Small laptop

[zacs7]

G'day!

Anyway I know very little about laptops, but I'm finding myself needing one for various things, nothing big such as games. I'm chasing a small laptop, basically I've narrowed down a few in no order

* Dell Inspiron Mini 9
* MSI Wind U100 or the U90 which has a 80GB HDD instead of 160GB and a 3-cell battery instead of 6-cell (how big of a difference does this make?)
* Asus eeePC
* Acer Aspire One AOA110 Blue7
* Acer Aspire 5313-201G08Mi Notebook (tad big)

The last 2 are cheap and I like the sound of them :-)

Linux compatibility is a big issue for me, I don't wish to use Windows at all. Nor do I want Ubuntu :-)

So my question is, has anyone used/heard of the laptops on my list? And are there any others I should be considering? Around the $550AUD mark and small of course.

Thanks for any input!
Back to research,
Zac

[edit]
The MSI Wind's sound fantastic! I'd probably opt for the U90 because of the smaller screen... But the U100 does have a 6 cell battery.
[/edit]

[matsp]

Yes, One AOA110 Blue7 and 5313-201G08Mi Notebook rolls of the tongue quite easily, whilst Insprion Mini9 is decidedly difficult to say [Yes, I realize that you didn't mean "like the sound of in that way, but couldn't resist].

--
Mats

[Elysia]

If you want a 600 MHz single core processor, then Eee is for you... otherwise, not.

[abachler]

I used to work at an acer distributer. That was years ago, and I never messed with their laptops, but their regular hardware was good, and their case designs were awesome at the time. I'm old school though and prefer a big square metal boxes that stack nicely for a case, not some fancy multicolored crap with curves and an art deco power button. Anyway not to get off topic, the cells in teh battery are meaningless, look at the mAh ratings versus the power consumption of th emodel, that will let you know how long the laptop will run on a full charge.

[cpjust]

Nor do I want Ubuntu :-)

I don't know much about the different distros of Linux, but aren't they all pretty much the same, just a little different GUI...? Is there a particular problem with Ubuntu that I should know about (since I use it at work)?

[Elysia]

I used to work at an acer distributer. That was years ago, and I never messed with their laptops, but their regular hardware was good, and their case designs were awesome at the time. I'm old school though and prefer a big square metal boxes that stack nicely for a case, not some fancy multicolored crap with curves and an art deco power button. Anyway not to get off topic, the cells in teh battery are meaningless, look at the mAh ratings versus the power consumption of th emodel, that will let you know how long the laptop will run on a full charge.

Typically it's written in Wh, however. Both the consumption and capacity.

[matsp]

Typically it's written in Wh, however. Both the consumption and capacity.

Well, batteries are usually specifed in xV and y(m)Ah, e.g. 7.2V 1300mAh. To make that into Wh, you multiply the Volts by Amperes's. So a 7.2V 1300mAh will be 1.3 * 7.2 Wh.

--
Mats

[Elysia]

Sometimes they are. Rechargeable batteries are usually listed with their voltage and capacity in mA. But laptops, however, are usually listed with Wh.
Although it is written on them with voltage and capacity in mA.
And consumption is measured in Watts.

It's a complex and evil world we're living in, but it's reality. You need to know how to convert these, and in that, you are, of course, correct.

[zacs7]

I don't know much about the different distros of Linux, but aren't they all pretty much the same, just a little different GUI...? Is there a particular problem with Ubuntu that I should know about (since I use it at work)?

What I mean by that is, I don't want to mess around with a custom kernel or custom modules (only because of future use concerns) which a few of the smaller ones have (ie the eeePC). Don't worry, I plan to put my favourite distro on it (Arch -- a real distro ). And Ubuntu has a few "issues" IMO, it doesn't exactly teach good use of a few "Linuxey" things like "sudo". And if you've used Arch or Slackware (or similar) then you'd probably never go back to Ubuntu (basically build from the ground or largely pre-packaged like Ubuntu).

It's a toss up between the Dell Inspiron Mini 9 and the MSI Wind U90/U100 -- But MSI isn't exactly a household name... Although the wind has a 120GB HDD compared to a 16GB SSD for the Dell. I'm considering these two because the Acers are very hard to find in my area (and for some reason cost a fair bit elsewhere...). Any downside/upside to a SSD other than the battery life?

Thanks for the information about batteries, I'll look into it when I get a shortlist.

[cyberfish]

This may be an obvious thing but... have you seen those laptops in person and tried them?

The screen and keyboard (especially the keyboard) are a lot smaller than they seem in pictures.

Not that there's anything wrong with it, just making sure you are aware of this.

DID SOMEONE CHANGE THE DATE ON THE SERVER OR SOMETHING?

THIS POST IS ACTUALLY POSTED AFTER POST #14 BY zacs7.

[SlyMaelstrom]

Although is the life expectancy of SSDs lower?

No, they have a better life expectancy. There's no moving parts. They also handle drops much better than hard drives.

Wow... this is impressive, I some how quoted the guy who posted two hours after me. I think Cboard is having a little internal clock problem.

[cyberfish]

hahahaha this is really fun

[GanglyLamb]

I bought myself one of those eee pc's 8 days ago. So far I'm very satisfied , its the 900 version which came with windows preinstalled.

One of the reasons I chose the eee pc and specificly this one is because of the ssd drive. Not for the speed or anything, just the fact that there is no moving part makes me feel more comfortable moving it around while its running (i already had a couple of laptop hd's that broke down because of the constant moving around).

If you want a 600 MHz single core processor, then Eee is for you... otherwise, not.

You make it sound like its impractical, ive been running mysql, apache and php on it without problems. Ive installed eclipse (ganymede) and I just finished writing an rmi server on it without any problems or long idle times...


Anyhow, I bought this eee pc exactly because its this small, I can easily put it away in any of my bags without the need for a gigantic laptop bag. And all good things usually come with some down sides, so generally you will not be able to find a small laptop - notebook with very high specification unless you want to spend $$$$ on it instead of $$$. (considering a decend ssd drive can easily cost up to 300 €, which is the same as for the eee pc)

[zacs7]

I might go for the Dell then... because of it's SSD drive. And it's got a 1.6GHz CPU. Although is the life expectancy of SSDs lower?

> You make it sound like its impractical
I agree! I have a similar horse at home as my Linux box for servery things. It's just a MicroATX computer running at ~900MHz. Not slow at all, in fact it runs almost the same as my AMD 3800+ X2 with the things I do anyway (Arch distro, but 64-bit vs 32-bit...).

[edit]
Or the ASUS Eee PC 900HA?
http://www.harveynorman.com.au/produ...a-netbook.html

More research tells me I don't want a Dell. The Dell is off the list.
[/edit]
[edit2]
Woah, Time Dialation!

> This may be an obvious thing but... have you seen those laptops in person and tried them?
Yes, and hence why I want one :-)

[/edit2]

Okay I've decided I'm getting a Asus EeePC 901 12GB SSD. Mainly because of GanglyLamb's opinion, so he'll be to blame if I don't like it

[Elysia]

You make it sound like its impractical, ive been running mysql, apache and php on it without problems. Ive installed eclipse (ganymede) and I just finished writing an rmi server on it without any problems or long idle times...

Well, I did just say that if 600 MHz is enough for you, then it might be for you. For me, it's impractical because 600 MHz is so incredibly 5 years ago, and it does not even a dual core.
It's impractical because it loses system responsiveness and it cannot even watch movies in HD. Not even 720p.

I might go for the Dell then... because of it's SSD drive. And it's got a 1.6GHz CPU. Although is the life expectancy of SSDs lower?

Some, some not.
Some can only take about 10.000 writes I think (to each flash cell), which makes them a little short-lived, but typically they incorporate technology to spread even writes so cells won't wear out.
But some never SSDs can take up to 100.000. It's going to take several years and a lot of use to wear out that one.

Okay I've decided I'm getting a Asus EeePC 901 12GB SSD. Mainly because of GanglyLamb's opinion, so he'll be to blame if I don't like it

Well, at least it's 1.6 GHz. Not as far-fetched as 600 MHz.
Though still, myself, I'd rather wait until they have dual core.
But ultimately, it's your choice, so let's hope you will be happy with your new netbook.