5. I put the desktop under my desk, and with a wireless keyboard and wireless mouse, there is much less of a snarl on my desk.
6. The desktop has an optical drive I still use.
7. The desktop has lots of USB ports and they're all in use.
8. I can replace/alter parts of the machine without buying a new one.
9. Desktops are cheap.
10. I can build what I want with parts from newegg. Premade powerful computers are always "gaming machines" and I don't want a gaming machine that comes with a graphics adapter that sounds like a 747 taking off.
11. I want an all-metal case because a machine caught fire once.
Edit: 12. My desktop doesn't have a microphone or camera, so they cannot be surreptitiously turned on remotely.
> Premade powerful computers are always "gaming machines" ...
Only for consumer level ones. Higher end ones are "workstations" and can generally be specced from mid-range-consumer-level to almost-a-friggin-supercomputer-node. ;)
What? There’s a lot of laptops that hit their top clocks with no issues. The main problem is that doing so seriously reduces your battery duration and emits significant noise.
Pick anything over the 800$ range that isn’t a macbook and you’re way more likely to hit clocks than not.
The problem isn't hitting the top clocks, but sustaining them. Only the biggest "desktop replacement" class laptops tend to be able to sustain 120W+ CPU dissipation.
Note that workstation-class (H) laptop CPUs also make compromises on performance - the Ryzen 9 4900H is 8C16T but only has 4MB L2$, 8MB L3$, and a max TDP of 54W. A desktop Ryzen 9 3950X by comparison is 16C32T and has 8MB L2$, 64MB L3$, and a 105W default TDP (and will go much higher with even basic PBO if your cooling allows). The differences on the Intel side are even starker.
Hmm, I suppose it's fallen a bit out of favor recently, I don't see it quite as much as I used to, but it's pretty much standard terminology in the semi industry showing up in everything from academic papers to data sheets (commonly you'll see that as D$ and I$ - data and instruction cache).
Perhaps why I've not seen it before is likely due to localization - I'm in the UK and of course the Pound has it's own symbol, thus the connection of $ -> Cash -> Cache may not be so readily made.
Ignoring the discussion around TDP figures, I’m well aware of the power limits, but that was (IHMO) not the point of OP.
It’s obvious that it’s impossible at the moment to get 3950X performance in a laptop format, but you can get laptops able to keep temps reasonable with 35-50W, and that’s what a lot of laptop SoCs target as total power.
Those SoCs hit (and sustain) their top clocks, whatever those are for that specific SKU.
What I understood from OP is a common complaint for macbooks, that fail consistently to sustain their specified to clocks, because Apple deliberately under specifies their cooling solutions for better ergonomics (and design reasons).
> Those SoCs hit (and sustain) their top clocks, whatever those are for that specific SKU.
This is actually completely wrong. Almost no laptops sustain their top (boost) clock on heavy workloads. Most usually only sustain max performance for minutes (or seconds!) before throttling. Here's an example chart that shows how various premium Athena/Evo U laptops perform: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Asus-Zenbook-S-UX393JA-Laptop-...
If you are interested in how modern Intel laptop chips throttle and what base and boost clocks mean, you want to do a search for PL1, PL2, and Tau. For AMD chips, you will want to look up STAPM, Fast and Slow PPT.
Note that while a i7-10875H's top "boost" clock is 5.1GHz, the sustained "base" clock is only 2.3GHz. This is so low to be meaningless as a top speed. In practice, unless your laptop's cooling is absolutely terrible, you'll probably end up mostly running in the 3-3.5GHz range under full load. In comparison, on a properly cooled desktop system, a same-gen i9-10900K desktop system should be able to maintain a sustained (all-the-time) clock of about 5GHz (very close to its 5.3GHz boost). AMD chips scale a little bit better due to 7nm having better power efficiency and how PPT works, but the same ratio roughly applies.
I’ve actually worked with Ryzen SoCs myself (I do board design).
This is the problem with all the marketing BS. When I talked about “top clocks”, I wasn’t referring about “boost” clocks. I’m talking of the clocks that the SoC is designed for (that won’t appear on the box), i.e. a lot of laptops are not leaving “performance gaps” due to bad cooling, those SoCs are designed for that level of performance and attaching a fat copper heatsink won’t do much difference.
I had a lot of trouble with a client that complained that our board was not properly designed because the performance they were seeing was not “as advertised”. In the end we had to ship the whole thing to AMD, and have them test the system with a thermal sink. Everything was as expected.
If anyone is interested in this kind of stuff, your explanation is really good, so I won’t add anything because I’d probably do a terrible job :)
I agree that there's a lot of misunderstanding on clocks - I've been on the other end - evaluation and validation of embedded boards, including V1000 Ryzen SoCs, but I think I'd disagree somewhat with the characterization of clocks as purely "marketing BS."
Back in the day, most CPUs had had a fixed clock, but these days modern Intel and AMD chips simply don't - they all clock opportunistically, which depends on powers, thermals, but also workload (try running an AVX-512 loads for example). How do you characterize "clock" in this context? Base (minimum) and Boost (hard limit, now split to Max Turbo <2C and All Boost MC) seem to be reasonably sensible numbers.
Now we can argue semantics all day, but to bring it back around if you're just going to say "top clocks" is what the SoC was designed for at a specific workload/power envelope (In AMD's PB, that'd be PPT, TDC, and EDC) then every laptops will "hit their top clocks with no issues," but I'd say that argument (statement?) is a bit circular/pointless. ;P
Yes, but only with ear protection and while the battery can keep up. When the battery is out of power, the computer shuts off. Need to buy a better powersupply than the one it came with...
NVMe throttling from 2GB/s to 0.5GB/s is usually not thermal, it is an SLC cache exhaustion that brings a drive back to MLC/TLC packing mode. One can get samsung pro or a similar ssd and it will retain 2GB/s indefinitely. On cheaper drives, having a lot of free space (i.e. slc cache) may help. Not sure though what process can generate such sustained write bandwidth beyond few things like copying or video transcoding.
A well proven way to move heat out of a silicon package to prolong its ability to perform at its highest potential. And in a desktop, you've got room for 'em.
No, that's wrong. A heatsink on an NVMe helps to let it run its top speed longer, or forever. Has nothing to do with issues in your case, those things just get warm, and before it gets too hot the heat has to be transported away or they will throttle.
Specifically, a lot of NVMe are right next to GPU placed in PCI slot 1, which is a pretty constant source of heat under load.
I installed an EK spreader sandwich on my Samsung NVMe drive, and it made a massive (20° c) difference over stock. It was previously a bare stick with no surface area/thermal sink to pull heat away.
No. NVME's are rated to run at 0-70 degrees. If your case makes your NVME run at > 80+ degrees you should prob fix the airflow in your case as your prob running your CPU/GPU rather hot.
You do not need a case for that! The NVMe heats up on its own. There are a bunch of reviews going into that topic, because it just matters for high end NVMe drives. See for example https://www.computerbase.de/2020-09/samsung-980-pro-ssd-test... - though the 980 Evo did well without an additional cooler, and here it's indeed depending on the airflow.
You seem to assume it's the case that heats up to 80C or more, that's not true and also not necessary for NVMe SSDs to go over their limit. Your CPU/GPU has fans moving the heat away, that's a better position to be in...
I said if your nvme is reaching 80+ degrees then you should fix the airflow in the case. I did not say the case is 80 degrees. Any semi decent airflow is 100% capable of running an nvme without causing any performance issues.
Nope. That article states the the ssd was 'naked' which leads me to believe they removed the sticker off it. Those stickers/labels are use to dissipate heat from the controller, so you, you know, don't need a heatsink. They act as a heatsink.
No. Lol. Cooling anything other than the controller is pointless. You don’t get throttling from nand. I have the gigabyte x570 elite. That nvme cover does nothing. And unless you’re benchmarking the nvme I highly doubt you’re going to heat up the controller enough to notice it. So yup. I agree. You’re wrong. Let’s move on.
Man, they are benchmarking the whole SSD. I actually sent you the graph. The SSDs go over 80C and then throttle. Not all of them, but enough of them to be a real problem. The NVMe covers actually work in reducing the temperature, that's also in the graph. You are wrong and you seem to have no knowledge about this topic at all, you really should not be so confident.
Read and learn! And then accept when an initial assumption turns out to be wrong.
It’s not an assumption. NAND does not throttle. The controller does. Unless you run the SSD constantly like in a benchmark you are unlikely to heat the controller up to make it throttle. The airflow of a case is enough to keep an nvme within limits that everyday usage is not going to be hindered in anyway shape or form. You don’t need a heat sink. Linking to a constant load benchmark doesn’t change that. You’re wrong.
I do not understand how you can still think that after my explanation and after looking at the graph I sent you. One very last try - though I assume in the best case it's for potential other readers.
Go to https://www.computerbase.de/2020-09/samsung-980-pro-ssd-test.... look at the graph. You see that a bunch of them go to the 80C line or hover above. All of them throttle (what you said does not happen). In that graph are shown, going above the limit:
1. FireCuda 520 1TB
2. Patriot Viper VP4100 1TB
3. Samsung 970 Evo 1TB
4. WD Black SN750 1TB (+ the same one with a cooler)
This is only a small part of the market of course, but it goes to show that the throttling is a real thing that happens with multiple models.
Then you had a moving goalpost there, that those SSDs do not throttle under realistic workloads. However, this is a sequential read that's only 5 minutes long. Hardly unrealistic. The hour long constant load benchmark is a different graph, however, constant load is also realistic if it's longer than 5 minutes.
If you activate the other chart modes you see the measured performance, which shows the drops linked to the too high temperature, and that they did the same thing for write performance.
You can counteract this with a lot of targeted airflow and/or a heatsink, the heatsink will at least help move the throttling to a later moment. Gamersnexus had a very impressive demonstration of this, one where they did get this wrong: They had an article about a MSI SSD heatsink where they claimed it did not help (so the SSD did throttle! Again something you said does never happen), where it then turned out that it did not work only because their applied temperature sensors (glued them to the heatsink), and IIRC they also missed the higher performance they got regardless. GN often gets it right, stuff like that happens, but it made this one memorable and highlighted the positive effect of these heatsink coolers.
I'm into this topic professionally for years now. I'm not wrong here. If you can't take my word for it, look at professional SSD reviews, they have covered this also for years now.
And sure: There are scenarios where this does not matter. Gaming. Browsing. But: In those workloads there is no significant difference to a SATA SSD anyway. These NVMe SSDs are only interesting if you have large (and thus: long) file transfers. This is what they have to get right (and some do, but not all of them).
By the way, by repeating that I'm wrong and by starting with a straight "No", by always commenting without reasoning and politeness, you made sure that I will correct you - and that I'm not buying into your strange attempts to correct your statements to something that is correctish. They don't work anyway, these SSDs throttle.
But you don't know what causes the throttling. Its stupid to shove a heatsink on nand. It does not help. Not a single bit. Period. Under any normal daily usage, or even if you had a workstation, you're not going to be reading/writing so constantly frequently that you're ever going to cause the controller to heat up and cause throttling. If you experience any excessive heat. You have bigger issues in your case. Period. Your only proof of throttling is benchmarks running constant read/writes over a period of time. This is not real world usage and doesn't make it necessary to go out and start shoving heatsinks on every single nvme drive. If that was the case then all the laptops which have space between the nvme and the case, or motherboards which lack a 'heatshield' like the gigabyte board you linked to, would have throttling issues. Which they don't.
> You should change your tone around here.
So now you're threatening me?
-----
Anyway I'm done, not gonna sit here an argue anymore.
Unless you compile multi-gigabyte targets, all writes will likely fit in a ram cache and thus cannot be a real bottleneck. That is assuming your compiler farm can read and compile at GB/s level, which is pretty unrealistic.
To test that, one can try it with ramdisk first, before getting an expensive ssd.
And that is something else that is alien to laptops. Best laptop I could find (for when I am away from my desktop) is 8c16t, that makes a massive difference for compilation.
> I mean, hardware wise they are not much faster, but cooling is a different story.
The highest spec macbook comes with a 9980HK and starts at 2800 $. A 3900X has approximately twice the performance in multi-threaded workloads and you can easily build an entire quiet workstation with it for less than 1000 $. Half the performance, thrice the price. Great deal.
Yes, there are also "laptops" with a 3900X in them. But even those still have lower performance than a desktop with a 3900X because of thermals.
There are obviously many ways to do this comparison, but going off Wikipedia's pricing for most recent Intel processors. Their highest end mobile processor is currently the i7-1185G7 which apparently retails for $426. Let's compare it with the closest desktop processor to that price, the i9-10900 ($438).
Cores (Threads): 4(8) vs. 10(20).
Base Freq: 3.0ghz (At 28w TDP) vs. 2.8ghz.
Max All Core Turbo: 4.3ghz vs. 4.8ghz
Specs can never tell the true story, but it's clear that the mobile processor is going to be much slower for anything remotely processor intensive, and probably much more than twice as slow for anything making good use of multithreading.
Having had to go back and forth between a laptop and a desktop for a processor intensive application (AutoCAD) the difference was painful.
You also have to watch out for the powersupply of the laptop. Some companies give you a 70-90 W even though your computer needs 120 W at high load, counting on the battery giving the extra juice for the short bursts. If you do long processor intensive work, the computer just might shut down on you or if you are lucky, start throttling.
Yeah, this seems to be an unfortunate recent trend in some gaming laptops, presumably in a bid to save some weight and/or cost, but luckily, it still seems rare enough that any time it happens, the manufacturers still get called out on it in reviews. Usually, the power drain is when CPU+GPU are maxed out, not one or the other. I suppose if you did manage to get into a situation where this was an issue, you could find a bigger power supply. Up to about 180W these tend to be common and reasonably priced, then size and weight start going up dramatically.
While we're mentioning other minor gotchas, another one is memory latency and bandwidth. While desktop systems commonly have XMP and 1.35V support, very few laptops do (typically running at JEDEC timings at 1.2V). While there's diminishing returns, the difference between JEDEC 2933 CL21 or 3200 CL22 and say 3800 CL16 can actually be noticeable in certain workloads and is often effectively "free" (one-click in the BIOS) extra performance on the desktops.
MacBooks have terrible thermals. They will thermal throttle before most laptops, much less even compared to a desktop.
Also, laptops generally have CPUs that pull 15 watts. Whereas desktops have CPUs that can pull 95 watts or higher (sometimes up to 150). The difference is astounding.
The 15/16" MBPs have a 45W CPU TDP; they can run CPU continuously at at least 45W as long as your ambient temperature is normal-ish and the airflow isn't obstructed, and can do 60W+ if thermals are cooperative.
i3/i5/i7/i9 aren’t actually different processors, they make a handful of desktop/laptop/server... variants for each generation of Core architecture CPU and differentiate down the line by binning and restrictions added at time of production. So mobile i5 might have nothing to do with desktop i5, or i7 and Xeon can be taken from the same batch.
I have a >3 year old GPU that's still faster than any mobile GPU. I have been having 64 GB RAM in my desktop for ... 5 years now. Even in the summer my PC is completely quiet, even under heavy load. (Both the GPU and the CPU are water cooled with stock all-in-one coolers.)
If your fans are noisy buy better fans. We had some corsair fans that came with the AIO at work, replaced them with noctuas and the computer went from mildly annoying to dead silent.
Though with water cooling you might also have a lot of pump noise, especially if the radiator is mounted incorrectly.
The larger the diameter of a fan, the lower the RPM it can spin at to move the same amount of air (same cooling capacity) as a small fan. Provided you can put the air where it's needed (e.g. a 1 foot fan can't "focus" air onto a 6 inch radiator) a larger fan will just about always be quieter and more efficient.
Oh, and having a water cooled PC with the radiator and fan inside the PC itself is silly. If you run the pipes outside or into your basement, your PC is almost completely silent, plus the cooling capacity will usually be much, much higher, because not having to cram fans and a radiator into a small enclosure lets you make them bigger and more efficient.
Your parent commenter is talking about AIOs, which are premade water cooling systems. Fixed radiator, hard connected to a pump. Nothing you can route out of your PC.
And historically, bigger case fans have been problematic, those 200mm fans they tried to introduce some years ago. Bad static pressure if I recall correctly?
Also, I wouldn't call having a radiator and fan inside the PC silly. The case eats a lot of the noise already, it's the easy and the common setup, and good AIOs are quiet and cool well. But maybe you just wanted to share a cool big water cooling setup with everything noisy routed into the basement ;)
Best way I found to reduce pump noise is to insulate it.
In my case I have a DDC style pump, and its very quiet after I got a car wash sponge and cut a square hole in it and put the pump inside. It looks ghetto but its inside a case so who cares.
At first I was worried about heat, but its lasted 10 years so far.
You can minimize noise with oversized radiator area and low fan rpm along with good flow/noise ratio fans like noctuas notoriously good 120mm design. You can compensate in one area for another, i.e. by having such a gigantic radiator that fans are hardly needed. Quiet setups cost extra, for sure.
I heard a story about a DIY PC that did nothing but circulate water through the cpu cooler from a fish tank; the tank was big enough to dissipate heat through evaporation and other means, only occasionally needing a top off.
I actually mounted an automotive transmission cooler to the outside of my PC and made it part of the watercooling loop, because it was inexpensive and large. There are no fans on it, but it still reduces the work the standard pc cooling radiator with the fans on it needs to do.
This will be true for a long time - the design constraints are so totally different it would be foolish to use the same design in desktop and laptop systems.
The most limiting thing is TDP, which in the highest performance laptop processors is still capped at 45W, whereas a maxed out desktop processor can draw 100W or more.
> The most limiting thing is TDP, which in the highest performance laptop processors is still capped at 45W, whereas a maxed out desktop processor can draw 100W or more.
Maybe a small desktop. My desktop processor is 180W TDP (Threadripper 1950x), while some others are 250W TDP. You can also get a dual-socket workstation, for 2x CPUs (both pulling 200W each).
Thermals and power are significantly higher on desktops, it ain't even funny. Laptops win in power-efficiency, but absolute performance is always going to be a Desktop.
My workstation has a 3990x in it. It may not be the fastest single threaded machine out there but there isn't a laptop available right now with 64 cores (128 with hyperthreading if that supports your workload). As a c++ developer, compilation speed is p0 to me and there isn't a laptop that comes even close.
The trend in laptops has been for longer battery life and less heat. Since there haven't been any major breakthroughs in battery technology or mobile processor power (at least from Intel), this means lower power for processors and generally lower performance in general. Almost all laptops are using ultra low voltage Intel chips. And even the ones that don't, except for high end gaming laptops, thermally throttle ALL the time.
As a result, your 10 year old desktop is probably 50-100% faster than the most expensive Macbook Pro or Thinkpad. It can be quite astonishing swapping to even an old desktop after using a laptop for a long time.
Eventually laptops will be so optimized for battery life, and display ads will be so aggressive, that you'll have to run chromium in the cloud and your thin client will be shut down the moment anyone accuses you of being a fascist. https://blog.cloudflare.com/browser-beta/
I know you put the Intel disclaimer in there, but I just bought a laptop with an AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS and am loving it. It has me pretty hyped to get an AMD processor for the first time for my desktop when the 5900 launches in November. But the laptop chip has far exceeded my expectations.
I have to agree that the latest AMD Renoir processors are beasts - I have 4800H in a laptop that can sustain 54W TDP OOTB and CPU benchmarks are within spitting distance of my 3700X workstation. Amazing for a 1.5kg portable package.
I'm planning to drop in a 5950X upgrade in the workstation in a couple weeks as well. Looking forward to both the huge multi-threaded and IPC gains.
What example configuration machine from a decade ago can match (or beat) a current-gen maxed-out Thinkpad or Macbook Pro in raw performance? Those laptops are quite speedy compared to something from 2010
Slight exaggeration on my part. I was thinking of my old desktop which is about 6 years old - taking about half the time to compile a project compared to my brand new MBP.
I mean it mostly depends on what you do no? But all I need is for my job is a terminal session open. A macbook from 2010 can (and does) do that fine for me. I don't need the 85% of the specs I never use and I suspect the same applies to the author.
not only is it still true, there's never been evidence it's not been true or that it's going away.
Time after time, as someone who's been working on his 10 year old desktop (with a replacement ssd + graphics card when the old one died), I meet devs and analysts using laptops who reason more or less: "well it says i7 and it says x GHz and it says ddr3/4 and it's got a gpu with the same marketing number, so laptops perform the same as desktops cause they have the same hardware in them don't they".
Clearly, what they really mean is "I've never worked with and compared with a desktop". I suppose one of the problems is that SOME of them that have 'used desktops' were actually using neutered VMs in a shared corporate environment that run really poorly and are pretty underspec'd in a shared environment.
But every time, it's actually been the case that not only is the desktop faster and cheaper, but things usually remained faster on an X year old desktop hardware vs more modern laptops for any serious workload.
Edit: and in case it needs to be said, I have both desktops and multiple portable devices in my household because the downside of desktops is clearly portability.
I usually build a desktop for $4-500, because I reuse parts from the older one, and don't need a gamer graphics card. I blow the money on the mobo, CPU, and lots of ram.
As a gamer I've fallen into upgrading my CPU/mobo/ram and GPU in an alternating fashion every 2ish years.
I might break the pattern this year though, I got a 3900x last year around launch and moved my 4670k to a home server. I've been pretty impressed with the 3900x while the 4670k has been maxing out all cores in the server for some tasks so was considering buying a second 3900X(T) to replace the 4670k again. But with the rumours about the 5900X, I might end up putting the 5900X in my desktop at the same time as a 3000 series GPU and moving the 3900x to my home server.
Same, I saved my ssd/hdd, gpu and case and built a ryzen 3700x with 16gb of ram for less than 400 dollars altogether. My 1k USD laptop has half of that computing power, easily.
My Aero 15 would never throttle, with a 7700HQ + 1060. There was a 700mhz penalty in that generation (3.5ghz vs 4.2ghz for the 7700k), but I kept it pegged for hours and it was rock solid.
Most laptop cooling is awful, but you can certainly find laptops that are well built if you look for it.
Not sure you should weigh bloatware, either. You can trivially install a fresh Windows or Linux and you have to on a custom built PC anyway. If you buy a premade PC, it probably comes with the same crap.
For what it's worth, I switched to a desktop once the core race heated up - now I've got a 12 core 3900X.
I can't believe how much faster it is when it's using all the cores. Night and day. Highly recommended. And 12 cores is barely scratching the surface of the crazy workstations you can build these days.
For tasks 4 threads and less, it would be a bit faster than a current gen Intel laptop chip, but I don't think it would have been worth the portability penalty to me personally if that's all I did with it.
You answered your own question: CPUs are throttled down when there is too much heat. That happens all the time in a laptop. A desktop with enough air flow never has that problem (unless overclocked).
It depends on your definition of throttled. A CPU that was totally unthrottled would just sit at its boost clock under sustained load, but even desktop CPUs can't manage that, dropping to their base if too much heat is generated. Of course, there are laptops that can't even sustain the base clocks, but some have enough cooling to match that.
The base clock rate is typically defined as the sustainable speed. Intel literally calls Turbo Boost "algorithmic overclocking".
The problem is this base clock speed is given by the CPU manufacturer not the laptop maker. And Intel wouldn't know what kind of laptop it's getting crammed into. So careful definitions don't really help. Desktops are already big clunky things that have to be kept plugged in, I can trust them a lot more to deliver the CPU's promised performance. Whereas laptops are notoriously making compromises because customers tend to be very unrealistic about noise, battery life, etc.
The amount of raw power you can drive will "always" be contingent upon your ability to dissipate heat. And the second law of thermodynamics being what it is, that ability is relative to the space you have (assuming you're using similar cooling technologies in both cases).
Laptops being power-conscious, they're usually much closer to the point of maximum efficiency on the power curve. In that sense you get better performance per watt. But that's negated by the increased front cost.
AFAIK mobile CPUs max out at 8 physical cores, whereas you can get 16 at the higher end of mainstream in desktops, and up to 64 in the enthusiast segment. Core count isn't the whole story, obviously, but an important consideration for many applications.
Now heat and power consumption is the bottleneck of laptop performance. Performance laptops uses same CPU silicon to desktop (even different SKU, especially Intel) but their performance is limited.
I didn't see any specific numbers in reply to your comment, so I just want to point out that base clock Ghz for Intel and AMD is much higher for desktop CPUs than laptops. For your average click-read cycle, this feels better.
At full load, it depends on the heat dissipation; Dell's Precision 7XX0 dissipates heat well enough to keep the CPUs from throttling, but the 5XX0 does not.
I've worked on a laptop for the past decade but I use a dedicated keyboard, mouse almost exclusively and a large 34'' monitor (2x24 previously).
Advantages of using a laptop :
- portability - I work as a consultant and I need to work on premises occasionally - if I had to switch between desktop/laptop it would be too cumbersome
- standalone when you need it - when I travel or am on vacation I usually need to do a few hours of work - I won't lug my full setup but I'm 100% ready on the go
- can develop for OSX/iOS with MBP
Disadvantages :
- thermals - I use a fully loaded 2018 i9 MBP and I have to undrvolt/disable turbo boost in office because the laptop hits full fan speed with a VM + IDE running and people start turning heads
- lower performance compared to desktop equivalent and especially compared to best available workstation
I'm hoping VS code and remote development setups (either running VSCode in the browser hosted on my desktop or remote tools) get sufficiently good that I can get a lightweight ARM Mac and then I SSH to my home workstation - feels like the ideal solution if the tooling gets there
My laptop only runs Office 365 for email, calendar, and the occasional word doc. It also runs Slack and a browser for zoom meetings as access to Jira/Bugzilla web interface.
Oh, and RDP into XFCE on Ubuntu on the desktop that runs as a server.
Plus the server is cabled up to development platforms (serial ports, remote power, GPIO, JTAG, USB). So it cannot move, and even if it were a laptop, it could not move.
I don't require the laptop to be upgradeable or powerful, it is just the UI into the rest of the system.
It currently sits here with the lid closed cabled to a 27 inch display.
On the topic of undervolting, I run Bootcamp with a 2019 MBP 16 (i9) and it cannot play games like Rocket League without discharging despite being plugged into a 100W adapter. I have even tried disabling Turbo Boost. Incredibly disappointing.
Yeah Intel mobile CPUs have been incredibly underwhelming in terms of efficiency and these premium portables are cramming overpowered HW into inadequate thermal/power solutions - Apple isn't the only one at fault here.
In the Windows land the only hope seems to be AMD while Apple has me hoping for the A14 performance.
15 inch MBP is too bulky and too hot for this - this is why I'd like to get a smaller ARM based device and go client/server.
Ideally Apple would push out a 2in1 with touch but they are set on pushing iOS for touch - which is just too limited for all intents and purposes. I would gladly buy a premium Lenovo 2in1 or some Ryzen 5xxx series ultra portable windows laptop (they are much better on thermals from what I've seen) but I still need a OSX client from time to time unfortunately. There's just no flexibility with Apple ecosystem - you either fit into their intended use cases or you're stuck with suboptimal tradeoffs.
I'd like to get a smaller ARM based device and go client/server
I'd like to be more client-server these days too, using whatever device is convenient at the time but storing my data centrally so all my devices can access it, it's all systematically secured and backed up, I can also access it remotely via VPN, etc.
The key thing, though, is that I want it to be my server, not someone else's that I don't control and have to keep paying for.
I've ended up splitting the difference with my desktop and my surface go. The surface go is portable and easy to bring around, the desktop has the power, if I need it on the surface I just remote in to the desktop. My laptop (a Dell XPS), basically now only exists for flights/abroad trips where I might need more power than the surface go but reliable connectivity is not guaranteed. Which means it hasn't been used this year
Yeah this was an option I was considering as well - surface line is really good as well - but I would prefer a Ryzen machine if I went for a Windows device, they seemed to have nailed power efficiency in the 4 series and 5 should improve on that.
Check out iStat, it gives you the ability to set a fan curve and that has helped quite a bit with my laptops Thermals. I found the highest rpm I could run without hearing the fans and set the two lowest points in the curve to keep it at/under that point and I almost never hear my fans anymore. Only time I really hear them now is when something is compiling and even then it's much more bearable since I keep the highest rpm limited to 80/85%.
Thanks but I tried this a long time ago - it does help with random tasks yoyoing the fans (which was extremely annoying) but running a device emulator + Android studio and a build service sends the laptop in to 747 mode - the only way I found to solve this is use Volta and disable turbo boost (I'm not sure if under-volt is working properly sometimes it seems to help sometimes it doesn't - I haven't actually measured)
> 1. I like big, big monitors. 2. I prefer a full size keyboard. 3. I prefer a separate mouse.
You can have these with a laptop too. At home I use my laptop with an external screen, keyboard, mouse (the latter two are wireless), because it's much more comfortable.
It's hard to find a full size bluetooth keyboard. I think I went through every keyboard on Amazon and found only one. If you use a USB wireless keyboard, well, there goes one of the two USB slots on the laptop.
It's not just the monitor being big, I want lots and lots of pixels. I'm currently running 3840*2160, and have a second monitor attached set up in portrait mode (so I can display a manual page while I work on the other one).
Of course, I'd get an even bigger monitor with more pixels if they didn't cost so dang much :-) How big, you ask? A wall size retina display! I've wanted one for 40 years.
This is the dream setup. When you’ve got lots of USB-C devices, plugging in one cable and connecting to everything feels great.
I’ve got a USB-C dock hooked up to my TV too with a wireless KB/mouse combo connected into that, if I want to plug my laptop in on the couch.
Even works with your phone, if you've got one that supports it. Recent flagship Samsung phones with DeX do, but I'm really holding out for more external monitor support in Phosh so I can plug in a Librem 5 like this.
I really wanted to do this, but then got screwed over by HP every step of the way. My laptop has a full-sized HDMI port and I figured it wouldn't be able to work alongside the one over Type-C, but as it turns out, it doesn't work over Type-C at all! It also, despite supposedly supporting Thunderbolt, which includes charging in the spec, does not charge over Type-C (despite many of their other models supporting both fast charging over barrel jack and standard charging over Type-C).
If you are on Windows, some USB-C hub allow to have two external display (and not mirror ones, for three different display). Not compatible with OSX though.
2 monitors are easy if your laptop has Display Port and you use daisy chaining, you can have 4 full HD monitors from a single DP 1.2 port. I did that with the previous laptop, the new one has HDMI and USB-C with extended mode supporting DP, so I can link probably 5 FHD monitors in total.
> It's hard to find a full size bluetooth keyboard.
Microsoft make at least two, the Surface Keyboard [1] and the Ergonomic version [2]. I own several of the standard ones, and they're the best-made keyboards I've ever owned (and the only ones my joints can currently cope with), but the fact that they're Bluetooth instead of USB drives me insane. I'd pay extra for a wired version that just instantly sends the keystroke every time instead of going to sleep after a while (while it's awake it's instant, it just wants to save battery after being idle).
I've use the Surface Ergonomic keyboard as my daily driver, and agree it is great. My only complaint is the indicator lights on Caps and Fn are not bright enough.
If you really want a dongle the previous Sculpt Ergonomic has a dongle but the Num Pad is separate :-/ It doesn't have the delay you talk about, and has much better battery life than the Surface version (had it for three years and have't changed them yet).
I don't see a lack of USB ports as a complete dealbreaker for using a laptop. USB hubs work fine to attach large numbers of lower-speed USB devices to a laptop.
I think it just comes down to how important you find the convenience of using the same machine when you're at your desk and when you're not.
I used an external monitor, keyboard and mouse when at the desk, even when I only owned a laptop. But I also use the laptop a lot on the couch, not just for traveling - so I wondered if I would find it annoying to have a separate desktop machine.
So far it's been well worth it. The desktop performance is much better (especially for gaming) and Dropbox, git, Chrome sync and VS Code sync make having multiple machines relatively painless.
Edit: I see in previous comments you were looking for a full sized bluetooth keyboard. I recently got a Logitech G915 [0] and I'm pretty happy with it. Expensive though.
I cannot type unless I'm sitting in a chair at my desk. Trying to type on the sofa or in bed means my hands are at all the wrong angles and touch typing completely fails me. (I wrote this not looking at the keyboard at all.)
The couch is fine for reading a tablet.
For me the trick when moving back and forth between the office and home was to have an external drive with everything on it and carry it back and forth. A better approach is probably remote desktop or remote login.
I travel with a cheap laptop loaded with only what I anticipate needing on the trip. It eases my mind to not worry too much about having it stolen, lost, or smashed.
I've gotten used to the convenience of a laptop, but I'm never happy with them. Now that I'm working remotely, the lappy just doesn't cut it. But I want to veg on the couch with my laptop once and a while. My solution is to use my older laptop as a thin client for my desktop.
Well... tbh I'm still working on the build. But I don't do windows and I don't play FPS or anything where latency would be super important. I use VNC across town to my office and that's generally good enough... but we'll see. I had small hopes that "laptop as linux thin client" would have an easy PNP solution by now, but my research indicates that this still isn't the case. Definitely open to suggestions.
It's been a bit since I had a second device to try it with, but my experienced with Windows Remote Desktop have been less of a "this would be hard to game with" lag and more a "the delay in my mouse movement is making my head hurt" lag.
My laptop is festooned with a hub. It covers power, peripherals, HDMI and networking. And that’s all I need. So really not very different to a desktop, except I can also pick it up and take it with me if I want.
I have a few USB devices (a colour calibrator springs to mind right now) that insist on being in a directly attached USB port, and won't work even with a powered hub, or, in the case of my Surface laptop, a dock.
Just use a usb hub. I have all my accessories on the hub and then when I finish work I move the hub usb to my desktop so my kb/mouse/mic are all switched over.
> It's hard to find a full size bluetooth keyboard.
not only is that hard, it's hard to find a bluetooth keyboard that isn't laggy as heck and doesn't occasionally freeze for a second or five. Or just give up until you re-pair it.
Maybe one of the next 20 that I try...
> How big, you ask? A wall size retina display! I've wanted one for 40 years.
I have always thought, since Digital Research GEM, that the "desktop" in GUIs should be your desk's top. We're nearly there...
This has been my experience, too. The full size Apple Magic Keyboard Works great with my MacBook Pro, no lag, no delays waking up, charge lasts weeks, plug it in with a lightning cable, and it charges while it works like as an USB HID keyboard, even works with my Raspberry Pi. The only challenge is that after about 5 years of daily use, a few of the keycaps are wearing down.
Connected to my 15" laptop, I have directly connected a 34", 24" and a portrait 24". Four displays total; two via DisplayPort, one via HDMI. Plus external BT mouse and keyboard. Then I have a powered Anker dock with eight external drives connected (photo and video for editing work).
At home, I have a similar setup but with a 27" colour-calibrated screen in place of the 34" curved.
When travelling, I use an unpowered four port dock which means I can connect five external drives without needing the powered dock and its power brick. The unpowered dock only struggles if I have more than a couple of platter drives (instead of SSD) connected.
Matias' laptop pro ticked all the boxes for me (tenkeyless, full travel, damped ALPS-clone key switches, macOS layout/markings, clunky retro-inspired design, long battery life) and it really was fantastic (though the keys do have a tiny bit of play) but then one of the brightness keys stopped working. :( I'm still using it though.
Prior to that I used Apple keyboards which work fine but have low-travel chiclet-style keys which aren't as nice to type on (they are much quieter for office environments though.)
I have the Logitech MX Master Keys, although I use a receiver with it instead of Bluetooth which is also connected to my Logitech mouse. The keyboard is good for people who like the shallow press laptop like keyboards instead of a long travel mechanical keyboard. It's similar looking to a Magic Keyboard but the keys have dimples in them so it's more comfortable.
Agreed. I spent 18 years working primarily on a laptop, and was happy with it. But then I gradually switched to a desktop for the last 7 year with tons of screen space (46" 4K plus 2 24" "wing" monitors. But for the last 6 months I've been working at home, and having my primary machine be able to move to and from the office easily, sounds pretty good what with the pandemic situation.
My setup now is a laptop with the USB-C docking station. So I plug in one USB-C cable and get:
30" external display, ErgoDox Ez, USB mouse, bigger speakers, 120W power, Mic for zoom calls.
I love desktops, but I have to admit that it's pretty great having a built-in UPS. To get the equivalent for my desktop is an extra $200+ and a big honking box that apparently will only last for 30 minutes when the power goes out.
The power goes out for a day, sometimes days, every year in my neighborhood when the wind blows. Finally fed up, I recently had a generator installed that attaches to the natural gas line.
I know that purchase was effective, because a week after it was installed there was a big storm and power went out everywhere except my neighborhood. Just having a generator successfully wards off power failure, you never have to actually turn it on.
I submit this is objective proof that I am living in a simulation and none of you exist, you're just artifacts of the simulation.
> Just having a generator successfully wards off power failure, you never have to actually turn it on.
Beware, you need to regularly maintain it too (hopefully it does a weekly starter test, and it probably needs yearly oil changes). I didn't check mine, and found the battery charger had failed at about 1 am when my wife had a flight out that morning. That was fun.
(We don't have everything on the generator, so it's not as effective as yours, our utility wiring is actually pretty fragile, and our well pump is one of the things not on the generator, buying a portable genrator for that seems to have helped, but I did have to roll it out a week ago)
Mine needs to be started once a month and the oil changed every year. I think I can handle that :-)
It would have cost twice as much to run everything with the generator, and that isn't really necessary, so it's a smaller one.
I worried about the battery being dead and no way to hand crank the generator, so I made sure that the generator could be started from a car battery or one of those zap-o-matic car jumpstarters. (I bought one of those last year, and had occasion to try it out on my stone dead car battery last month - it worked great!)
Whenever I'm waiting on someone, say to arrive at my place before we go to some event together, I start doing something else. I'll start doing dishes, playing a game. Within 60 seconds they show up. #GameTheSystem.
Not sure what this means. FWIW, I'm in the UK, and short brown-outs are not uncommon if, for example, the national grid is adapting to a failure somewhere during severe weather. For a while when there was a recurring equipment failure a year or two back, my whole area had several full power cuts, even lasting for multiple hours once or twice, until they finally figured out the root cause and fixed it.
The UPSes we have all our key equipment running on have been some of the best tech investments we've ever made, even if they did cumulatively cost over £1,000.
I’m from Denmark and when power went out I was television worthy news. I don’t actually recall it happening more than once. I never experienced a power loss in the five years I lived in France. Now I’m in silicon valley, the tech hub of the world - with 3rd world internet and power that goes out every time the wind blows.
There was a ~45 minute power cut in the centre of Copenhagen last month, starting at about 1:30am. There was another (several hours) in 2018, which I think is the one that made the news. (I was at home, awake, for both.) They're a bit more common than you remember, but I suspect most of these Tweets are affecting fairly small areas, e.g. construction work cutting cables etc: https://twitter.com/radiuselnet
I have some servers in Copenhagen, and from their logs they've lost mains power about every 2-3 years. They have a UPS, but I certainly don't bother for a desktop computer.
I'm from Jutland which might be part of the explanation. Also, I left 20 years ago.
I'm not sure what you mean by "most of these Tweets"; I'm reporting on my experience living in Silicon Valley, California, where power goes out a couple of times a month on avg.
I have all servers etc on UPSes but wish I could find bigger UPSes as most can only hold up about 1 hour which often isn't enough.
I'll go look again, but last I did I didn't find much [affordable].
I do have an (no longer in production?) APC Smart UPS which can be extended with an external battery, alas vastly overpriced.
Of note, if various online resources are to be believed, you can't just hack and extend the battery capacity for longer run-times as they likely aren't rated for the corresponding higher thermal load.
they're not cheap, but i've bought cheaper and that stuff costs even more in the end.
power electronics that are safe and reliable costs.
> you can't just hack and extend the battery capacity for longer run-times as they likely aren't rated for the corresponding higher thermal load.
thermal load... of batteries?
i'd expect you'd confuse the microcontroller in the UPS. more batteries will require longer to bring up to voltage than it expects, which implies something is wrong. further all of the time remaining estimations it presents will be wrong.
[Following your advise I did find some Tripp-Lite that are almost reasonable]
Thermals referred to the power electronics which do get hot.
Yes certainly better to get equipment designed for it rather than risk burning down the house.
California is not like the rest of the US, though. I’ve never lost power except during extreme weather events (hurricanes, intense tree-felling storms, etc).
You’re right about the internet, though. It’s a monopolized system here, and the anticompetitive nature of it means it sucks across the entire country.
I'm in London for the best part of a decade, and haven't ever had a power cut at home, but a few years ago we had a brief brownout in the office (monitors and lights turned off, but servers and desktops carried on running).
I guess YMMV... but it's not something I've personally had to worry about, and won't do anything about it unless the electricity supply gets significantly less reliable. They are saying that the move to renewables might make the grid less stable over the next few years though, so worth thinking about perhaps.
Frankly, I find nowadays I can't do much without an internet connection anyway... Maybe we should put ~5 second batteries into desktops just to sync disks and power off safely.
People who live in low-density rural areas almost anywhere will occasionally have power outages because branches and other things picked up by the wind will hit overhead HV lines and rural areas are often served by a single radial HV feeder.
In a 240V system, that feeder will typically feed one or more pad-mounted distribution substations which feed properties and in very rural areas a number of pole-mounted smaller distribution transformers.
In a 110V system, many more properties are fed from pole-mounted transformers (because you want to minimise length of 110V runs due to resistance losses and you therefore do not want the extensive LV mains used in a 240V system.
In general, the US has longer lengths of vulnerable HV lines but fewer of them are radials (in other words, more US HV runs between two HV/EHV subs and can therefore be sectionalised and run from either end). Therefore an HV fault is more common in the US but it is less likely to take out as many people for as long.
In this case though, it scarcely matters since either system is likely to have properties connected to only a single HV line which comes off as a spur from an EHV/HV substation. These HV lines are often on poles in rural areas and therefore vulnerable to damage in heavy weather. This happens less in urban areas because HV lines tend to be buried there. In The Netherlands which is one extreme, everything under 50kV is buried but NL is a very dense country.
There is no point comparing your experience of power cuts in Amsterdam, London, Copenhagen, vs Chicago or NYC because power cuts are quite rare in all of these places. If you live in the English Lake District in a small village or in a small town in a rural area of the US, you are likely to have experienced power cuts. Performance on continuity of service measures like TIEPI varies much more within countries than between them.
> Not sure what this means. FWIW, I'm in the UK, and short brown-outs are not uncommon if, for example, the national grid is adapting to a failure somewhere during severe weather.
I am from Germany. The latest wide-scale power failure I can think of was 2007. I remember another shorter one in Bremen which must have been around ten years ago. They happen really rarely here, in spite of all that FUD that wind and solar energy makes the power supply unreliable.
There's no shortage of reasons that make desktops better. But the few advantages of more mobile devices outweigh the benefits of desktops for most users.
I understand. I also have a laptop for traveling, and carry a separate keyboard and mouse with it in my luggage. But every time I use it, I long for my desktop.
I also bought a chromebook just for fun for $150 from the pawn shop. I have a "build farm" of various computers with different operating systems in the basement for use when there's a problem with one of the D targets, but using putty to remotely access them.
This 100% describes me. Desktops are better in every conceivable way, except for the fact that I do most of my computing outside of the office while sitting in my living room with my family. Sure I'm SSHing into a server downstairs a lot, but I'm not willing to hide from my family just because I want to play a game or work on a side project while socializing.
There's a middle ground, where one buys a small form factor desktop (SFF, NUC, or a "Mini PC" like the ASUS PN50), and uses USB3/Thunderbolt/NAS for extensions/eGPU/extra storage.
This keeps most of the advantages (the processor is weaker on the smaller form factor thanks to the cooling requirements), while also keeping some size, mobility and power-saving benefits.
I got into this because I got tired of opening up the large cases, moving to a smaller form factor and external devices was much easier. I don't care for working on the move, and every place I'm likely to ever want to use the computer at will have spare monitors/keyboards/mice.
That's what I like about a desktop PC as well. It gives computer-based activities a designated physical place, and therefore the time I spend at the computer is more deliberate.
A year or so ago I spent probably 2 months to try and find a keyboard that had the layout I wanted.
Also when pressing Ctrl+F4 I use the outside of my hand to press Ctrl, then my index finger for F4. That means that the F4 key needs to be over or to the left of the #5 key, or else I can't reach.
I hate when ThinkPad lovers point out that it can be remapped in BIOS... it's not the same thing! The width of the keys is different and at least in my sporadic use of colleagues' ThinkPads, it's been a major pain point.
Right away I will say that I do use desktops and in general would prefer because of the absolute power. However my laptops are gaming grade and most of the time I use one of those as a desktop. And this is how it goes again your list:
1) I have 2 "big big" 4K monitors hooked up to my laptop so no problems here. The laptop's monitor is not used as the lid is closed.
2/3) I use external keyboard and mouse. No problems here
4) I have 2TB worth of SSD in laptop and I also have huge external drives array.
5) Said laptop is sitting on my shelf, I do not even see it. On my desk are 2 huge monitors on arms with VESA mounts and wireless keyboard/mouse. Said laptop is also running NOMACHINE so I can also access my few worktations and servers without lifting my butt.
6) I have external optical drive but frankly I do not recall single time in a last 3 years when I had to actually activate it.
7) I have 2 external 10 port USB 3.0 hubs hooked up to 40Gbps Thunderbolt 3 port of said laptop. Again no problem in this department.
8) Yep. Desktop is much better in this department.
9) Not my desktops ;) They're server/workstation type.
10) This is how I build my "desktops". No argument here.
I didn't know that a modern laptop could drive 2 4K monitors. This is good news.
BTW, it sounds to me that your laptop setup is indistinguishable from a desktop, and your setup is even less portable than a desktop, so why not go the cheap desktop route?
>"I didn't know that a modern laptop could drive 2 4K monitors. This is good news."
Not any laptop but some do. It even does it while driving its own built-in monitor but I do not really use it.
>"your laptop setup is indistinguishable from a desktop"
you got that part right
>"your setup is even less portable than a desktop"
Nope. When I am out of my main office for whatever reason I unhook said laptop from all the cables and it works off-site including all my development environment. If my stay away is extended (working for a month in ocean side cottage for example I also would take one of those monitors). I just do not run production servers/databases/etc on my laptop ;). Btw my laptop soon transitioning from 32GB RAM to 128GB RAM as to give me more flexibility with the databases.
Worth case I can still access my workstations/servers remotely using SSH or NOMACHINE if SSH does not cut it. Since I have very fat internet pip it works just fine.
My laptop (16" MacBook Pro) can allegedly drive four 4K monitors. I currently use two 32" 4K (landscape) and one 24" 1440p (portrait). The additional portrait 1440p is totally silly, and it was because work happened to send me it for WFH.
Allegedly. I've never managed to make more than 2 of them work at 60hz at the same time. Maybe the correct set of cables might make it work, but they're like $20 each and frankly I'm sick to death of spending without results.
Not GP, but I travel a lot for work (last 7 months notwithstanding). When I’m home and docked, I have a 9/10 experience compared to my personal desktop. When I travel, I have a 1/2 as good experience as compared to when docked but 100% better experience than my desktop would give.
I think what confuses me about the GGP is that at some point don't you just get both a desktop and a laptop rather than trying to turn a super-laptop into an on-par desktop?
That’s what I did (and with one USB cable swap and a button press on the monitor, I can switch keyboard, mouse, monitor, speakers, and camera between them).
But the key for me is I do that because I have a work laptop and a personal desktop and I want no question about the ownership of things I do on the desktop.
This. Employers tend to give out laptops for home use, not desktops. I'm not about to use my personal desktop for work, or my work laptop for personal stuff.
When I disconnect my laptop to work from another location I have all my open files in the same place, all my shells alive and ready to re- ssue their last commands without fiddling with a large history file.
I organized my windows and tabs and splits in such a way that it degrades gracefully when I switch from the external monitor and back.
How often often do I really need that? Not often, but when I do it's really useful.
Also because of 8 (I can replace/alter parts of the machine without buying a new one.) desktops are much more environmentally friendly. My laptops usually last 3-5 years (and with this I'm using them more than my peers) whereas I have a desktop thats been chugging along for 10+ years. It had a few upgrades (SSD, RAM) and currently it functions as an internet browsing machine for my grandpa.
My PC is 17 ears old. Although I think only the case and two drives are left of the original build. It recently got upgraded again with an Intel Core i9 and 64Gb RAM. Upgrade I'm most torn apart over is the ortholinear ErgoDox EZ keboard, because after acing the layout, using anything else really throws me.
Also just gave away the remaining one of two 24" NEC flat panels I bought 17years ago. It still works.
The graphics card caught fire. Fortunately, I was at my desk at the time and couldn't help but notice the heavy smoke boiling out of the machine. I pulled the plug pronto which halted the fire, and put the machine out on the concrete patio till it stopped smoking. Curious, I plugged it in again and the fire started again. REmoving the cover showed the graphics card and a section of the mobo was burned to a crisp.
I had to wash the floor, walls, everything in my office to get the stink out.
Replaced the mobo and graphics card and I was back in business, but this time I bought some sheet steel and set the computer on that, which hopefully would buy some time to get the fire out.
The machine had a metal case, which I'm sure greatly slowed down the spread of the fire. So for me from now on, it's metal cases all the way, baby.
I once turned on my crt monitor and smoke started coming out so I freaked out and immediately unplugged it. My uncle, an electronist, was passing by and told him I screwed my monitor and wanted him to take a look. He plugged in, turned it on it worked just fine. I don’t remember ever having problems with that EGA monitor again. I could never explain that white smoke
I had, from what I can tell, the 3.3v power Button wire met and catch fire, no idea how and it sounds very unlikely but the computer worked once the fire was put out - I just had to start it with a screw driver.
I've seen the remains of a computer in a school, after the building was struck by lightning overnight. Only that one computer was affected, and inside it was mostly black dust.
P51 owner here. I'm using Thinkpads/Lenovos for 15 years as my main development computers:
1. Not thaaat big, but I prefer sub-4k anyway: WQXGA support, with docking station more than one - check
2. External keyboard - check
3. Check
4. Two M2 1TB Samsung + one 500GB SATA + optional external drives of similar sizes. More than enough
5. Admitted, docking station for some cases and connections.
6. Not anymore, USB bootable devices for the rare occasion. Other former reasons are more or less obsolete for my causes.
7. Docking station again
8. Lenovos are not so bad in this respect too
9. This one was > 2000EU - but will last several years as its ancestors did too
...
12. A piece of duct tape solves all camera problems
I am a consultant, the necessity for traveling around was partly responsible for the original choice, but even today I'm not missing much. I have still NAS-es with even bigger drives and DIY desktops and rack-based servers for image processing (requiring multiple GPU's). But thats me and my area of work. For most things, the laptop ist quite sufficient.
13 (and the most important one). Desktop computer can be used at the desk. I don't have to carry it around, nor it distracts me from my "non-computer time" elsewhere.
Also, my desktop PC is my "cloud" computer. I don't waste time trying to sync code, OneNote, or browser tabs between my laptop and PC. I just Remote Desktop into my PC using my laptop (on the rare occasion I try to work using a laptop) and just work on the single source of truth. Also simplifies backups. I understand that your mileage may vary based on the stability of your Internet bandwidth and power outage situation. Here in Hong Kong, the electrical and internet cabling is below the ground, and there are no power outages even in a T10 typhoon when literal tree branches can be flying around!
My last 4 machines have been Alienware laptops. I enjoy the freedom to travel and take my machine with me. I still use external monitor/keyboard and mouse. It's basically a modular, portable computing machine. Perfect for graphic design, web development and light to moderate gaming.
That's why I use a desktop-replacement laptop. Lots of USB ports (and display ports), large built-in monitor but I use a docking station for a larger one, usually bring a mouse and the keyboard is full-sized (includes numpad) and the dock also has a keyboard, has a spot for an optical drive (I just refreshed, so my new one doesn't have one installed, but that's an easy buy as there's still a slot), it has 2 hard drives (and you can get multi-terabyte hard drives, now).
Upgrading stuff and costs are both really significant for personal use (which is why I am typing this from my home desktop), but if money is no object, I just get a desktop-replacement laptop.
I hate the whole "let's just make laptops like tablets" thing, where "like tablets" means "no ports."
I need ports for all kinds of stuff, including driving robotics and interfacing equipment. Which is also why having a laptop is nicer than a desktop. It's really great to have a built-in UPS and be able to move my office easily.
EDIT: Just checked, and it's easy to upgrade RAM or replace the battery, and I have room for a 2.5" hard drive and actually 2 NVMe SSDs (they make 8TB ones) plus an optional SIM card and a PIV card and SD card and the built-in camera and microphone array are really nice to have nowadays. But I do love desktops. You wouldn't think 10 USB ports is that important, but nowadays everything uses USB, so it's nice to have for pure convenience.
I use a desktop replacement laptop for my work computer as well. I wouldn't want to travel with it, but it's good for a home office and occasionally bringing to the living room or into my employer's office. I wouldn't spend my money on one, but the economics make sense for a primary work machine. The thermals are good enough to run with the lid closed, which my cat likes and it keeps him off the keyboard.
The speaker is generally hooked up to a pre-amp and that pre-amp to the DAC. The hardware would need to also have an ADC attached to the speaker for that work. So such an attack could only happen if sound-chipset/card integrated into the motherboard also has an ADC sitting on the same analog line as the speaker output.
I have only ever seen the hybrid mic/headphone ports on laptops and not desktop motherboards. They may exist, but I have yet to see one. Although I guess what matter is how the ports are actually wired.
I've doggedly stuck to my desktop over all this time for many of the same reasons but also because the only time I've actually found a laptop useful is when travelling which I don't really do a lot of, maybe once or twice a year and even then I should be relaxing and not using a computer :)
Just a point about the loud graphics cards: all of them now don't even spin their fans unless you are gaming. So it is kinda nice to spend a bit of money on one to get two machines in one (work and play).
I've had some very cheap cards that ramp up to 100% when powered on, making quite a racket. After 5 seconds, they would slow to something more reasonable.
My motherboard does that too. I always assumed it was to get all the fans spinning, in case you have them volted down to a point where they will continue to run, just not start.
I will never do a wireless keyboard. The idea of trusting a company to properly encrypt my wireless keystrokes is laughable. My security is far more important than cable management thanks.
If you are concerned about your keystrokes being broadcast wirelessly (which is a reasonable concern), I remember from a video or something I saw a long time ago that there was success in reconstructing keys pressed by the sound waves they make. Modern methods are probably better.
From what I understand Side channel attacks like that are usually theoretical in that in practice they are not very accurate, require a tremendous sample of known typed information to correlate with the recorded sounds and relies on the listening device remaining the same distance from the keyboard and the user maintaining the same verbosity of typing. Something sophisticated like that would probably be used more by a spy agency with a political or diplomatic target rather than somebody trying to steal your banking info
I'll bet sound-based skimming is even more feasible with the resurgence of mechanical keyboards (particularly among those most paranoid about these things)
A little box like this could allow you to plug big big monitors to any laptop though [1] (been using it and works fine). I almost never open up the laptop and use it directly.
... You can put a big disk on a laptop, USB3 hub, etc etc
I think main thing missing for me is a beefy GPU and maybe a bit more RAM.
Yeah I just use a kvm switch. I keep my base work and life on a laptop that can go anywhere I go, and then hit a little switch and do all the heavy lifting work and gaming on the pc
There are desktop PSUs you can purchase, that have built in UPS. And I recall there was a UPS designed to fit in the case - 5+1/4" drive bays as I recall. A quick google search would probably surface those relics of the past. At the desks in our house we run a UPS, even if a laptop is plugged in to it. The UPS protects the laptop charger, the monitors, the powered USB hub, printer, and other peripherals.
Just as a PSA for others: Laser printers in particular draw too much inrush current through their fuser drum heater for surge protectors/UPS devices to handle. They (the printers) should be always connected directly to the wall.
The Konica Minolta document center in the workshop is on a dedicated surge suppressor (ESP unit) as recommended by the Konica Minolta service tech, which I picked up from eBay (the surge suppressor, not the tech) for around $150 a couple of years back. The laser printer in the closet is on a APC UPS surge only port that was, AFAIK, rated to handle a laser printer, specifically a HP3600n. I suspect that most lower-end or consumer grade UPS devices, and certainly an $8 surge suppressor from Best Buy just ain't gonna be up to the job.
That did occur to me reading through this discussion.
I migrated entirely off desktops and went laptop / mobile.
Got happy as my current work benefits from me being highly mobile. Super glad I did it. Ended up surprised at just how much can do with a Note type phone and optional keyboard / track pad.
But, I never did replace fast and responsive. Just kind of coped and the other benefits made the whole thing worth it.
This pandemic has me rethinking some things and yeah, I want to build a nice machine. Want that workstation type feel and performance.
The closed computing argument holds more water every quarter too.
What we need is a reasonable battery pack, and software to throttle the machine down on an interruption. Make this package a couple hundred bucks, or something a person can just load their own cells into and it's bound to be a winner.
In my case a mouse slows me down. I have to take my hands off the keyboard and reach for the mouse. The touchpad is right there where my hands are. My touchpad also have three physical buttons, which are very useful instead of tapping the touchpad (I disabled that.)
I really need a mouse only for playing (which I stopped doing on my laptop since many years ago) or to try out some very rare sites linked to HN. It doesn't happen every year.
This is probably the only ergonomics pro of a laptop (except that I carry it with me, of course). Just in case I'll need a separate keyboard again, does anybody know of a good full size one with a touchpad under the space bar and physical buttons? I googled and found many keyboards with a touchpad in place of the number pad or further to the right. By the way, the number pad is not important for me. I'd love not to have it on my 15" laptop. I can keep it there on an external keyboard, but it's extra travel for my right hand if I really have to use a mouse and I never use it anyway.
I _don't_ want to work on spreadsheets from my couch. In fact, I don't want to be able to work on spreadsheets on my couch. I want my couch to be a completely spreadsheet-free area!
Where I am, each developer gets a laptop and a desktop. Though, it is expected that anything needed to work is on the laptop. Meaning email and any software (whatsoever) needed to checkout the latest code. This works out quite well for us.
I prefer desktops too, basically. But as I‘m working on multiple locations, I got annoyed by having to update multiple environments. If I install a piece of software on desktop A, I need to do the same thing on desktop B.
Now that you phrase it that way, I guess I prefer a desktop too, because I have most of those things, but split between my NAS in the closet and my laptop docked to my big monitor, keyboard, and mouse.
A previous comment in this thread mentioned QuietPC [0] in a list of prebuilt companies.
They have some really cool fanless builds, that if you were using a CPU like the AMD 4750g [1], you would have zero noise, and it'd make for a very decent workstation.
You can buy fairly powerful desktops configured with just the on chip graphics or inexpensive business class graphics cards.
I'll add a '13' to your list.
13. Bluetooth is evil, and any desktop I have seen with Bluetooth had it on a mini-pcie card, and could be yanked.
My desktop is always cabled via 1Gb Ethernet, so if yanking the BT also loses the WiFi, I don't really care.
If you are using wireless keyboards/mice, I don't know if the logitech adapters are more or less secure than BT. That could be an entire separate thread.
1-3. You can attach big screens and keyboard and mouse to a laptop.
4. The size of the drive isn't an issue; you can fit big drives just as easily in a laptop. The only difference is that a desktop PC can fit more than two drives.
I've come to really like the convenience of being able to pick up my workstation and take it with me.
To me, there's only one really, really big disadvantage to laptops: the noise. If I put together a desktop, it's as quiet as possible. Powerful laptops apparently can't be quiet.
> 12. My desktop doesn't have a microphone or camera, so they cannot be surreptitiously turned on remotely.
Your points are all good but this one gave me pause for thought. We're all working from home and using our microphones and cameras more than ever. I'm using my regular laptop with plug-in microphone and webcam. Are laptop makers thinking in terms of upping the specs on the microphone and webcams in their upcoming models?
Apple have made major improvements to their laptop microphones in the last few years. On cameras, while they’re usually very bad right now, laptop cameras will never be great; there’s just no room for the optics in the lid. No laptop has had a lid as thick as a phone in decades.
> No laptop has had a lid as thick as a phone in decades
Maybe I'm nitpicking, but I feel like this is a bit much of an exaggeration. I just measured my Pixel 3 (at its thickest point, the camera lens) and a 2011 Macbook Pro (including the rubber bumper, admittedly, but those were super slim at the time), and the MBP is only ~2mm thinner than the Pixel. The race for ultra-thin laptops seems like a relatively recent thing to me.
What they need to add is a physical electric switch to turn off the cam/mike.
In any case, because of all my remote collaboration these days, I bought a decent mike on a boom to use, and my colleagues say it is much better. Still have to find a decent camera.
The Logitech C920/C922/C930 series with autofocus are OK for personal or small group use. Of the consumer USB webcams, I haven't found any other makers' to be as good. Only 1080p 30Hz, but any more is demanding too much of your recipients' bandwidth and hardware in the general case.
Advice from my wife, a photographer:
- if you're still having picture problems (after setting the camera's anti-flicker to 50Hz/60Hz as appropriate), put diffuse illumination on your face e.g. a full-screen browser window on http://blank.org; or for more control--colour temperature as well as brightness--a cheap LED panel and desktop tripod (from a photo supplies shop).
- turn off any "smoothing" or "beauty"features in the cam's software.
- likewise, don't use any fake background features. Pin up a plain bedsheet behind yourself if you think your place is too messy to be the background.
Anyway, once there is a picture of any kind, in my experience most people care more about the audio being unclear or laggy, so you're well ahead.
In my experience, even the most basic of webcams is perfectly acceptable when paired with decent lighting. I'd highly recommend something like https://www.elgato.com/en/ring-light (no affiliation, just a happy customer)
Many "real" camera manufacturers (at least Canon, Nikon, Sony, I think Fuji as well) have released software during the past six months that allow many of their existing system cameras (DSLR or mirrorless) to be used as very high quality webcams. Likely overkill if all you need is a webcam, but might be worth considering if you also need a camera and/or happen to already own a compatible one.
You can connect an external display to your laptop. That's what I'm doing right now. Similarly for 2 through 6.
> 7. The desktop has lots of USB ports and they're all in use.
The external monitor will give you more.
I think reasons 8, 9, and 10 are all legit. I don't think there are any intrinsic benefits to going one way or the other. It all boils down whether you feel the time you spend building your rig is worth the money you save.
> the time you spend building your rig is worth the money you save.
It takes less than an hour. I enjoy it, and it keeps me familiar with the guts.
Most of the hour is just being careful I'm hooking up the wires correctly. In college I worked as an electronics technician, and one job was putting together a stack of Heathkit serial interface cards. I don't recall the exact times, but the first one took me an hour and the 5th one maybe 10 minutes.
It's also like taking the cylinder heads off my old Mustang V8. The first time took me 2 hours. The third time - 20 minutes. It's all in being familiar with just what to do, and having all the right tools ready.
Pretty similar in other countries. Here you do in fact need an external monitor, because it's required to be height adjustable. Similarly you're not allowed to work without separate keyboard and mouse. You're even required to have these things at home, if you want to work from home.
Basically you can work on a laptop, unless it's a special extremely short term situation.
Two options: You can just get a quiet graphics card. There are a bunch of them, even high end cards, that come with good coolers. Look for example at reviews of the Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 5700 XT.
If you do not need a strong graphics card you can always just get a weak one, with less energy usage. GT 1030 for example, though that's really weak, but it's also just a 30W card.
Or depending on the processor you need you can use the integrated graphics. The AMD Apus are pretty great, Ryzen 3 3200G and Ryzen 5 3400G - and there are new 4000 versions that can be be bought in kits or OEM machines. Intel has their own weaker integrated graphics on most of their processors, even their stronger units, for just office work strong enough.
I have laptop and
1. 32" external display
2. wireless fullsize keyboard
3. wireless mouse
4. two hard drives inside, no problem to upgrade if I felt like
5. agree, laptop taking some space, but if I really cared I could buy vertical stand
6. so does mine laptop
7. my laptop has 4, I use permanently only 1
8. I could replace pretty much everything besides motherboard and CPU
9. so are refurbished good quality thinkpad and dell paotps
10. laptops have also plenty of configs
11. that's really unlikely scenario
12. my laptop has permanently closed lid, so no camera, but yeah, microphone would need to be disabled if I worried so much
Thanks that’s very interesting. I’d never heard of these. They seem expensive but you get the millennium aspect (not something a spinning magnetic disk can claim).
Everything else set aside, the company lasted 7 years until bankrupcy, and that sort of casts a shadow on the millennium claim. There's at least nobody left as resposible, if it's not true.
On the contrary. I've been on an island literally halfway across the world and it's been quite good. I primarily do non-SSH stuff. I surf the web, use IDEs etc.
When I'm at my cabin with 10/2 Mbps internet it's like I'm at home, except when I forget myself and start watching YouTube, then I notice the reduced quality of the video (RDP selectively encodes fast-updating regions to lowish bitrate h264 or similar).
I even do my Teams stuff over RDP, bidir sound just works without fiddling.
People stream 4k60 with no problem from the internet but you think rdp is laggy/artifacty on a LAN? Pretty sure rdp works lossless with no problem whatsoever.
laptop docks so your not wiring everything every time and more ports. a desktop is a lot more modular but not mobile. with cloud sync(personal local or remote, or third parties) having two computers is less of a hassle. i see them with the same purpose but different circumstances but a laptop can play both roles with ease with the right setup.
I don't agree with the part about desktops not being mobile, there are plenty of sub 10L cases that you can literally fit in your backpack and walk away. If you don't carry your computer around very often you can easily have a desktop that's portable. The most extreme example of this is the Velkase Velka 3[1].
I don't think it's useful to conflate the terms 'mobile' and 'portable'. You've been able to make a portable desktop for several decades. (I recall one Compaq that came in a closable case with a handle.) That's not typically what people mean by 'mobile'.
That 'extreme example' weighs as much as many laptops and it's just a case. Even if you carried a small display, and everything else you need, I doubt most people would take that out if they found themselves with extra time at the airport.
That makes sense, I agree with you. Though I still think there’s something to be said about the mobility of desktop computers today and saying outright that they are not mobile might not do justice to them.
Edit: Especially with the rise of the Small form factor PC culture.
> Especially with the rise of the Small form factor PC culture.
Small cases have gotten pretty nice but if you have to carry around a separate screen to go with it then you might not end up any better off than if you had an all-in-one luggable computer.
I'm using a MacBook Pro with an external monitor, so I thought I would share my response. I'm pretty happy with my home office [1].
> 1. I like big, big monitors.
I've realized that I find it uncomfortable to use more than one screen, so I just use one 27″ 4K screen. But occasionally I open my laptop and put it on a stand to show some extra windows.
> 2. I prefer a full size keyboard.
My favorite keyboard is the older version of the Apple Wireless Keyboard powered by AA batteries. It feels really nice to type on it (maybe because I'm used to it.) I recently bought a brand new Apple keyboard because I thought it would be better (and I could recharge it over USB), but it's much worse.
> 3. I prefer a separate mouse.
I use an Apple trackpad, and I love it. I only go back to a mouse if I'm playing a game.
> 4. I prefer big freaking disk drives installed.
I have a 2 TB SSD, which is more than enough for me.
> 5. I put the desktop under my desk, and with a wireless keyboard and wireless mouse, there is much less of a snarl on my desk.
I like to put my laptop on the desk, and I only plug in a single Thunderbolt 3 cable for charging, gigabit ethernet, and my monitor. I really love my CalDigit TS3 Plus dock [2].
It's really nice that I can unplug a single cable and take my laptop to any cafe or co-working space. (Before/after the pandemic.)
> 6. The desktop has an optical drive I still use.
I haven't used an optical drive for about 5 years, and I don't own any optical disks.
> 7. The desktop has lots of USB ports and they're all in use.
My dock has a lot of USB-A and USB-C ports, and it's in a very convenient location.
> 8. I can replace/alter parts of the machine without buying a new one.
That's a great point, and it's one of the major downsides of using an Apple laptop. I do have AppleCare, and Apple's support is really amazing.
> 9. Desktops are cheap.
That's very true! But I was using a 2012 MacBook for 8 years before I upgraded it, and I think I'll probably continue using my current laptop for another 8-10 years. It's expensive, but it's a very high quality machine and I think it will last for a very long time.
> 10. I can build what I want with parts from newegg. Premade powerful computers are always "gaming machines" and I don't want a gaming machine that comes with a graphics adapter that sounds like a 747 taking off.
I certainly can't do that for any kind of laptop (either Apple or other brands.)
> 11. I want an all-metal case because a machine caught fire once.
Nothing to worry about there
> Edit: 12. My desktop doesn't have a microphone or camera, so they cannot be surreptitiously turned on remotely.
MacBooks have a hardware light that turns on when the camera is active, and I haven't heard any reports about hackers being able to disable it. Although one disadvantage with the newest MacBook is that you can't attach a sliding camera cover anymore, because it will crack the screen when you close it.
The microphone can be surreptitiously turned on, but it's not something I'm too worried about.
I'm similar to you, but with the optical drive. I just bought a USB one from ebay for £10 which works perfectly well and I can put it away in a drawer until next time I need an optical drive.
1. Ripping a CD I just bought. Yes, I still buy CDs. So shoot me now.
2. Burning a bluray for backup. (I do backups on different media types just for insurance, and I like that blurays are write-once and incompetence and ransomware cannot fk with them.)
2. Failing that, just archive your existing discs and ditch the drive for good. It's the year 2020, and most (all?) software are distributed digitally, so you shouldn't need to get out your drive in the future.
I did archive all my CDs to HDD (gotta love 10Tb drives!! why buy anything less?), but I keep the CDs as backup in case (cough) the machine catches fire and burns up my hard drives (cough).
This line bugged me also - the definition of wanting your cake and eating it too. How would such products ever get to the volumes required for prices to come down if even people who "care" aren't prepared to buy them.
I came here to comment on this exact quote. "Overpriced" is such an odd word for the author to use in this context, it undermines their entire argument.
Are these laptops more expensive than a similarly spec'd mainstream alternative? Yes. However, as is the point of the article, you're really not buying the laptop for the specs.
Unfortunately, the desire for open source being rather niche, these companies do not benefit from the economies of scale a mainstream brand enjoys. AND these companies are not positioning themselves to profit from their customers recurringly through cloud memberships, app stores, microtransactions, and the likes.
I don't see it. I recently bought a System76 laptop, in honest competition with a comparable (and comparably priced) machine from a huge corporation. I ended up going for S76 based on better battery life and better design, plus the benefits of open firmware and excellent hardware integration with Linux. No regrets. I also got my employer to buy me a S76 desktop at work.
At home, though, I do run a slightly modified old Dell desktop that I bought on Craigslist for basically nothing, and for daily work I much much prefer it to any laptop. So yeah, old desktops and S76 FTW.
> I don't see it. I recently bought a System76 laptop, in honest competition with a comparable (and comparably priced) machine from a huge corporation. I ended up going for S76 based on better battery life and better design, plus the benefits of open firmware and excellent hardware integration with Linux. No regrets. I also got my employer to buy me a S76 desktop at work.
I really want to want a System76 laptop, but I just can't bring myself to get one because of the 16:9 screens [1].
[1] 16:9 screens are another one of the computing marketplace's shitty regressions over the last decade. General purpose computers should have 16:10 or 3:2 screens, but unfortunately the number of models that have one is very small.
Curious, what's the difference between the aspect ratios, in your experience? I've been using 16:9s for a long time now. Off the top of my head, I'd say that 16:9 favours entertainment uses, while a "taller" aspect ratio would favour text-heavy tasks. I use a one-window-at-a-time approach when programming, so screen specifics have relatively little effect on me.
For 1080p screens, on the vertical you only have 1080 pixels which is pitiful once you subtract 300px worth of start menu, title bars, menu bars, ribbons, status bars, url bars. Even with higher resolution it looks like a letterbox.
Additionally, like you said, for text, you ideally want windows with portrait aspect ratios - but if you split a fullHD 16:9 screen in two, your portrait windows only have 960 pixels of horizontal resolution which is not enough for many IDEs (or e-mail clients or spreadsheets).
On a 28 inch 4K screen 16:9 is not a problem - you can have 3 long vertical text windows next to each other, or ultra-wide spreadsheets, or a combination thereof. On a 13 inch laptop screen it is a different story.
If you try the HTTPS version of that article's URL, you get a cert failure because the presented certificate's domain is "cheapskatesguide.org". The author sounds pretty dedicated to a frugal life style!
As someone who worked a couple of decades for a company selling GPL-ed development tools, I was always mystified by a similar case. It was the developers who wanted to develop proprietary software and were upset that they would have to pay subscriptions if they wanted to distribute their software without the GPL "restrictions".
Yep, on that, I made my own desktop workstation - but it certainly wasn't "cheap".
Latest gen AMD motherboard with strong power delivery, 32gb of blistering fast memory (3600/16), 12/24 core Ryzen CPU @ 4.4ghz all core (1.27vcore loaded; 1.3v idle), PCIE4 NVME storage - 1kw platinum PSU, 360mm AIO CPU cooling (one DYI was enough..), a great case with terrific airflow (Define 7 Dark TG, Corsair ML140 fans) - overall it's a bloody ripper of a (gaming#) workstation. 7731 CineBench 2.0 score.
Absolutely love working on it. I have four monitors - 4th above the middle one on my custom aluminum profile. MKB & mouse, studio lighting.
I run Win10, but all my work is through WSL2/Ubuntu/MS Terminal. I happen to really like this combo - and it's my computer, so my choice.
#) Everything's new this year - I renew every 5 years or so, and son gets my old. Am however using an old 1080TI and holding off on the GPU until well into 2021, due to current market craziness and to be able to see the size of AMD's rabbit. Oh and my Soundblaster ZXR stayed too; love the wired audio I'm getting from this!
Of course it's not cheap on an absolute scale if you buy the absolute top of the line specs. It is still relatively cheap — try buying a laptop with those specs (or, more reasonably, the other way around). Especially if you don't buy the latest gen, which really isn't needed.
I'm still running an i7 6700. Initially it was one of the fastest components in my system, but has become the bottleneck as I've upgraded the parts around it (added a discrete gpu and nvme ssd, affecting the bottleneck for gaming and compiling, respectively). But honestly, it's still good enough most of the time, and I'm in no hurry to replace it.
Also/especially, while the initial build is not that much cheaper, the cost over time is — both the longer expected lifetime of the parts and the ability to upgrade piecemeal instead of replacing the whole thing.
These smaller linux vendors are at two disadvantages.
One is they don't get the volume.
Second is they don't get kickbacks for bundling an operating system, or other software or make a profit collecting data. This is probably $50 per machine.
Mainstream manufacturers have to deal with consumers who know nothing about computers. They expect full support. They will also follow directions on any website without knowing what they're doing, and mess things up. The move to lock down computers isn't really a Big Brother conspiracy to prevent us from doing things on our computers that The Man doesn't want us to. It's a safety measure to stop inexperienced users bricking their machines and demanding support fix it.
Purism (and others) sell "overpriced" computers to people who know what we're doing. When I had a problem on my Purism laptop, they told me to unscrew the back and check the connections. That's not something that Dell can do with their customers.
I think they'll always stay "overpriced", partly because we're happy paying for the extra freedom. And partly so that they don't become mainstream and end up with a huge support overhead.
Given that the author's demands are being met, exactly, by Purism (etc), then I don't think he gets to complain that it's "too expensive" - that's not how markets work. You have a niche need, you pay a niche price. Stop with the Big Brother conspiracy theories and pay the extra cash to get the specific thing you want.
> If they can lock down the computer, they can drop the price while _increasing_ CLTV.
How much? I bet it's not much.
> That’s why System76 is more expensive. They’re NOT overpriced. They’re priced as “general purpose computers” must be to be competitive.
They're so much more expensive because they're niche. Not because of anything inherent to the product or producing it.
So "overpriced" sounds fair to me.
> I agree with this author, but this suggests that the strength of his conviction is maybe $400.
Is that not enough? If you can spread the word enough, and get enough people that are willing to spend $50 extra, you'll find plenty of companies begging for that money. The profit margin for building computers is bad.
At tuxedocomputers (equivalent to System76 but in EU) you can choose which components you want. Good RAM and SSD is costlier but worth it IMHO. I prefer a Samsung SSD and highest RAM clocks to whatever the OEM could get for cheap.
I forget what all of the main players are right now, but I know I’ve read on at least 2 of these types of open hardware companies’ sites how they scrub the intel ME all but completely out of the machine. That’s kind of the whole point, and they advertise that pretty conspicuously in their marketing.
If I didn’t start using a (17”, 3lb!) LG Gram laptop right around the time before I learned about open firmware, I would probably use a system76 laptop. For right now, the LG is just so damn light for that huge beautiful screen.....i’ve ruined myself and can’t switch to anything else until further notice unless another manufacturer makes a similarly ridiculous screensize:weight-ratio’d laptop lol (pine, purism, s76...you listening?)
From the article: "What worries me as much as the end of general-purpose computing for the masses is that so few seem to understand that it is ending."
Correction: Has Ended. The vast majority of people using computers has shifted to phones and tablets. I have a friend who's a millenial who barely knows how to use his desktop PC (It's a Mac) but is fluent on his iPad/iPhone.
Most people are not content creators, they are consumers. The people who are still building their own PC's are mostly enthusiasts. There's no profit in building custom PC's anymore, so local computer shops aren't selling them (And if they are, it's at a hefty premium).
The author of the article calls the 1980's the "Golden era" of personal computing. I disagree. Networked computing is an amazing thing, but it's also been monetized and now the consumers are the product being sold. And happily so. The outliers are those who buy pre-2012 computers so they can skip UEFI and are happy to live under their rocks to do it. That's okay with me.
Personally I need a faster computer than that, so I'm stuck with UEFI and because W10 is the right OS for my needs, I'm stuck with it phoning home. This doesn't mean the golden age was in the 80's or 90's. It means that by the time we figured out how to make computing awesome, we also figured out how to make computing itself profitable, not just the computers. The golden age the could have been, never was.
I don't think "the masses" were ever interested in general-purpose computing. For them it never started.
For people who actually care, I think the concerns are overblown and we'll always have access to a machine that can run open software.
And yes sure, we might not be able to pay consumer prices for them, but they are not going anywhere.
And sure, we might elect a fascist government which will simply ban the technology, or the west will go to war with China making it very difficult to manufacture anything. Unlikely.
Before social media, the average person had little to no interest in the internet - or PCs in general - aside from email and instant messaging apps. The internet has changed, but it's 99.9% because more people are using it, and their interests and needs are best served by 'it just works'.
This change, along with progress in general, has also made life better for technical folks. General purpose computing is dead? Come on. Desktop Linux actually works. Municipal fiber is a thing. Capable enterprise hardware is available online for less than a second hand iPhone, and if you don't have a couple of hundred to spend, a VPS costs less than a hamburger.
There's a large chunk of enthusiasts between "the masses" and the hard core of people who "actually care" enough (and are rich enough) to go out of their way to have their own machine at home no matter what short of it being illegal.
No self-respecting author would write "We'll always have access to typewriters without built-in censorship. Sure, we might not be able to pay consumer prices for them, but they are not going anywhere."
What makes you so sure the restrictions will stop somewhere you're comfortable with? What happens when unlocked machines are only available to "enterprise" (not unlike a certain Windows version), and you have to agree to audits when buying them? What chance do free operating systems stand, when 99% of users don't even have access to computers that could run them?
We need not worry as long as somewhere, in some dark basement, a sysadmin is able to assemble an unlocked personal computer from his company's old hardware?
If unrestricted machines are restricted only to people with money, it perpetuates our unjust society that creates a prison-like, behavioral nudge, policed, and restricted experience for the poor and a free democratic state for the rich. This is just another manifestation of the economy producing this result via individual consumer choice that manages to simultaneously enrich everyone at the top.
The way to stop this is through legislation and protest, but it's a battle because the state likes locked down computers too.
I guess I'm confident that an open market will always provide for us. I don't know why you think it would not.
Right now, today, it has never been easier to just go down to the local mall and buy a general purpose computer, and sure, there are lots of phones, tablets, and consoles on display as well, but there is no less computers as a result.
Good luck getting LSD or uranium-235 on the open market. You can still buy these, but only illegally. The market is slightly less open due to laws and regulations.
These regulations can easily outlaw general-purpose computing on the same grounds of being too dangerous for the society. I can remind you how encryption algorithms were considered "munitions" back in 1990s, less than 30 years ago. At that time one would possibly say that it will always be possible to bring a small bottle of water onboard of an airplane. Betting on things always being "naturally" available, without a conscious effort to sustain them, is a fraught enterprise.
They are still considered munitions. That law passed just fine. So now there's someone re-implementing the algorithms in Europe because they can't be exported.
I did concede in my original comment that a fascist government could make them illegal. I think it's far more likely than them just not being economical to make any more and disappearing from the market.
If we continue to give power to right wing extremists, all bets are off.
The percentage of unlocked computers for consumers has been falling. Consoles, tablets, smartphones (all iPhones and many Androids don't allow rooting), smart TVs... even some laptops. Surface RT laptops had locked secure boot, and Chromebooks made it very difficult to install alternative OSes, as far as I know.
As for the incentives of the "open market", there's profit in locking down devices, and selling you back fragments of that locked functionality. For example, nvidia pushed an EULA that forbade using their consumer GPUs in datacenters, making them buy the far more expensive enterprise versions.
With how markets tend towards oligopolies and monopolies, there's no guarantee the handful of manufacturers left won't conspire to put restrictions on all computers. Especially if 95% of consumers don't care about being able to run gcc.
I don't know why do you think it would? Both software and hardware-side, there's no end of complaints that power users are being left behind. All the money is in making Fisher-Price software for the masses. Ain't nobody have time to cater for ergonomics or efficiency in computing, it's only a distraction from milking the general population.
This, to me, is a clear example of the market underserving a customer segment.
Fortunately, businesses still have both plenty of use for general purpose computers and lots of money. PC hardware isn't going away any time soon.
The more worrying thing IMHO is that the software to make use of that hardware is becoming increasingly polarised between what's aiming for big businesses and what's aiming for consumer drones.
The thing that gives me some hope is that the geeks all those businesses rely on to build the software that makes them billions are almost all in the "lost middle" and, given enough time and inclination, are quite capable of creating open software to destroy those businesses.
I run a Linux distro on a Macbook Pro and I disagree with you.
Sure, I'm as annoyed as you and the author about UEFI, but as long as I can install an OSS bootloader and launch whatever I want, I'm good. It may be a pain, but the tinkering capability is still there.
If it wasn't possible to tinker with it, less people would buy that laptop.
Having closed hardware is a problem and it definitely doesn't make me feel safe. We may all be full of NSA backdoors, but to be honest I don't care much about it and I assume a large part of the tech knowledgeable feel the same way.
I suspect this is why Open Hardware is not more prevalent in the market: not enough interest.
I don't care about computer companies making more user friendly devices; we can find a way to hack whatever or just start buying laptop parts from China and make our own laptops.
What worries me is if the government will decide to ban cryptography or introduce regulations that force me to change how I tinker with my computer.
>This, to me, is a clear example of the market underserving a customer segment.
Sure, there are some spercific form factors that I would love to have that are not available or very rare. I really want to replace my iPad with something that runs linux, for example.
All I'm arguing is that, I don't believe that in my lifetime, or the foreseeable future, will there ever be a time where I can't reasonably easily get some kind of desktop computer and run whatever code I want on it. (Unless those computers literately become illegal - like some code already is)
I might not be able to carry it in my pocket, or wear it on my face, and it might not have some holographic interface that has not yet been invented yet.
I'm also not saying we should ignore the the fight for general purpose machines, and I will continue to vote with my wallet, as well as lobby to have laws that opening our machines.
I think its a disgrace that Apple no longer supports my iPad witch functions perfectly well, but I can't install anything on anymore.
Society would be much better if all our phones were open, I just don't think we need to freak out about desktop computers disappearing.
> I have a friend who's a millenial who barely knows how to use his desktop PC (It's a Mac) but is fluent on his iPad/iPhone.
This worries me not because of any open computing concerns, but because of how FUNDAMENTAL general purpose computers are to nearly every decent paying professional job out there. All of them. No one daily drives Excel or Salesforce One or edits video or codes websites or balances accounts in Quickbooks on an iPad. Literally no one; we're decades away from that being mainstream, if it ever happens.
Everyone needs to be computer literate. Being a wiz on your iPhone or iPad does not, in any sense of the word, make you computer literate. Kids growing up with these closed-off devices quite literally destroys the fire of desire for learning how computers work, or even accidentally gaining a glancing knowledge with them enough to hold a good office office job.
Companies like Apple endlessly mouth their desire to get more kids to code, then their arms release devices so closed off that even trying to take a quick peek at how they work triggers eighteen system integrity protection alarms. You can't have it both ways, Apple.
Well, whatever. I don't really care. It just means more ultra high paying jobs for me. Apple (and Google, and to a lesser degree Microsoft) are literally actively sabotaging their own talent pool, guaranteeing that they'll never be able to hire enough people while paying the ones they do hire a ton of money.
> Companies like Apple endlessly mouth their desire to get more kids to code, then their arms release devices so closed off that even trying to take a quick peek at how they work triggers eighteen system integrity protection alarms. You can't have it both ways, Apple.
Apple C-Suites: "We want kids to code."
Apple Ads: "What's a computer?"
Whilst it might be me, somebody somewhere doesn't understand something.
It's not an all-or-nothing. One side perpetuates ignorance to keep consumer prices high; the other balances out to produce just enough technicians to keep wages low. They don't need everyone to be a technician, but they do need everyone to be a consumer.
If you think of it as a firewall around knowledge, it's basically like this set of rules:
How does limiting the supply of technicians lower their wages? Is it because Apple is limiting their own supply of available technicians? Why can't a given technician go elsewhere -- is that because the "don't poach treaty" never stopped or something else?
I think you're underestimating the convergence of tablets and PCs here.
I edit 4k video on my iPad, edit pictures, memes, do a bit of drawing with Procreate. I'm by no means professional at any of these things, but it isn't the tools holding me back.
I don't see any reason not to use Excel or Numbers or what have you on an iPad with the keyboard. I'm sure it would work fine.
I know a couple professional music producers who do the bulk of their work on a tablet now.
What hasn't made it to tablets is coding environments. Codea and Swift Playgrounds feel like toys to me.
But it's only a matter of time. I think "decades, if it ever happens" is entirely too pessimistic, it's more "now, if you want it", for most of those things.
And it's definitely not "literally no one". It's more people than you think.
I agree with your point, but remember that the average person ten years ago was just as technically illiterate.
We look through rose colored glasses because, back then, we were able to use Excel, Word, (insert your program of choice). The people in our social circle were also able to use them. However, this was almost entirely because of who we hung out with.
The shift to closed devices (may) eventually have an effect on hobbyists, in the same way that the average person no longer knows how to change the oil in their car, but for now there's little evidence that iPhones and tablets are limiting the number of young, competent programmers (or even the number of IT hobbyists in general).
> Most people are not content creators, they are consumers.
And using locked-down devices will condemn them to that for the term of their natural lives.
But actually I disagree. At different stages in their lives, people do different things. Make music. take photos, and wonder why they suck. Make family trees. Various hobbies, that require working with multiple bits of sotware on on multiple projects.
Take electronics. It's a hobby. It's nuts to use apps that each store their data in their own sandbox. One app to draw a schematic diagram, another app to plan the hardware layout, another app to record calibrations and test results, another for photos--and other apps to record the project goals and plans, and the lessons learned.
If I couldn't use a general purpose computer and store all of these files (and others, such as manufacturers' datasheets for critical components) in a single folder for each project (not part in one app, and another bit in aonther app, and so on), I'd be using paper, a drawing board and a filing cabinet.
I think what happened is that smart phones took over because people who were not using PCs started using smart phones, and so it seems that phones took over but I think it just tapped into a gigantic market that wasn't really touched by desktop PCs, whose users are mostly professionals, power users, gaming nerds, etc. These groups like the most powerful computing options, and still do but the there are way more non-technical people using a computing device now than before.
> What worries me as much as the end of general-purpose computing for the masses is that so few seem to understand that it is ending.
I think the author would have better phrased his comment: "What worries me as much as the end of general-purpose computing for hobbyists and hackers is that so few seem to understand that it is ending."
reply
> Correction: Has Ended.
I guess I have a different definition of "General Purpose Computing" than you or the author, because personally I see the iPhone and iPad as the beginning of general purpose computing for the masses. The traditional PC was computing for the elite/ computer experts.
This romanticism of 80s computing as the golden age completely mystifies me. The 80s/ 90s were a phenomenally fun time for geeks like me/ us. For everyone else, a PC was a thing you had to learn a bunch of esoteric bullshit to use.
"For the masses", the iPhone, Android, and the iPad are far more interesting and useful.
Even if you look at more specific PC style computing, most people don't care about whether their bios is locked or not.
> Most people are not content creators, they are consumers.
I don’t think this is true at all, everybody that has a Twitter / Facebook / Instagram / YouTube / TikTok account is a content creator. There’s a reason the term “browsing the web” has died out, it’s not about passive consumption anymore.
Writing code is just about the only thing you can’t do on an iPad. And while I think we can all agree on HN that having a gateway to programming is super important, you can’t expect most people to care.
> everybody that has a Twitter / Facebook / Instagram / YouTube / TikTok account is a content creator.
All the fora you mention are characterized by lack of longform text. What people are creating today tends to be image-heavy and eschew any long argumentation or prose storytelling.
Having just a smartphone obviously represents a limitation. For example, I am a member of some niche travel communities. A decade ago, when it was common for people to lug a laptop, there was a healthier community of people writing detailed blog posts on certain destinations, editing Wikivoyage or Hitchwiki, etc. Now that those same travelers are leaving the laptop at home and traveling only with a phone where it is inconvenient to enter much text, the ecosystem of travel resources is actually poorer than it was in the past.
Definitely agree with this. Twitter and other social media has really forced the short 140 character snippet or image to be favored over thoughtful posts and blog articles.
Yes, long-form text is down and photo/video based content has exploded — things are different but I’d hesitate to say that they’re worse overall. I used to share a computer with 5 other family members growing up in the 90’s, nowadays every kid has a content creation device on them 24/7. That seems like a good thing to me.
The iPad coding experience is decidedly sub-par, and has a long ways to go.
This is in contrast to almost anything else you might care to do on a computer, where the iPad equivalent ranges from "basically fine" to "actually better".
But people's perceptions are lagging a few years behind where the platform is at. That's normal.
> There's no profit in building custom PC's anymore, so local computer shops aren't selling them (And if they are, it's at a hefty premium).
Most (all) shops I have seen will sell you custom PCs for the price of the components. Unless you are talking about Entreprise ones (not sure if they do exist), most of these cater for gamers who are price-sensitive. But the components are the same, and you can pick an aluminum case instead of the RGB ones.
On the other hand, 30 million Raspberry Pis have been sold and an enormous number of people are learning to code as a result of free online resources. I'm not so sure the end of general-purpose computing for the masses is all that over.
Even your example describes someone who, while he isn't fluent with it, actually owns a general purpose computer.
PC is better for long text. Phones are better for photo / media. Both have pros and cons.
There's also the platform. A lot of phone content ends up siloed into auto-suggesting apps, where click-bait (touch-bait?) tends to just overrun people.
People can now sit for hours just swiping on auto-suggested content. The same can be true for text (see clickbait) but you'd tend to access that through a web browser, where you're just a tab away from something actually useful.
The masses run any program or punch their credentials into any phishing site you send them. I'm fine with them being restricted to the iphones and androids of the world.
That's where it's going to go, the security situation is not getting better. You already see it in a lot of political organizations where many of the workers get by with chromebooks. And for joe schmo, that's FINE.
Android is still general purpose. I have Termux if I need to compile and run something. I can sideload APKs. I run Windows on desktop for newer games, but quite a few work on my Ubuntu laptop too.
To be fair, quite a few Android phones have unlockable bootloaders. You go to the manufacturer's website, download a utility or request a code, and you can then also install whichever OS you want.
In my experience realistically even if you can unlock the bootloader, the hardware is still so proprietary that you have no hope of ever installing an alternative OS it because by the time you reverse engineer it all the phone is already 10 years old.
In my experience it usually goes just fine. I’m actually not totally sure what you’re talking about, what does the hardware have to do with it if you’ve got the bootloader unlocked? Assuming you’ve got something common like a Qualcomm SoC, it’s pretty straightforward to take codeaurora or whatever source and AOSP and 90% of the time have an almost fully functional custom image for your device.
Now granted I’ve rooted every phone I’ve had since the HTC Incredible, and I always check XDA forums before buying a new one to see if there’s a decent development community. And in recent years there has been a SHARP drop in the % of manufacturers that even allow their bootloaders to be unlocked - I don’t think the last like 6 samsung galaxy’s have ever been possible to do it. But there are still plenty, I’ve managed to find a kickass flagship model every year or 2 years and upgrade through at least 2 or 3 versions of android (I always buy last- or last-last-gen models used for <$200 so they’re typically a bit out of date already).
I couldn’t imagine any other way honestly. I absolutely love rooting & flashing custom roms, and it’s kept all my phones practically as young and snappy as the day they originally released...or better
There are different definitions of alternative OS. I'm guessing yours is a different build of Android with the original kernel blobs transplanted from the OEM rom. The other one is being able to run mainline linux or a custom OS from scratch.
If Linux didn't already exist it would never have been possible to create since all computing platforms are getting more and more locked down.
That's a little bit sad state of affairs. But better than nothing, thanks! Latest version was released almost 3 years ago. I wonder if security being taken seriously? It seems that security holes are found more often than that.
And they turn it on after updates or ignore the setting or nag you every day to turn it back on. Every time I boot back in to windows I get a full screen message about tying my account to an online one.
Instead of blasting UEFI, take a minute to learn about tools like `efibootmgr`, and how to install your own keys, so that you control your own machine. UEFI is a bit overengineered, but it's OK.
- Most computers' UEFI firmware, desktop or laptop, allows you to install your own keys.
- And every computer I've ever heard of with UEFI will allow you to disable secure boot.
- Linux runs just fine on UEFI.
I'm worried about a lot of the trends in laptops and smartphones, but I'm not yet worried about UEFI.
It was hard to read past the attitude that Secure Boot is the enemy. That’s just not the case, and if the author believes it is, it kind of undermines their expertise/the rest of the writing.
Yeah, hemming and hawing over whether or not an x86/64 PC can disable Secure Boot in 2020 is a bit silly when it's been a certification requirement by Microsoft for ages
As someone who knows little to nothing about UEFI except what I read on these types of blogs and comments, what do you mean that secure boot is no longer an issue? and that it's been a certificate requirement by microsoft?
Microsoft has always required (on x86, ARM is different) that for Windows logo certification Secure Boot must be able to be disabled, you must trust Microsoft’s CA and the third-party CA that they run (and that Red Hat/Ubuntu/Debian use to sign their builds) and that the user must be able to load their own keys. This means that any x86 device sold with UEFI Secure Boot can still boot Linux (or if it can’t, it’s not Secure Boot’s fault).
No, it's the other way around. It originally was as the article described, and once Microsoft probably got scared about antitrust (or thought about how the heck they'd buy hardware for Azure and not be able to load their own secure boot keys), they changed the procedure. As of 2015-ish, the information I linked applies (for x86).
>All x86-based Certified For Windows 10 PCs must meet several requirements related to Secure Boot:
> - They must have Secure Boot enabled by default.
> - They must trust Microsoft’s certificate (and thus any bootloader Microsoft has signed).
> - They must allow the user to configure Secure Boot to trust other bootloaders.
> - They must allow the user to completely disable Secure Boot.
The last two points in particular. It's been this way since SB was introduced.
Note that this requirement does not apply to non-x86 devices. In particular, ARM devices (Windows RT) are explicitly required to disallow SB from being disabled, to meet the certification requirement.
"They must trust Microsoft’s certificate (and thus any bootloader Microsoft has signed)."
This one in particular always pissed me off, and I'm glad it only applies to pre-built machines that come with Windows 10 preinstalled. If the individual motherboard makers ever decide they need to be "certified for Windows 10" and start auto-trusting a certificate for closed-source commercial software, I'm left with no choice but to either stick with my "old" (not really that old) hardware or switch to another platform like POWER9.
You can revoke the keys as a user, it’s just that the system has to trust the Microsoft CA out of the box. If you have purchased a device with Secure Boot capability (including a motherboard), it trusts Microsoft’s CA (since it would be extremely confusing for 99% of users if Windows wouldn’t boot without trusting a key).
You can remove Microsoft's certs from the trust store used by the board, though. You can choose to keep them to facilitate dual boot with Secure Boot on, but you can also choose to eject them from the trust store.
Sure, they're loaded by default, and you can argue that we can't prove the board isn't gonna trust them behind your back -- but that applies to older non-open hardware too.
My bigger annoyance is Intel Boot Guard. I want Intel to let us control the firmware more directly -- even if it requires some physical authorization/kills some DRM component in ME or something. But that's not happening anytime soon...
Full compliance with Windows 10 Enterprise certification requires ability to enter Setup Mode, where all certificates are deleted and owner has to reload the whole certificate database from scratch.
The requirements mentioned by grandparent are for setup where without any extra configuration you can approach a computer with Windows 10 install media and it will install properly.
"The requirements mentioned by grandparent are for setup where without any extra configuration you can approach a computer with Windows 10 install media and it will install properly."
You can do this on any x86/x86_64 hardware made in the past 15 years. Whether your machine has a traditional BIOS, UEFI with SecureBoot off, or UEFI with SecureBoot on, Windows 10 will install with zero complaints.
You only get to be "certified by Microsoft" if you follow all of their rules, but you don't have to be certified to install Windows 10 (yet).
I don't think it is hard to read past it and I don't think there are only positive sides. If it stays an optional component it might be true, but it would be naive to just let this be the only perspective in hindsight of development of closed systems like smartphones.
But the author states that they still use computers from before 2012 because they are avoiding EFI. Why?
From 2012 until present, computers have been produced that run any EFI binary you want. Why not buy one of those? It's no different than sticking with pre-2012 machines, except you aren't attached to cruft from the 1980s anymore.
Your experience matches mine. And UEFI is more capable if you're interested in a multiboot setup, preserving a recovery partition, and such-like. I've yet to see a UEFI machine where you couldn't shut off secure boot in its firmware/settings menu.
I have been reading this same article for the past thirty years. Yet, I can still install and run whatever operating system and software I want on my laptop _and_ desktop, and I don't see any sign that that freedom will go away anytime soon.
It is true that the billion-dollar media companies have decided a subscription model is more lucrative than a one-time-purchase model for the mass-market content they produce (movies, TV shows, music, etc.).
But also unlike the author, I don't think my ability to consume mass-market media on my own terms is a moral imperative or has much bearing on my overall freedom. If Warner Brothers doesn't want to sell me a copy of Transformers 43 that I can play with VLC, I don't see that as much of a threat to anything I care about.
> Yet, I can still install and run whatever operating system and software I want on my laptop _and_ desktop, and I don't see any sign that that freedom will go away anytime soon.
We got awfully close though. Had Linux not been popular enough back when UEFI SecureBoot started being adopted, Microsoft would require x86 UEFI motherboards to not allow the user to install their own keys, like they did with ARM UEFI (https://www.softwarefreedom.org/blog/2012/jan/12/microsoft-c...).
I can still install and run whatever operating system and software I want on my laptop _and_ desktop, and I don't see any sign that that freedom will go away anytime soon.
The question is how much of that is thanks to this kind of article appearing for the past thirty years.
It's kind of like saying Y2K wasn't a problem: it would have been a problem if we hadn't prepared for it.
You cannot install whatever operating system you want on your tablet, phone, or, soon, any mac desktop/laptop at all. The enthusiast/gamer market isn't enough to keep the intel/adm desktop market going. Soon the only place you'll be able to run a free operating system is on a rented vm in the cloud.
Not on Apple devices, but custom operating systems are alive and well on most non-Apple laptops, tablets, phones, servers, or even embedded systems with no signs of it changing. PostmarketOS is a great example.
You might be able to on your specific laptop and desktop, but that isn’t universally true. It’s not true at all of video game consoles, mobile phones, tablets, smart electronics, and other computing devices.
The percentage of “open” devices has been trending downward.
What's crazy to me is how insanely overspec'd mobile devices are for what they deliver. If you went back in time and told 1999 me the following:
I'll give you a computer with the following:
* 256GB of solid-state storage
* 6 CPUs @ 3+GHz
* 8GB of RAM
* Weighs only 200 grams
* Battery-powered, lasts 5+ hours
* 1440 x 3168 resolution display
I would have been absolutely gobsmacked. Such a machine absolutely outclasses every desktop up into the early 2010s!
And then you would tell me that it's mostly used to shitpost on reddit and Twitter and would be completely useless as a development machine, and the manufactures would do everything to make it impossible to put what software I want on it...and also it would spy on me everywhere I went in order to sell me garbage...
For me it's a mystery how phone specs are so good, but their performance is so bad. Always freezing, crashing, long load times, etc.
I have an old PSP (PlayStation Portable) and whenever I turn it on I'm amazed at how fast and lag-free it is. This probably proves that the problem is most likely the software, not the hardware.
Frameworks piled on frameworks to make things 5% faster to develop, combined with a general tendency for software developers to not optimize anything until someone complains.
One of the golden things about gaming consoles is that software is typically written with the exact hardware in mind and there are pretty big costs on both sides of the vendor/buyer relationship.
You have the opportunity to be able to know exactly how all of your customers will run it and you have a good chance of having the extra $ to actually give a damn about performance.
It's because mobile GPUs cannot keep up the pace at which display technologies are advancing.
First there was this trend to have ultra high dpi and ultra high resolution in the palm of your hands, and now they are toying with increasing refresh rates.
All while trying to maintain a reasonable battery life.
You want to 'develop' on a mobile device? Interested to hear how you would envision this being a pleasant experience.
It's also a trade off between installing what software you want and security - the App store means you don't have to worry about (certain kinds) of maliciousness from software you install.
I just think it's a little bit of a spicy take saying mobile devices "don't deliver" when they are most successful form of computing in history by a large margin. I would argue this is for a reason and they provide enormous value.
My point is that they have incredible computational power that is often wasted on pretty graphics and other nonessentials. Pretty much all communication/text apps (except video) could easily run on a device spec'd far lower. The web is ridiculously bloated and full of ads and crapware. Just rendering pages of decent-looking text shouldn't take so much power. Even manipulating maps for navigation is mostly a 2d graphics scaling problem that can't possibly require that much horsepower.
But yes, my point about development does pretty much rely on having an external keyboard and mouse.
The miniaturization of tech is absolutely astounding to me, even today. We're pretty unappreciative and wasteful, IMHO. 20 year old me would have been absolutely astounded that that much power was packed in that tiny space, and yet what it delivers is just marginally prettier and not more usable than back then.
Motorola Atrix comes to mind, or one of those. This was a thing back in 2011 or whenever that phone came out. You could dock your phone and use it as a laptop.
fwiw some people develop software for jailbroken devices on their device. They seem to manage somehow. I suspect with a Bluetooth keyboard and an external screen it would be too bad if you had no other choice.
I wonder if it's possible to take a cheap Android phone and turn it into a desktop? I.e. connect keyboard, mouse, external monitor, install Linux with X?
What seems odd about this to me is his complaint that what he wants is out there, in the form of laptops built for linux and set up exactly like he wants, but they're "overpriced". Uh what? If you're gonna be that picky about your setup, then it's time to pony up and pay for it. This stuff is never gonna get more manufacturer attention unless people buy it. If you wanna pay the lowest price, you should expect to get lowest common denominator in terms of setup.
I'm generally quite price-sensitive and frugal and I want to describe why I think you are right in calling out the author on their "overpriced" comment:
Two aspects are important to keep in mind for a decision of this kind:
This machine is going to be your primary professional tool for the next several years - do you really care about a few hundred dollars extra? Especially if you have niche-requirements (read: non mass-market) like strong Linux desktop support and deep concern for privacy / security?
Sure - you could do the research and build yourself and pay less for the parts - but if you consider your time at market rates, are you really making a financially smart decision by not paying a small premium on the price of constituent parts?
Of course, I am aware of the excitement that can be associated with creating a custom build - if you are into that sort of thing: enjoy it as a hobby project, not because it is a better deal.
Humans seem to have a hard time taking costs into account that are not easily quantified.
I agree. IMO, being frugal is more like being careful to spend extra money only when it makes a real difference in what you're getting than getting the cheapest version of everything no matter what. By all means, don't buy a $30k car when a $12k car does everything you need a car to do. But for a tech professional, it's silly to pinch pennies on a tool you spend a substantial part of your waking hours using and is used to earn your living and should last several years.
Just calculating, $400 extra means doubling the price for most of the corporate laptops (I checked the prices, my laptop was a bit cheaper than that).
And I guess the OP was already spending more for a better spec'ed laptop, not buying the cheapest junk, so doubling up the extra is easy to speak about, harder to do, especially if you don't work for big money and you are in the rest of the world outside USA, Canada, Western Europe and Australia.
I agree. Even if the attention of major manufacturers is not caught, at least you are supporting the small companies doing it right. Back in the "golden age" we wouldn't have dreamed it would be possible to run a profitable company building free software friendly laptops or phones. I feel the frustration of the OP but at least now there are ways to vote with your wallet.
I don't understand the conflation of uefi with secure boot. Uefi can be independent of secure boot—I use uefi and have never enabled secure boot—the purpose of uefi was to consolidate definition and discovery of various bios-level APIs. Probing memory, setting video modes, and more; these things were poorly specified, and implementations frequently differed. Uefi is huge and overengineered, but it's still a definite improvement.
Yeah I’m not sure either - I’ve used UEFI only on my last few laptops (mostly Dell XPS) and it’s been great. Sure, the process is a hair more confusing, but there’s massive benefits and it’s FAST. In particular, I’ve been impressed with systemd-boot and how you can use systemd-analyze and logging to really understand _everything_ that’s going on in your boot chain.
I also really like the capsule firmware update mechanism, I’ve been able to use fwupdmgr to keep all of my devices firmware up to date, from Linux, without freeDOS or windows foolery. Additionally, the Dell UEFI BIOS supports booting right to the firmware update cab or exe, further strengthening the utility of a Linux-only install.
I'm going to go a step further and say that I absolutely adore UEFI. Why should I have to install my own bootloader to multiboot? Why can't the motherboard do that for me?
With UEFI I can set up my own boot entries and boot directly into whichever Linux kernel I like with whatever arguments I like. I can write a script that easily boots me into another OS exactly once. And it's a delight to not have to think about traditional bootloaders anymore.
You can of course leave secure boot disabled in UEFI, but you can’t run secure boot with BIO, to my knowledge. That’s why the association - if you want SB, use UEFI.
Not sure I've ever seen anyone wanting secure boot. what is it actually good for aside from generating searches for Google when you have to figure out how to circumvent it?
I prefer to use Secure Boot when it makes sense. It completely shuts down lots of incredibly hard to detect forms of malware. Its nice knowing the boot environment is exactly as I intended and hasn't changed.
It makes sure that someone didn’t boot into another OS on my laptop and try to decrypt BitLocker, since BitLocker will hard lock if the secure boot keystore is fiddled with or if a USB drive is booted from.
I wouldn’t run any laptop without it and drive encryption. The combo are really tough for a bad actor to bypass. In terms of things that make me worry less about having a laptop stolen, SB&DE are tops.
It's frustrating to me (as a UEFI engineer) to see and read the fear-mongering on blogs like these. Much of what I do is focused on open-sourcing and making the industry as a whole better.
I tend to side with others in the thread that the "end of general purpose computing" isn't a result of manufacturers pushing in a direction but rather following consumers. The percentage of computer scientists, programmers, and enthusiasts that consider the openness of their hardware a deal breaker grow smaller each year. For the rest of the population, they can find something that's general enough for their use cases.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for opening hardware up and making it transparent. But until we as general consumers (not just the fine folks of Hacker News) care enough to let that sway our buying decisions, this trend is going to continue.
There will always be general hardware. It's just going to get more expensive.
> the "end of general purpose computing" isn't a result of manufacturers pushing in a direction but rather following consumers.
This is an even stronger claim than that consumers don't care if their hardware is closed. Consumers aren't begging for their hardware to be closed, and companies aren't passively trying to please them. The vast majority of consumers don't care if their hardware is closed until they discover something that their hardware is capable of doing that they're not allowed to do with it or something that their hardware is doing that they're not allowed to keep it from doing. Companies close as much as they can while trying not to upset consumers enough that they leave or complain to the government - which means either that they have to find ways to 1) add or limit functionality in a closed way, or that 2) they have to get all competitors to agree to prevent or allow the same things (to eliminate alternatives), or 3) they have to advocate a POV (and lobby for it in government) that whatever functionality is missing or required is dangerous to add or remove.
This is following consumers in a way; like building a wall behind them every time they move in a particular direction could be considered following them.
The consumer value of locked down platforms where you can only install approved software is that you mostly don't need to worry about viruses. It's really hard to protect systems against malware if they make it easy to run arbitrary code. People paying $60 per year for antivirus software is a symptom of this.
Of course, Android malware exists too. But Google's approval process, application sandboxing and the ability to remotely remove applications after they're found to be malicious makes it a much smaller problem. It's not something consumers cheer about, but rather something we mostly don't think about when using phones and tablets.
I find it strange how the article puts forwards having to build a desktop computer as some kind of weird, horrific, form of torture. Oh no man! Don't build a desktop computer. Anything but that! The problem can't possibly be so bad that... h-he is considering --building-- a computer... Does the author not know how many computer enthusiasts do just that every day and what a basic task it is? They literally teach you enough about hardware to put together your own PC in most introductory college courses. These days its like lego blocks.
I don't think the assumption that processing power is decreasing and all devices are becoming dumb terminals is true, either. Moore's law... Look at the new chips released by AMD and Intel. Look at CPU benchmarks: the more recent chips blow older generations out the water... and there's no conspiracy to keep these advancements out of consumer's hands. Anyone is free to buy a server rack and build a small super computer (should they have the cash.)
What this article raises that I agree with is the complaint that many chips contain proprietary blobs that can't be inspected or removed. Unfortunately, technology like this is how companies try protect trade secrets. It's definitely not ideal, and backdoors + security flaws have been found in these areas in the past. I think if you're concerned about such flaws you really have to ask yourself whether you need to protect government-secrets... or whether your laptop is just going to contain your shopping list and other mundane data. Once you decide what type of data you're going to be working with. You can decide on an appropriate security strategy.
I doubt it makes sense for most people to stick to decades old hardware to avoid the possibility of having someone exploit (and risk revealing what would probably be worth millions on the black market) something in their firmware or microcode.
> h-he is considering --building-- a computer... Does the author not know how many computer enthusiasts do just that every day
Thought the same when skimming the post. Creators, streamers, AI folks, Kagglers, gamers, some crypto devs, all have a desktop, mainly because of nvidia GPUs. This isn't news for them for probably a decade.
Pretty much anyone who works for more than 1hr a day at home and doesn't do so on a big beautiful desktop has been making a mistake. (Presuming no limitations like affordability, literally can't fit a desk in their bedsit, etc.)
Anyone who consciously thought desktops were a good idea to move away from in the above case made an initial, much bigger mistake. (Again presuming it was a general lifestyle choice and not some necessity.)
It's as simple as answering the following question:
Would you rather have a) a tiny monitor with a bunch of expensive fragile dying-to-have-coffee-spilled-on-it shit jutting way out at you in the horizontal, always at a weird angle or too low or b) a couple of big beautiful monitors and loads of desk space? If you think you can have both, you're probably wrong. Even a nice dock setup requires you to do things like install brackets under the desk to shove your laptop in to, and disable its monitor lest it become a weird bastard screen full of junk you have no intention of looking at.
All the docks and laptop stands and extra monitors in the world can't solve the problem that laptops are broadly speaking, unpleasant to use. I think the only times I've actually been grateful to have my expensive and pretty laptop, are during power outs - watching netflix in bed. Though the whole setup is reliant on a well practiced construction of pillows and an external bluetooth speaker because no laptop has ever been made with speakers worth the power they draw.
If you can even remotely get away with not using one, don't use one.
I don't think desktops require retina displays. There are an endless selection of big, bright, high refresh rate, high resolution, and cheap monitors to choose from.
Macbooks max out at 16 inches. Retina displays are (a good) attempt at trying to make laptops more viable for long use, but still they fall short of even the cheapest 4k decent nitts desktop monitor. They haven't adapted the tech, because it's not needed. The same pressures of selection aren't present.
The biggest font and text clarity nerd that I am aware of agrees on the matter, and makes some sensible suggestion and gives reasoning here: https://tonsky.me/blog/monitors/
> I understand that firmware malware is a legitimate cause for concern, UEFI seems to me to have been more about locking Linux out of the laptop market to insure that Microsoft Windows remained dominant.
Ignorant nonsense.
UEFI, while overengineered, allows for a computer-OS to tell the firmware how to cleanly boot it, so you can have several OSes installed in parallel without anyone stepping on anyone else’s toes.
Basically it simply and cleanly solves the dreaded and always unreliable dual/multi-boot situation which almost exclusively Linux users have had to endure, with Windows update accidentally overwriting their bootloader every now and then.
But who complains about UEFI and the solutions it brings and clings to legacy BIOS boot with all its warts and complications? Yup. Linux-users who are so politically opposed to UEFI that they cannot bother looking into the actual technology to see if their political opposition is warranted at all. Talk about FUD, eh.
It’s a sad sight. And I say that as a happy (UEFI booting) 100% Linux desktop-user.
I sometimes answer questions in the tech-help reddits to get a feel for the kind of IT-problems everyday users are battling with.
The amount of people asking if they can upgrade the CPU, GPU, SSD/HDD or memory in their new-ish laptops is disheartening. Most of the questions concerns the CPU og GPU where the answer is no 99.99% of the time these days. 90% of consumer grade laptops have the RAM soldered to the mainboard too now. Luckily the HDD/SSD is usually replaceable or upgradeable in case of failure, performance problems or lack of free disk space... but for how long?
From a purely ecological standpoint, the laptop producers should be forced to buy back and recycle all their shitty unupgradeable, unrepairable, made-to-fail consumer electronics. It's a shameful situation we are in.
If societies can get 99% of glas and plastic bottles recycled using bottle deposit money, we should be able to reach the same figures for consumer electronics like laptops.
The lack of an upgrade path wouldn't be as much of a concern if laptops actually shipped with decent specifications to begin with.
One thing that caught me off guard was the number of low end models with 4 GB of RAM and pricier models limited to 8 GB RAM. With Windows using nearly 2 GB on boot and a chunk being used for the GPU, that doesn't leave much for applications. Having a non-upgradable CPU is not a huge issue in my opinion, except the performance of low end models is astoundingly abysmal. I doubt that many of them could keep up with my 8 year old desktop, which was not a high end build at the time. Not only is the hardware disposable, in many cases it is intended to have a very short life.
I feel the same with SSD, although it's replacable. Often it's cheaper to buy the smallest SSD option, throw it out and buy a new 2TB SSD instead of asking for it integrated.
Agreed. While I was responding from the perspective of disposable would be more acceptable if they were actually usable for a significant period of time, I do look for a replaceable SDD. Granted, that is mostly because I expect a data recovery path should the machine break.
Overall though, I would be happier if manufacturers were clear on what you are getting. While I do some real work on my laptop, I tend to offload most of my work onto a desktop. This means that I look for a handful of key features and don't care about the rest. Unfortunately, my last laptop purchasing experience was a nightmare. Researching a couple of laptops took more time than deciding upon parts for a desktop build and, of course, you have to look at more than a couple of laptops to find something that is acceptable in terms of features, performance, and price.
This is a good point. Tangentially related, it’s especially ironic how much Apple talked about the environment in their recent iPhone 12 announcement when they pretty much started the trend of unupgradeable electronics, and aren’t about to stop.
I much prefer desktops and don't even own a laptop at the moment, but what's with the fixation on UEFI? I'm not well versed in the technical differences between BIOS and UEFI, but I don't think it really matters? All these people like Richard Stallman and this guy make their lives harder as a method of virtue signaling. I'm convinced they get off on the masochism of making their life hard for the sake of "freedom."
Meanwhile, the rest of us just want to get work done: my Arch Linux desktop that boots with UEFI is functionally identical to one that boots with BIOS. So.. really, who cares?
> So.. really, who cares?
Consider yourself lucky if you don't need to care.
It's a mechanism to lock down a computer to only run "trusted" OSes. Who gets to decide which OSes are trusted? Does Arch have lobbyists?
It's just one falling domino in a series of falling dominos, where maybe one day you don't get to run Arch anymore.
This stuff really can go either way. People were allowed to record TV using VCRs in the 90s. Ripping CD Audio onto hard disks? Dunno. Copying DVDs & Blu-ray onto hard disks? Definitely not. What about running software on a phone? Better "jailbreak" it.
> my Arch Linux desktop that boots with UEFI is functionally identical to one that boots with BIOS
Stallman agrees with you that you don't get anything from UEFI: "This is not a security feature. This is abuse of the users. I think it ought to be illegal."
He also made the claim, "Microsoft demands that ARM computers sold for Windows 8 be set up so that the user cannot change the keys; in other words, turn it into restricted boot."
Crazy?
> For logo-certified Windows RT 8.1 and Windows RT PCs, Secure Boot is required to be configured so that it cannot be disabled.
If they wanted to lock it down they could have just used coreboot and didn't build a big honking framework deliberately designed to allow running different systems that have no pre-existing knowledge about the machine.
Just like many other closed platforms of yore, or how in practice Macs of today work (their UEFI is, plainly, not to spec - a lot of hackintosh work is figuring out "what Apple did wrong this time")
You can accuse RMS for many things, but he definitively does not 'virtue signal.' He at least (from all public appearances anyway) practices what he preaches.
UEFI has more capabilities than BIOS, and is the go-forward standard. You may see functional parity on your workstation simply because you aren’t using any of the UEFI features. UEFI can do what BIOS did, but BIOS can’t do what UEFI does (e.g. TPM chip, secure boot, and many other cool things).
I find it really gross this trend nowadays to look down upon or make fun of people that are interested in preserving their freedom. If I assume you're from the US, what's supposed to be the "land of the free, home of the brave", and yet you're mocking somebody for wanting to be free in this particular aspect of their life.
> The golden age of personal computing in the 1980's is long over.
When an article starts with a statement[1] like this I know I'm in for a whine-fest about how everything sucks now and we need to Make Computing Great Again.
What the author wants is a ThinkPad P Series or a Clevo clone. I don't know why the author is making the assumption that a more modular, utility-focused laptop or portable device doesn't exist. They absolutely exist. Just don't be mad that it's a niche and that other people who just want an appliance have different needs than you. Don't be mad that other people in the world aren't necessarily any more interested in computing than they are in fixing their car.
It's also entirely inaccurate to say that the 1980s was a freedom-loving general purpose heaven. In reality, users still bought into ecosystems and proprietary technologies, perhaps even more-so than today.
For example, remember when you had to worry about what format your floppy disk was formatted in? Remember when the same productivity program on a different platform had different save formats? Remember when different platforms had different ports and physical connections for things as simple as a mouse? It's not like Amigas and Commodores and Apple ]['s were just oozing interoperability with each other.
I've owned laptops for the past 16 years, and not once have I ever considered leaving my desktop computers. Sure, laptops are portable, but that's all that can be said for them.
When you've set up your laptop to be ergonomic to use, it's as portable as a desktop, so that one thing it did well, it turns out, it couldn't even do that.
Laptops are portable, when you REALLY need to be able to compute at some different place than usual.
They're expensive and even then, still underspecced compared to desktops..
My desktop has 20 tib of storage and 64 gib ram, has a 5 ghz cpu and it runs silently most of the time, I can't even buy a laptop with those specs, if I could it'd be super expensive and noisy or frequency throttling.
This is unfortunately going away a bit, but I still have many more upgrade options for a desktop. Now everything is USB but with the right adapters, I can still use those weird ISA cards I've got hanging around, I can still read 5.25" and 3.5" floppies, and CDs and ZIP. (and yes, the "easy" way to read those disks is using a isa floppy controller on a USB to ISA adapter).
Also, I guess I just don't need to move around that much, but when I do, I have a second-hand I7 machine with 16 gib memory that runs linux off of an SSD reasonably well, if I need "performance"..
If I only need connectivity, I'm using a this small blue HP StreamBook 11 that I bought for around $200 years ago, it also runs Linux well enough, but it's pretty much limited to running a terminal and ssh.
Over the last 10 years or so I have transitioned to having two big desktops, one at work and one at home, with with a large dropbox folder keeping them in sync. I found I just never needed to carry a laptop with me and could get better price / performance in desktop.
I do get a little nervous being without a computer when I'm on holiday 5-6 times a year, but in 25 years I've never actually had to do any emergency work while on holiday. I think the risk is very small.
I never properly moved to laptops, I just put my desktops on a shelf and wired them to a network, and use a laptop, an obsolete N900, and an Intel NUC attached to my flatscreen (controlled with a bt mini keyboard) with no important local data on any of them - to interface with the desktops. All the drives on the desktops are encrypted, all long jobs and services are run on/from the desktops, the desktops are on Debian stable and the laptop and tv are on testing.
If the day comes that I can't get a laptop that I can unfuck, I guess I'll just have to work in a remote desktop on a VM in one of the servers. I can always keep the laptop and devices from chattering through the routers. I do have a real fear that it might become hard to find routers that I can install OpenWrt on, or that OpenWrt might go the way of Firefox.
There are a number of misplaced points in this article, but I will focus on two.
UEFI, properly implemented, is a huge improvement over old BIOS. It isn't required to be 'locked', and I have never encountered a Windows laptop or desktop that didn't not allow you to disable secure boot within the BIOS. I am not as familiar with Apple hardware so I will not comment on that.
UEFI and it GUID partition layout is superior to traditional BIOS. I develop within embedded systems that rely on GUID partitions to provide granularity of storage. One current system I support has 34 partitions, to support redundancy, safe image updates, and soft recovery.
With UEFI on the desktop, you can implement the same strategies.
So those are two statements in the post that I found to be misleading, if not outright wrong.
On the hardware front, yes, current era consumer laptops have become completely sealed boxes. If you want to own a laptop that can be upgraded and maintained, you need to buy either a gaming or enterprise laptop.
For most people, and enterprise laptop is only going to be slightly more expensive than a consumer grade device. It is not going to be as slim and 'sexy'. It t will likely have useful ports down the side.
On desktops, as long as you are buying a full sized desktop, I have not seen any (yet) that are not completely equipped with appropriate connectors and cabling to support upgrades.
I have seen 'mini' systems that are completely soldered down, but that is the price you pay for small. Connectors consume real estate.
I can't grok why people fall for laptops in the first place. Laptops are a bunch of compromises in every detail: screen size, storage volume, keyboard, sound etc etc.
I got my first PC 30 years ago and never bought a new one ever since. It was always upgrades, small or large. Even stepping up MB and CPU I've kept my drives, graphics card, most of the smaller peripherals, sometimes even RAM, so even the largest changes are always in several hundred dollars ballpark. The process is fun, interesting and makes me keep tabs with industry.
I've bought a laptop when switching to "digital nomad" lifestyle for several years, and it was my very worst experience with personal computing. I've spent about 15 hundreds bucks and never made worst investment ever since.
I don't think people "fall" for laptops. They're well aware of the cons, but the single pro of not being strapped to a desk outweighs all of the disadvantages for many people.
I'm using a MacBook Pro from 2014, after putting in a new battery recently it still works great, and when I'm at my desk I plug it into a big monitor. Not as upgradeable as a desktop, but even assuming I can't sell the laptop when I upgrade it, it cost me less than $500 per year.
I've tried using multiple computers in the past (big desktop + MacBook Air, costs about the same in total as a 15" MacBook Pro that is much less powerful than the desktop) but I realized that the convenience of knowing that all of my files are on one computer is more important to me.
Ah, Apple ecosystem! Then alas, you don't actually have any viable choice. Desktops are Mac Mini or iMac, first is crippled, last is overpriced, both are almost non-upgradeble (
I’ve owned Windows desktops in the past. I prefer MacOS, but Windows is fine. The reason I use laptops is because I only want to own one computer, and that one computer needs to be portable, not because I’m stuck in an ecosystem.
I don't understand what the author is concerned about. Are there PC laptops being sold today on which you are prohibited from installing Linux because of UEFI / Secure Boot?
There was once a time while windows RT still existed and microsoft had a requirement that it must not be possible to disable secure boot. There is also the T2 chip on macbooks which currently does this.
My current desktop is getting on about 7 years old. I used to build new computers every year or two, so the idea of getting almost a decade out of the same box is wild and represents how much PC tech has plateaued.
However, I have a nice laptop from work and I really like my work setup, where I just connect a couple ports and instantly have a couple more big monitors, a good keyboard and mouse and other stuff.
So I've really been considering replacing my desktop with a decent laptop at home. I've also seen some benchmarks that are putting fairly commodity systems within spitting distance of what my old workhorse can do, meaning if I invested in a decent laptop I could probably keep about the level of performance I have today, but gain portability.
Then in the last few months we got the new Nvidia 3080 line (with AMD's RDNA 2 coming soon), the AMD 5000 series processors, new classes of SSDs like the 970 Evo Plus which have performance that used to be what we saw with DRAM.
All of these combined in a new system are going to be an entirely new class of desktop performance that my old system won't even come close to touching and portable machines won't touch either.
So I'm thinking of going with a new desktop sometime next year once inventory and prices stabilize, and if I need it a rock bottom budget laptop for traveling. Target price <$3k all-in.
I've gone from desktops to laptops and back again. The reasons are somewhat technical but mostly center around psychology.
From a technical perspective not many laptops come close to my desktop's performance and if they did they'd cost way more.
But the psychological benefit of having a desktop to do my work on is when I get home I don't continue working. I lock my ability to do most of my job (DevOps) to my desktop at my private office away from the home. That means when I get home I can do basic tasks on my 2020 MBP but for security reasons there's a lot I can't do.
Maybe this is something to consider when making your choice? Let me know how you get on.
The subtext of the article seems to be the loss of "freedom to tinker" and the loss of control over your gadgets - both valid. Personally, I find the NUC a nice hybrid that is portable and modular enough to keep my inner nerd satisfied :). It currently sits under the TV and runs a Plex server.
In addition, as a father of an inquisitive 6 year old, I find the PC a tad better for the following reasons:
- Ability to show the internals (from a few feet away!) thereby spawning curiosity on the possibilities of technology
- His coursework can be seen on TV and ensuring that TV is not merely entertainment
- "Certified" media for him to consume (we don't have youtube installed in any of our devices so I use youtube-dl to download astronomy stuff for him)
The desktops are more rugged and robust in every means at most of the times.
I do not remember using a laptop as my primary dev machine in last 10 years, I use the same 10 year old c2d 2.5ghz machine with newer motherboard(2014-g41mcombo gigabyte) and enough ram.
The system runs both ubuntu and windows 7 at ease and I am not considering update in at least next year. that describes the robustness of desktop.
It is not that desktop does not break, they do quite often. But mostly we can manually troubleshoot them, In 10 years I have fried a motherboard, bricked 2 psu, ram and 3 harddrives. Its that I can just fix broken part and get going.
Hardware upgrades are only required if you are resource constrained, like require multiple vm, or multimedia editing and some crypot type gpu and cpu intensive stuffs. Even in those cases desktop shines.
Laptops are really great for mobility and they are really capable machines which can be configured to comparable performance with most of the desktops but not in durability and flexibility.
I agree with the point that modern devices like smartphones ad tables aren't a PC replacement. But having to buy a pre-2012 laptop just to be able to install a Linux distro is false: nowadays mayor distros support secure boot and if this isn't the case of your distro or it complicates the install process you can easily disable it in most of the cases. Actually I was unaware of the existence of motherboards preventing you form disabling secure boot before reading this article. AFAIK the only laptops where you could actually have problems installing Linux are MacBooks due to a security chip (it's called T9? But also I'm not informed about MacBooks so maybe there's a way around), on all others you shouldn't encounter actual roadblocks, in the worst case scenario you could have some minor hw incompatibility.
I have a MacBook Pro running Manjaro Linux, Audiophile Linux and the latest OS-X. There's no issue: there's a command that can toggle the security status. I think the instructions are even in the Apple documentation.
Now getting some of that configured to use the cheap hardware is a more complicated story.
While were on the subject I'm tired of these BS laptop keyboards. Stop trying to cram a numeric keyboard on there and shifting all the keys and trackpad to the left. It's great for the 1% of the time I need a full size numeric keyboard but sucks for the 99% of the time I don't.
I notice the lack of user input/output options. USB requires you to jump thru hoops to use it and does not give the constance bandwidth I got with older ports that the CPU could bit-bang.
Today I have multi-GigaHertz machines that I can't build the simple projects that I could use with my Amigas because I have no way to interface directly to the buss.
The latency of what present computer supplies is horrible.
These days the standard way to do this is to use a USB UART adapter, or a USB-connected Arduino, an Ethernet-connected Raspberry Pi, etc. -- they have GPIO ports, both analog and digital, as well as I2C, SPI, etc etc. There are enormous numbers of options for motor controllers and sensors available off the shelf. You can bit bang all you want from your desktop computer, via this interface!
The problem is the bandwidth you get from such solutions. I could push 3.5 megabytes per second thru my Amiga interface, the USB->RS232 limits me to about 32 kilobytes per second.
Hrmm. My latest PC motherboard has the usual 2x 16550 UARTs and a wealth of other headers for various serial protocols. The optional BMC board for same has a ridiculous abundance of GPIOs, too. And a parallel port on a PCIe stick costs $20.
It seems like the bit-banging abilities of these current PCs are as good as they ever were.
I switched to a Linux desktop since wfh from a MacBook Pro. It’s superior in every way except portability - but there’s nowhere I could take my laptop right now anyway. I can get tons of NVMe storage, lots of fast memory, a wildly powerful CPU with 8+ cores, an unfathomable GPU(coming from laptops) for the same price as that laptop.
None of this is news but it definitely makes the development experience so much nicer, and I can play any game with max settings on it too. Building desktops is also just a lot nicer than it used to be. There are tons of quality of life improvements in the cases, PSUs with detachable cables, silent fans and cooling solutions, etc.
Does anyone have any recommendations if I want to keep using macOS, but I'm not tied to a MacBook?
I realized I hadn't taken my main MacBook off the dock in 9 months. When I go out, I have an older one that I'm happy to use away from my desk. Since it's acting like a desktop now, I though maybe I'd replace it with a higher-spec mac desktop. But a high end mac mini isn't much different than a high-end MacBook.
It seems if you want a high-performance mac but don't want to spend 6k+ on a mac pro, a specced-out 16" MacBook is the best choice. Is that correct?
I've got a 2018 i7 mac mini that I upgraded the ram to 32GB myself and it's a very capable little machine (got it when I needed to do Unity Mobile Game development, but it keeps up with pretty much everything).
I do wish I would have gotten a bigger internal SSD (I bought it with 256GB, but have now moved most of my files to an external SSD and it's a constant struggle).
I've also now purchased an external GPU to drive my 2 4k monitors at home (it can do 2 4k monitors of text editing itself without struggling _too_ much, but it does run about 15C cooler with the eGPU), so it's hard to say if an iMac wouldn't have been a better purchase, but the nice thing about the mac mini is I can easily throw it in a backpack when I need to travel every couple of months.
Do they still make iMacs? My main computer is a 2015 5K iMac, maxed out for that class, and it is way faster than all the much-newer MacBook Pros (that I also use, at other desks/when traveling/etc)
That's interesting, I had never considered an iMac because I always thought they were designed as lower-spec family workstations. These look like the middle ground I was hoping to find. I'm still not sure I like the form factor, but I'll certainly consider this when it's time to replace my current system. Thanks!
I used to think the same thing - my previous workhorse was a Mac Pro, but I switched to the iMac to get "Retina" back in 2015 (hard/annoying on Mac Pro at the time), and it totally impressed me.
The high end iMacs are quite nice, as long as you don't mind their all-in-one nature (including the monitor obviously). Back in the day I might have suggested Hackintosh, although that's always seemed like quite a hassle to me, and certainly less appealing now Apple are moving over to ARM.
If I buy another Apple laptop it'll probably be a 16" Macbook Pro. In fairness to Apple I usually get at least 5 years out of one of their laptops so can generally live with the premium.
You'll still get a good five years out of a Hackintosh box. If you build it from the right components and use OpenCore https://dortania.github.io/OpenCore-Install-Guide/ its really not too hard. After Apple drops Intel support you can always switch it over to Linux or Windows.
I'm also wondering about this: I'd be very interested in building a desktop computer atm if I could run a reliable/up-to-date copy of macOS on it. A brief search on this didn't turn up anything promising though...
For previous work I had a big workstation (HPz620, 32 cores, 64 gigs of ram, large GPU)
Whilst it wasn't portable, it was _fast_. Granted not in single threaded performance (they are all old hat nowadays)
But I could run a bunch of containers, VMs if I wanted and run slack and chrome (although I use firefox mostly)
New work has given me a fancy macbook. Which is fine, but I miss the extra resolution of the 4k screen (which I suspect is perceived rather than actual. I have very small fonts)
For me the most important factor against using a laptop is cooling. With a desktop you can go to the extremes and install water cooling. With a laptop you're always compromising on performance because if the load gets high the processor starts throttling and thus its performance is severely reduced. As a side effect there's also the issue with noise. A laptop fan is way more noisy than a desktop one because there's so much more space inside the box.
The author seems to care mostly about UEFI and secure boot, but there are other advantages to desktop (not to mention the likely partially permanent shift to remote work post-covid). Personally, I run a bit of a hybrid setup.
My new Dell XPS 13 came with Ubuntu pre-installed (which I replaced with Void Linux) and for the most part allows for a lot of tweaking. When I'm at home, I connect to my eGPU unit with one cable, allowing me to use my secondary monitor, a proper mouse, and external hard drives (although internal is already 1TB SSD). The eGPU unit is a Razer Core V2 with a GTX 1060, which is good enough for VR games, which play well on Linux these days surprisingly. Then a lot of my stuff is self-hosted in the cloud anyway, like a media server, backups, servers for development, even an IRC bouncer. I also run my own smart home software on a raspberry pi.
So while at the moment this might not be typical for an average consumer, the trend towards edge computing will really make the laptop into an "internet appliance" as the author says, and the browser an OS. Hell, with 5G, cloud gaming for VR may even be viable, and then we're back to the equivalent of terminals and mainframes.
The only real issue then is the ownership of these services — I don't agree with the author that everything will become a SaaS and no more open hardware will exist. It will always exist as long as there's a demand for it, you just have to accept that it'll be more expensive and less consumer-friendly. E.g. I have to accept that I can't hotplug my eGPU on Linux like you can on Windows, and I need to pay for my servers. Spotify and Netflix will always be cheaper than any legal means of acquiring media otherwise specifically because of their size.
I would like a pc that would be silent, small and would actually look good. Most cases have "gamer" or "office" aesthetic, neither of which I like. I think the only decent looking is Streacom DB4: https://streacom.com/products/db4-fanless-chassis/
Those mostly seem to be basically naked pc:s with a completely perforated case and lots of fans. This would make them very vulnerable to dust.
I was thinking of the opposite: the case being the heat sink. The Fanlesstech blog presents these sometimes. https://www.fanlesstech.com/
I don't know if it's enough to just cool the CPU (and using integrated graphics) and let convection handle the other components? Does the chipset or memory need active airflow over them?
I’ve always had desktop PCs at home, and I’ll always have. For me, a laptop PC has always been a complement to a desktop PC, not a replacement. My desktop PCs are sitting on the floor, so they don’t take up much space.
In January I knew the pandemic was going absolutely destroy everything so I bought 3k worth of parts for liquid cooled AMD build. After developing on OS X for 20 years, I’ve been working from home on Manjaro (gnome) for 8 months and never once regretted it.
Even "appliance" devices can be used in a manner which increases freedom, e.g. retain iPad flexibility and reliability while using it as a thin client for self-hosted content and services on FreeNAS/TrueNAS on open hardware. Choose iOS apps (e.g. Omni, 2Do, DevonThink, GoodReader, Codebook, Netnewswire, LumaFusion, Textastic, Working Copy, Secure Shellfish, PhotoSync, Jump, Screens) which support synchronization protocols like CalDAV, WebDAV, ssh/scp, SMB, DLNA, RDP etc. With the recently introduced iSH (user-space Linux) on iOS, more integration options are available. You can also use an iOS remote desktop with mouse/keyboard to drive remote desktops and VMs that have less OS/app restrictions.
If more people are working at home, in one place, the value of a laptop decreases quite a bit
It wouldn’t surprise me at all if we see a resurgence in desktop computers since all the places a laptop shines: coffee shop, train commute, working on a plane, aren’t all that important anymore.
Not to even mention these shitty island type keyboards in all laptops.
From all features of pre 2012-NOW laptops the REAL KEYBOARD is what I miss the most.
I really hoped that Lenovo will make something more from its 25th Anniversary Edition ThinkPad (some name id T25) but from what I know only 5000 pieces were made and finito. Or ar least that Lenovo will PERMANENTLY provice a classic/retro ThinkPad with every new generation with REAL KEYBOARD.
That is why I still use 2011 ThinkPad W520 and ThinkPad X220 - to have REAL USABLE KEYBOARD with REAL PGUP/PGDN HOME/END INS/DEL keys block in the top right space.
Future looks very dark since years in the laptop space.
The more I look into laptop computing (and often computing in general) the more only single word stands out.
To be quite honest I also thought, once upon a time, that I could NEVER leave my proper 7 row X220t keyboard for the shitty new island keyboards in new thinkpads.
I now type happily on my X1 Yoga. It’s a very good keyboard, you get used to it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
There are tradeoffs we all have to make, and I chose having new processors and things like USB-C over having a really good built in keyboard. I just settled for a good keyboard, not a really good one.
I used this type of keyboard for 3 years on ThinkPad W530.
Thought that I will get used to it. I kinda did but the first moment when I moved back to REAL 7-row keyboard was like driving a bike again. Its just so good I do not want to get back to anything other then that.
Maybe I will have two machines. One to type and one for other things ... or with external ThinkPad SK-8855 keyboard :)
Time will come, maybe I will do one last 'hop' with ThinkPad 25th Anniversary Edition ... if they will be available in several years ...
It's nice to hear that I'm not alone. I still have a music library, and rip dvd's with handbrake. Ripping a dvd with a 12 core desktop machine is a breeze, and so are other general computing tasks.
I know I'm probably a dinosaur. I run a lot of desktop applications for work, and run most my models locally. I use the shell to automate tasks, and rarely use the "cloud" and try to limit browser tasks.
What's funny about this post is that I'm actually in the market for a new laptop, and am quite paralyzed in the process. I can't get myself to spend $1500 on some mediocre machine where everything is soldered on the mobo, I can't replace the battery, and that will become garbage in 2 years.
Meetings. Working in different areas. Even at home I won’t stay in one place.
All the pro desktop vs laptop arguments are funny. No one wanted less performance at higher prices. We want to take the machine with us and use it in different places.
I really wish my employer would just give me a desktop; they keep insisting on giving me a laptop that I immediately close and plug into a dock. But, it's just not a fight worth having for me.
I too have been considering going 'back' to desktop recently, but it's to do with the pandemic. Laptop died last may, I got a new one, and... it's still reasonably good. However, I've been far less mobile in the last few months, and that will likely stay that way for a long time.
I've been primarily on laptops for the past 12-13 years or so. Much of my work involves traveling and meeting clients, sometimes doing some work on their premises. This was not an every day thing, but it was enough that I considered the laptop the primary tool. And I would typically get the higher-powered laptop models when I'd get new ones, as it's the main day to day tool.
The last 6+ months have changed most of my movements. I haven't met a client in person this year. I don't expect I will for at least another year. If it's sooner, it's sooner, but probably not. Being forced in to being non-mobile, my thoughts are turning back to desktops. I'll still want a laptop, but price/performance, I know I can get some more from desktop, and I'm considering switching to desktop as 'primary work tool' in the next couple of months. I'll keep current laptop (18 months old now) and it will serve fine as a secondary tool.
I'm curious how covid will impact other peoples' decisions in this area. I can't be the only one in this situation thinking about this decision.
I recently replaced the laptop that 80 year old relatives where using with a "desktop". It is just a small NUC box, 24" monitor, webcam, wireless mouse & keyboard. Cheaper than a laptop of similar power. And they love it. Because our eyes and hands worsen with age, and mobile computing something for younger people. Maybe this is me in the future, or maybe I'll be using voice control and a bit TV. But for all of us living to an old enough age, small devices will become a problem.
Surprised to not see more love for USB-C docks in this thread?
Have set up three USB-C "workstations" with montior, keyboard and mouse (USB via Logitech Unify) in the house: One cable dock for any of the household laptops. There has been some toothing pain, but with USB-C reaching corporate machines, these are quickly becoming a non-issue.
Have been moving the SO and kids to USB-C laptops over the last couple of years (used Thinkpad X's are great value -- and tend to get full teen approval).
My current desktop system is a Raspberry Pi 4B with a 64 bit quad core ARM processor at 1.5 GHz and 4GB memory (8GB version is also available). It runs BSD's and Linux distributions, it has no UEFI, and I can tinker with it to my hearts content. It's great for writing and coding and everything else I do. If I want to play games, my son has several games consoles.
I recommend that you take a look at the Raspberry Pi and other single-board computers. They're cheap too :-)
Humm. The author is a bit too security conscious isn't he? To be polite. Also, he talks like using a laptop is the thing to do by default.
Excluding his exaggerated motivation, why would you use a laptop for real work anyway, when you can run a multiple monitor desktop with tons of storage, no thermal problems and a real keyboard to type on?
Personally I use a desktop 95% of the time for work. I own a laptop but I only work on it when I have no choice.
Just the other day I reluctantly put in an order for a laptop with Dell. I hated using laptops for software work. Nothing was powerful enough and specs were limited. My last laptop had a max screen resolution of 1366x768; I was disgusted when I booted it. I don't like Macs.
Due to Covid I moved away from our central office, but next year I'll have to commute there every month or two for meetings. Obviously I can't lug a massive desktop around on a train.
So I bought a customised Dell Precision Mobile workstation. It cost a small fortune, but I reckon I'll have this for years. The CPU will probably outperform my current 4790K and it allows more RAM (128GB) than my current motherboard (32GB). I can also stick a 4G SIM card into it so I'll have broadband pretty much anywhere I am. Ideal for these days of remote working.
I'll get work to buy a M.2 drive and I'll stick a VM on it and restrict work activities to that. If I leave I can just send that back.
I'm not sure I'd buy another desktop if my current one goes kaput. Potentially for gaming, but I don't do that quite so much these days. (Ryzen would be a temptation though.)
I can fully get behind the thesis of this post. But I still love using my thin laptop.
My solution: run desktops at home as your own private cloud and use them in various ways from you laptop or phone. Create your own services or use oss services to fulfill your needs from your thin internet devices, no middle man/woman needed, use your desktop/s anywhere. This won't solve your uefi problem if you use modern laptops, nor will it solve your usb 2.0 problem if you stick to old laptops. But set up your own services, don't let them take over! It's quite a bit of work to setup, but maybe it'll get easier if more people take on the challenge. (Disclosure: this is my personal pipe dream, and I'm in the early stages of working this out myself.)
On a side note, the open laptops you refer to can be more pricy, but if that's what you believe in, then support the cause!
Shouldn’t this be an obvious option? When did desktops become a non-thing?
I know it’s not a practical choice for everyone, but I’ve always maintained both a desktop and a laptop. The desktop tends to be both significantly cheaper and more powerful, and it typically also survives a couple laptop upgrades before being replaced.
As long as you work essentially at one place, don't need to work on the go, don't need to show your work to a customer when meeting in a cafe, and genuinely can use a ton of processing power and storage, a desktop is a clear choice.
I suspect a lot of the movement towards laptops was and is due to the desire to run macOS. It just so happens that Apple desktop computers are either way underpowered or way expensive. An MBP is basically the sanest way to run macOS. So MBPs tend to become makeshift portable desktops, with external screens, keyboard, mice / trackpads, power bricks, and cooling pads.
If your work processes are not beholden to Apple software, building (or ordering a customized) desktop is a refreshing gulp of power. You suddenly can afford much more, or spend way less.
I'm writing this from a Linux desktop, and I'm quite content with it.
Bought a desktop computer last week for the first time since 2005. Installed Ubuntu. Still SSH’ing into it mostly from MacBook, but it’s such a boon to productivity to have an always-on machine right here. And yeah the modularity of a desktop form factor is really amazing compared to Apple product line
At best I'd agree on something like VSCode remote: performant _local_ client and remote server. All the things like RDP access to powerful machine or even something in-browser (yes, I know that VSCode is also having electron underneath) are just too slow and too inconvenient.
I had desktops for a while. Then I decided to switch to laptop and bought latest Thinkpad X1 Extreme (at a time). It throttles, it struggles to play even relatively easy games. Occasionally it loses connection to the lenovo dock and I need to restart it. It can't have more than 3 monitors.
When the time of next upgrade will come I'm certainly going to desktop + some light laptop like my wife's X1 Carbon. I don't like macs and I strongly believe that Win + WSL / dual boot to linux are much better for development.
Regarding the "tragic" part of the post... It feels like there are more people learning Python and other things like that than there were 10 years ago. Linux is built into Windows, there is a lot of github activity, is all of this a sign that there will be more tinkerers in the future? That tinkering will be more for everyone rather than a few experts?
Also since you have a lot of computer science majors, and coding is a thing everyone knows about (?), it seems like there will always be a sizable portion that will need proper computers and a proper OS that isn't just a "device". I mean without programmers and technical people in the future the companies themselves will not be able to run so there must always be proper options for those who want it
>>Now, nine or more years out of date in computer technology, I am still using laptops with mostly USB 2.0 ports and internal SATA SSD's.
I'm also using old laptops (T500s) so that I can replace Intel's firmware with libreboot and also install alternative wireless cards.
The USB 2.0 thing is a problem, and reading this article made me think that there might be a way around that, and sure enough, you can get a PCMCIA card with USB 3.0 ports[1].
I know this isn't a long term solution, but it might be an immediate solution to the time spent making backups.
I get what the author is saying, on several levels. There is freedom (in the Richard Stallman sense) of having a better chance to control your hardware and software. There is something good about having one specific place to work; it is too easy to turn a laptop on in the living room at night when you should be paying attention to your family, friends, or roommates. Desktops are cheaper .
All that said, I have moved 100% away from desktops. I really do like to be able to work outside (two areas to choose from), kitchen table next to our parrot’s cage, living room, or bedroom. Sometimes I need to work while traveling.
Finally, iPad Pros (or similar products) are simply better devices for reading, doing research, and watching entertainment.
I produce music with hardware from Universal Audio, which, if you want true zero-latency monitoring (and yes you do), this is your only valid choice, thus you are stuck with the Apple ecosystem. That means either one of their extremely overpriced and underpowered laptops (like my MacBook Pro), a Mac Mini, an iMac/iMac Pro, or a Mac tower, all with high cost of entry and completely non-upgradable and non-user-servicable. Sure you can try to build a Hackintosh, but I want to spend my time making music, not f-int around with incompatible hardware. So unless I want to shell out $6,000+ for a bare-bones Mac Pro which cannot even be upgraded nor can I repair it myself, desktop is not an option for me.
I used to have a dream computing setup back when I was in college:
A beefy desktop computer - high performance/$ CPU and GPU with several terabytes of storage so I could not worry about how much stuff I download and have several OSes installed without having to shortchange some on storage.
A netbook - one of those 10"-screen dinky little things that had just enough compute to run some basic desktop stuff. I would use this as a remote terminal to the desktop so I could still use the desktop's power from my couch.
As wifi speeds have increased, netbooks have all but disappeared and laptops mostly suck, I'm seriously considering this again, but instead of a netbook I'd jerry-rig a Raspberry Pi into a "laptop".
I cooked two HP 17 inch laptops running finite element analysis tools for --the irony-- a thermal management project. They just couldn't handle the sustained load, even with external fans aimed at their air intake areas.
I've always used self-built desktop towers. When it's time to upgrade we build them five or ten at a time so every system matches. It makes for a much simpler build and bring-up experience.
In this case I needed to continue working, and so I decided to task two HP laptops on the network as external processors for the FEA tool. I have to say, they worked great for about four weeks. During that time they experienced about 18 hours per day of continuous processing. Fun while it lasted.
What these people usually don't get is that computer at the end of the day is just a tool. It is a means to an end not the goal. Having a powerful computer for the sake of having a computer doesn't accomplish any meaningful.
To me desktop computer means there's a place where I work. A fixed place. Moreover, as I use my computer a lot, my family knows where I am. It also mean I sit on a chair, not on a sofa.
(it also means it can run Linux properly, not with battery issues...)
I've been thinking along similar lines, especially now that - with WFH likely to be the norm for the foreseeable future - my need for a portable computer is much diminished. I could get a lot more bang for my buck and build a system that was specced exactly the way I want.
The rub for me is that I really dislike Windows. I use it for work - I have to - but it's not an OS I'd choose for myself[0]. I like OSX but the problem there is that, unless you go down the Hackintosh route (which soon I suspect won't really be a viable option anyway with the move to ARM), you have to buy preconfigured Apple hardware.
And then there's desktop Linux, which fills me with dread simply because I've not had great experiences in the past. Moreover, some key software that I need simply won't run on it. Notably Ableton Live. (I know Linux-compatible DAWs exist, but I really like Live and don't want to have to give it up.)
A decade ago, for me, buying a Mac was unequivocally the best option. Now that's perhaps no longer the case and, worse, there aren't any other great options that I can see. I'd be glad to be proven wrong though.
EDIT: Actually, maybe what I could do is dual-boot Windows and Linux. Use Linux for software development and most everything else (even Office 365 will run on Linux under Wine nowadays, apparently), then use Windows for Ableton Live and games. With UEFI it might not be the worst thing in the world to set up and maintain either.
[0] The main beef I have with Windows is that it just doesn't get out of the damn way. It really wants you to know it's there, from the dreadful multi-DPI multi-monitor support[1], gimpily inconsistent UI, the shitty 10 second dance all your desktops and windows do when you plug in another monitor[2], and crappy update mechanism, to the driver issues, WiFi connectivity issues, ropey audio support, instability and blue screens. And there's always, always, ALWAYS some random thing or other sucking CPU and running the fans. Don't get me wrong: every problem that bothers me on Windows also bothers me on OSX. It's just that on Windows these problems bother me several times per day, whereas on OSX I'm bothered by one of these issues maybe once a month. The upgrade to Catalina was initially painful and enraging but after the first couple of weeks, having upgraded everything, all was well again and remained so.
[1] Granted, likely to be less of an issue with a desktop system where you're likely to purchase monitors with identical DPIs and resolutions.
[2] Also less likely to be an issue with a desktop system, unless you need to use a KVM so you can share your desktop displays with your work laptop.
I had a very similar experience - dual-boot is nice but not ideal because restarting takes time and you lose all your context. Now im running a (headless) ubuntu server on the host with a windows VM with GPU passthrough on top. With a modern 6-8 core CPU + extra RAM (+ a cheap 2nd GPU for linux if you want a desktop environment on both linux and windows active at the same time) you can have both windows & linux running simultaneously with no need to dual-boot. VFIO & GPU passthrough makes the VM run pretty much at native speed although it does take some tweaking to set up.
That's an interesting idea: certainly worth experimenting with. As you say, with GPU passthrough it ought to be possible to get a near-native experience on the virtual desktop.
im using libvirt, which uses qemu, which uses KVM. There's plenty of good guides if you search for something like "VFIO VM GPU passthrough". Here is a good one:
Definitely worth investigating. There's some sense in which throwing hardware at the problem will solve it and, with a desktop computer, it's actually relatively affordable to do that.
I have never liked using laptops for software development for all the reasons (and more) listed in the comments.
Also consider using Raspberry Pi for portable apps and development, I am also into open hardware, great projects like the Arduino and pure electronics on bread boards and designing your own pcb.
Linux, once the bellwether of of tech freedom is slowly being diluted by corporate interests and bad decisions.
There are still places to explore, the amazing world of materials like graphene which is fairly simple to synthesize.
To quote from Breaking Bad, "It's Saul Goodman!"
I just bought a system 76 ubuntu native build with 64gb ram and 12 cores. It cost a little over 2K. It was not over priced. There is a demand for these machines in AI and data science. They are not going away.
I never left. I have a few subnotebooks around for emergencies and travel, but all real work is on desktops with a good keyboard, a big screen at eye height, a mouse, and a fast wired Internet connection.
Personally, I already pulled the trigger 2 years ago when I first starting to write Rust professionally. A laptop just becomes far tooooo noisy compiling Rust code. These days I use 3 machines:
* A fanless Chromebook with decent screen for travel use
* An Intel NUC that is hooked to a big monitor, which is also the device I'm typing this on
* A beefy Ryzen desktop that sits in the corner of my balcony, which I usually connect via ssh and perform all the heavy tasks
To me I'm getting all the benefits of each computer, and the combined cost is still less than a so-called macbook pro :)
EFI as a standard needs to be better implemented, but TPMs are your friend when you can change the keys.
I switched back to desktops when the 1st gen Ryzen 8-cores came out and haven't regretted it for a second. Bigger screens, beefy specs, more connectivity, and all of it is incredible value given the price of some 13-14 inch laptops!
I can go actually as light as I would like on my laptop now, even something ARM so that's a plus too, if you don't need mobility and beefy specs at the same time.
Recently I built a small form factor PC for playing video games and streaming and I love it! Here it is, Condensed Anthem Lazer Power: Frostblade NeWT:
Two problems, it has: Weight/portability for when I do need to take it somewhere, and that it runs Windows and I prefer Mac OS. I keep my MacBook Pro because of these but am thinking of making the PC a dual-boot Hackintosh.
I really wish the technology was there for a thin client laptop that can hook up to a more powerful desktop machine, GUI and all, sharing hardware etc.
I've tried VNC and other remote desktop solutions but the but the performance has always been abysmal, it's a niche idea and obviously comes with the network requirement, but I think it would give the best of both worlds when you need the portability of a laptop around the house, with the power of a desktop.
The whole time you have been apart from desktops I have been using one.
I recently stepped up the game a bit and built a homelab.
I don't care if most people move on to using dumb devices that limit what they can do: they are probably not the people who were really using computers anyway.
Everyone who wants a good PC will have one, nothing is threatening the existence of PCs and the esports industry will keep them alive.
As for a brick and mortar computer store? If you're lucky you live near a microcenter or something.
Around 2015/6 I went full laptop (Razer Blade 15) with an eGPU and multiple monitors after trying the same with a MacBook Pro (poor nvidia integration) and after years of crashes, overheating laptop shells and weird Wi-Fi issues when returning from sleep with the eGPU, I just gave up.
A couple months ago I got full ATX case with the 16 core AMD CPU, the best GPU out there and it runs cool, quiet and I just RPD to it when needed (prob less than twice a year)
I never moved away from desktops. It’s too much fun to spec and then build the beast of your dreams. I have a cheap laptop for web browsing and low power tasks.
Ive been mainly using a desktop for years, ever since I started working from home. I have the keyboard, mouse and monitor on a sort of 'breakfast in bed tray' type thing I made. This tray fits on top of a little desk I made. So I can work at the desk or in a bed sitting up on cushions if I want.
When I'm not in my computer room I dont want to be using a computer anyway, so theres no downside for me.
I'm also considering going back to a custom build desktop. Lots of flexibility, much more stronger, cheaper, upgradable, etc. I'm already connecting my laptop to a display and mechanical keyboard and mouse. Specially now we work from home and probably continue doing so which I enjoy a lot, I can just put the laptop aside for rare cases I need a mobile computer.
I think the idea of the 'Personal Computer' has been grossly warped over the past 20 years from a tool that primarily serves our personal goals to a 'Device' that's designed to serve the goals of a corporation. The general public has become 'ok' with the concept of paying for a premium for a device but not really owning it.
What I'm really concerned about is Secure Boot, Notarization (and Windows equivalents) and Mandatory SSL being pushed by browser vendors.
Those three things taken together, with a well-targeted government intervention, could turn the internet into a walled garden, in the name of stopping scams/terrorism/child porn/piracy for the first few years, obviously.
I miss the modular ability of desktops, but I do not miss their lack of portability.
The best camera is the one you have with you.
The best computer is the one you have with you.
But, I am annoyed heavily that I can't play some great games due to lack of graphic cards, and would like to investigate the whole usb-c/thunderbolt plug in video card thing.
When I bought my current desktop computer it was not so very easy to find one without windows. I live in the Netherlands and I actually ended up ordering one from Germany. It used to be that I could just buy a windows-free pc from the local computer store. I find this a bit worrisome and shocking...
I like mini-pcs (NUC) for dev work, they run linux without much drama, are nice and cheap, and crucially, are not intended to be carried everywhere and stay at the office. I enjoy being physically removed from my work machine. Covid has altered this relationship in a way I'm not sure I like.
I am surprised by this article. Obviously laptops are vastly inferior as desktop machines. The trouble now is that laptops are becoming crap as laptops as well. The thermals on my new XPS 15 are garbage and looking around there doesn't seem to be anything better out there.
I keep a light laptop for traveling, but at home I much prefer a desktop. The fact that I can upgrade incrementally as time goes on and have a choice over which HW goes in is something a laptop just can't beat.
That said, pretty much every point of WalterBright also applies.
Just buy an Intel Nuc i7 or an AMD Ryzen mini-pc. A 1TB m2 slot SSD and 32GB ram. Perfect for programming. You can fit it in your pocket if you need to move it around. Big screens, keyboards and mice should stay at the desks where you work.
Agree. Keeping a work desktop is better option, combined with a low-end MacBook Air, or anything you prefer. There are times when you still have to head to meeting rooms, work outdoors, or in front of TV. Laptop is handy at that time.
Personally, I prefer using a Workstation Laptop, such as the System76 Serval or Bonobo. Most of the time, I'll use a big monitor and mechanical keyboard. But if I'm travelling, I can still use the machine as a laptop.
The level of abstraction at which the average tinkerer is tinkering continuously increases over time. Certainly makes things harder for those who long to tinker at a lower level, but I don't see it as a tragedy.
You’ll be happy you did. People talk about how laptops are “fast enough” which they are, but when you’re using them all day, things happening a tiny bit faster makes for a much more pleasant experience.
My main concern with desktops is that they’re much less power efficient than laptops, and therefore create a lot more heat in my office.
Something like a Mac cheese grater is probably more power efficient than my custom built PC, but you lose a lot of the value going with a prebuilt system.
This is only slightly true: if you buy a well-designed system and don't disable power management, a desktop will use more power but not substantially so unless you're actually using that extra capacity. If you buy some massive gaming / ML rig, yes, that'll use a lot more but it's a lot closer if you buy a comparable capacity and quality system.
The best way to see this is to buy a watt-meter and test it while doing what you normally do. Also remember that two decades ago you'd probably have had the computer _with_ a CRT sucking several hundred watts constantly, probably with some nice incandescent / halogen bulbs to keep things extra toasty, and a decade ago if you weren't using a Mac you probably had most of the power savings features disabled for system stability and/or compatibility. By now even the faster components have great power management when they're not fully loaded.
Why do you think a well built desktop PC would be less power efficient? It's probably more power hungry, but I don't think desktop PCs use inherently more power per instruction executed or whatever arcane metric we'd be measuring. Modern desktops can clock up and down just as quick as their more mobile counterparts, and due to proper cooling, the same chip you have in a laptop would be more efficient in a desktop enclosure - the cooler a chip is, the more efficient it can be - higher temperatures necessitate more power to move a charge across a conduit.
If you're comparing "I'm using a laptop to edit a spreadsheet" to "I'm using a desktop to edit a spreadsheet", desktops are more often than not going to use more power to do essentially the same work (and by extension, radiate more heat).
This is one of the reasons that I ditched my desktop and switched to a laptop for my daily driver (moved heavy workloads to the cloud inc. gaming via GeForce Now, ditched all file sync tools to keep my desktop and laptop sync'd, etc). I can now comfortably close my office door and not have my office heat up to a zillion degrees.
I bought an HP Elitebook, it was quite pricey, about $3500 but I figured it will be reliable at least. So far the keyboard broke, the screen broke, the motherboard broke (the USB-C connector was loose) all in less than a year. Since replacing all three those the motherboard is breaking again and the keyboard is breaking again and will likely need two more replacements before the warranty expires, at which point I will just toss it for the garbage it is.
My plan is to next time buy the cheapest laptop I can stomach and assume the thing will pretty much only last a year and then move resource intensive stuff to a desktop.
Also I'm not ever buying HP again, they make overpriced garbage.
I used to make fun of desktop computer owners but wow! They're cheaper, the manufactures aren't pathologically trying to screw you over, and the ability to expand them is real!
At this point I'm pretty happy with cheap small laptops and ssh into my larger ryzen desktop in my workshop.
Nothing beats 32 cores with a 32 inch 4K IPS monitor, and a proper mechanical keyboard. Also, wired internet, not subject to radio interference. The very pinnacle of computing experience.
I have never understood the fixation on what terminal one uses to connect to the network with. I never have anything of great value on my laptop or desktop, and I use them mainly to communicate with bigger machines in data centers (or websites like ycombinator and Twitter). If I haven’t got pushed recently I might lose a little work if the endpoint gets broken but I mostly push too often rather than not enough. (My commits don’t all have a Jira number). I do like a screen big enough to have two files side by side but I prefer not to have everything visible at once as it reduces my concentration on the one thing I am doing. Multiple tmux windows or an excessive number of emacs buffers will remember the state of those tasks till I need them again. It is a shame I need 32G of ram to let all the corporate spyware run and have it be as fast as an 8G from
ten years ago, but ssh and emacs are still reasonably snappy. Basically the same setup with more pixels and slower UI as when i did the same work (different languages and less compute) over a 14.4 modem. But I also have enough spare local compute and bandwidth to have a browser tab playing music from YouTube somewhere while I work instead of from the CD player.
In the past several years, I began using my desktop less and less. All my work happens on a MacBook Pro... a 2015 model and now finally the 2019 16”.
I was actually shocked to see on my iPhone that I’m spending several hours a day on the device. I remember five years ago, my main activity when laying in bed was thinking about things going on in my life or sleeping. Now I spend hours in bed reading on my phone — and honestly, it’s not the most productive or uplifting content. It doesn’t necessarily better me in any way.
I agree that newer devices aren’t necessarily improving in the right ways. The MagSafe charger on my 2015 MacBook was a fairly innovative and user friendly design choice. It no longer exists, presumably to make a thinner laptop, but honestly — the weight of my older machine was never a problem. Apple solved a problem I never had, and I carried that MacBook to and from work everyday for the past 5 years.
It basically feels like a rat race where companies, to show value and drive earnings for their shareholders, are making pointless design choices with no real vision. Even the larger track pad on the new machine doesn’t really solve a problem I previously had. If anything, I just needed a more performant machine, preferably with a larger screen. I honestly would have preferred a better front facing camera, but instead, I have a thinner machine, different keyboard, and larger trackpad. We’re in a period of cheap money with cut throat capitalism — in my mind, the federal government have made all this possible and massively inflated asset prices. Apple’s stock continues to go up up and up because of this.
I’m singling out Apple for examples sake. They’re not alone in this.
I'm kind of flabbergasted anyone from the desktop era stopped using desktop computers. Trying to do serious work on a laptop is either not doing serious work or laughably insane. Big monitors, big IO (laptop motherboards mostly throttle IO), big memory chips, many hardware threads, actually fast and low latency internets; even the keyboard and mouse experience is vastly better than using the proverbial toilet paper tube of a laptop. I mean, maybe most people don't need this: I do. Pretty much every aspect of my desktop makes me more productive. The only downside is it's more difficult to transport my 60lb threadripper than my thinkpad, but even that can be done, and is totally worth the trouble when there is serious work to be done.
Laptops have mostly regressed into consumer appliances; my 2011 thinkpad is significantly faster and has more memory than a 2017 macbook pro. The monitor (and I guess speakers if I'm using it as a TV) is better in the macbook; that's it!
Dear bozo. Why are you "considering" vs. solely using a desktop? You obviously do not care about performance or privacy. So what are you complaining about?
1. I like big, big monitors.
2. I prefer a full size keyboard.
3. I prefer a separate mouse.
4. I prefer big freaking disk drives installed.
5. I put the desktop under my desk, and with a wireless keyboard and wireless mouse, there is much less of a snarl on my desk.
6. The desktop has an optical drive I still use.
7. The desktop has lots of USB ports and they're all in use.
8. I can replace/alter parts of the machine without buying a new one.
9. Desktops are cheap.
10. I can build what I want with parts from newegg. Premade powerful computers are always "gaming machines" and I don't want a gaming machine that comes with a graphics adapter that sounds like a 747 taking off.
11. I want an all-metal case because a machine caught fire once.
Edit: 12. My desktop doesn't have a microphone or camera, so they cannot be surreptitiously turned on remotely.
Only for consumer level ones. Higher end ones are "workstations" and can generally be specced from mid-range-consumer-level to almost-a-friggin-supercomputer-node. ;)
As a bonus, no RGB. :)
Examples:
* https://www.quietpc.com/sys-amd-workstation
* https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/shop/workstations-isv-certif...
* https://www8.hp.com/us/en/workstations/desktops/index.html
* https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/thinkworkstations
* https://www.supermicro.com/en/products/superworkstation
Pick anything over the 800$ range that isn’t a macbook and you’re way more likely to hit clocks than not.
Note that workstation-class (H) laptop CPUs also make compromises on performance - the Ryzen 9 4900H is 8C16T but only has 4MB L2$, 8MB L3$, and a max TDP of 54W. A desktop Ryzen 9 3950X by comparison is 16C32T and has 8MB L2$, 64MB L3$, and a 105W default TDP (and will go much higher with even basic PBO if your cooling allows). The differences on the Intel side are even starker.
Yes. And as a bonus, I can use my Alienware 17 R4 as a throwing weapon. Or for workout. And the power brick is a perfect cup warmer.
But I like it, nonetheless.
It’s obvious that it’s impossible at the moment to get 3950X performance in a laptop format, but you can get laptops able to keep temps reasonable with 35-50W, and that’s what a lot of laptop SoCs target as total power.
Those SoCs hit (and sustain) their top clocks, whatever those are for that specific SKU.
What I understood from OP is a common complaint for macbooks, that fail consistently to sustain their specified to clocks, because Apple deliberately under specifies their cooling solutions for better ergonomics (and design reasons).
This is actually completely wrong. Almost no laptops sustain their top (boost) clock on heavy workloads. Most usually only sustain max performance for minutes (or seconds!) before throttling. Here's an example chart that shows how various premium Athena/Evo U laptops perform: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Asus-Zenbook-S-UX393JA-Laptop-...
On the workstation side, people complain about Macbooks, but recent MBPs actually throttle their Intel H processors less than a comparable XPS 15 for example: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-15-2019-in-r...
If you are interested in how modern Intel laptop chips throttle and what base and boost clocks mean, you want to do a search for PL1, PL2, and Tau. For AMD chips, you will want to look up STAPM, Fast and Slow PPT.
Note that while a i7-10875H's top "boost" clock is 5.1GHz, the sustained "base" clock is only 2.3GHz. This is so low to be meaningless as a top speed. In practice, unless your laptop's cooling is absolutely terrible, you'll probably end up mostly running in the 3-3.5GHz range under full load. In comparison, on a properly cooled desktop system, a same-gen i9-10900K desktop system should be able to maintain a sustained (all-the-time) clock of about 5GHz (very close to its 5.3GHz boost). AMD chips scale a little bit better due to 7nm having better power efficiency and how PPT works, but the same ratio roughly applies.
This is the problem with all the marketing BS. When I talked about “top clocks”, I wasn’t referring about “boost” clocks. I’m talking of the clocks that the SoC is designed for (that won’t appear on the box), i.e. a lot of laptops are not leaving “performance gaps” due to bad cooling, those SoCs are designed for that level of performance and attaching a fat copper heatsink won’t do much difference.
I had a lot of trouble with a client that complained that our board was not properly designed because the performance they were seeing was not “as advertised”. In the end we had to ship the whole thing to AMD, and have them test the system with a thermal sink. Everything was as expected.
If anyone is interested in this kind of stuff, your explanation is really good, so I won’t add anything because I’d probably do a terrible job :)
Back in the day, most CPUs had had a fixed clock, but these days modern Intel and AMD chips simply don't - they all clock opportunistically, which depends on powers, thermals, but also workload (try running an AVX-512 loads for example). How do you characterize "clock" in this context? Base (minimum) and Boost (hard limit, now split to Max Turbo <2C and All Boost MC) seem to be reasonably sensible numbers.
Now we can argue semantics all day, but to bring it back around if you're just going to say "top clocks" is what the SoC was designed for at a specific workload/power envelope (In AMD's PB, that'd be PPT, TDC, and EDC) then every laptops will "hit their top clocks with no issues," but I'd say that argument (statement?) is a bit circular/pointless. ;P
How often is that a problem, really?
Multithreaded builds (make -j 24) can really hammer the drive. Read and write interleaved, which uses up cache in both directions.
A well proven way to move heat out of a silicon package to prolong its ability to perform at its highest potential. And in a desktop, you've got room for 'em.
I installed an EK spreader sandwich on my Samsung NVMe drive, and it made a massive (20° c) difference over stock. It was previously a bare stick with no surface area/thermal sink to pull heat away.
You seem to assume it's the case that heats up to 80C or more, that's not true and also not necessary for NVMe SSDs to go over their limit. Your CPU/GPU has fans moving the heat away, that's a better position to be in...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzSIfxHppPY&t=375s
You will just have to accept that you've been wrong on this topic. Move on, it happens.
Read and learn! And then accept when an initial assumption turns out to be wrong.
Go to https://www.computerbase.de/2020-09/samsung-980-pro-ssd-test.... look at the graph. You see that a bunch of them go to the 80C line or hover above. All of them throttle (what you said does not happen). In that graph are shown, going above the limit:
1. FireCuda 520 1TB
2. Patriot Viper VP4100 1TB
3. Samsung 970 Evo 1TB
4. WD Black SN750 1TB (+ the same one with a cooler)
This is only a small part of the market of course, but it goes to show that the throttling is a real thing that happens with multiple models.
Then you had a moving goalpost there, that those SSDs do not throttle under realistic workloads. However, this is a sequential read that's only 5 minutes long. Hardly unrealistic. The hour long constant load benchmark is a different graph, however, constant load is also realistic if it's longer than 5 minutes.
If you activate the other chart modes you see the measured performance, which shows the drops linked to the too high temperature, and that they did the same thing for write performance.
You can counteract this with a lot of targeted airflow and/or a heatsink, the heatsink will at least help move the throttling to a later moment. Gamersnexus had a very impressive demonstration of this, one where they did get this wrong: They had an article about a MSI SSD heatsink where they claimed it did not help (so the SSD did throttle! Again something you said does never happen), where it then turned out that it did not work only because their applied temperature sensors (glued them to the heatsink), and IIRC they also missed the higher performance they got regardless. GN often gets it right, stuff like that happens, but it made this one memorable and highlighted the positive effect of these heatsink coolers.
I'm into this topic professionally for years now. I'm not wrong here. If you can't take my word for it, look at professional SSD reviews, they have covered this also for years now.
And sure: There are scenarios where this does not matter. Gaming. Browsing. But: In those workloads there is no significant difference to a SATA SSD anyway. These NVMe SSDs are only interesting if you have large (and thus: long) file transfers. This is what they have to get right (and some do, but not all of them).
By the way, by repeating that I'm wrong and by starting with a straight "No", by always commenting without reasoning and politeness, you made sure that I will correct you - and that I'm not buying into your strange attempts to correct your statements to something that is correctish. They don't work anyway, these SSDs throttle.
You should change your tone around here.
But you don't know what causes the throttling. Its stupid to shove a heatsink on nand. It does not help. Not a single bit. Period. Under any normal daily usage, or even if you had a workstation, you're not going to be reading/writing so constantly frequently that you're ever going to cause the controller to heat up and cause throttling. If you experience any excessive heat. You have bigger issues in your case. Period. Your only proof of throttling is benchmarks running constant read/writes over a period of time. This is not real world usage and doesn't make it necessary to go out and start shoving heatsinks on every single nvme drive. If that was the case then all the laptops which have space between the nvme and the case, or motherboards which lack a 'heatshield' like the gigabyte board you linked to, would have throttling issues. Which they don't.
> You should change your tone around here.
So now you're threatening me?
-----
Anyway I'm done, not gonna sit here an argue anymore.
There are all kinds of vendors / models, who knows what kind of throttling they use?
Having a fast machine that can sustain throughput and I/O is a perfectly rational desire, and for some of us, need.
To test that, one can try it with ramdisk first, before getting an expensive ssd.
I mean, hardware wise they are not much faster, but cooling is a different story.
The highest spec macbook comes with a 9980HK and starts at 2800 $. A 3900X has approximately twice the performance in multi-threaded workloads and you can easily build an entire quiet workstation with it for less than 1000 $. Half the performance, thrice the price. Great deal.
Yes, there are also "laptops" with a 3900X in them. But even those still have lower performance than a desktop with a 3900X because of thermals.
Specs can never tell the true story, but it's clear that the mobile processor is going to be much slower for anything remotely processor intensive, and probably much more than twice as slow for anything making good use of multithreading.
Having had to go back and forth between a laptop and a desktop for a processor intensive application (AutoCAD) the difference was painful.
* https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i7-1185G7-vs-Inte...
* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/4354735?baselin...
These are short tests too, so would be a best case. In real life, laptop performance is probably significantly worse due to thermal throttling.
While we're mentioning other minor gotchas, another one is memory latency and bandwidth. While desktop systems commonly have XMP and 1.35V support, very few laptops do (typically running at JEDEC timings at 1.2V). While there's diminishing returns, the difference between JEDEC 2933 CL21 or 3200 CL22 and say 3800 CL16 can actually be noticeable in certain workloads and is often effectively "free" (one-click in the BIOS) extra performance on the desktops.
Also, laptops generally have CPUs that pull 15 watts. Whereas desktops have CPUs that can pull 95 watts or higher (sometimes up to 150). The difference is astounding.
See: https://evanmccann.net/blog/2020/5/13-inch-macbook-pro-revie...
40, 100, 29 in pmset -g thermlog instantly.
CAD, for example, barring new geometry work in progress now, is single threaded.
People working on high surface count models want these things:
Big, fat, fast cache
Sustained sequential compute performance
Sustained I/O
GPU that focuses on geometry and precision. This is not generally an issue today, but can be on laptops.
Desktop machines with active cooling are where it is at.
Desktops are great.
Though with water cooling you might also have a lot of pump noise, especially if the radiator is mounted incorrectly.
The larger the diameter of a fan, the lower the RPM it can spin at to move the same amount of air (same cooling capacity) as a small fan. Provided you can put the air where it's needed (e.g. a 1 foot fan can't "focus" air onto a 6 inch radiator) a larger fan will just about always be quieter and more efficient.
Oh, and having a water cooled PC with the radiator and fan inside the PC itself is silly. If you run the pipes outside or into your basement, your PC is almost completely silent, plus the cooling capacity will usually be much, much higher, because not having to cram fans and a radiator into a small enclosure lets you make them bigger and more efficient.
And historically, bigger case fans have been problematic, those 200mm fans they tried to introduce some years ago. Bad static pressure if I recall correctly?
Also, I wouldn't call having a radiator and fan inside the PC silly. The case eats a lot of the noise already, it's the easy and the common setup, and good AIOs are quiet and cool well. But maybe you just wanted to share a cool big water cooling setup with everything noisy routed into the basement ;)
The hoses aren't welded steel, you know.
In my case I have a DDC style pump, and its very quiet after I got a car wash sponge and cut a square hole in it and put the pump inside. It looks ghetto but its inside a case so who cares.
At first I was worried about heat, but its lasted 10 years so far.
I heard a story about a DIY PC that did nothing but circulate water through the cpu cooler from a fish tank; the tank was big enough to dissipate heat through evaporation and other means, only occasionally needing a top off.
I actually mounted an automotive transmission cooler to the outside of my PC and made it part of the watercooling loop, because it was inexpensive and large. There are no fans on it, but it still reduces the work the standard pc cooling radiator with the fans on it needs to do.
The most limiting thing is TDP, which in the highest performance laptop processors is still capped at 45W, whereas a maxed out desktop processor can draw 100W or more.
See these tables for i9, for example, compare Coffee-Lake-S (Desktop) with Coffee-Lake-H (Laptop) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i9_processo...
Maybe a small desktop. My desktop processor is 180W TDP (Threadripper 1950x), while some others are 250W TDP. You can also get a dual-socket workstation, for 2x CPUs (both pulling 200W each).
Thermals and power are significantly higher on desktops, it ain't even funny. Laptops win in power-efficiency, but absolute performance is always going to be a Desktop.
My Macbook laptop, on the other hand, sounds like a jet everytime I run yarn install.
So yes, desktops have higher thermals. But it handles it so much better than a laptop that it almost becomes irrelevant.
As a result, your 10 year old desktop is probably 50-100% faster than the most expensive Macbook Pro or Thinkpad. It can be quite astonishing swapping to even an old desktop after using a laptop for a long time.
I'm planning to drop in a 5950X upgrade in the workstation in a couple weeks as well. Looking forward to both the huge multi-threaded and IPC gains.
I have mine set to 80% and only set it to 100% if I know I'm going to be away from AC for a while.
Time after time, as someone who's been working on his 10 year old desktop (with a replacement ssd + graphics card when the old one died), I meet devs and analysts using laptops who reason more or less: "well it says i7 and it says x GHz and it says ddr3/4 and it's got a gpu with the same marketing number, so laptops perform the same as desktops cause they have the same hardware in them don't they".
Clearly, what they really mean is "I've never worked with and compared with a desktop". I suppose one of the problems is that SOME of them that have 'used desktops' were actually using neutered VMs in a shared corporate environment that run really poorly and are pretty underspec'd in a shared environment.
But every time, it's actually been the case that not only is the desktop faster and cheaper, but things usually remained faster on an X year old desktop hardware vs more modern laptops for any serious workload.
Edit: and in case it needs to be said, I have both desktops and multiple portable devices in my household because the downside of desktops is clearly portability.
More expensive, less performant, and less serviceable with a suite of proprietary bloatware on top.
I might break the pattern this year though, I got a 3900x last year around launch and moved my 4670k to a home server. I've been pretty impressed with the 3900x while the 4670k has been maxing out all cores in the server for some tasks so was considering buying a second 3900X(T) to replace the 4670k again. But with the rumours about the 5900X, I might end up putting the 5900X in my desktop at the same time as a 3000 series GPU and moving the 3900x to my home server.
Most laptop cooling is awful, but you can certainly find laptops that are well built if you look for it.
Not sure you should weigh bloatware, either. You can trivially install a fresh Windows or Linux and you have to on a custom built PC anyway. If you buy a premade PC, it probably comes with the same crap.
For what it's worth, I switched to a desktop once the core race heated up - now I've got a 12 core 3900X.
I can't believe how much faster it is when it's using all the cores. Night and day. Highly recommended. And 12 cores is barely scratching the surface of the crazy workstations you can build these days.
For tasks 4 threads and less, it would be a bit faster than a current gen Intel laptop chip, but I don't think it would have been worth the portability penalty to me personally if that's all I did with it.
The problem is this base clock speed is given by the CPU manufacturer not the laptop maker. And Intel wouldn't know what kind of laptop it's getting crammed into. So careful definitions don't really help. Desktops are already big clunky things that have to be kept plugged in, I can trust them a lot more to deliver the CPU's promised performance. Whereas laptops are notoriously making compromises because customers tend to be very unrealistic about noise, battery life, etc.
Laptops being power-conscious, they're usually much closer to the point of maximum efficiency on the power curve. In that sense you get better performance per watt. But that's negated by the increased front cost.
At full load, it depends on the heat dissipation; Dell's Precision 7XX0 dissipates heat well enough to keep the CPUs from throttling, but the 5XX0 does not.
Advantages of using a laptop :
- portability - I work as a consultant and I need to work on premises occasionally - if I had to switch between desktop/laptop it would be too cumbersome
- standalone when you need it - when I travel or am on vacation I usually need to do a few hours of work - I won't lug my full setup but I'm 100% ready on the go
- can develop for OSX/iOS with MBP
Disadvantages :
- thermals - I use a fully loaded 2018 i9 MBP and I have to undrvolt/disable turbo boost in office because the laptop hits full fan speed with a VM + IDE running and people start turning heads
- lower performance compared to desktop equivalent and especially compared to best available workstation
I'm hoping VS code and remote development setups (either running VSCode in the browser hosted on my desktop or remote tools) get sufficiently good that I can get a lightweight ARM Mac and then I SSH to my home workstation - feels like the ideal solution if the tooling gets there
My laptop only runs Office 365 for email, calendar, and the occasional word doc. It also runs Slack and a browser for zoom meetings as access to Jira/Bugzilla web interface.
Oh, and RDP into XFCE on Ubuntu on the desktop that runs as a server.
Plus the server is cabled up to development platforms (serial ports, remote power, GPIO, JTAG, USB). So it cannot move, and even if it were a laptop, it could not move.
I don't require the laptop to be upgradeable or powerful, it is just the UI into the rest of the system.
It currently sits here with the lid closed cabled to a 27 inch display.
In the Windows land the only hope seems to be AMD while Apple has me hoping for the A14 performance.
Ideally Apple would push out a 2in1 with touch but they are set on pushing iOS for touch - which is just too limited for all intents and purposes. I would gladly buy a premium Lenovo 2in1 or some Ryzen 5xxx series ultra portable windows laptop (they are much better on thermals from what I've seen) but I still need a OSX client from time to time unfortunately. There's just no flexibility with Apple ecosystem - you either fit into their intended use cases or you're stuck with suboptimal tradeoffs.
I'd like to be more client-server these days too, using whatever device is convenient at the time but storing my data centrally so all my devices can access it, it's all systematically secured and backed up, I can also access it remotely via VPN, etc.
The key thing, though, is that I want it to be my server, not someone else's that I don't control and have to keep paying for.
Check out iStat, it gives you the ability to set a fan curve and that has helped quite a bit with my laptops Thermals. I found the highest rpm I could run without hearing the fans and set the two lowest points in the curve to keep it at/under that point and I almost never hear my fans anymore. Only time I really hear them now is when something is compiling and even then it's much more bearable since I keep the highest rpm limited to 80/85%.
How is this an advantage of using a laptop?
You can have these with a laptop too. At home I use my laptop with an external screen, keyboard, mouse (the latter two are wireless), because it's much more comfortable.
It's not just the monitor being big, I want lots and lots of pixels. I'm currently running 3840*2160, and have a second monitor attached set up in portrait mode (so I can display a manual page while I work on the other one).
Of course, I'd get an even bigger monitor with more pixels if they didn't cost so dang much :-) How big, you ask? A wall size retina display! I've wanted one for 40 years.
edit: two monitors is still a pain, though.
I’ve got a USB-C dock hooked up to my TV too with a wireless KB/mouse combo connected into that, if I want to plug my laptop in on the couch.
Even works with your phone, if you've got one that supports it. Recent flagship Samsung phones with DeX do, but I'm really holding out for more external monitor support in Phosh so I can plug in a Librem 5 like this.
Microsoft make at least two, the Surface Keyboard [1] and the Ergonomic version [2]. I own several of the standard ones, and they're the best-made keyboards I've ever owned (and the only ones my joints can currently cope with), but the fact that they're Bluetooth instead of USB drives me insane. I'd pay extra for a wired version that just instantly sends the keystroke every time instead of going to sleep after a while (while it's awake it's instant, it just wants to save battery after being idle).
[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-US/p/surface-keyboard/8r3rqvvfl...
[2] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/surface-ergonomic-keyboard...
If you really want a dongle the previous Sculpt Ergonomic has a dongle but the Num Pad is separate :-/ It doesn't have the delay you talk about, and has much better battery life than the Surface version (had it for three years and have't changed them yet).
https://www.microsoft.com/accessories/en-us/products/keyboar...
Once the laptop is festooned with hubs, external drives, cables everywhere, might as well just buy a desktop.
I used an external monitor, keyboard and mouse when at the desk, even when I only owned a laptop. But I also use the laptop a lot on the couch, not just for traveling - so I wondered if I would find it annoying to have a separate desktop machine.
So far it's been well worth it. The desktop performance is much better (especially for gaming) and Dropbox, git, Chrome sync and VS Code sync make having multiple machines relatively painless.
Edit: I see in previous comments you were looking for a full sized bluetooth keyboard. I recently got a Logitech G915 [0] and I'm pretty happy with it. Expensive though.
[0] - https://www.logitechg.com/en-eu/products/gaming-keyboards/g9...
The couch is fine for reading a tablet.
For me the trick when moving back and forth between the office and home was to have an external drive with everything on it and carry it back and forth. A better approach is probably remote desktop or remote login.
I travel with a cheap laptop loaded with only what I anticipate needing on the trip. It eases my mind to not worry too much about having it stolen, lost, or smashed.
https://parsecgaming.com/
Sure if I'm on a high latency link I might have to adjust to clicking taking a wee bit to register, but normally I don't have to adjust my usage.
Windows to Windows.
It's a dealbreaker for me.
not only is that hard, it's hard to find a bluetooth keyboard that isn't laggy as heck and doesn't occasionally freeze for a second or five. Or just give up until you re-pair it.
Maybe one of the next 20 that I try...
> How big, you ask? A wall size retina display! I've wanted one for 40 years.
I have always thought, since Digital Research GEM, that the "desktop" in GUIs should be your desk's top. We're nearly there...
Never had any issue like that with my full-size Apple Magic Keyboard. It Just Works™
With Thunderbolt/USB-C hubs, this is easily fixed.
At home, I have a similar setup but with a 27" colour-calibrated screen in place of the 34" curved.
When travelling, I use an unpowered four port dock which means I can connect five external drives without needing the powered dock and its power brick. The unpowered dock only struggles if I have more than a couple of platter drives (instead of SSD) connected.
Prior to that I used Apple keyboards which work fine but have low-travel chiclet-style keys which aren't as nice to type on (they are much quieter for office environments though.)
My setup now is a laptop with the USB-C docking station. So I plug in one USB-C cable and get:
30" external display, ErgoDox Ez, USB mouse, bigger speakers, 120W power, Mic for zoom calls.
Obviously there's a tradeoff, but the point is you can get many of the advantages of both fairly easily.
I know that purchase was effective, because a week after it was installed there was a big storm and power went out everywhere except my neighborhood. Just having a generator successfully wards off power failure, you never have to actually turn it on.
I submit this is objective proof that I am living in a simulation and none of you exist, you're just artifacts of the simulation.
Beware, you need to regularly maintain it too (hopefully it does a weekly starter test, and it probably needs yearly oil changes). I didn't check mine, and found the battery charger had failed at about 1 am when my wife had a flight out that morning. That was fun.
(We don't have everything on the generator, so it's not as effective as yours, our utility wiring is actually pretty fragile, and our well pump is one of the things not on the generator, buying a portable genrator for that seems to have helped, but I did have to roll it out a week ago)
It would have cost twice as much to run everything with the generator, and that isn't really necessary, so it's a smaller one.
I worried about the battery being dead and no way to hand crank the generator, so I made sure that the generator could be started from a car battery or one of those zap-o-matic car jumpstarters. (I bought one of those last year, and had occasion to try it out on my stone dead car battery last month - it worked great!)
Every time.
Fortunately, after about 6 weeks or so, the market forgets I did a transaction, and things start moving my way. I'm forced to be a long term investor.
Vijay, is that you?
Hmm. Is this something I can buy at Home Depot or something?
Oh, are you from the US?
The UPSes we have all our key equipment running on have been some of the best tech investments we've ever made, even if they did cumulatively cost over £1,000.
Just reporting facts.
I have some servers in Copenhagen, and from their logs they've lost mains power about every 2-3 years. They have a UPS, but I certainly don't bother for a desktop computer.
I'm not sure what you mean by "most of these Tweets"; I'm reporting on my experience living in Silicon Valley, California, where power goes out a couple of times a month on avg.
I have all servers etc on UPSes but wish I could find bigger UPSes as most can only hold up about 1 hour which often isn't enough.
until you switch to external batteries, they keep increasing the inverter size, which is unnecessary for your use case.
you could also just buy chargers, batteries and inverters separately and wire them together.
Of note, if various online resources are to be believed, you can't just hack and extend the battery capacity for longer run-times as they likely aren't rated for the corresponding higher thermal load.
they're not cheap, but i've bought cheaper and that stuff costs even more in the end.
power electronics that are safe and reliable costs.
> you can't just hack and extend the battery capacity for longer run-times as they likely aren't rated for the corresponding higher thermal load.
thermal load... of batteries?
i'd expect you'd confuse the microcontroller in the UPS. more batteries will require longer to bring up to voltage than it expects, which implies something is wrong. further all of the time remaining estimations it presents will be wrong.
Thermals referred to the power electronics which do get hot. Yes certainly better to get equipment designed for it rather than risk burning down the house.
You’re right about the internet, though. It’s a monopolized system here, and the anticompetitive nature of it means it sucks across the entire country.
I guess YMMV... but it's not something I've personally had to worry about, and won't do anything about it unless the electricity supply gets significantly less reliable. They are saying that the move to renewables might make the grid less stable over the next few years though, so worth thinking about perhaps.
Frankly, I find nowadays I can't do much without an internet connection anyway... Maybe we should put ~5 second batteries into desktops just to sync disks and power off safely.
In a 240V system, that feeder will typically feed one or more pad-mounted distribution substations which feed properties and in very rural areas a number of pole-mounted smaller distribution transformers.
In a 110V system, many more properties are fed from pole-mounted transformers (because you want to minimise length of 110V runs due to resistance losses and you therefore do not want the extensive LV mains used in a 240V system.
In general, the US has longer lengths of vulnerable HV lines but fewer of them are radials (in other words, more US HV runs between two HV/EHV subs and can therefore be sectionalised and run from either end). Therefore an HV fault is more common in the US but it is less likely to take out as many people for as long.
In this case though, it scarcely matters since either system is likely to have properties connected to only a single HV line which comes off as a spur from an EHV/HV substation. These HV lines are often on poles in rural areas and therefore vulnerable to damage in heavy weather. This happens less in urban areas because HV lines tend to be buried there. In The Netherlands which is one extreme, everything under 50kV is buried but NL is a very dense country.
There is no point comparing your experience of power cuts in Amsterdam, London, Copenhagen, vs Chicago or NYC because power cuts are quite rare in all of these places. If you live in the English Lake District in a small village or in a small town in a rural area of the US, you are likely to have experienced power cuts. Performance on continuity of service measures like TIEPI varies much more within countries than between them.
I am from Germany. The latest wide-scale power failure I can think of was 2007. I remember another shorter one in Bremen which must have been around ten years ago. They happen really rarely here, in spite of all that FUD that wind and solar energy makes the power supply unreliable.
I do agree with the other items, especially number 10. It's the one big thing I miss from having a desktop.
I also bought a chromebook just for fun for $150 from the pawn shop. I have a "build farm" of various computers with different operating systems in the basement for use when there's a problem with one of the D targets, but using putty to remotely access them.
This keeps most of the advantages (the processor is weaker on the smaller form factor thanks to the cooling requirements), while also keeping some size, mobility and power-saving benefits.
I got into this because I got tired of opening up the large cases, moving to a smaller form factor and external devices was much easier. I don't care for working on the move, and every place I'm likely to ever want to use the computer at will have spare monitors/keyboards/mice.
Laptops are for shallow work, not much else.
For you. I get all my work done a laptop and have been for a decade.
Also every laptop has a different - stupid - keyboard layout.
Also when pressing Ctrl+F4 I use the outside of my hand to press Ctrl, then my index finger for F4. That means that the F4 key needs to be over or to the left of the #5 key, or else I can't reach.
This makes the whole keyboard lopsided, rendering the rightmost quarter completely useless. Don't get why they would do that.
Let the 15 people in the world who _need_ the numpad for data entry use an external one.
1) I have 2 "big big" 4K monitors hooked up to my laptop so no problems here. The laptop's monitor is not used as the lid is closed.
2/3) I use external keyboard and mouse. No problems here
4) I have 2TB worth of SSD in laptop and I also have huge external drives array.
5) Said laptop is sitting on my shelf, I do not even see it. On my desk are 2 huge monitors on arms with VESA mounts and wireless keyboard/mouse. Said laptop is also running NOMACHINE so I can also access my few worktations and servers without lifting my butt.
6) I have external optical drive but frankly I do not recall single time in a last 3 years when I had to actually activate it.
7) I have 2 external 10 port USB 3.0 hubs hooked up to 40Gbps Thunderbolt 3 port of said laptop. Again no problem in this department.
8) Yep. Desktop is much better in this department.
9) Not my desktops ;) They're server/workstation type.
10) This is how I build my "desktops". No argument here.
11) I do not know what to say about it.
BTW, it sounds to me that your laptop setup is indistinguishable from a desktop, and your setup is even less portable than a desktop, so why not go the cheap desktop route?
Not any laptop but some do. It even does it while driving its own built-in monitor but I do not really use it.
>"your laptop setup is indistinguishable from a desktop"
you got that part right
>"your setup is even less portable than a desktop"
Nope. When I am out of my main office for whatever reason I unhook said laptop from all the cables and it works off-site including all my development environment. If my stay away is extended (working for a month in ocean side cottage for example I also would take one of those monitors). I just do not run production servers/databases/etc on my laptop ;). Btw my laptop soon transitioning from 32GB RAM to 128GB RAM as to give me more flexibility with the databases.
Worth case I can still access my workstations/servers remotely using SSH or NOMACHINE if SSH does not cut it. Since I have very fat internet pip it works just fine.
But the key for me is I do that because I have a work laptop and a personal desktop and I want no question about the ownership of things I do on the desktop.
I organized my windows and tabs and splits in such a way that it degrades gracefully when I switch from the external monitor and back.
How often often do I really need that? Not often, but when I do it's really useful.
Also just gave away the remaining one of two 24" NEC flat panels I bought 17years ago. It still works.
I would love elaboration on what happened.
I had to wash the floor, walls, everything in my office to get the stink out.
Replaced the mobo and graphics card and I was back in business, but this time I bought some sheet steel and set the computer on that, which hopefully would buy some time to get the fire out.
The machine had a metal case, which I'm sure greatly slowed down the spread of the fire. So for me from now on, it's metal cases all the way, baby.
This reminds me of an old joke: https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/46sere/a_p...
1. Not thaaat big, but I prefer sub-4k anyway: WQXGA support, with docking station more than one - check
2. External keyboard - check
3. Check
4. Two M2 1TB Samsung + one 500GB SATA + optional external drives of similar sizes. More than enough
5. Admitted, docking station for some cases and connections.
6. Not anymore, USB bootable devices for the rare occasion. Other former reasons are more or less obsolete for my causes.
7. Docking station again
8. Lenovos are not so bad in this respect too
9. This one was > 2000EU - but will last several years as its ancestors did too ...
12. A piece of duct tape solves all camera problems
I am a consultant, the necessity for traveling around was partly responsible for the original choice, but even today I'm not missing much. I have still NAS-es with even bigger drives and DIY desktops and rack-based servers for image processing (requiring multiple GPU's). But thats me and my area of work. For most things, the laptop ist quite sufficient.
Desktop computing FTW.
Upgrading stuff and costs are both really significant for personal use (which is why I am typing this from my home desktop), but if money is no object, I just get a desktop-replacement laptop.
I hate the whole "let's just make laptops like tablets" thing, where "like tablets" means "no ports."
I need ports for all kinds of stuff, including driving robotics and interfacing equipment. Which is also why having a laptop is nicer than a desktop. It's really great to have a built-in UPS and be able to move my office easily.
EDIT: Just checked, and it's easy to upgrade RAM or replace the battery, and I have room for a 2.5" hard drive and actually 2 NVMe SSDs (they make 8TB ones) plus an optional SIM card and a PIV card and SD card and the built-in camera and microphone array are really nice to have nowadays. But I do love desktops. You wouldn't think 10 USB ports is that important, but nowadays everything uses USB, so it's nice to have for pure convenience.
I am pretty sure your computer has a microphone, because it most likely has a speaker.
I have only ever seen the hybrid mic/headphone ports on laptops and not desktop motherboards. They may exist, but I have yet to see one. Although I guess what matter is how the ports are actually wired.
... You can put a big disk on a laptop, USB3 hub, etc etc
I think main thing missing for me is a beefy GPU and maybe a bit more RAM.
1: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0838WTFD1
Just as a PSA for others: Laser printers in particular draw too much inrush current through their fuser drum heater for surge protectors/UPS devices to handle. They (the printers) should be always connected directly to the wall.
I migrated entirely off desktops and went laptop / mobile.
Got happy as my current work benefits from me being highly mobile. Super glad I did it. Ended up surprised at just how much can do with a Note type phone and optional keyboard / track pad.
But, I never did replace fast and responsive. Just kind of coped and the other benefits made the whole thing worth it.
This pandemic has me rethinking some things and yeah, I want to build a nice machine. Want that workstation type feel and performance.
The closed computing argument holds more water every quarter too.
What we need is a reasonable battery pack, and software to throttle the machine down on an interruption. Make this package a couple hundred bucks, or something a person can just load their own cells into and it's bound to be a winner.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Alienware-Area-51m-i9-9900K-RT...
In my case a mouse slows me down. I have to take my hands off the keyboard and reach for the mouse. The touchpad is right there where my hands are. My touchpad also have three physical buttons, which are very useful instead of tapping the touchpad (I disabled that.)
I really need a mouse only for playing (which I stopped doing on my laptop since many years ago) or to try out some very rare sites linked to HN. It doesn't happen every year.
This is probably the only ergonomics pro of a laptop (except that I carry it with me, of course). Just in case I'll need a separate keyboard again, does anybody know of a good full size one with a touchpad under the space bar and physical buttons? I googled and found many keyboards with a touchpad in place of the number pad or further to the right. By the way, the number pad is not important for me. I'd love not to have it on my 15" laptop. I can keep it there on an external keyboard, but it's extra travel for my right hand if I really have to use a mouse and I never use it anyway.
13. I'd like to work on some spreadsheets from my couch.
Damn...guess I'll buy a laptop again.
Probably less of a concern, but it also moves the heat output.
They have some really cool fanless builds, that if you were using a CPU like the AMD 4750g [1], you would have zero noise, and it'd make for a very decent workstation.
[0] https://www.quietpc.com/systems
[1] https://www.quietpc.com/sys-amd-da2-fanless-z2
You can buy fairly powerful desktops configured with just the on chip graphics or inexpensive business class graphics cards.
I'll add a '13' to your list.
13. Bluetooth is evil, and any desktop I have seen with Bluetooth had it on a mini-pcie card, and could be yanked. My desktop is always cabled via 1Gb Ethernet, so if yanking the BT also loses the WiFi, I don't really care.
If you are using wireless keyboards/mice, I don't know if the logitech adapters are more or less secure than BT. That could be an entire separate thread.
1. M.2 cards
2. Full-size PCIe cards (WiFi+Bluetooth combo cards, the Bluetooth part may actually connect to an internal USB header)
3. USB dongles
4. The size of the drive isn't an issue; you can fit big drives just as easily in a laptop. The only difference is that a desktop PC can fit more than two drives.
I've come to really like the convenience of being able to pick up my workstation and take it with me.
To me, there's only one really, really big disadvantage to laptops: the noise. If I put together a desktop, it's as quiet as possible. Powerful laptops apparently can't be quiet.
Your points are all good but this one gave me pause for thought. We're all working from home and using our microphones and cameras more than ever. I'm using my regular laptop with plug-in microphone and webcam. Are laptop makers thinking in terms of upping the specs on the microphone and webcams in their upcoming models?
Maybe I'm nitpicking, but I feel like this is a bit much of an exaggeration. I just measured my Pixel 3 (at its thickest point, the camera lens) and a 2011 Macbook Pro (including the rubber bumper, admittedly, but those were super slim at the time), and the MBP is only ~2mm thinner than the Pixel. The race for ultra-thin laptops seems like a relatively recent thing to me.
In any case, because of all my remote collaboration these days, I bought a decent mike on a boom to use, and my colleagues say it is much better. Still have to find a decent camera.
Advice from my wife, a photographer:
- if you're still having picture problems (after setting the camera's anti-flicker to 50Hz/60Hz as appropriate), put diffuse illumination on your face e.g. a full-screen browser window on http://blank.org; or for more control--colour temperature as well as brightness--a cheap LED panel and desktop tripod (from a photo supplies shop).
- turn off any "smoothing" or "beauty"features in the cam's software.
- likewise, don't use any fake background features. Pin up a plain bedsheet behind yourself if you think your place is too messy to be the background.
Anyway, once there is a picture of any kind, in my experience most people care more about the audio being unclear or laggy, so you're well ahead.
Ideally you want a camera that does clean HDMI out (no ISO indicators etc), but even that can be worked around if you run OBS studio and crop it out.
You can connect an external display to your laptop. That's what I'm doing right now. Similarly for 2 through 6.
> 7. The desktop has lots of USB ports and they're all in use.
The external monitor will give you more.
I think reasons 8, 9, and 10 are all legit. I don't think there are any intrinsic benefits to going one way or the other. It all boils down whether you feel the time you spend building your rig is worth the money you save.
It takes less than an hour. I enjoy it, and it keeps me familiar with the guts.
Most of the hour is just being careful I'm hooking up the wires correctly. In college I worked as an electronics technician, and one job was putting together a stack of Heathkit serial interface cards. I don't recall the exact times, but the first one took me an hour and the 5th one maybe 10 minutes.
It's also like taking the cylinder heads off my old Mustang V8. The first time took me 2 hours. The third time - 20 minutes. It's all in being familiar with just what to do, and having all the right tools ready.
It was able to be angled for comfort, etc. So, you'd be able to put a desktop somewhere (above? below?) and use it from bed.
No idea if they're still sold, but it wouldn't be too surprising. :)
Basically you can work on a laptop, unless it's a special extremely short term situation.
Out of curiosity, what do you use instead? I'm wondering what the best options are for workstation-type desktops.
If you do not need a strong graphics card you can always just get a weak one, with less energy usage. GT 1030 for example, though that's really weak, but it's also just a 30W card.
Or depending on the processor you need you can use the integrated graphics. The AMD Apus are pretty great, Ryzen 3 3200G and Ryzen 5 3400G - and there are new 4000 versions that can be be bought in kits or OEM machines. Intel has their own weaker integrated graphics on most of their processors, even their stronger units, for just office work strong enough.
If I'm running a multicore big job, the fan spins up and annoys me.
in case someone thinks I dunno how to write
Or are you just doing ssh work?
When I'm at my cabin with 10/2 Mbps internet it's like I'm at home, except when I forget myself and start watching YouTube, then I notice the reduced quality of the video (RDP selectively encodes fast-updating regions to lowish bitrate h264 or similar).
I even do my Teams stuff over RDP, bidir sound just works without fiddling.
- [1]: https://www.velkase.com/products/velka-3
That 'extreme example' weighs as much as many laptops and it's just a case. Even if you carried a small display, and everything else you need, I doubt most people would take that out if they found themselves with extra time at the airport.
Edit: Found the machine I was thinking of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compaq_Portable
Edit: Especially with the rise of the Small form factor PC culture.
Small cases have gotten pretty nice but if you have to carry around a separate screen to go with it then you might not end up any better off than if you had an all-in-one luggable computer.
You can, until Apple integrates all the suppliers into their supply chain.
> 1. I like big, big monitors.
I've realized that I find it uncomfortable to use more than one screen, so I just use one 27″ 4K screen. But occasionally I open my laptop and put it on a stand to show some extra windows.
> 2. I prefer a full size keyboard.
My favorite keyboard is the older version of the Apple Wireless Keyboard powered by AA batteries. It feels really nice to type on it (maybe because I'm used to it.) I recently bought a brand new Apple keyboard because I thought it would be better (and I could recharge it over USB), but it's much worse.
> 3. I prefer a separate mouse.
I use an Apple trackpad, and I love it. I only go back to a mouse if I'm playing a game.
> 4. I prefer big freaking disk drives installed.
I have a 2 TB SSD, which is more than enough for me.
> 5. I put the desktop under my desk, and with a wireless keyboard and wireless mouse, there is much less of a snarl on my desk.
I like to put my laptop on the desk, and I only plug in a single Thunderbolt 3 cable for charging, gigabit ethernet, and my monitor. I really love my CalDigit TS3 Plus dock [2].
It's really nice that I can unplug a single cable and take my laptop to any cafe or co-working space. (Before/after the pandemic.)
> 6. The desktop has an optical drive I still use.
I haven't used an optical drive for about 5 years, and I don't own any optical disks.
> 7. The desktop has lots of USB ports and they're all in use.
My dock has a lot of USB-A and USB-C ports, and it's in a very convenient location.
> 8. I can replace/alter parts of the machine without buying a new one.
That's a great point, and it's one of the major downsides of using an Apple laptop. I do have AppleCare, and Apple's support is really amazing.
> 9. Desktops are cheap.
That's very true! But I was using a 2012 MacBook for 8 years before I upgraded it, and I think I'll probably continue using my current laptop for another 8-10 years. It's expensive, but it's a very high quality machine and I think it will last for a very long time.
> 10. I can build what I want with parts from newegg. Premade powerful computers are always "gaming machines" and I don't want a gaming machine that comes with a graphics adapter that sounds like a 747 taking off.
I certainly can't do that for any kind of laptop (either Apple or other brands.)
> 11. I want an all-metal case because a machine caught fire once.
Nothing to worry about there
> Edit: 12. My desktop doesn't have a microphone or camera, so they cannot be surreptitiously turned on remotely.
MacBooks have a hardware light that turns on when the camera is active, and I haven't heard any reports about hackers being able to disable it. Although one disadvantage with the newest MacBook is that you can't attach a sliding camera cover anymore, because it will crack the screen when you close it.
The microphone can be surreptitiously turned on, but it's not something I'm too worried about.
[1] https://imgur.com/a/soE6TMJ
[2] https://www.caldigit.com/ts3-plus/
>6. The desktop has an optical drive I still use.
for what? You're probably better off (in terms of both convenience and IO performance) to store it on a hdd/ssd as an iso and mount it.
2. Burning a bluray for backup. (I do backups on different media types just for insurance, and I like that blurays are write-once and incompetence and ransomware cannot fk with them.)
No need. You still buy CDs, you're old enough that we can wait.
;-)
(I still buy them, too.)
2. Failing that, just archive your existing discs and ditch the drive for good. It's the year 2020, and most (all?) software are distributed digitally, so you shouldn't need to get out your drive in the future.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/create-installat...
This quote suggest to me the author is an integral part of the problem.
Companies are ALWAYS trying to increase their profitability. If they can lock down the computer, they can drop the price while _increasing_ CLTV.
That’s why System76 is more expensive. They’re NOT overpriced. They’re priced as “general purpose computers” must be to be competitive.
I agree with this author, but this suggests that the strength of his conviction is maybe $400.
Are these laptops more expensive than a similarly spec'd mainstream alternative? Yes. However, as is the point of the article, you're really not buying the laptop for the specs.
Unfortunately, the desire for open source being rather niche, these companies do not benefit from the economies of scale a mainstream brand enjoys. AND these companies are not positioning themselves to profit from their customers recurringly through cloud memberships, app stores, microtransactions, and the likes.
At home, though, I do run a slightly modified old Dell desktop that I bought on Craigslist for basically nothing, and for daily work I much much prefer it to any laptop. So yeah, old desktops and S76 FTW.
I really want to want a System76 laptop, but I just can't bring myself to get one because of the 16:9 screens [1].
[1] 16:9 screens are another one of the computing marketplace's shitty regressions over the last decade. General purpose computers should have 16:10 or 3:2 screens, but unfortunately the number of models that have one is very small.
Additionally, like you said, for text, you ideally want windows with portrait aspect ratios - but if you split a fullHD 16:9 screen in two, your portrait windows only have 960 pixels of horizontal resolution which is not enough for many IDEs (or e-mail clients or spreadsheets).
On a 28 inch 4K screen 16:9 is not a problem - you can have 3 long vertical text windows next to each other, or ultra-wide spreadsheets, or a combination thereof. On a 13 inch laptop screen it is a different story.
Other than that, it meets all the Free source and ergonomic thin laptop requirements for $200.
My ideal setup is something like that as a client, and a bunch of high end machines located far away from my desk.
That said, sure making your own desktop is also an option.
Latest gen AMD motherboard with strong power delivery, 32gb of blistering fast memory (3600/16), 12/24 core Ryzen CPU @ 4.4ghz all core (1.27vcore loaded; 1.3v idle), PCIE4 NVME storage - 1kw platinum PSU, 360mm AIO CPU cooling (one DYI was enough..), a great case with terrific airflow (Define 7 Dark TG, Corsair ML140 fans) - overall it's a bloody ripper of a (gaming#) workstation. 7731 CineBench 2.0 score.
Absolutely love working on it. I have four monitors - 4th above the middle one on my custom aluminum profile. MKB & mouse, studio lighting.
I run Win10, but all my work is through WSL2/Ubuntu/MS Terminal. I happen to really like this combo - and it's my computer, so my choice.
#) Everything's new this year - I renew every 5 years or so, and son gets my old. Am however using an old 1080TI and holding off on the GPU until well into 2021, due to current market craziness and to be able to see the size of AMD's rabbit. Oh and my Soundblaster ZXR stayed too; love the wired audio I'm getting from this!
I'm still running an i7 6700. Initially it was one of the fastest components in my system, but has become the bottleneck as I've upgraded the parts around it (added a discrete gpu and nvme ssd, affecting the bottleneck for gaming and compiling, respectively). But honestly, it's still good enough most of the time, and I'm in no hurry to replace it.
Also/especially, while the initial build is not that much cheaper, the cost over time is — both the longer expected lifetime of the parts and the ability to upgrade piecemeal instead of replacing the whole thing.
One is they don't get the volume.
Second is they don't get kickbacks for bundling an operating system, or other software or make a profit collecting data. This is probably $50 per machine.
Mainstream manufacturers have to deal with consumers who know nothing about computers. They expect full support. They will also follow directions on any website without knowing what they're doing, and mess things up. The move to lock down computers isn't really a Big Brother conspiracy to prevent us from doing things on our computers that The Man doesn't want us to. It's a safety measure to stop inexperienced users bricking their machines and demanding support fix it.
Purism (and others) sell "overpriced" computers to people who know what we're doing. When I had a problem on my Purism laptop, they told me to unscrew the back and check the connections. That's not something that Dell can do with their customers.
I think they'll always stay "overpriced", partly because we're happy paying for the extra freedom. And partly so that they don't become mainstream and end up with a huge support overhead.
Given that the author's demands are being met, exactly, by Purism (etc), then I don't think he gets to complain that it's "too expensive" - that's not how markets work. You have a niche need, you pay a niche price. Stop with the Big Brother conspiracy theories and pay the extra cash to get the specific thing you want.
How much? I bet it's not much.
> That’s why System76 is more expensive. They’re NOT overpriced. They’re priced as “general purpose computers” must be to be competitive.
They're so much more expensive because they're niche. Not because of anything inherent to the product or producing it.
So "overpriced" sounds fair to me.
> I agree with this author, but this suggests that the strength of his conviction is maybe $400.
Is that not enough? If you can spread the word enough, and get enough people that are willing to spend $50 extra, you'll find plenty of companies begging for that money. The profit margin for building computers is bad.
Careful, your ignorance is showing.
I'm yet to find a decent laptop in this range that's max 14.5"@min 1440p (I don't even need 4k!) and support for 24GB RAM.
Librem 14 is not even launched yet and only has a 1080p option.
They're distracting people from the real problem, and doing so is harmful.
I forget what all of the main players are right now, but I know I’ve read on at least 2 of these types of open hardware companies’ sites how they scrub the intel ME all but completely out of the machine. That’s kind of the whole point, and they advertise that pretty conspicuously in their marketing.
If I didn’t start using a (17”, 3lb!) LG Gram laptop right around the time before I learned about open firmware, I would probably use a system76 laptop. For right now, the LG is just so damn light for that huge beautiful screen.....i’ve ruined myself and can’t switch to anything else until further notice unless another manufacturer makes a similarly ridiculous screensize:weight-ratio’d laptop lol (pine, purism, s76...you listening?)
I doubt that.
Compute Cores are fine, so the CPU still works.
You confirmed this how?
> Read their site, they go into the details there.
Debunked. The HAP bit doesn't do what they think it does:
https://twitter.com/rootkovska/status/938458875522666497
https://twitter.com/rootkovska/status/938458875522666497
Correction: Has Ended. The vast majority of people using computers has shifted to phones and tablets. I have a friend who's a millenial who barely knows how to use his desktop PC (It's a Mac) but is fluent on his iPad/iPhone.
Most people are not content creators, they are consumers. The people who are still building their own PC's are mostly enthusiasts. There's no profit in building custom PC's anymore, so local computer shops aren't selling them (And if they are, it's at a hefty premium).
The author of the article calls the 1980's the "Golden era" of personal computing. I disagree. Networked computing is an amazing thing, but it's also been monetized and now the consumers are the product being sold. And happily so. The outliers are those who buy pre-2012 computers so they can skip UEFI and are happy to live under their rocks to do it. That's okay with me.
Personally I need a faster computer than that, so I'm stuck with UEFI and because W10 is the right OS for my needs, I'm stuck with it phoning home. This doesn't mean the golden age was in the 80's or 90's. It means that by the time we figured out how to make computing awesome, we also figured out how to make computing itself profitable, not just the computers. The golden age the could have been, never was.
For people who actually care, I think the concerns are overblown and we'll always have access to a machine that can run open software.
And yes sure, we might not be able to pay consumer prices for them, but they are not going anywhere.
And sure, we might elect a fascist government which will simply ban the technology, or the west will go to war with China making it very difficult to manufacture anything. Unlikely.
Before social media, the average person had little to no interest in the internet - or PCs in general - aside from email and instant messaging apps. The internet has changed, but it's 99.9% because more people are using it, and their interests and needs are best served by 'it just works'.
This change, along with progress in general, has also made life better for technical folks. General purpose computing is dead? Come on. Desktop Linux actually works. Municipal fiber is a thing. Capable enterprise hardware is available online for less than a second hand iPhone, and if you don't have a couple of hundred to spend, a VPS costs less than a hamburger.
What makes you so sure the restrictions will stop somewhere you're comfortable with? What happens when unlocked machines are only available to "enterprise" (not unlike a certain Windows version), and you have to agree to audits when buying them? What chance do free operating systems stand, when 99% of users don't even have access to computers that could run them?
We need not worry as long as somewhere, in some dark basement, a sysadmin is able to assemble an unlocked personal computer from his company's old hardware?
The way to stop this is through legislation and protest, but it's a battle because the state likes locked down computers too.
Right now, today, it has never been easier to just go down to the local mall and buy a general purpose computer, and sure, there are lots of phones, tablets, and consoles on display as well, but there is no less computers as a result.
These regulations can easily outlaw general-purpose computing on the same grounds of being too dangerous for the society. I can remind you how encryption algorithms were considered "munitions" back in 1990s, less than 30 years ago. At that time one would possibly say that it will always be possible to bring a small bottle of water onboard of an airplane. Betting on things always being "naturally" available, without a conscious effort to sustain them, is a fraught enterprise.
If we continue to give power to right wing extremists, all bets are off.
The percentage of unlocked computers for consumers has been falling. Consoles, tablets, smartphones (all iPhones and many Androids don't allow rooting), smart TVs... even some laptops. Surface RT laptops had locked secure boot, and Chromebooks made it very difficult to install alternative OSes, as far as I know.
As for the incentives of the "open market", there's profit in locking down devices, and selling you back fragments of that locked functionality. For example, nvidia pushed an EULA that forbade using their consumer GPUs in datacenters, making them buy the far more expensive enterprise versions.
With how markets tend towards oligopolies and monopolies, there's no guarantee the handful of manufacturers left won't conspire to put restrictions on all computers. Especially if 95% of consumers don't care about being able to run gcc.
I don't know why do you think it would? Both software and hardware-side, there's no end of complaints that power users are being left behind. All the money is in making Fisher-Price software for the masses. Ain't nobody have time to cater for ergonomics or efficiency in computing, it's only a distraction from milking the general population.
This, to me, is a clear example of the market underserving a customer segment.
The more worrying thing IMHO is that the software to make use of that hardware is becoming increasingly polarised between what's aiming for big businesses and what's aiming for consumer drones.
The thing that gives me some hope is that the geeks all those businesses rely on to build the software that makes them billions are almost all in the "lost middle" and, given enough time and inclination, are quite capable of creating open software to destroy those businesses.
Sure, I'm as annoyed as you and the author about UEFI, but as long as I can install an OSS bootloader and launch whatever I want, I'm good. It may be a pain, but the tinkering capability is still there. If it wasn't possible to tinker with it, less people would buy that laptop.
Having closed hardware is a problem and it definitely doesn't make me feel safe. We may all be full of NSA backdoors, but to be honest I don't care much about it and I assume a large part of the tech knowledgeable feel the same way. I suspect this is why Open Hardware is not more prevalent in the market: not enough interest.
I don't care about computer companies making more user friendly devices; we can find a way to hack whatever or just start buying laptop parts from China and make our own laptops. What worries me is if the government will decide to ban cryptography or introduce regulations that force me to change how I tinker with my computer.
Sure, there are some spercific form factors that I would love to have that are not available or very rare. I really want to replace my iPad with something that runs linux, for example.
All I'm arguing is that, I don't believe that in my lifetime, or the foreseeable future, will there ever be a time where I can't reasonably easily get some kind of desktop computer and run whatever code I want on it. (Unless those computers literately become illegal - like some code already is)
I might not be able to carry it in my pocket, or wear it on my face, and it might not have some holographic interface that has not yet been invented yet.
I'm also not saying we should ignore the the fight for general purpose machines, and I will continue to vote with my wallet, as well as lobby to have laws that opening our machines.
I think its a disgrace that Apple no longer supports my iPad witch functions perfectly well, but I can't install anything on anymore.
Society would be much better if all our phones were open, I just don't think we need to freak out about desktop computers disappearing.
This worries me not because of any open computing concerns, but because of how FUNDAMENTAL general purpose computers are to nearly every decent paying professional job out there. All of them. No one daily drives Excel or Salesforce One or edits video or codes websites or balances accounts in Quickbooks on an iPad. Literally no one; we're decades away from that being mainstream, if it ever happens.
Everyone needs to be computer literate. Being a wiz on your iPhone or iPad does not, in any sense of the word, make you computer literate. Kids growing up with these closed-off devices quite literally destroys the fire of desire for learning how computers work, or even accidentally gaining a glancing knowledge with them enough to hold a good office office job.
Companies like Apple endlessly mouth their desire to get more kids to code, then their arms release devices so closed off that even trying to take a quick peek at how they work triggers eighteen system integrity protection alarms. You can't have it both ways, Apple.
Well, whatever. I don't really care. It just means more ultra high paying jobs for me. Apple (and Google, and to a lesser degree Microsoft) are literally actively sabotaging their own talent pool, guaranteeing that they'll never be able to hire enough people while paying the ones they do hire a ton of money.
Apple C-Suites: "We want kids to code."
Apple Ads: "What's a computer?"
Whilst it might be me, somebody somewhere doesn't understand something.
If you think of it as a firewall around knowledge, it's basically like this set of rules:
How does limiting the supply of technicians lower their wages? Is it because Apple is limiting their own supply of available technicians? Why can't a given technician go elsewhere -- is that because the "don't poach treaty" never stopped or something else?
I edit 4k video on my iPad, edit pictures, memes, do a bit of drawing with Procreate. I'm by no means professional at any of these things, but it isn't the tools holding me back.
I don't see any reason not to use Excel or Numbers or what have you on an iPad with the keyboard. I'm sure it would work fine.
I know a couple professional music producers who do the bulk of their work on a tablet now.
What hasn't made it to tablets is coding environments. Codea and Swift Playgrounds feel like toys to me.
But it's only a matter of time. I think "decades, if it ever happens" is entirely too pessimistic, it's more "now, if you want it", for most of those things.
And it's definitely not "literally no one". It's more people than you think.
If it were possible to multitask Excel or Word in Android, that's probably what I would be using right now for a lot of my basic workflow.
We look through rose colored glasses because, back then, we were able to use Excel, Word, (insert your program of choice). The people in our social circle were also able to use them. However, this was almost entirely because of who we hung out with.
The shift to closed devices (may) eventually have an effect on hobbyists, in the same way that the average person no longer knows how to change the oil in their car, but for now there's little evidence that iPhones and tablets are limiting the number of young, competent programmers (or even the number of IT hobbyists in general).
And using locked-down devices will condemn them to that for the term of their natural lives.
But actually I disagree. At different stages in their lives, people do different things. Make music. take photos, and wonder why they suck. Make family trees. Various hobbies, that require working with multiple bits of sotware on on multiple projects.
Take electronics. It's a hobby. It's nuts to use apps that each store their data in their own sandbox. One app to draw a schematic diagram, another app to plan the hardware layout, another app to record calibrations and test results, another for photos--and other apps to record the project goals and plans, and the lessons learned.
If I couldn't use a general purpose computer and store all of these files (and others, such as manufacturers' datasheets for critical components) in a single folder for each project (not part in one app, and another bit in aonther app, and so on), I'd be using paper, a drawing board and a filing cabinet.
I think the author would have better phrased his comment: "What worries me as much as the end of general-purpose computing for hobbyists and hackers is that so few seem to understand that it is ending." reply
> Correction: Has Ended.
I guess I have a different definition of "General Purpose Computing" than you or the author, because personally I see the iPhone and iPad as the beginning of general purpose computing for the masses. The traditional PC was computing for the elite/ computer experts.
This romanticism of 80s computing as the golden age completely mystifies me. The 80s/ 90s were a phenomenally fun time for geeks like me/ us. For everyone else, a PC was a thing you had to learn a bunch of esoteric bullshit to use.
"For the masses", the iPhone, Android, and the iPad are far more interesting and useful.
Even if you look at more specific PC style computing, most people don't care about whether their bios is locked or not.
I don’t think this is true at all, everybody that has a Twitter / Facebook / Instagram / YouTube / TikTok account is a content creator. There’s a reason the term “browsing the web” has died out, it’s not about passive consumption anymore.
Writing code is just about the only thing you can’t do on an iPad. And while I think we can all agree on HN that having a gateway to programming is super important, you can’t expect most people to care.
Typed on my iPhone. In bed.
All the fora you mention are characterized by lack of longform text. What people are creating today tends to be image-heavy and eschew any long argumentation or prose storytelling.
Having just a smartphone obviously represents a limitation. For example, I am a member of some niche travel communities. A decade ago, when it was common for people to lug a laptop, there was a healthier community of people writing detailed blog posts on certain destinations, editing Wikivoyage or Hitchwiki, etc. Now that those same travelers are leaving the laptop at home and traveling only with a phone where it is inconvenient to enter much text, the ecosystem of travel resources is actually poorer than it was in the past.
Swift playgrounds will actually run quite large codebases with a little fiddling around.
You can trivially get a robust Linux command line with Blink and a free tier Google compute instance.
I agree there is no XCode.
This is in contrast to almost anything else you might care to do on a computer, where the iPad equivalent ranges from "basically fine" to "actually better".
But people's perceptions are lagging a few years behind where the platform is at. That's normal.
I didn’t make the distinction between writing code and writing software but I guess it’s an important one.
I think you’d be surprised how close swift playgrounds has become.
All it really needs is a project navigation UI, and it will be good enough for building pure Swift/SwiftUI apps.
Most (all) shops I have seen will sell you custom PCs for the price of the components. Unless you are talking about Entreprise ones (not sure if they do exist), most of these cater for gamers who are price-sensitive. But the components are the same, and you can pick an aluminum case instead of the RGB ones.
Even your example describes someone who, while he isn't fluent with it, actually owns a general purpose computer.
PC is better for long text. Phones are better for photo / media. Both have pros and cons.
There's also the platform. A lot of phone content ends up siloed into auto-suggesting apps, where click-bait (touch-bait?) tends to just overrun people.
People can now sit for hours just swiping on auto-suggested content. The same can be true for text (see clickbait) but you'd tend to access that through a web browser, where you're just a tab away from something actually useful.
That's where it's going to go, the security situation is not getting better. You already see it in a lot of political organizations where many of the workers get by with chromebooks. And for joe schmo, that's FINE.
Now granted I’ve rooted every phone I’ve had since the HTC Incredible, and I always check XDA forums before buying a new one to see if there’s a decent development community. And in recent years there has been a SHARP drop in the % of manufacturers that even allow their bootloaders to be unlocked - I don’t think the last like 6 samsung galaxy’s have ever been possible to do it. But there are still plenty, I’ve managed to find a kickass flagship model every year or 2 years and upgrade through at least 2 or 3 versions of android (I always buy last- or last-last-gen models used for <$200 so they’re typically a bit out of date already).
I couldn’t imagine any other way honestly. I absolutely love rooting & flashing custom roms, and it’s kept all my phones practically as young and snappy as the day they originally released...or better
If Linux didn't already exist it would never have been possible to create since all computing platforms are getting more and more locked down.
You can also run mainline linux on the Nexus 7 2012 but you lose wifi support.
Most alternative OSs just use the patched kernel that shipped with the device.
- Most computers' UEFI firmware, desktop or laptop, allows you to install your own keys.
- And every computer I've ever heard of with UEFI will allow you to disable secure boot.
- Linux runs just fine on UEFI.
I'm worried about a lot of the trends in laptops and smartphones, but I'm not yet worried about UEFI.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/informatio...
>All x86-based Certified For Windows 10 PCs must meet several requirements related to Secure Boot:
> - They must have Secure Boot enabled by default.
> - They must trust Microsoft’s certificate (and thus any bootloader Microsoft has signed).
> - They must allow the user to configure Secure Boot to trust other bootloaders.
> - They must allow the user to completely disable Secure Boot.
The last two points in particular. It's been this way since SB was introduced.
Note that this requirement does not apply to non-x86 devices. In particular, ARM devices (Windows RT) are explicitly required to disallow SB from being disabled, to meet the certification requirement.
This one in particular always pissed me off, and I'm glad it only applies to pre-built machines that come with Windows 10 preinstalled. If the individual motherboard makers ever decide they need to be "certified for Windows 10" and start auto-trusting a certificate for closed-source commercial software, I'm left with no choice but to either stick with my "old" (not really that old) hardware or switch to another platform like POWER9.
My Ryzen board trusted Microsoft out of the box, it has to if they want to pass Windows logo certification. You can check yours here: https://partner.microsoft.com/en-us/dashboard/hardware/searc...
That's the entirety of my complaint.
Thanks for the link! My board is not on it as I assumed.
Sure, they're loaded by default, and you can argue that we can't prove the board isn't gonna trust them behind your back -- but that applies to older non-open hardware too.
My bigger annoyance is Intel Boot Guard. I want Intel to let us control the firmware more directly -- even if it requires some physical authorization/kills some DRM component in ME or something. But that's not happening anytime soon...
The requirements mentioned by grandparent are for setup where without any extra configuration you can approach a computer with Windows 10 install media and it will install properly.
You can do this on any x86/x86_64 hardware made in the past 15 years. Whether your machine has a traditional BIOS, UEFI with SecureBoot off, or UEFI with SecureBoot on, Windows 10 will install with zero complaints.
You only get to be "certified by Microsoft" if you follow all of their rules, but you don't have to be certified to install Windows 10 (yet).
It also covers "will work as advertised", i.e. certain features will operate properly. And secured boot path is, indeed, one of such features.
From 2012 until present, computers have been produced that run any EFI binary you want. Why not buy one of those? It's no different than sticking with pre-2012 machines, except you aren't attached to cruft from the 1980s anymore.
So I was a bit confused when I read the OP.
It is true that the billion-dollar media companies have decided a subscription model is more lucrative than a one-time-purchase model for the mass-market content they produce (movies, TV shows, music, etc.).
But also unlike the author, I don't think my ability to consume mass-market media on my own terms is a moral imperative or has much bearing on my overall freedom. If Warner Brothers doesn't want to sell me a copy of Transformers 43 that I can play with VLC, I don't see that as much of a threat to anything I care about.
We got awfully close though. Had Linux not been popular enough back when UEFI SecureBoot started being adopted, Microsoft would require x86 UEFI motherboards to not allow the user to install their own keys, like they did with ARM UEFI (https://www.softwarefreedom.org/blog/2012/jan/12/microsoft-c...).
Microsoft has enough clients that require custom keying that for them, locking it down would be a financial downside without Linux being in the scope.
The question is how much of that is thanks to this kind of article appearing for the past thirty years.
It's kind of like saying Y2K wasn't a problem: it would have been a problem if we hadn't prepared for it.
With the kid, I want to get a motherboard, power supply, RAM and disk and build it all up to a prompt.
Then do Linux From Scratch on it.
Not practical for daily usage, but invaluable for teaching what is at stake with the stack.
The percentage of “open” devices has been trending downward.
I'll give you a computer with the following:
* 256GB of solid-state storage
* 6 CPUs @ 3+GHz
* 8GB of RAM
* Weighs only 200 grams
* Battery-powered, lasts 5+ hours
* 1440 x 3168 resolution display
I would have been absolutely gobsmacked. Such a machine absolutely outclasses every desktop up into the early 2010s!
And then you would tell me that it's mostly used to shitpost on reddit and Twitter and would be completely useless as a development machine, and the manufactures would do everything to make it impossible to put what software I want on it...and also it would spy on me everywhere I went in order to sell me garbage...
We took a wrong turn somewhere, didn't we?
I have an old PSP (PlayStation Portable) and whenever I turn it on I'm amazed at how fast and lag-free it is. This probably proves that the problem is most likely the software, not the hardware.
Frameworks piled on frameworks to make things 5% faster to develop, combined with a general tendency for software developers to not optimize anything until someone complains.
You have the opportunity to be able to know exactly how all of your customers will run it and you have a good chance of having the extra $ to actually give a damn about performance.
First there was this trend to have ultra high dpi and ultra high resolution in the palm of your hands, and now they are toying with increasing refresh rates.
All while trying to maintain a reasonable battery life.
That said, they're not so hard to dev on. You can unlocked bootloader Androids fairly easily.
It's also a trade off between installing what software you want and security - the App store means you don't have to worry about (certain kinds) of maliciousness from software you install.
I just think it's a little bit of a spicy take saying mobile devices "don't deliver" when they are most successful form of computing in history by a large margin. I would argue this is for a reason and they provide enormous value.
My point is that they have incredible computational power that is often wasted on pretty graphics and other nonessentials. Pretty much all communication/text apps (except video) could easily run on a device spec'd far lower. The web is ridiculously bloated and full of ads and crapware. Just rendering pages of decent-looking text shouldn't take so much power. Even manipulating maps for navigation is mostly a 2d graphics scaling problem that can't possibly require that much horsepower.
But yes, my point about development does pretty much rely on having an external keyboard and mouse.
Here's a pic of the logic board of an iPhone 11: https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/UNjifVHATsvaagZB.f...
The miniaturization of tech is absolutely astounding to me, even today. We're pretty unappreciative and wasteful, IMHO. 20 year old me would have been absolutely astounded that that much power was packed in that tiny space, and yet what it delivers is just marginally prettier and not more usable than back then.
Of course, you need an OS that supports that and provides a proper desktop-like experience.
I'm not surprised Apple doesn't have something like this as it would probably cannibalize their Macbook sales.
Two aspects are important to keep in mind for a decision of this kind:
This machine is going to be your primary professional tool for the next several years - do you really care about a few hundred dollars extra? Especially if you have niche-requirements (read: non mass-market) like strong Linux desktop support and deep concern for privacy / security?
Sure - you could do the research and build yourself and pay less for the parts - but if you consider your time at market rates, are you really making a financially smart decision by not paying a small premium on the price of constituent parts?
Of course, I am aware of the excitement that can be associated with creating a custom build - if you are into that sort of thing: enjoy it as a hobby project, not because it is a better deal.
Humans seem to have a hard time taking costs into account that are not easily quantified.
I also really like the capsule firmware update mechanism, I’ve been able to use fwupdmgr to keep all of my devices firmware up to date, from Linux, without freeDOS or windows foolery. Additionally, the Dell UEFI BIOS supports booting right to the firmware update cab or exe, further strengthening the utility of a Linux-only install.
With UEFI I can set up my own boot entries and boot directly into whichever Linux kernel I like with whatever arguments I like. I can write a script that easily boots me into another OS exactly once. And it's a delight to not have to think about traditional bootloaders anymore.
Not sure I've ever seen anyone wanting secure boot. what is it actually good for aside from generating searches for Google when you have to figure out how to circumvent it?
I tend to side with others in the thread that the "end of general purpose computing" isn't a result of manufacturers pushing in a direction but rather following consumers. The percentage of computer scientists, programmers, and enthusiasts that consider the openness of their hardware a deal breaker grow smaller each year. For the rest of the population, they can find something that's general enough for their use cases.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for opening hardware up and making it transparent. But until we as general consumers (not just the fine folks of Hacker News) care enough to let that sway our buying decisions, this trend is going to continue.
There will always be general hardware. It's just going to get more expensive.
This is an even stronger claim than that consumers don't care if their hardware is closed. Consumers aren't begging for their hardware to be closed, and companies aren't passively trying to please them. The vast majority of consumers don't care if their hardware is closed until they discover something that their hardware is capable of doing that they're not allowed to do with it or something that their hardware is doing that they're not allowed to keep it from doing. Companies close as much as they can while trying not to upset consumers enough that they leave or complain to the government - which means either that they have to find ways to 1) add or limit functionality in a closed way, or that 2) they have to get all competitors to agree to prevent or allow the same things (to eliminate alternatives), or 3) they have to advocate a POV (and lobby for it in government) that whatever functionality is missing or required is dangerous to add or remove.
This is following consumers in a way; like building a wall behind them every time they move in a particular direction could be considered following them.
Of course, Android malware exists too. But Google's approval process, application sandboxing and the ability to remotely remove applications after they're found to be malicious makes it a much smaller problem. It's not something consumers cheer about, but rather something we mostly don't think about when using phones and tablets.
I don't think the assumption that processing power is decreasing and all devices are becoming dumb terminals is true, either. Moore's law... Look at the new chips released by AMD and Intel. Look at CPU benchmarks: the more recent chips blow older generations out the water... and there's no conspiracy to keep these advancements out of consumer's hands. Anyone is free to buy a server rack and build a small super computer (should they have the cash.)
What this article raises that I agree with is the complaint that many chips contain proprietary blobs that can't be inspected or removed. Unfortunately, technology like this is how companies try protect trade secrets. It's definitely not ideal, and backdoors + security flaws have been found in these areas in the past. I think if you're concerned about such flaws you really have to ask yourself whether you need to protect government-secrets... or whether your laptop is just going to contain your shopping list and other mundane data. Once you decide what type of data you're going to be working with. You can decide on an appropriate security strategy.
I doubt it makes sense for most people to stick to decades old hardware to avoid the possibility of having someone exploit (and risk revealing what would probably be worth millions on the black market) something in their firmware or microcode.
Thought the same when skimming the post. Creators, streamers, AI folks, Kagglers, gamers, some crypto devs, all have a desktop, mainly because of nvidia GPUs. This isn't news for them for probably a decade.
Anyone who consciously thought desktops were a good idea to move away from in the above case made an initial, much bigger mistake. (Again presuming it was a general lifestyle choice and not some necessity.)
It's as simple as answering the following question:
Would you rather have a) a tiny monitor with a bunch of expensive fragile dying-to-have-coffee-spilled-on-it shit jutting way out at you in the horizontal, always at a weird angle or too low or b) a couple of big beautiful monitors and loads of desk space? If you think you can have both, you're probably wrong. Even a nice dock setup requires you to do things like install brackets under the desk to shove your laptop in to, and disable its monitor lest it become a weird bastard screen full of junk you have no intention of looking at.
All the docks and laptop stands and extra monitors in the world can't solve the problem that laptops are broadly speaking, unpleasant to use. I think the only times I've actually been grateful to have my expensive and pretty laptop, are during power outs - watching netflix in bed. Though the whole setup is reliant on a well practiced construction of pillows and an external bluetooth speaker because no laptop has ever been made with speakers worth the power they draw.
If you can even remotely get away with not using one, don't use one.
Also for whatever reason the desktop screen market doesn't know about retina style high ppi displays. It's a shame, same with dropping 16:10.
I don't think desktops require retina displays. There are an endless selection of big, bright, high refresh rate, high resolution, and cheap monitors to choose from.
Macbooks max out at 16 inches. Retina displays are (a good) attempt at trying to make laptops more viable for long use, but still they fall short of even the cheapest 4k decent nitts desktop monitor. They haven't adapted the tech, because it's not needed. The same pressures of selection aren't present.
The biggest font and text clarity nerd that I am aware of agrees on the matter, and makes some sensible suggestion and gives reasoning here: https://tonsky.me/blog/monitors/
Ignorant nonsense.
UEFI, while overengineered, allows for a computer-OS to tell the firmware how to cleanly boot it, so you can have several OSes installed in parallel without anyone stepping on anyone else’s toes.
Basically it simply and cleanly solves the dreaded and always unreliable dual/multi-boot situation which almost exclusively Linux users have had to endure, with Windows update accidentally overwriting their bootloader every now and then.
But who complains about UEFI and the solutions it brings and clings to legacy BIOS boot with all its warts and complications? Yup. Linux-users who are so politically opposed to UEFI that they cannot bother looking into the actual technology to see if their political opposition is warranted at all. Talk about FUD, eh.
It’s a sad sight. And I say that as a happy (UEFI booting) 100% Linux desktop-user.
The amount of people asking if they can upgrade the CPU, GPU, SSD/HDD or memory in their new-ish laptops is disheartening. Most of the questions concerns the CPU og GPU where the answer is no 99.99% of the time these days. 90% of consumer grade laptops have the RAM soldered to the mainboard too now. Luckily the HDD/SSD is usually replaceable or upgradeable in case of failure, performance problems or lack of free disk space... but for how long?
From a purely ecological standpoint, the laptop producers should be forced to buy back and recycle all their shitty unupgradeable, unrepairable, made-to-fail consumer electronics. It's a shameful situation we are in.
If societies can get 99% of glas and plastic bottles recycled using bottle deposit money, we should be able to reach the same figures for consumer electronics like laptops.
One thing that caught me off guard was the number of low end models with 4 GB of RAM and pricier models limited to 8 GB RAM. With Windows using nearly 2 GB on boot and a chunk being used for the GPU, that doesn't leave much for applications. Having a non-upgradable CPU is not a huge issue in my opinion, except the performance of low end models is astoundingly abysmal. I doubt that many of them could keep up with my 8 year old desktop, which was not a high end build at the time. Not only is the hardware disposable, in many cases it is intended to have a very short life.
Overall though, I would be happier if manufacturers were clear on what you are getting. While I do some real work on my laptop, I tend to offload most of my work onto a desktop. This means that I look for a handful of key features and don't care about the rest. Unfortunately, my last laptop purchasing experience was a nightmare. Researching a couple of laptops took more time than deciding upon parts for a desktop build and, of course, you have to look at more than a couple of laptops to find something that is acceptable in terms of features, performance, and price.
Meanwhile, the rest of us just want to get work done: my Arch Linux desktop that boots with UEFI is functionally identical to one that boots with BIOS. So.. really, who cares?
It's a mechanism to lock down a computer to only run "trusted" OSes. Who gets to decide which OSes are trusted? Does Arch have lobbyists?
It's just one falling domino in a series of falling dominos, where maybe one day you don't get to run Arch anymore.
This stuff really can go either way. People were allowed to record TV using VCRs in the 90s. Ripping CD Audio onto hard disks? Dunno. Copying DVDs & Blu-ray onto hard disks? Definitely not. What about running software on a phone? Better "jailbreak" it.
> my Arch Linux desktop that boots with UEFI is functionally identical to one that boots with BIOS
Stallman agrees with you that you don't get anything from UEFI: "This is not a security feature. This is abuse of the users. I think it ought to be illegal."
He also made the claim, "Microsoft demands that ARM computers sold for Windows 8 be set up so that the user cannot change the keys; in other words, turn it into restricted boot."
Crazy?
> For logo-certified Windows RT 8.1 and Windows RT PCs, Secure Boot is required to be configured so that it cannot be disabled.
> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/manufactur...
edit: Just thought of three more battles currently going on:
* Oculus headsets now require Facebook logins.
* youtube-dl just got blocked on GitHub
* Iranians and GitLab
Just like many other closed platforms of yore, or how in practice Macs of today work (their UEFI is, plainly, not to spec - a lot of hackintosh work is figuring out "what Apple did wrong this time")
Including approaching the booting of a computer as if it was still KA-10 and you were using RIM10B bootstrap loader.
Seems like UEFI make sense, as it is agreed upon by all large vendors like Intel, Apple, MS.
When an article starts with a statement[1] like this I know I'm in for a whine-fest about how everything sucks now and we need to Make Computing Great Again.
What the author wants is a ThinkPad P Series or a Clevo clone. I don't know why the author is making the assumption that a more modular, utility-focused laptop or portable device doesn't exist. They absolutely exist. Just don't be mad that it's a niche and that other people who just want an appliance have different needs than you. Don't be mad that other people in the world aren't necessarily any more interested in computing than they are in fixing their car.
It's also entirely inaccurate to say that the 1980s was a freedom-loving general purpose heaven. In reality, users still bought into ecosystems and proprietary technologies, perhaps even more-so than today.
For example, remember when you had to worry about what format your floppy disk was formatted in? Remember when the same productivity program on a different platform had different save formats? Remember when different platforms had different ports and physical connections for things as simple as a mouse? It's not like Amigas and Commodores and Apple ]['s were just oozing interoperability with each other.
When you've set up your laptop to be ergonomic to use, it's as portable as a desktop, so that one thing it did well, it turns out, it couldn't even do that.
Laptops are portable, when you REALLY need to be able to compute at some different place than usual.
They're expensive and even then, still underspecced compared to desktops..
My desktop has 20 tib of storage and 64 gib ram, has a 5 ghz cpu and it runs silently most of the time, I can't even buy a laptop with those specs, if I could it'd be super expensive and noisy or frequency throttling.
This is unfortunately going away a bit, but I still have many more upgrade options for a desktop. Now everything is USB but with the right adapters, I can still use those weird ISA cards I've got hanging around, I can still read 5.25" and 3.5" floppies, and CDs and ZIP. (and yes, the "easy" way to read those disks is using a isa floppy controller on a USB to ISA adapter).
Also, I guess I just don't need to move around that much, but when I do, I have a second-hand I7 machine with 16 gib memory that runs linux off of an SSD reasonably well, if I need "performance".. If I only need connectivity, I'm using a this small blue HP StreamBook 11 that I bought for around $200 years ago, it also runs Linux well enough, but it's pretty much limited to running a terminal and ssh.
I do get a little nervous being without a computer when I'm on holiday 5-6 times a year, but in 25 years I've never actually had to do any emergency work while on holiday. I think the risk is very small.
If the day comes that I can't get a laptop that I can unfuck, I guess I'll just have to work in a remote desktop on a VM in one of the servers. I can always keep the laptop and devices from chattering through the routers. I do have a real fear that it might become hard to find routers that I can install OpenWrt on, or that OpenWrt might go the way of Firefox.
UEFI, properly implemented, is a huge improvement over old BIOS. It isn't required to be 'locked', and I have never encountered a Windows laptop or desktop that didn't not allow you to disable secure boot within the BIOS. I am not as familiar with Apple hardware so I will not comment on that.
UEFI and it GUID partition layout is superior to traditional BIOS. I develop within embedded systems that rely on GUID partitions to provide granularity of storage. One current system I support has 34 partitions, to support redundancy, safe image updates, and soft recovery.
With UEFI on the desktop, you can implement the same strategies.
So those are two statements in the post that I found to be misleading, if not outright wrong.
On the hardware front, yes, current era consumer laptops have become completely sealed boxes. If you want to own a laptop that can be upgraded and maintained, you need to buy either a gaming or enterprise laptop.
For most people, and enterprise laptop is only going to be slightly more expensive than a consumer grade device. It is not going to be as slim and 'sexy'. It t will likely have useful ports down the side.
On desktops, as long as you are buying a full sized desktop, I have not seen any (yet) that are not completely equipped with appropriate connectors and cabling to support upgrades.
I have seen 'mini' systems that are completely soldered down, but that is the price you pay for small. Connectors consume real estate.
I got my first PC 30 years ago and never bought a new one ever since. It was always upgrades, small or large. Even stepping up MB and CPU I've kept my drives, graphics card, most of the smaller peripherals, sometimes even RAM, so even the largest changes are always in several hundred dollars ballpark. The process is fun, interesting and makes me keep tabs with industry.
I've bought a laptop when switching to "digital nomad" lifestyle for several years, and it was my very worst experience with personal computing. I've spent about 15 hundreds bucks and never made worst investment ever since.
I'm using a MacBook Pro from 2014, after putting in a new battery recently it still works great, and when I'm at my desk I plug it into a big monitor. Not as upgradeable as a desktop, but even assuming I can't sell the laptop when I upgrade it, it cost me less than $500 per year.
I've tried using multiple computers in the past (big desktop + MacBook Air, costs about the same in total as a 15" MacBook Pro that is much less powerful than the desktop) but I realized that the convenience of knowing that all of my files are on one computer is more important to me.
However, I have a nice laptop from work and I really like my work setup, where I just connect a couple ports and instantly have a couple more big monitors, a good keyboard and mouse and other stuff.
So I've really been considering replacing my desktop with a decent laptop at home. I've also seen some benchmarks that are putting fairly commodity systems within spitting distance of what my old workhorse can do, meaning if I invested in a decent laptop I could probably keep about the level of performance I have today, but gain portability.
Then in the last few months we got the new Nvidia 3080 line (with AMD's RDNA 2 coming soon), the AMD 5000 series processors, new classes of SSDs like the 970 Evo Plus which have performance that used to be what we saw with DRAM.
All of these combined in a new system are going to be an entirely new class of desktop performance that my old system won't even come close to touching and portable machines won't touch either.
So I'm thinking of going with a new desktop sometime next year once inventory and prices stabilize, and if I need it a rock bottom budget laptop for traveling. Target price <$3k all-in.
From a technical perspective not many laptops come close to my desktop's performance and if they did they'd cost way more.
But the psychological benefit of having a desktop to do my work on is when I get home I don't continue working. I lock my ability to do most of my job (DevOps) to my desktop at my private office away from the home. That means when I get home I can do basic tasks on my 2020 MBP but for security reasons there's a lot I can't do.
Maybe this is something to consider when making your choice? Let me know how you get on.
- Ability to show the internals (from a few feet away!) thereby spawning curiosity on the possibilities of technology
- His coursework can be seen on TV and ensuring that TV is not merely entertainment
- "Certified" media for him to consume (we don't have youtube installed in any of our devices so I use youtube-dl to download astronomy stuff for him)
I do not remember using a laptop as my primary dev machine in last 10 years, I use the same 10 year old c2d 2.5ghz machine with newer motherboard(2014-g41mcombo gigabyte) and enough ram.
The system runs both ubuntu and windows 7 at ease and I am not considering update in at least next year. that describes the robustness of desktop. It is not that desktop does not break, they do quite often. But mostly we can manually troubleshoot them, In 10 years I have fried a motherboard, bricked 2 psu, ram and 3 harddrives. Its that I can just fix broken part and get going.
Hardware upgrades are only required if you are resource constrained, like require multiple vm, or multimedia editing and some crypot type gpu and cpu intensive stuffs. Even in those cases desktop shines.
Laptops are really great for mobility and they are really capable machines which can be configured to comparable performance with most of the desktops but not in durability and flexibility.
I wish people interested in this gave it more of an in-depth look and actually played with it.
It really attacks the problem at its source in a way a lot of these other methods don’t.
You can use a desktop, but services are still going to be largely centralized. We need a from first principles correction to fix broken incentives.
Now getting some of that configured to use the cheap hardware is a more complicated story.
Unlike the author I do use recent Laptops with Linux. Like the author I like to actually own my machine.
I would never trade this for a "gadget" running Android, ChromeOS, or IOS - other than my phone that is.
Today I have multi-GigaHertz machines that I can't build the simple projects that I could use with my Amigas because I have no way to interface directly to the buss.
The latency of what present computer supplies is horrible.
It seems like the bit-banging abilities of these current PCs are as good as they ever were.
None of this is news but it definitely makes the development experience so much nicer, and I can play any game with max settings on it too. Building desktops is also just a lot nicer than it used to be. There are tons of quality of life improvements in the cases, PSUs with detachable cables, silent fans and cooling solutions, etc.
I realized I hadn't taken my main MacBook off the dock in 9 months. When I go out, I have an older one that I'm happy to use away from my desk. Since it's acting like a desktop now, I though maybe I'd replace it with a higher-spec mac desktop. But a high end mac mini isn't much different than a high-end MacBook.
It seems if you want a high-performance mac but don't want to spend 6k+ on a mac pro, a specced-out 16" MacBook is the best choice. Is that correct?
I do wish I would have gotten a bigger internal SSD (I bought it with 256GB, but have now moved most of my files to an external SSD and it's a constant struggle).
I've also now purchased an external GPU to drive my 2 4k monitors at home (it can do 2 4k monitors of text editing itself without struggling _too_ much, but it does run about 15C cooler with the eGPU), so it's hard to say if an iMac wouldn't have been a better purchase, but the nice thing about the mac mini is I can easily throw it in a backpack when I need to travel every couple of months.
If I buy another Apple laptop it'll probably be a 16" Macbook Pro. In fairness to Apple I usually get at least 5 years out of one of their laptops so can generally live with the premium.
It was awful on all dimensions, even the portability as the thing I choose at the time was not light, I used it at home only once.
Not worth it.
Whilst it wasn't portable, it was _fast_. Granted not in single threaded performance (they are all old hat nowadays)
But I could run a bunch of containers, VMs if I wanted and run slack and chrome (although I use firefox mostly)
New work has given me a fancy macbook. Which is fine, but I miss the extra resolution of the 4k screen (which I suspect is perceived rather than actual. I have very small fonts)
I also miss linux as a local dev environment.
My new Dell XPS 13 came with Ubuntu pre-installed (which I replaced with Void Linux) and for the most part allows for a lot of tweaking. When I'm at home, I connect to my eGPU unit with one cable, allowing me to use my secondary monitor, a proper mouse, and external hard drives (although internal is already 1TB SSD). The eGPU unit is a Razer Core V2 with a GTX 1060, which is good enough for VR games, which play well on Linux these days surprisingly. Then a lot of my stuff is self-hosted in the cloud anyway, like a media server, backups, servers for development, even an IRC bouncer. I also run my own smart home software on a raspberry pi.
So while at the moment this might not be typical for an average consumer, the trend towards edge computing will really make the laptop into an "internet appliance" as the author says, and the browser an OS. Hell, with 5G, cloud gaming for VR may even be viable, and then we're back to the equivalent of terminals and mainframes.
The only real issue then is the ownership of these services — I don't agree with the author that everything will become a SaaS and no more open hardware will exist. It will always exist as long as there's a demand for it, you just have to accept that it'll be more expensive and less consumer-friendly. E.g. I have to accept that I can't hotplug my eGPU on Linux like you can on Windows, and I need to pay for my servers. Spotify and Netflix will always be cheaper than any legal means of acquiring media otherwise specifically because of their size.
I was thinking of the opposite: the case being the heat sink. The Fanlesstech blog presents these sometimes. https://www.fanlesstech.com/
I don't know if it's enough to just cool the CPU (and using integrated graphics) and let convection handle the other components? Does the chipset or memory need active airflow over them?
Totally done with laptops, honestly.
It wouldn’t surprise me at all if we see a resurgence in desktop computers since all the places a laptop shines: coffee shop, train commute, working on a plane, aren’t all that important anymore.
From all features of pre 2012-NOW laptops the REAL KEYBOARD is what I miss the most.
I really hoped that Lenovo will make something more from its 25th Anniversary Edition ThinkPad (some name id T25) but from what I know only 5000 pieces were made and finito. Or ar least that Lenovo will PERMANENTLY provice a classic/retro ThinkPad with every new generation with REAL KEYBOARD.
That is why I still use 2011 ThinkPad W520 and ThinkPad X220 - to have REAL USABLE KEYBOARD with REAL PGUP/PGDN HOME/END INS/DEL keys block in the top right space.
Future looks very dark since years in the laptop space.
The more I look into laptop computing (and often computing in general) the more only single word stands out.
D I S S A P O I N T E D
I now type happily on my X1 Yoga. It’s a very good keyboard, you get used to it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
There are tradeoffs we all have to make, and I chose having new processors and things like USB-C over having a really good built in keyboard. I just settled for a good keyboard, not a really good one.
Thought that I will get used to it. I kinda did but the first moment when I moved back to REAL 7-row keyboard was like driving a bike again. Its just so good I do not want to get back to anything other then that.
Maybe I will have two machines. One to type and one for other things ... or with external ThinkPad SK-8855 keyboard :)
Time will come, maybe I will do one last 'hop' with ThinkPad 25th Anniversary Edition ... if they will be available in several years ...
Thanks.
I know I'm probably a dinosaur. I run a lot of desktop applications for work, and run most my models locally. I use the shell to automate tasks, and rarely use the "cloud" and try to limit browser tasks.
What's funny about this post is that I'm actually in the market for a new laptop, and am quite paralyzed in the process. I can't get myself to spend $1500 on some mediocre machine where everything is soldered on the mobo, I can't replace the battery, and that will become garbage in 2 years.
All the pro desktop vs laptop arguments are funny. No one wanted less performance at higher prices. We want to take the machine with us and use it in different places.
I too have been considering going 'back' to desktop recently, but it's to do with the pandemic. Laptop died last may, I got a new one, and... it's still reasonably good. However, I've been far less mobile in the last few months, and that will likely stay that way for a long time.
I've been primarily on laptops for the past 12-13 years or so. Much of my work involves traveling and meeting clients, sometimes doing some work on their premises. This was not an every day thing, but it was enough that I considered the laptop the primary tool. And I would typically get the higher-powered laptop models when I'd get new ones, as it's the main day to day tool.
The last 6+ months have changed most of my movements. I haven't met a client in person this year. I don't expect I will for at least another year. If it's sooner, it's sooner, but probably not. Being forced in to being non-mobile, my thoughts are turning back to desktops. I'll still want a laptop, but price/performance, I know I can get some more from desktop, and I'm considering switching to desktop as 'primary work tool' in the next couple of months. I'll keep current laptop (18 months old now) and it will serve fine as a secondary tool.
I'm curious how covid will impact other peoples' decisions in this area. I can't be the only one in this situation thinking about this decision.
Have set up three USB-C "workstations" with montior, keyboard and mouse (USB via Logitech Unify) in the house: One cable dock for any of the household laptops. There has been some toothing pain, but with USB-C reaching corporate machines, these are quickly becoming a non-issue.
Have been moving the SO and kids to USB-C laptops over the last couple of years (used Thinkpad X's are great value -- and tend to get full teen approval).
Do you have any good dual monitor USB-C docks you could recommend? I’ve been wanting to expand my work station a bit.
I recommend that you take a look at the Raspberry Pi and other single-board computers. They're cheap too :-)
Excluding his exaggerated motivation, why would you use a laptop for real work anyway, when you can run a multiple monitor desktop with tons of storage, no thermal problems and a real keyboard to type on?
Personally I use a desktop 95% of the time for work. I own a laptop but I only work on it when I have no choice.
Due to Covid I moved away from our central office, but next year I'll have to commute there every month or two for meetings. Obviously I can't lug a massive desktop around on a train.
So I bought a customised Dell Precision Mobile workstation. It cost a small fortune, but I reckon I'll have this for years. The CPU will probably outperform my current 4790K and it allows more RAM (128GB) than my current motherboard (32GB). I can also stick a 4G SIM card into it so I'll have broadband pretty much anywhere I am. Ideal for these days of remote working.
I'll get work to buy a M.2 drive and I'll stick a VM on it and restrict work activities to that. If I leave I can just send that back.
I'm not sure I'd buy another desktop if my current one goes kaput. Potentially for gaming, but I don't do that quite so much these days. (Ryzen would be a temptation though.)
I have a low powered laptop for 'on the go' but I only tend to use it to take notes in meetings, and rarely if never use it for work.
Gone are the days of buying a 2k-3k laptop every 18 months and being disappointed with the performance!
My solution: run desktops at home as your own private cloud and use them in various ways from you laptop or phone. Create your own services or use oss services to fulfill your needs from your thin internet devices, no middle man/woman needed, use your desktop/s anywhere. This won't solve your uefi problem if you use modern laptops, nor will it solve your usb 2.0 problem if you stick to old laptops. But set up your own services, don't let them take over! It's quite a bit of work to setup, but maybe it'll get easier if more people take on the challenge. (Disclosure: this is my personal pipe dream, and I'm in the early stages of working this out myself.)
On a side note, the open laptops you refer to can be more pricy, but if that's what you believe in, then support the cause!
I know it’s not a practical choice for everyone, but I’ve always maintained both a desktop and a laptop. The desktop tends to be both significantly cheaper and more powerful, and it typically also survives a couple laptop upgrades before being replaced.
I suspect a lot of the movement towards laptops was and is due to the desire to run macOS. It just so happens that Apple desktop computers are either way underpowered or way expensive. An MBP is basically the sanest way to run macOS. So MBPs tend to become makeshift portable desktops, with external screens, keyboard, mice / trackpads, power bricks, and cooling pads.
If your work processes are not beholden to Apple software, building (or ordering a customized) desktop is a refreshing gulp of power. You suddenly can afford much more, or spend way less.
I'm writing this from a Linux desktop, and I'm quite content with it.
Use a server! , You can get cheap used, Dual Xeons 12 cores, with like 128G of ram on ebay for about 1000$
And that's not the only thing you get compared to a regular desktop you get:
But yes it sounds like a airplane, but the idea is to put that computer away from your desk in a closet or in your basement.Thanks to Fiber Optic based DisplayPort cables, I have my server 30 ft away from me in the basement. My work area is dead silent!
Note I also use a usb extender and a usb DAC, so I got 2 long cables and I get keyb/mouse/audio and 4K 60Hz video.
I think a comparable spec new desktop would have cost about 5-10k..
With the savings I was able to get a PCI card with NVME drives, and 2x16TB drives and that was still cheaper :)
I had desktops for a while. Then I decided to switch to laptop and bought latest Thinkpad X1 Extreme (at a time). It throttles, it struggles to play even relatively easy games. Occasionally it loses connection to the lenovo dock and I need to restart it. It can't have more than 3 monitors.
When the time of next upgrade will come I'm certainly going to desktop + some light laptop like my wife's X1 Carbon. I don't like macs and I strongly believe that Win + WSL / dual boot to linux are much better for development.
Also since you have a lot of computer science majors, and coding is a thing everyone knows about (?), it seems like there will always be a sizable portion that will need proper computers and a proper OS that isn't just a "device". I mean without programmers and technical people in the future the companies themselves will not be able to run so there must always be proper options for those who want it
I'm also using old laptops (T500s) so that I can replace Intel's firmware with libreboot and also install alternative wireless cards.
The USB 2.0 thing is a problem, and reading this article made me think that there might be a way around that, and sure enough, you can get a PCMCIA card with USB 3.0 ports[1].
I know this isn't a long term solution, but it might be an immediate solution to the time spent making backups.
[1]https://www.newegg.com/p/17Z-00GU-00075?Description=PCMCIA%2...
All that said, I have moved 100% away from desktops. I really do like to be able to work outside (two areas to choose from), kitchen table next to our parrot’s cage, living room, or bedroom. Sometimes I need to work while traveling.
Finally, iPad Pros (or similar products) are simply better devices for reading, doing research, and watching entertainment.
A beefy desktop computer - high performance/$ CPU and GPU with several terabytes of storage so I could not worry about how much stuff I download and have several OSes installed without having to shortchange some on storage.
A netbook - one of those 10"-screen dinky little things that had just enough compute to run some basic desktop stuff. I would use this as a remote terminal to the desktop so I could still use the desktop's power from my couch.
As wifi speeds have increased, netbooks have all but disappeared and laptops mostly suck, I'm seriously considering this again, but instead of a netbook I'd jerry-rig a Raspberry Pi into a "laptop".
I've always used self-built desktop towers. When it's time to upgrade we build them five or ten at a time so every system matches. It makes for a much simpler build and bring-up experience.
In this case I needed to continue working, and so I decided to task two HP laptops on the network as external processors for the FEA tool. I have to say, they worked great for about four weeks. During that time they experienced about 18 hours per day of continuous processing. Fun while it lasted.
What these people usually don't get is that computer at the end of the day is just a tool. It is a means to an end not the goal. Having a powerful computer for the sake of having a computer doesn't accomplish any meaningful.
(it also means it can run Linux properly, not with battery issues...)
The rub for me is that I really dislike Windows. I use it for work - I have to - but it's not an OS I'd choose for myself[0]. I like OSX but the problem there is that, unless you go down the Hackintosh route (which soon I suspect won't really be a viable option anyway with the move to ARM), you have to buy preconfigured Apple hardware.
And then there's desktop Linux, which fills me with dread simply because I've not had great experiences in the past. Moreover, some key software that I need simply won't run on it. Notably Ableton Live. (I know Linux-compatible DAWs exist, but I really like Live and don't want to have to give it up.)
A decade ago, for me, buying a Mac was unequivocally the best option. Now that's perhaps no longer the case and, worse, there aren't any other great options that I can see. I'd be glad to be proven wrong though.
EDIT: Actually, maybe what I could do is dual-boot Windows and Linux. Use Linux for software development and most everything else (even Office 365 will run on Linux under Wine nowadays, apparently), then use Windows for Ableton Live and games. With UEFI it might not be the worst thing in the world to set up and maintain either.
[0] The main beef I have with Windows is that it just doesn't get out of the damn way. It really wants you to know it's there, from the dreadful multi-DPI multi-monitor support[1], gimpily inconsistent UI, the shitty 10 second dance all your desktops and windows do when you plug in another monitor[2], and crappy update mechanism, to the driver issues, WiFi connectivity issues, ropey audio support, instability and blue screens. And there's always, always, ALWAYS some random thing or other sucking CPU and running the fans. Don't get me wrong: every problem that bothers me on Windows also bothers me on OSX. It's just that on Windows these problems bother me several times per day, whereas on OSX I'm bothered by one of these issues maybe once a month. The upgrade to Catalina was initially painful and enraging but after the first couple of weeks, having upgraded everything, all was well again and remained so.
[1] Granted, likely to be less of an issue with a desktop system where you're likely to purchase monitors with identical DPIs and resolutions.
[2] Also less likely to be an issue with a desktop system, unless you need to use a KVM so you can share your desktop displays with your work laptop.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/PCI_passthrough_via_OVM...
And as far as USB2 limiting backups speed, I would look at a NAS with gigabit Ethernet which any old laptop should have.
* A fanless Chromebook with decent screen for travel use
* An Intel NUC that is hooked to a big monitor, which is also the device I'm typing this on
* A beefy Ryzen desktop that sits in the corner of my balcony, which I usually connect via ssh and perform all the heavy tasks
To me I'm getting all the benefits of each computer, and the combined cost is still less than a so-called macbook pro :)
I switched back to desktops when the 1st gen Ryzen 8-cores came out and haven't regretted it for a second. Bigger screens, beefy specs, more connectivity, and all of it is incredible value given the price of some 13-14 inch laptops!
I can go actually as light as I would like on my laptop now, even something ARM so that's a plus too, if you don't need mobility and beefy specs at the same time.
https://hypertexthero.com/pc/
Two problems, it has: Weight/portability for when I do need to take it somewhere, and that it runs Windows and I prefer Mac OS. I keep my MacBook Pro because of these but am thinking of making the PC a dual-boot Hackintosh.
I've tried VNC and other remote desktop solutions but the but the performance has always been abysmal, it's a niche idea and obviously comes with the network requirement, but I think it would give the best of both worlds when you need the portability of a laptop around the house, with the power of a desktop.
I guess plan9 tried this approach....
RDP is also fantastic (text is sharper), as long as you don’t need to play movies or games or something.
I recently stepped up the game a bit and built a homelab.
I don't care if most people move on to using dumb devices that limit what they can do: they are probably not the people who were really using computers anyway.
Everyone who wants a good PC will have one, nothing is threatening the existence of PCs and the esports industry will keep them alive.
As for a brick and mortar computer store? If you're lucky you live near a microcenter or something.
A couple months ago I got full ATX case with the 16 core AMD CPU, the best GPU out there and it runs cool, quiet and I just RPD to it when needed (prob less than twice a year)
When I'm not in my computer room I dont want to be using a computer anyway, so theres no downside for me.
Those three things taken together, with a well-targeted government intervention, could turn the internet into a walled garden, in the name of stopping scams/terrorism/child porn/piracy for the first few years, obviously.
A desktop would definitely be faster. My wife has a low-end desktop that blows my top-end laptop out of the water.
But I don’t play games, and need to take my system on the road, occasionally, so I need the laptop.
I do have a couple of screamingly fast external USC-C SSD drives. They work nicely, and are teeny.
The best camera is the one you have with you.
The best computer is the one you have with you.
But, I am annoyed heavily that I can't play some great games due to lack of graphic cards, and would like to investigate the whole usb-c/thunderbolt plug in video card thing.
That said, pretty much every point of WalterBright also applies.
I personally don’t care what boot stuff is under the hood if it can boot Linux.
Cloud eating everything on the other hand does worry me. Busy building a home server to get away from that a little
Because personally I hate to do 'research' with my phone. Of course on the go, or for a quick lookup that's perfectly fine.
1. 104-key is in my muscle memory and i'm much more efficient.
2. Laptop plus keyboard plus power supply = desktop.
3. By being flexible, I can use only secondhand hardware.
/linux laptop owner who paid up
It’s great!
I also had fun researching how to get the best deal ~$2,000.
I do use a laptop when necessary, on a plane, etc...
/linux laptop owner who paid up
mine laptop (T520) was released 9.5 years ago and I have no issues with performance after upograding SSD hard drive and adding RAM
Something like a Mac cheese grater is probably more power efficient than my custom built PC, but you lose a lot of the value going with a prebuilt system.
The best way to see this is to buy a watt-meter and test it while doing what you normally do. Also remember that two decades ago you'd probably have had the computer _with_ a CRT sucking several hundred watts constantly, probably with some nice incandescent / halogen bulbs to keep things extra toasty, and a decade ago if you weren't using a Mac you probably had most of the power savings features disabled for system stability and/or compatibility. By now even the faster components have great power management when they're not fully loaded.
This is one of the reasons that I ditched my desktop and switched to a laptop for my daily driver (moved heavy workloads to the cloud inc. gaming via GeForce Now, ditched all file sync tools to keep my desktop and laptop sync'd, etc). I can now comfortably close my office door and not have my office heat up to a zillion degrees.
Depending on the workload, a device that consumes a lot of power but also goes into an idle state much faster could actually use less overall power.
My plan is to next time buy the cheapest laptop I can stomach and assume the thing will pretty much only last a year and then move resource intensive stuff to a desktop.
Also I'm not ever buying HP again, they make overpriced garbage.
At this point I'm pretty happy with cheap small laptops and ssh into my larger ryzen desktop in my workshop.
I was actually shocked to see on my iPhone that I’m spending several hours a day on the device. I remember five years ago, my main activity when laying in bed was thinking about things going on in my life or sleeping. Now I spend hours in bed reading on my phone — and honestly, it’s not the most productive or uplifting content. It doesn’t necessarily better me in any way.
I agree that newer devices aren’t necessarily improving in the right ways. The MagSafe charger on my 2015 MacBook was a fairly innovative and user friendly design choice. It no longer exists, presumably to make a thinner laptop, but honestly — the weight of my older machine was never a problem. Apple solved a problem I never had, and I carried that MacBook to and from work everyday for the past 5 years.
It basically feels like a rat race where companies, to show value and drive earnings for their shareholders, are making pointless design choices with no real vision. Even the larger track pad on the new machine doesn’t really solve a problem I previously had. If anything, I just needed a more performant machine, preferably with a larger screen. I honestly would have preferred a better front facing camera, but instead, I have a thinner machine, different keyboard, and larger trackpad. We’re in a period of cheap money with cut throat capitalism — in my mind, the federal government have made all this possible and massively inflated asset prices. Apple’s stock continues to go up up and up because of this.
I’m singling out Apple for examples sake. They’re not alone in this.
Laptops have mostly regressed into consumer appliances; my 2011 thinkpad is significantly faster and has more memory than a 2017 macbook pro. The monitor (and I guess speakers if I'm using it as a TV) is better in the macbook; that's it!