4 ms·

Another feature laptop makers could differentiate is easy repairability. I mean: Make the laptop as easy to repair as it is to repair a (self-built) desktop PC.

Another feature laptop makers could differentiate is easy repairability. I mean: Make the laptop as easy to repair as it is to repair a (self-built) desktop PC. This is an ideal that can never be reached completely due to the (e.g. space) constraints - but it can serve as an ideal to strive for. And either provide your modified GPU drivers with regular updates for the whole lifetime of the device (i.e. 3-5 years) or let the GPU vendor do the job. But don't make it hard/impossible to install the GPU vendor's drivers if you cannot regularly provide updates. Make it easy to find the drivers that you need to install when one sets up the OS newly. I've seen driver websites of laptop vendors where just the complete list of drivers is shown for hardware that might be used in some laptops of the family. Not fun. :-( Negatiate hard with Microsoft whether you can also provide Windows 10 Enterprise to your customers, where a lot more surveillance functions can be blocked (a large reason why a lot of German companies don't update to Windows 10 - only Enterprise allows decent blocking of the surveillance, but is hard to get).

colejohnson66 9y ago
For the “surveillance” (as you put it), can’t that be turned off with Group Policies? There’s a setting in there to disable the telemetry.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  Not really. Depending on the edition and branch you are using you cannot disable telemetry. If you have high assurance environment that use O365, the best path right now is Windows 8.1, which takes care of you until 2023. After that, assume that you'll use another platform and make appropriate application decisions.
  - walterbell 9y ago
    Can Win 10 LTSB be configured with equivalent assurance to Win 8.1 (or Win 7) minus telemetry updates? How realistic is application migration for the 2023 timeframe? MacOS requires a hardware change and the macOS/iOS landscape may be very different in six years. If applications wcan afford to invest in migration to Qt/wxWidgets, they can support all three of Windows, macOS and Linux. Electron-based (web) applications are consistent across platforms but memory/resource intensive. This might be improved with WebAssembly. The most efficient cross-platform app architectures are used by games, which combine a fast garbage-collected runtime (e.g. Lua) with native graphics rendering libraries. The downside is a complete absence of "native" widgets or semi-standard "web widgets". What could be the options for a high-assurance desktop application architecture of 2023? Let's assume that high-assurance and "cloud/SaaS" are separate markets. Even VDI solutions require an OS to run applications. OpenBSD + Qt? Qubes + unikernels + graphics compositing? Linux + Qt? A fusion of macOS and iOS? A reversal of Microsoft on Windows telemetry and data collection business model? The challenge is for any platform to achieve the scale needed to attract developers, an advantage which Microsoft is throwing away.
Tinyyy 9y ago
That will not affect sales in any significant manner, because most people don't care.
QML 9y ago
That gives me a question: why is the desktop market so different from the laptop market? Maybe because manufacturers are incentivized not to make modular parts because that would compete with their business models. But that doesn't explain companies like Asus which both makes personal computers and provide the parts. Perhaps the reason is because all the parts to make a laptop are custom for that size specification.
- PeterisP 9y ago
  Modularity directly increases space and weight of the parts, you can make a smaller/thighter/lighter laptop by sacrificing repairability. There are people who'd accept a bit bigger and a bit heavier laptop - so for them you put in more battery in that weight and space, instead of "spending" it on repairability. This doesn't apply for desktops because there noone cares about tiny differences in space or weight.

colejohnson66 9y ago

For the “surveillance” (as you put it), can’t that be turned off with Group Policies? There’s a setting in there to disable the telemetry.

Spooky23 9y ago
Not really. Depending on the edition and branch you are using you cannot disable telemetry. If you have high assurance environment that use O365, the best path right now is Windows 8.1, which takes care of you until 2023. After that, assume that you'll use another platform and make appropriate application decisions.
- walterbell 9y ago
  Can Win 10 LTSB be configured with equivalent assurance to Win 8.1 (or Win 7) minus telemetry updates? How realistic is application migration for the 2023 timeframe? MacOS requires a hardware change and the macOS/iOS landscape may be very different in six years. If applications wcan afford to invest in migration to Qt/wxWidgets, they can support all three of Windows, macOS and Linux. Electron-based (web) applications are consistent across platforms but memory/resource intensive. This might be improved with WebAssembly. The most efficient cross-platform app architectures are used by games, which combine a fast garbage-collected runtime (e.g. Lua) with native graphics rendering libraries. The downside is a complete absence of "native" widgets or semi-standard "web widgets". What could be the options for a high-assurance desktop application architecture of 2023? Let's assume that high-assurance and "cloud/SaaS" are separate markets. Even VDI solutions require an OS to run applications. OpenBSD + Qt? Qubes + unikernels + graphics compositing? Linux + Qt? A fusion of macOS and iOS? A reversal of Microsoft on Windows telemetry and data collection business model? The challenge is for any platform to achieve the scale needed to attract developers, an advantage which Microsoft is throwing away.

Tinyyy 9y ago

That will not affect sales in any significant manner, because most people don't care.

QML 9y ago

That gives me a question: why is the desktop market so different from the laptop market? Maybe because manufacturers are incentivized not to make modular parts because that would compete with their business models. But that doesn't explain companies like Asus which both makes personal computers and provide the parts. Perhaps the reason is because all the parts to make a laptop are custom for that size specification.

PeterisP 9y ago
Modularity directly increases space and weight of the parts, you can make a smaller/thighter/lighter laptop by sacrificing repairability. There are people who'd accept a bit bigger and a bit heavier laptop - so for them you put in more battery in that weight and space, instead of "spending" it on repairability. This doesn't apply for desktops because there noone cares about tiny differences in space or weight.