Performance, Size, Weight, etc.

[Randy Whittle <whittle@usc.edu>]

At 10:44 AM 9/5/96 -0500, James Gramling wrote:

>>        Basically, this is just the facts of life with respect to buying a
>>notebook machine.  These are the tradeoffs you make to have something that
>>weighs 4 lbs. and is as thing as a spiral notebook.  It will be the case, to
>>one extent or another, no matter *what* notebook machine you buy.  An
>>equivalent CPU on any desktop machine is going to be faster, and sometimes a
>>slower CPU on a desktop, given faster "other" components (video, HD) is
>>going to be faster too. 
>
>I think you are being to kind to the ibm.  Several magazines have done
>comparison tests with other notebooks, and found the ibm lagging behind.  In
>most cases the difference was attributable to the lack of an L2 cache, which
>in my opinion was a crucial and unbelievable mistake by ibm.  It's a nice
>box, but it is slow in relative terms, even compared to other similar
>notebooks.  I don't disagree with your premise, ie, that notebooks are
>usually slower than comparable desktops, but there's more to it with the
>560.  Take the compaq armada, for example.  In its stripped down
>configuration, it weighs only 5 pounds, yet with an L2 cache should be much
>faster than a similarly equipped 560.  Unless .9 lbs. is that crucial, why
>would one buy the ibm?  

        That's the point--that .9 lbs is *hugely* crucial to some us!  If
weight weren't an issue, I'd be lugging around a 7 or 8 lb. 760 series or a
Tecra, marveling at my big screen, huge removable hard disk, cool options
like putting in a second battery or second hard disk, etc.  These options
would all be very important to me if it was my only machine, but I consider
my notebook as a satellite of my desktop.

        I used to have a 750, which for its time was the *best* machine
around (though not necessarily the fastest).  It had something *really* cool
that had never been done before--a flip-up keyboard with easy access to all
these various parts.  You could even put a TV Tuner (and I did!) or a
cellular packet-switching doohicky phone thing in a bay.

        Over time, I've since realized I don't need any of that neato/cool
stuff.  Even the second battery in a bay isn't a huge item--I can easily
spend an extra couple minutes hibernating my machine and swapping
batteries--same result.  I've also realized that I have lots of heavy stuff
to carry, and the notebook computer was among the heaviest.  All it takes is
some time, and you realize that a pound or two of difference is *huge* if
you have to carry this thing along with some other stuff for a few hours.

        I've owned 4 notebooks, 3 of them IBM's (I admit--I really like the
ThinkPads, mostly because of the pointers & keyboards).  I'll admit I didn't
buy the 560 for performance reasons (though I did decide to go with a
machine with a Pentium).  But "performance" wasn't my main criteria in
selecting a machine.  If it were, I would have looked at all the benchmarks
and hunted for the fastest beast around.  I got the 560 for its form
factor/weight.  I looked at the Armada (also the Digital Hi-Note Ultra II),
and for 5 lbs. the Armada weighed, I decided I could either (a) get another
notebook with more stuff on it or (b) get a lighter notebook with just as much.

        I don't need a speed demon.  I need a machine that adequately fast,
but light enough that I'll actually carry it with me, rather than groan at
the thought of lugging that huge brick.

        In fact, it is perhaps for that reason, that I kinda got hooked on
the HP 100LX three and a half years ago (I just recently bought a 200LX
because my trusty 100LX started to fritz-out on the screen).  At the size of
about 4 checkbooks stacked on top of each other and a weight of 11 oz., its
the *one* computer I can *always* carry with me, no matter what.  It works
for me in many senses (contacts/phone numbers, appointments/scheduling,
notes, minor editing of text files, etc.).  In fact, I find the built-in
1-2-3 spreadsheet *very* useful on a frequent basis, even though I'm an
Excel afficianado.  It allows me to whip out some financial models on a
moment's notice with no difficulty at all, despite that I prefer Excel in
Windows--ut pulling out my notebook machine isn't always an option, and its
a *lot* slower to get up and running.  The LX turns on *instantly* and I'm
in business--turns off just as instantly.

        But of course, I don't find the LX adequate for many other uses, not
the least of which is E-mail & internet stuff (though I do know of *many*
people who actually USE the LX to do these things!).

        Anyway, that's portability to me, and that's all I have to say about
that!  (apologies to Forest Gump.)

-------
Randy Whittle		rwhittle@usa.net
USC Graduate School of Business    http://www-scf.usc.edu/~whittle