| gabriel rosenkoetter on Wed, 16 Apr 2003 21:15:15 -0400 |
|
On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 09:18:25AM -0400, Jason Costomiris wrote: > On Saturday, April 12, 2003, at 01:46 AM, Paul wrote: > Also, they weigh roughly a metric buttload. Huh? LCDs weigh almost nothing relative to batteries... There's some metal weight, but most of that is control circuitry. Increases in screen size might imply a slight increase in the metal around the screen, but that's typically aluminum. > I've yet to see a 16" laptop that's under 10 pounds! Except of course, > the 17" Powerbook, rather svelte by comparison.. ... which is a perfect counter example to your point. :^> And, in any case, 10 lbs? Sheesh. That's almost nothing. I've got (several, but only one working, so) an aging ThinkPad 760. It tips the scales at well more than, say, a new PowerBook, but if there's anything that bugs me about it, it's the *heat* that it produces on my lap (especially in this weather... tomorrow, I'll probably not care again, what with our expected 46 degree drop in high temperatures overnight tonight). If the complaint is that it's too heavy to carry... hit the damn gym, 'cause ten pounds is *nothing*. You were that much weight in *clothing* (count shoes and you double it; compare morning and evening and you probably triple it). If the complaint is that it's ten *more* pounds in addition to books/papers/whatever... get the hell out of the eighteenth century and carry those things on the laptop! All of this somewhat tongue in cheek. (But I really did stop carrying about half of my school books--the CS-related half--when I started carrying my laptop daily at Swarthmore. Rather, I carried the PDF versions of the text that were sold with the school book instead. Extra bonus if you're less than completely honest and simply burn a copy of that CD, or simply copy its contents, and return the text.) -- gabriel rosenkoetter gr@eclipsed.net Attachment:
pgp3IvcANczOk.pgp
|
|