7 ms·

Please, by all means do post a link to a comparable new Windows laptop for $400, including a fast GPU, reasonable amount of fast storage (and not counting an SD

Please, by all means do post a link to a comparable new Windows laptop for $400, including a fast GPU, reasonable amount of fast storage (and not counting an SD card or such), a high-DPI monitor, and non-embarassing build quality. I'd love to see this.

chocochunks 7mo ago
The GPU in the Neo isn't particularly fast...nor is the storage. Neo makes loads of compromises to hit $600 with some of it's features. Even for $400 you can get Windows PCs with TWO whole USB 3.0 ports. $400 quickly hits diminishing returns territory. Like here's a $500 PC: https://www.amazon.com/Aspire-Copilot-WUXGA-Display-Processor/dp/B0DWNLN3KP https://www.amazon.com/Aspire-Copilot-WUXGA-Display-Processo... https://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-Aspire-14-AI-review-Basic-home-and-office-laptop-done-right.974950.0.html#c12912859 https://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-Aspire-14-AI-review-Basic... Twice the storage, twice the RAM, comparable GPU. CPU is a slower in single core, but comparable in multi-core. Faster storage. USB 4, HDMI, multiple USB A ports. Supports more than 1 external monitor. Yep, chassis and screen are worse but it's better in many other ways.
- philistine 7mo ago
  You're proving the point. The computer you found wins on the specs page for sure. But the proof is in the pudding; Apple makes money hand over fist because they focus on reasonable specs, and quality. The thing that kills a modern laptop is not a slow CPU or RAM on the chip; it's a cheap chassis that breaks. That's what makes people change their computer.
  - chocochunks 7mo ago
    Apple wins on the perception of being a luxury brand. That's it.
    - kstrauser 7mo ago
      That, and having a machine at this price point that people aren’t horrified to use.
      - chocochunks 7mo ago
        What makes it horrifying? Plastic? Is the only thing that's important the material it's made out of? I think there's many use cases where the Acer would be less horrifying to use than the Neo. Which device would be better for running a Linux VM for CS class homework for example?
        kotaKat 7mo ago
        Hypervisor.framework on the Mac, personally.
        chocochunks 7mo ago
        With half the RAM?
        ryandrake 7mo ago
        A vanishingly small number of end users (both PC and Mac) care about how much RAM they have. I'd be willing to bet that at least 75% of PC and Mac laptop owners couldn't even tell you how much RAM they have, or they mistake hard disk storage for RAM or vice versa.
        MrDrMcCoy 7mo ago
        Why bother with a VM for Linux on the Acer? Just run it natively. There's almost nothing that actually requires Microsoft anymore, and you'll get better performance.
        garbagewoman 7mo ago
        Its ok, your laptop is best, just go buy it already
- kstrauser 7mo ago
  So for $100 less, you get a markedly lower-DPI screen that's 40% dimmer, a slower CPU, hotter running, and a worse chassis. Almost no one's going to be slapping multiple external monitors on either of these. If they did, they might run into the problem where the Acer is often limited to 640x480: https://community.acer.com/en/discussion/733442/have-a-new-aspire-14-ai-external-display-resolution-will-not-go-better-than-640-x-480-help?tab=all https://community.acer.com/en/discussion/733442/have-a-new-a... That is not remotely in the same category as the Neo.
  - chocochunks 7mo ago
    You get twice as much RAM, twice as much storage. 4x faster storage too. You get a full sized HDMI port. You can do multiple monitors if you need to. It has a fan for better sustained performance. You can plug in a flash drive, mouse, monitor or other external peripheral without a dongle. Oh, and it's actually COOLER running than the Neo. The Neo costs a $100 more, needs a $30 dongle to connect to 90% of the stuff people have, has half the RAM, half the storage, slower storage. Has considerably worse I/O. But has a better screen and build quality comparable to a MacBook Pro from 2007. It's different compromises. Personally I'd rather have more RAM, storage and IO than a prettier case and better screen.
    - janalsncm 7mo ago
      You don’t need to buy Apple adapters. You can buy a $10 usbc to hdmi adapter off Amazon and it’ll work just fine. Same thing with the USB A ports. Not really selling point imo.
      - chocochunks 7mo ago
        Apple's official HDMI adapter is $70. I was already talking generic.
      - kstrauser 7mo ago
        Or just use a Thunderbolt cable to send video, power, and USB to a newer monitor with a single cord. That’s my work setup and I’d never go back. And yeah, USB A? I got a cheapo C-to-A hub for my dwindling number of legacy devices. There’s no remaining upside to A.
- yourusername 7mo ago
  The screen is also much worse. 60% SRGB coverage 1920x1200 300 nits vs 97% 2408x1506 500 nits. I'd pick the macbook neo for $99 extra.
- thrawa8387336 7mo ago
  Should be at least 4X the RAM and 4X CPU cores, just to run Windows at a comparable speed.

chocochunks 7mo ago

The GPU in the Neo isn't particularly fast...nor is the storage. Neo makes loads of compromises to hit $600 with some of it's features. Even for $400 you can get Windows PCs with TWO whole USB 3.0 ports. $400 quickly hits diminishing returns territory. Like here's a $500 PC: https://www.amazon.com/Aspire-Copilot-WUXGA-Display-Processor/dp/B0DWNLN3KP https://www.amazon.com/Aspire-Copilot-WUXGA-Display-Processo... https://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-Aspire-14-AI-review-Basic-home-and-office-laptop-done-right.974950.0.html#c12912859 https://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-Aspire-14-AI-review-Basic... Twice the storage, twice the RAM, comparable GPU. CPU is a slower in single core, but comparable in multi-core. Faster storage. USB 4, HDMI, multiple USB A ports. Supports more than 1 external monitor. Yep, chassis and screen are worse but it's better in many other ways.

philistine 7mo ago
You're proving the point. The computer you found wins on the specs page for sure. But the proof is in the pudding; Apple makes money hand over fist because they focus on reasonable specs, and quality. The thing that kills a modern laptop is not a slow CPU or RAM on the chip; it's a cheap chassis that breaks. That's what makes people change their computer.
- chocochunks 7mo ago
  Apple wins on the perception of being a luxury brand. That's it.
  - kstrauser 7mo ago
    That, and having a machine at this price point that people aren’t horrified to use.
    - chocochunks 7mo ago
      What makes it horrifying? Plastic? Is the only thing that's important the material it's made out of? I think there's many use cases where the Acer would be less horrifying to use than the Neo. Which device would be better for running a Linux VM for CS class homework for example?
      - kotaKat 7mo ago
        Hypervisor.framework on the Mac, personally.
        chocochunks 7mo ago
        With half the RAM?
        ryandrake 7mo ago
        A vanishingly small number of end users (both PC and Mac) care about how much RAM they have. I'd be willing to bet that at least 75% of PC and Mac laptop owners couldn't even tell you how much RAM they have, or they mistake hard disk storage for RAM or vice versa.
      - MrDrMcCoy 7mo ago
        Why bother with a VM for Linux on the Acer? Just run it natively. There's almost nothing that actually requires Microsoft anymore, and you'll get better performance.
      - garbagewoman 7mo ago
        Its ok, your laptop is best, just go buy it already
kstrauser 7mo ago
So for $100 less, you get a markedly lower-DPI screen that's 40% dimmer, a slower CPU, hotter running, and a worse chassis. Almost no one's going to be slapping multiple external monitors on either of these. If they did, they might run into the problem where the Acer is often limited to 640x480: https://community.acer.com/en/discussion/733442/have-a-new-aspire-14-ai-external-display-resolution-will-not-go-better-than-640-x-480-help?tab=all https://community.acer.com/en/discussion/733442/have-a-new-a... That is not remotely in the same category as the Neo.
- chocochunks 7mo ago
  You get twice as much RAM, twice as much storage. 4x faster storage too. You get a full sized HDMI port. You can do multiple monitors if you need to. It has a fan for better sustained performance. You can plug in a flash drive, mouse, monitor or other external peripheral without a dongle. Oh, and it's actually COOLER running than the Neo. The Neo costs a $100 more, needs a $30 dongle to connect to 90% of the stuff people have, has half the RAM, half the storage, slower storage. Has considerably worse I/O. But has a better screen and build quality comparable to a MacBook Pro from 2007. It's different compromises. Personally I'd rather have more RAM, storage and IO than a prettier case and better screen.
  - janalsncm 7mo ago
    You don’t need to buy Apple adapters. You can buy a $10 usbc to hdmi adapter off Amazon and it’ll work just fine. Same thing with the USB A ports. Not really selling point imo.
    - chocochunks 7mo ago
      Apple's official HDMI adapter is $70. I was already talking generic.
    - kstrauser 7mo ago
      Or just use a Thunderbolt cable to send video, power, and USB to a newer monitor with a single cord. That’s my work setup and I’d never go back. And yeah, USB A? I got a cheapo C-to-A hub for my dwindling number of legacy devices. There’s no remaining upside to A.
yourusername 7mo ago
The screen is also much worse. 60% SRGB coverage 1920x1200 300 nits vs 97% 2408x1506 500 nits. I'd pick the macbook neo for $99 extra.
thrawa8387336 7mo ago
Should be at least 4X the RAM and 4X CPU cores, just to run Windows at a comparable speed.