Originally Posted by
nkedel
Moore's Law doesn't apply to screens, keyboards, or batteries, all of which provide fundamental limits to the size and weight of laptops separate from the processor/memory (and solid state storage, which kinda-sorta follows a similar trajectory.)
Sure.
And I didn't expect the screen, keyboard or battery to get
smaller. But the whole machine (touted as "equivalent") got
bigger.
Old New
Dell 6320 Dell 6440
Latitude Latitude
h: 1.2" h: 1.25"
w: 13.2" w: 13.31"
d: 8.8" d: 9.16"
weight:3.64 lb weight:4.68 lb
screen: 13.3" screen: 14"
That's a 9% increase in volume and a 29% increase in weight. The processor speed is the same, although there's more RAM and the hard disk is twice as big. But I was (foolishly) hoping for either a machine that did (a bit) more for the same size, or a machine that did (roughly) the same but was smaller. Instead I was offered a machine that did more and is a lot bigger/heavier.
Originally Posted by
nkedel
13" machines are very popular in the consumer space (and from Apple), but haven't gotten a lot of traction in business models, especially since the Lenovo X1 Carbon came out (it's a 14" model in a 13"-sized chassis, and probably the best business ultrabook out there.)
If there's a business case for 12" and 14" but not 13" that is, of course, a different argument than whether a 13" laptop in 2014 could be smaller and lighter than an "equivalent" 13" laptop in 2011.
Originally Posted by
nkedel
The new Dell XPS 13 looks like it's following a similar pattern, writ smaller; 13" screen crammed into a 12"-class chassis with thin bezels. Unfortunately, the XPS line isn't dockable, and hasn't done very well marketing to businesses compared to their Latitude line.
Our company laptops
are Latitudes, and in 2011 the default choice was the 6320 with the 13.3" screen.