[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[no subject]
- <!--x-content-type: text/plain --> "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
- <!--x-date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 18:07:25 -0500 (GMT-05:00) -->
- <!--x-from-r13: eboregurnira ng rneguyvax.arg (Dboreg Vrnira) -->
- <!--x-message-id: 12296114.1131145646121.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net -->
- <!--x-subject: [ale] OT: $400 Laptop -->
- <li><em>date</em>: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 18:07:25 -0500 (GMT-05:00)</li>
- <li><em>from</em>: robertheaven at earthlink.net (Robert Heaven)</li>
- <li><em>subject</em>: [ale] OT: $400 Laptop</li>
Once upon a time (around 96-97 time frame) I bought a Compaq laptop that didn't even make the 3 year mark before it became useless. (first laptop ever sold for under $2000) However, these days the software feature/bloat growth rate is much lower than it was in the late 90's so computer lifespans are definitely getting longer. For instance, I've got several AMD Athlon CPUs in the 1.4-1.6Ghz range, that I'v had for several years, that run Linux (Ubuntu/Suse/Slack) exceptionally well for my needs. (browser/email/openoffice) If my wife wasn't already complaining about the 9 computers (5 running) in my office, I'd be very tempted to run buy one of those $400 models myself.
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Magee <mattslistmail at earthlink.net>
To: ale at ale.org
Sent: Nov 4, 2005 4:53 PM
To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts <ale at ale.org>
Subject: Re: [ale] OT: $400 Laptop
My last Wal-Mart watch lasted 3 years at a cost of $10. Sounds like a
good compromise to me.
If the laptop lasts 3 years for $400, I think that's a reasonable
lifespan for a budget product. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. At $400,
it would be hard to pick between this new unit, or an older but higher
quality used laptop. I suppose for 99% of the people out there, the
Wal-Mart junk is good enough.
James P. Kinney III wrote:
>On Fri, 2005-11-04 at 16:16 -0500, Paul Cartwright wrote:
>
>
>>On Fri November 4 2005 3:40 pm, James P. Kinney III wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If WalMart sells it, it MUST be crap.
>>>
>>>
>>I've got a 15 year old watch I bought at Wal-Mart.. still running, on
>>it's 4th or 5th battery. The inside light is long gone, but it still
>>runs and does what I want it to do.
>>
>>
>
>Every once in a while, they screw up and sell a lemon. Your watch is one
>of those. It hasn't broken yet thus denying WalMart a chance to sell you
>a new one that is planned to break after 18 months.
>
>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Ale mailing list
>>Ale at ale.org
>><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale">http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
>>
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale">http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
</pre>
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
<hr>
<ul><li><strong>Follow-Ups</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="00063" href="msg00063.html">[ale] OT: $400 Laptop</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> esoteric at 3times25.net (Geoffrey)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
<!--X-References-->
<!--X-References-End-->
<!--X-BotPNI-->
<ul>
<li>Prev by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00053.html">[ale] OT: $400 Laptop</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00055.html">[ale] OT: oh crap</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Previous by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00067.html">[ale] OT: $400 Laptop</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00063.html">[ale] OT: $400 Laptop</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Index(es):
<ul>
<li><a href="maillist.html#00054"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="threads.html#00054"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
<!--X-User-Footer-->
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
</body>
</html>