Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 17th Sep 2013 15:11 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems

With Intel's new Haswell chip, manufacturers can choose to either build slimmer notebooks or try to optimize battery life as much as possible. Dell has clearly shown its dedication to the latter with the new Inspiron 11 3000 series. Budget notebooks don't always have big batteries, but Dell claims the $379 Haswell version of the Inspiron 11 lasts up to eight hours and 20 minutes on a single charge.

Something I've been pondering for a while: if we can have high-quality tablets and smartphones at low prices, why can't we have high-quality laptops at said prices too? Cheap laptops are almost always crap, but this Inspiron 11 actually looks like it could reverse the trend. Since I don't really need an expensive laptop anymore, a cheap but still relatively high quality 11" laptop is right up my alley. Is anyone aware of any alternatives?

Also, when did Dell find the design stick?

Permalink for comment 572599
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[15]: Is it OSsified?
by woegjiub on Fri 20th Sep 2013 09:26 UTC in reply to "RE[14]: Is it OSsified?"
woegjiub
Member since:
2008-11-25

On windows 7 pdf files i open on the web opens in the browser. On windows 8 it opens in metro...


Then, that means you need to change the file association in the browser, as opposed to the OS.
Regardless, it's just a file association to an app you don't like.

I use my windows 8 install for testing a client app not for playing around with new "innovations" from ms so no i havent seen the new copy dialog. Ribbon interface is up there with metro when it comes to design f--kups.

Pity. It aids in discovery, and being hidable is better than having a menu constantly cluttering the window.

So finely ms figured out that they have to cleanup their code insted of relying on people to buy new hw to run their os. Good for them. But the same could be said about windows 7 if i am not mistaken

You are not mistaken.
7 is more efficient than vista, 8 is more efficient than 7, and 8.1 is even moreso.
It's quite refreshing compared to the "progress" made from the early releases through to XP/Vista

You do know that you can search in the windows 7 start menu aswell? And when do so in windows 7 you don't need to switch to a fullscreen start menu...

I do. There's no sense in just using a tiny portion of the screen for it, though.
OSX's mission control launcher is similar, as is unity's netbook interface launcher.
If it's not frequently enough used to be pinned to the taskbar/dock/whatever, or have a hotkey, it deserves more focus like that.

If you only want functionality when its applicable i do not understand why you want to clutter your start menu with information that is not contextual. If i need to start a program i do not need a "live tile" showing pictures. That is not contextual information when i need to start a browser or what not...

I do believe we just have to agree on not agreeing on metro being a pile of bubu or usefull...

So all the "live tiles" do not add clutter?

Because it's not just a launcher, it's a full desktop of its own?
The live tiles replace menu items, taskbar entries and widgets.
I have almost everything removed from mine, but just like people who insist on having icons on their desktops, sticking widgets on their homescreens/desktops or leaving scores of applications on their launchers, cluttering is permissible.

Browsers are often enough used that you should probably have it pinned or hotkeyed, but the full-screen is not distracting when one is used to it.

Indeed. It would seem as though it is as useless as arguing vim vs emacs or gnome vs KDE.
At any rate, when you talk of your distaste to people in the future, you should give concrete reasons, even if they are "I liked the old way, I find it distracting, I don't like how it looks".
Calling something "crap" and "useless" is borderline trolling, and you have legitimate reasoning behind your distates, so there's no need for it.

Edited 2013-09-20 09:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3