Why I like a "15 display on a gaming laptop

At first I was searching exclusively for a "17.3 gaming laptop, but now I have grown to prefer the smaller variant,

Why? not for the supposedly increased mobility, which I find to be complete bull since both would fit in my backpack. There is just something very aesthetically pleasing about something so small delivering so much power, whereas something big would be "expected" to deliver huge performance. Its like that tiny handgun in Men in Black.

Thanks for reading my cool story.

 

Cool.

I've also just went from 17" gaming to 15,6". And I must say that I love the way I can move my gaming laptop round for now

 

Guys like to think that, but women will always prefer something bigger.

 

Ever since I got my 23" external full hd screen I don't use my 15" laptop screen anymore. Its small, its glossy, too dark, basicly its afwull.

Bigger = better for guys too (you don't see us driving in mini coopers do you?).

 

I used to think the same but when you are sitting in bed watching an action movie, that all goes out of the window really.

 

i always wondered, isnt it a bit uncomfortable to use an external display? Wouldnt the laptops screen block your sight? or do you set it up high and get neck ache from looking up all the time?

 

I personally set the external display to the side, so I don't really get tired nor blocked from the screen.

I like 15.6 powerhouses but I prefer 17inchers if they do deliver more power. For example, between two exact same machines specwise with only size being different, I will most probably go for the 15.6incher.

 

Aye. If you move your laptop a lot or use it on your lap, 15.6" is as big as I'd go. If your laptop is more of a desktop replacement that just needs to be moved rarely, then a 17"+ will give you more power for the money.

It depends entirely on your priorities and needs

/me pets his Envy 15

 

I bought my m15x for the reason of portability. In the long run I realized that what I gained in portability, I lost in overall usability. Scrolling on some webpages, smaller viewing area when programming, that kinda thing. I could have gone for an upgraded 1920x1080 screen in my 15", but I figured that would make my laptop's video card feel weaker, quicker.

I plan to buy a 17" laptop very soon, and it will be a machine I haul with me everywhere. As it is I haul my Alienware m15x and my Cr-48 with me everyday to work. I plan to replace the m15x with an M17x, soon. It will go with me everyday to work, to on site jobs, everywhere I travel to, that kinda thing.

Basically these are my thoughts on the two screen sizes:

15 inch Pros: Portability, easier to find laptop bags for, cheaper, generally more battery life, smaller power adapter, cheaper accessories

17 inch Pros: More screen real estate, more power, generally more features/ideas put into them, larger keyboards, sometimes better cooling, more ports/video connectors/expansion bays, generally easier to work on and take apart

I used to lug a 17" HP around back in high school/college and I actually remember hating it. But, I think I hate the limitations I find by using my 15" screen even more than the hastle of carrying a huge laptop around.

 

I personally don't mind whether it's 15" or 17", as long as the screen is 1080-quality

 

15IN is too small. Why squint at a tiny screen?

 

Those buying 17" monsters are obviously not compensating for anything... lol

 

It's a matter of opinion. I have a 15.6" 1920x1080 screen, and a 14" 1440x900 screen. Neither require me to squint, and I like the portability combined with the pixel "real estate"

Perhaps you're just getting old?

 

1080P on a 15.6 is just overkill with its tiny text. It doesn't require physical squinting but you still have to make an effort to read some of the text.

 

Oh, come on, that's not a valid reason. A simple change in font sizes solves the too-small-pixels problems.

Though if you don't plan to move a lot the laptop I don't see a reason not to aim for a 17'' screen (provided the prices and other specifications are in the same price range).

 

Then what's the point of the higher resolution?

 

I actually use my laptop on my lap quite frequently, so 15.6" is as large as I'll go. I find it to be an excellent size, persoally. I used to use a big 17" Toshiba, and it was just not convenient to take it anywhere, particularly not to class. Before my current laptop, I also (briefly) had its 14" cousin, which I found to be ever-so-slightly too small to see the screen comfortably while gaming. Particularly when trying to snipe someone who's only a few pixels high from across the map

 

I have a 17in because I won't be moving it anywhere at all. If I need mobility I would get a netbook instead. I don't see why people want a laptop that has everything (power, battery life, size) and shell out a lot of money for it. You can accomplish both by getting a really powerful 17in+ to use at home and a small cheap sub$200 netbook on the go.

 

Appreciation in games and movies, not writing in Word or web browsing

 

Well, IMO a netbook's screen is barely large enough to browse the web or use Word properly. I used one when my job required having constant access to an ultra-portable computer, but that company went under so I don't have a use for it anymore. Sure you can get one with high resolution and small size, but then you're squinting again so it's not practical or raising the DPI so there's no gain in text-based activities. I chose to get an "average" laptop for when I don't want to be at a desk, and when I am I'll just use my desktop that, for $1,000 or a little over, beats $2,000+ laptops in terms of performance.

Battery life is the one thing I've always been willing to sacrifice a bit, as I don't think I've ever had a requirement for anything more than about 2 hours. Also, a second battery isn't that hard to swap in while the machine is hibernating if I need more run time without losing my work.

 

I disagree. I don't mind gaming at 1280*720. But when I'm doing PS, Word, Research Browsing having 1080p is awesome. Having split screen is even better. I appreciate 1080 far more for using applications than gaming.

 

I'm on a 12.1" Google Chrome Cr-48 and I hardly ever have to scroll the screen to see webpages. This is about the perfect size for me. Still very light, but not huge.

My 10.1" Toshiba NB305 is great too, but theres a lot more scrolling and feels a lot more crunched. Some day we'll be able to buy couple hundred generic laptops with tons of battery life and cpu power and be able to use Onlive to play all our games remotely. At least, thats the idea at this point. Onlive, unfortunately, is still pretty new and there aren't a lot of games on their system yet. But someday they will probably be a strong force.

 

That's another discussion and there are already a few threads dedicated to this and I agree with the majority no, OnLive is not the future and there is no point to OnLive. As technology progresses, you'll just be able to game on smaller laptops, period. No need for OnLive.

Paying for games you don't own is just idiocy.

Actually you already can. M11x is more than capable of gaming at it's resolution.

 

Thing is I'm always on the move as I'm in a co-op university program and I'll be in a new job every 4 months in a new location so desktops wouldn't be viable.

if you're settled down in one location then desktop makes a lot more sense.

 

i prefer a 15in when im moving around for work so much, but 17in for dtr and when my work doesn't need much of moving around, so there, but actually its not a big deal for me, maybe the 1080p res in 15in which makes me see the icons smaller (oh yeah i can change the res) but i always go with native res.

i would like to see if there's a sli or xfire config in a 15in laptop (haven't seen one yet)

 

You will if manufacturers got smart and took out the useless optical drive and put in a crossfire or SLi instead.

 

I bought a performance laptop, not just a gaming laptop.

1080p is a bloody must if you ever need to refer to two (or more) windows onscreen at the same time.

Sometimes I even have a game windowed with a movie running next to it.

And it was cheaper than the 3 desktops I'd need to have workstations where I needed them.

Plus I can pick it up and go outside within 30 seconds on a nice day when I want to

No, all the comments would be "why would I want that performance for so small a screen".... and that's who the manufacturers would listen to in their focus groups. Plus it wouldnt be Dell or Clevo as they wouldn't want to cannabalise the sales of their 17"/18" $3k+ behemoths with anything that much cheaper, in the end there just isn't a business case for it. (well until Asus or MSI take a gamble and end up selling a bucketload of them... time will tell)

 

Can't agree more. I don't need an optical drive at all, in fact I have a USB optical drive just incase I ever do need one. I'd much rather have more USB ports, more video ports, and a second video card... Use the space better and stop wasting it with a dinosaur optical drive.

 

Stop being silly. Optical based storage is the most prevalent form of storage still, and it will be for a long time yet. For 99% of the world population (yes, even enthusiasts), not having an optical drive would be a deal breaker.

 

Optical drive is a dead technology with no room for improvement. Why lug around a CD case when you can carry it all with a USB drive?

There's not a single thing that you can do with a CD and can't duplicate with a USB drive. It also only takes up a single USB port with a small footprint as opposed to 1/5 of a laptop and a freaking SATA port.

Let's say we don't put in crossfire or SLI instead. We can do an additional HDD slot, more USB slots, additional fan, more battery space, and the list goes on.

They can still sell it for $3k+ if they want to, what makes a smaller laptop with crossfire cheaper? You're probably looking at a 2k cost. No business case? Why do people buy even crossfire then?

 

Except for copying the contents of your CDs onto USB drives

 

What if you had a USB CD/DVD drive?

 

Really? You didn't like being able to use your 17" laptop as a table? lol

I own a 17" laptop at a Uni with 40,000 undergrads. There are plenty of cool places to study. However, I bring my laptop to a select few. I worry about my laptop falling out of the bottom of my backpack during transportation. Seriously.

 

Actually, theres a huge push right now to get away from physical media. Netbooks don't have optical drives and the sold over 40 million netbooks last year alone.

Think about the support for moving away from physical media. You have Steam for games which now has over 30 million subscribers. Each console now has an online store so you won't even have to buy console games physically anymore. You have iTunes for music, TV shows, movies. You have Hulu, Netflix, and hundreds of other websites for movies and TV shows. Heck even places like Best Buy are selling music on flash drives nowadays. Now they are even talking about Microsoft selling Windows 7 and future versions of Windows on flash drives.

Blu-ray has only been around for a little while and I've already read articles about its death and how it isn't selling as well as they hoped. Plus theres already half a dozen technologies to replace Blu-ray as a storage device.

There really isn't a reason to have an optical drive in a computer (for most people) anymore, plus its yet another mechanical device (that has a somewhat high failure rate) we can remove from a laptop and have a more solid machine that isn't going to break from bumps and bruises.

So all this translates into me supporting gaming laptop makers in removing optical drives and using the space for something more useful. Make SLI and Crossfire 15" laptops, put better dedicated video cards in 13 and 14 inch laptops. Heck, put a 3rd video card in 17" laptops.

 

I'd rather have the single discrete GPU, in hybrid crossfire it with an APU...then I could swap out the ODD for another HDD.

Throw in an XGP plus a desktop discrete with an onboard Lucid Hydra chip, and I think we'd be in business.

 

While it's true that everything is going towards digital distribution, capped internet seems to becoming more and more common (thank god I don't have a cap). It doesn't take much these days tearing through a few gigs of data if you're watching movies, downloading games, and even playing games. I'm fortunate enough to have a fast reliable connection with no limits on how much I can download, but I suspect a lot of folks aren't so lucky.

 

There's already been a thread on whether ODDs should stay or be removed.

My answer here is the same as there: flexibility.

Quite a few business laptops already come with multiple options of things you can put in the ODD's place(including an ODD) such as an extra HDD, an extra battery and a port replicator. IMO, this is the way to go i.e. give customers a choice in what the "extra space" is used for. Obviously it's not the cost effective choice for them hence why it probably won't be that much more widespread than it is now(i.e. restricted to mostly business laptops and larger laptops).

As the poster above me said, capped internet is still a HUGE issue with dealing with digital distribution products. Hell, in Canada it's going to become a standard soon so you can bet that we won't be happy if we have to DL all our products(and pay both the distributer AND our ISP for the extra bandwidth).

 

Meh, the internet caps really aren't that bad.. yet.

Lowest I've heard is 150GB which is still difficult for the average user to hit.

Yes, there are a few laptops that give you the option to replace the ODD with something else.. for example my 2.5 year old m15x I could put a second battery or a second HDD in my ODD slot.. the only problem is I can't get rid of that expansion slot entirely and fill it with something better (Second video card, more ports, etc), nor can I get rid of the ODD entirely (I still had to pay for it from Alienware no matter what). This is what I'm asking for.

And I know some of you regulars around here keep saying "Theres already been a thread about that" but unfortunately there isn't much that hasn't been talked about on this forum so you might as well quit complaining. Topics are going to get repeated. Not a big deal.

 

Sorry what? Maybe in the US 150gb caps are the lowest, but in canada isps have tiered services from 2gb (super low end) to 200gb (considered highend). There are only a handful of isps that even have unlimited options, with the average (75%+ households) user having a 50-75gb cap.

As for the op, I really prefer 17" at this point; more screen space, more space for keyboarding, more space for cooling/components. At the cost of maybe 2lbs and another inch... I'm not a big guy, but really what's the difference between 6 and 8lbs in a backpack?

 

As an RTS player (warcraft3, starcraft) I find that I have trouble tracking everything on a larger screen - it strains my eyes. With a smaller screen, I can see all the units in my field of vision.

 

I apologize, I revise my statement to "Lowest I've seen in the US". Also, we still have the option here to get business grade packages with no cap from a lot of ISP's.

I can sign a 2 year contract with Comcast and get a business plan. Just have to pay about $20 more a month to go to the business package which keeps the same speed, removes the download cap, and gives you guaranteed 99% uptime and they will have a tech onsite within 4 hours if they can't fix your problem over the phone. My only problem was the 2 year contract. Wasn't sure I was going to stay in this state for that long.

 

Well in Canada things aren't going to get better. Bell (one of the monolistic ISPs in Canada and with the largest network) got approval to use "pay per use/pay per GB" for its internet for both users AND for other ISPs piggybacking off their network which means Canadian prices most likely will get worse before they get any better(unlimited packages will soon be phased so says Bell). Therefore, the idea of having another method over pure digital distribution is something that might still appeal to people until we get proper bandwidth levels as accessible to nearly everyone.

Anyhow we're veering off-topic here. You can make a new thread if you wanan discuss the use of an ODD bay as we're hijacking the OP's thread.

 

I just use my laptop next to my screen, like you do with your desktop computer (ok nowadays most people put their desktop underneath their desk).

I used to watch a lot of movies in bed, but I can't enjoy a movie fully on a small screen. Even this 23" is a bit too small for watching movies, but its still a totaly different experience.

 

I'm deciding between 15" or 17" currently as well for a new laptop. A lot of it probably has to do with what you are used to. Using my 15.6" was "decent" early on with my 1680 x 1050 when I needed to, but after hooking it up to a 1600 x 1200 20" desktop screen now, booting up and using it on the laptop screen is very annoying and painful. That and astigmatism paired with my older age on the eyes has me leaning more towards a 17".

You can upscale text of course, but won't the text bulge over the window bars, etc?