New computers

[karen2205]

My computer's been doing its crashing thing even more often than usual recently and as part of my attempts to deal with it I attempted to delete the Content.IE5 folder that's where IE caches web pages, since sometimes I get viruses in that folder. Unfortunately, I seem to be unable to delete anything atm - either in normal mode or safe mode which is slightly concerning in itself. My other problem is that I've only got 402MB of space left on my hard drive - my HD is 5.58GB. It being a laptop that almost certainly doesn't have USB2, an external hard drive wouldn't run on it and I believe fitting a new internal hard drive to be fairly tricky/complicated - I'm not even sure that there's the right kind of slot to fit it in.

So I'm coming to the conclusion that maybe it is time to buy myself a new computer and I need some help.

My requirements - must be a laptop - I need to be able to transport it and I'm not going to be living anywhere large enough for a desktop in the near future.

Must be something that I can install some version of Linux on (probably debian - but am open to other suggestions).

Preferably will be dual Windows XP/some sort of Linux (but am open to argument that it's best to make the leap straight from Windows to Linux).

Must be compatible with ADSL (I'm guessing this won't be a problem 'cos it'll come with an ethernet card which I connect to a router which I can then connect to the ADSL).

Must be powerful enough for me to use it for building a large database + associated stuff to do with programming eg. writing website pages that pull information from the database.

I don't play computer games (beyond solitaire etc) so no need for particularly fast graphics. I will be doing some editing of pictures - I believe Photoshop is the best software for this, though I tend to do my editing in Paint/Microsoft Photo Editor.

[Poll #507301]

Comments

[crschmidt.livejournal.com]

Get an Apple. It's worth it. Unless you're doing something that specifically requires windows (nothing you mentioned does), you'll be much happier with an Apple.

The default 12" or 15" models will do you just fine, although if you're going to be doing a fair amount of photoshop work, an upgrade in RAM won't hurt you in the slightest.

You can run Debian on the PPC platform, but since it's already BSD, there's not much reason.

If you don't get a mac, you'll be kicking yourself later.

[karen2205]

What's the difference between the iBook and the PowerBook?

The iBook is cheaper than the PowerBook but I can't work out which features it's missing.

[crschmidt.livejournal.com]

That's kind of like asking what the difference is between Gateway's Consumer And Business Model computers is: as far as specs go, there isn't really that much difference, the difference is simply in the quality that goes into the work.

The powerbook is a high end machine, and the reason I suggested it for you is that it's likely to last a lot longer than the iBook. Given that you still have a laptop with only 5 Gig of HD, it seems like you hold onto your computers for a good long time, so buying the high end now means you won't have to buy a new one when the iBook falls over in a couple years.

Spec differences between iBook 12" and Powerbook 12":
30 Gig HD compared to 60 Gig HD
256 Meg RAM compared to 512 Meg RAM (this is almost a must anyway, so that's $125 of the difference right there)
1.2 Ghz v 1.5 Ghz processor (this is relatively slight, but probably still noticible for some tasks, especially with image processing)
32MB v 64MB built in Video RAM (this will be noticible)

Powerbooks also have:
Built In Firewire
Dual Monitor capability built in (it's possible with a firmware hack with the iBook, apparently, otherwise it's just monitor mirroring: same thing on both screens)
Full Size keyboard (and it's nicer to type on than the iBook: the plastic v. Metal covering is significant here)
Built in Bluetooth (though this probably won't matter for your needs)

Like I said though, a lot of it is simply that the Powerbook is the high end machine, which I'd advise for the longer term. If you wanted something cheap to hold you over, I wouldn't advise against the iBook, I just wouldn't advise it as a longer term solution.

[weatherpixie.livejournal.com]

If you want to play about with webservers and Apache and Perl and PHP then a mac is probably a better choice than a windows box, particularly if you have no wish to play games. No need for dual boot as OSX is a nicely pretty windowing system on top of a BSD like unix. Shells when you need it, and the ability to run MS Word.

Oh and they're much less of a virus target too.

Depends how deeply tied to windows you are, I did most of the development for Weatherpixie on my old school orange iBook, so latest ones are certainly usable as a Development Apache/PHP/Perl/MySQL box.

[karen2205]

I'm not deeply tied to Windows - I'm fairly certain it wouldn't take me too long to learn how to use a Mac (and am sure I'll find it easier to learn to use a Mac than to use a Linux distribution). I think I'd rather spend time building what I need than learning how to use Linux, but then again, I think I'm going to need to be able to use Linux in the long run anyway 'cos I think the machine the database + website will eventually be hosted on will be a Linux box.

I also don't know how much weight to put on what hsenag says about things that are easy in Linux being difficult on Macs.

[hsenag.livejournal.com]

It sounds from what other people are saying that the stuff you'll need to do for the webshop will be OK. Assuming your final hosting environment will be Debian or similar, you'll have a little bit of hassle sorting out paths and so on when you move your stuff over, but nothing major.

[cultureofdoubt.livejournal.com]

I would point out, since Karen mentioned specifically that she played it, Macs don't come with Solitaire :-D

[karen2205]

I think I can live without solitaire :-D

[crschmidt.livejournal.com]

They come with Chess instead! Much more stimulating.

[bob]

hp have just announced they are working with ubuntu to make sure that a range of their laptops works fully with linux.
And im very happy with my hp nc6000 under openbsd. the missing drivers arnt important.

Speed wise, any modern machine will be fast enuff. admiiitedly if you want to run windows the faster the better.
Also half a gig of ram is a minimun these days. If youseriously want to do graphics stuff along with web dev 1gig would be better.


For graphics stuff under linux you cant beat the gimp. It does most of the stuff you can do in photoshop.

[weatherpixie.livejournal.com]

Gimp also works under windows and macs.

[hsenag.livejournal.com]

I haven't got personal experience of Macs, but everything I've seen of other people using them makes me think that MacOS X does a half-arsed job of pretending to be UNIX.

On the other hand, I get the impression that they tend to just work.

One option would be to get VMware+some X server and run both Windows and Linux at the same time. That's what I do, to save hassle with getting all my hardware working under Linux and to keep the stuff Windows does well (a solid, easy-to-configure GUI, for one thing). Unfortunately it's not a very cheap option.

[ewx.livejournal.com]

What do you think is half-arsed (or for that matter pretend) about it?

[mwk.livejournal.com]

I love my shiny, shiny Powerbook. It is a thing of great beauty. Really, it is. But it isn't even a half-assed attempt at *ix. It is a no-assed attempt. 'Built-on' may mean that somewhere way down there it is BSD, but up here in pony-tailed-Photoshopping-overly-priced-under-RAMmed loveliness-land, it bears no resemblance to *ix at all.

Package management (via fink) resembles apt, but not enough to make me happy. I had woes trying to get gcc to cross-compile. (I gave up, installed Virtual PC and did it properly.) And MacPerl? Pur-lease.

Would I give up OSX? Hell no. St Steve says we rock. And I believe him. Now, all I need is an iPod...

[hsenag.livejournal.com]

Well, this is all second-hand impressions. mwk is one of the sources for these impressions - essentially I've seen a lot of complaints from people struggling with trying to install or use stuff that just works on Debian/FreeBSD etc. Specifically, the filesystem layout is extremely confusing compared to traditional UNIX, fink/the software available through it is rather lacking, gcc causes more trouble than elsewhere, perl isn't quite the same, the ghc port seems to have a lot of trouble. There was also a glaring security hole some time ago (allowing people to change the root account via LDAP or something?) that gave me the general impression that Apple don't really understand UNIXish things.

[mwk.livejournal.com]

On seconds thoughts, the amount of times (because I used to believe that is really was *ix) I got code, tried to compile it, and it just exploded numbers greater than ten. (Whereas if you do it on a proper *ix, it would have worked.)

See, now it sounds like I am bashing here. All I was saying was I agree with Ganesh. (God forbid that happens. Maybe he won't notice I said I thought he was right.)

[ewx.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure BASIC was ever been a language of choice. What do you count as a "large" database? The kind of thing that adjective makes me imagine puts me in mind of 10 grand monsters, rather than laptops.

My only experience of laptop manufacturers is with Apple, and my iBook is seems reliable enough.

[weatherpixie.livejournal.com]

I'm such a geek that my first ever program was on paper tape...

I think the BASIC thing came from all the spectrums/BBC Micros/Amigas from the home computer revolution in the 80s

It was the way a lot of people got their first intro to programming, tho I don't think it was ever anyones language of choice...

[ewx.livejournal.com]

Yes, all I really mean is that if you only know one language, it's at least arguably not really a choice to implement in it but a necessity. Of course perhaps there are hoards of people I'm missing who knew a bunch of sensible languages but nonetheless regularly chose to write in some flavour of BASIC but I wouldn't bet on it l-)

[cultureofdoubt.livejournal.com]

Yeah, exactly what I was thinking. Language of choice only when the other alternative was assembly.

[weatherpixie.livejournal.com]

Would nuking and reinstalling the Current windows machine help its stability?

[karen2205]

Quite probably, but I can't because doing that would destroy my payroll data and I can't do that in the middle of a tax year.

I will relegate my current machine to doing nothing but processing the pay once I've bought a new one.

[weatherpixie.livejournal.com]

You can't back your payroll data up and reinstall it on the new install?

[mstevens.livejournal.com]

BASIC has never been the language of choice :)

I said IBM because you want Windows. If you don't have unmentioned Windows needs then Apple is worth looking at.

Apple will give you something UNIX'y, but if you want actual Linux I'd go for a PC.

Memory and disk are the things to spend money on.

Looking at the IBM site, I didn't realise Thinkpads were that cheap.

My current favoured Linux is Ubuntu - it's based on Debian but newer and a lot easier to install.
I've not considered the photo editing side as I know nothing about it.

[draconid.livejournal.com]

Can't be bothered to read all the comments so apologies if I'm repeating anything.

I agree that a Mac might be the answer, but if you're looking for cheap then don't look for a Mac laptop. You might want to consider the Mac Mini. You'd still need a monitor, but you could pick up a fairly cheap 15" flatscreen and still have very little to carry around.

If you definitely want a laptop then don't go with Sony Viao as they are horribly heavy. And don't go with Compaq because well, everyone hates Compaq. We have a Fujitsu Siemens which is pretty nice, and for an AMD 64 was bloody cheap. A colleague has a much smaller Fujitsu Siemens which is light as a feather.

Whatever you decide to get, if you want to use Linux I would seriously suggest searching for the exact model and compatibility issues. Laptops can be a bit iffy in that respect. I've heard bad reports of getting Linux working fully on our laptop, although we haven't tried it yet. I've also heard that it's doable so I'm not too worried, but it's definitely worth checking. I've heard bad things about Linux compatibility with Sony laptops so another reason to count those out.

Linux-wise, I'm not going to recommend anything. To be honest, I don't think it really matters for what you are looking at. I run Fedora because I've always run a Red Hat based system. I've tried Debian and Slackware and just couldn't be arsed with the installation, let alone anything else. Because Fedora is more commercial I expect you'll get less issues with compatibility. You might want to try some of the free live disks once you have a laptop - this way you can test the compability of what you have without having to install anything. I've played with a few live disks just to see what other flavours of Linux are like. Apparently Ubuntu is specifically trying for laptop compatibility so you should definitely look into that.

The important thing is to find out what peripherals the laptop you like has and then search for compatibility. If you want any help with that sort of thing, then feel free to ask! I can't say I'm an expert but I enjoy that sort of research.