Notebook Recommendations

[One]

I am about to buy a replacement for my Inspiron 4000, which I purchased several years ago. I have many accessories for the inspiron 4000, such as 3 batteries and an external charger. Unfortunately these are not compatable with Dell's newer models. I have not kept up with the times and am not sure which notebooks best suit my needs.

I will be using the computer almost entirely for surfing the Internet while comfortably sitting in an easy chair. I will need Word, Excel, and perhaps some web publishing software. I will not be doing any extensive graphics work and will not be using it for any games. What is most important to me is

--Keeping Prices Low
--Having a 15" Screen
--A relatively light weight since it is on seated on my lap (my former Inspiron 4000 was 7lb with battery)
--Being reliable, with few repairs
--I want to use a touchpad, not a keyboard pointer

What notebook computers would you recommend for someone in my situation? I am thinking about a Dell 1150. I am also open to purchasing the notebook from other companies that I am less familiar with.

 

[Abhi]

NO. Not a 1150! .... its 8 lbs...

Is 1000$ in your budget... if it is... aim for the 600m. (14 inch screen btw)

 

[jcwagers]

Check out PowerNotebooks and see if you can find anything that you like. They have some very nice laptops. They also have an outstanding record of service and a 10 on resellerratings. You can customize about any aspect of them to get what you want. Good luck with your purchase!

jc

 

[UltraWide]

wait for Celeron M, those will have resonable and good performance. Same as Pentium M with 1/2 cache, retains all other goodies, 400mhz FSB etc...

 

[One]

Originally posted by: UltraWide
wait for Celeron M, those will have resonable and good performance. Same as Pentium M with 1/2 cache, retains all other goodies, 400mhz FSB etc...

When will the celeron 600m be available?

 

[Frightcrawler]

I doubt the celeron-M (not called celeron-M, of course. The celeron-M already exists) will have good performance. Think about it. 1/2 cache = 512k cache. What else has a 512k cache? Pentium 4.
So, what you are getting is a much lower clocked Pentium 4 with power saving. Not worth it.

 

[Abhi]

Originally posted by: Frightcrawler
I doubt the celeron-M (not called celeron-M, of course. The celeron-M already exists) will have good performance. Think about it. 1/2 cache = 512k cache. What else has a 512k cache? Pentium 4.
So, what you are getting is a much lower clocked Pentium 4 with power saving. Not worth it.

By that calculation... a celeron m 1.7 = ...a pentium 4 1.7 ghz with low power consumption?

 

[trungthiendo]

celeron M is different from mobile celeron...celeron M is based on pentium M where as the mobile celeron is based on a p4.

the "celeron-M" based on the pentium M core will be much different then a p4...there seems to be reviews out for it already if you look around i forgot where i saw it, but even with 1/2 the cache as the pentium M it peforms pretty much the same....

link to article

a 1.4 pentium M is comparable to a 1.9-2.0ghz p4 in most things...the celeron M at the same speed as a pM should be almost the same.

 

[Abhi]

Hmm ... just a thot...

If the celeron M 1.4 = 2.0 ghz Celeron .... ...... :Q

But it ll probably be performing like the 2.0 mobile celery... with 256 l2...

 

[Connoisseur]

actually since the celeron M is based on the P-M rather than the P4, i'd imagine you can get a better performance gauge by comparing it against the Celeron cores based on the P3. If I remember correctly, although the celeron did have worse performance compared to the P3, the difference was a lot less drastic than that of the Celeron 4 vs Pentium 4. I believe it has to do with the actual P4 architecture, which needs a larger on die cache to compensate for the longer instruction pipeline.