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?

Thread beginning with comment 572520
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[13]: Is it OSsified?
by woegjiub on Thu 19th Sep 2013 15:09 UTC in reply to "RE[12]: Is it OSsified?"
woegjiub
Member since:
2008-11-25

When using win7 my browser opens pdf files just fine. Why cant win8 just do the same..?

In win7 it opens pdfs in whichever application you chose as the default handler.
Windows 8 happens to have a metro application as the default handler, so you would need to associate the filetype with a desktop application.
Win8 will behave *exactly* like win7 if you just change the default app via "open with".

Aid focus? If one needs to focus on a start menu i'd say the creator made a bubu

When the user is looking for something, a huge cluttered list is more difficult to navigate. This method is simpler and more intuitive.
Regardless, metro is more than just the start screen. It's also about the modern application style with the tiling window manager.

As i nolonger have to play sysadm on windows systems i do not know much about the administration. But as a user i have found nothing has improved.

Surely you have noticed how much better the copy dialog is, the extra functionality available in explorer via task pinning, the ribbon interface's improved feature prominence...

Ofcause it's my oponion. I do not get paided to talk up some crazy shit as we could suspect others do.

What added functionality are we talking about here? The ability to switch to a touch start menu or something usefull? Please do tell. I aparently missed something...

You did miss something. Every desktop application has more features and uses less resources.
Also, the modern interface is far more than just the start screen. It also doesn't really have to tie with touch, it works perfectly without it.

I do not like the fact that my start menu needs to be fullscreen. I have yet to read just one good argument as to why thats needed.

I don't care if metro is young or not. It does not help me getting my work done faster so why should i go for a change?

How can a new start menu make me more productive?

Why do you have a start menu?
Trawling through a list is a waste of time, when it is far faster and easier to type 2-3 letters, hit return and have the correct application run via search.
The "all programs" listing is there for when one forgets the name of something, but apart from that, the tiles enable quick and prominent access just like pinned start menu apps used to.
Otherwise, it's <meta key><type2-3 letters><return>, and you're working.
Waving a mouse about fishing for something is very slow by comparison.
Please give a good reason for having a huge heirarchical listing when search allows one to get on with work faster.

The point of metro is to bring the dated and cluttered interface forward with modern trends.
Applications should be about *content*, not buttons and menus scattered all over the place.
We have hotkeys and gestures for that.
It's more intuitive to have functionality reveal itself when needed, and get out of the way when it's not.
Functionality should also be contextual, only being available when it's actually applicable.
These sorts of movements towards iHCI are a large part of modern UI design.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[14]: Is it OSsified?
by hamster on Fri 20th Sep 2013 08:22 in reply to "RE[13]: Is it OSsified?"
hamster Member since:
2006-10-06


In win7 it opens pdfs in whichever application you chose as the default handler.
Windows 8 happens to have a metro application as the default handler, so you would need to associate the filetype with a desktop application.
Win8 will behave *exactly* like win7 if you just change the default app via "open with".


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


When the user is looking for something, a huge cluttered list is more difficult to navigate. This method is simpler and more intuitive.
Regardless, metro is more than just the start screen. It's also about the modern application style with the tiling window manager.


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


Surely you have noticed how much better the copy dialog is, the extra functionality available in explorer via task pinning, the ribbon interface's improved feature prominence...


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 fuckups.


You did miss something. Every desktop application has more features and uses less resources.
Also, the modern interface is far more than just the start screen. It also doesn't really have to tie with touch, it works perfectly without it.


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


Why do you have a start menu?
Trawling through a list is a waste of time, when it is far faster and easier to type 2-3 letters, hit return and have the correct application run via search.
The "all programs" listing is there for when one forgets the name of something, but apart from that, the tiles enable quick and prominent access just like pinned start menu apps used to.
Otherwise, it's , and you're working.
Waving a mouse about fishing for something is very slow by comparison.
Please give a good reason for having a huge heirarchical listing when search allows one to get on with work faster.


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...


The point of metro is to bring the dated and cluttered interface forward with modern trends.
Applications should be about *content*, not buttons and menus scattered all over the place.
We have hotkeys and gestures for that.
It's more intuitive to have functionality reveal itself when needed, and get out of the way when it's not.
Functionality should also be contextual, only being available when it's actually applicable.
These sorts of movements towards iHCI are a large part of modern UI design.


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...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[15]: Is it OSsified?
by woegjiub on Fri 20th Sep 2013 09:26 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