set the right kernel switches in grub.conf.
(especially: noapic pci=noacpi)

Developer
Developer said:
[quoted text muted]
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top