| ▲ | chocochunks 5 hours ago |
| The GPU in the Neo isn't particularly fast...nor is the storage. Neo makes loads of compromises to hit $600 with some of it's features. Even for $400 you can get Windows PCs with TWO whole USB 3.0 ports. $400 quickly hits diminishing returns territory. Like here's a $500 PC: https://www.amazon.com/Aspire-Copilot-WUXGA-Display-Processo...
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-Aspire-14-AI-review-Basic... Twice the storage, twice the RAM, comparable GPU. CPU is a slower in single core, but comparable in multi-core. Faster storage. USB 4, HDMI, multiple USB A ports. Supports more than 1 external monitor. Yep, chassis and screen are worse but it's better in many other ways. |
|
| ▲ | kstrauser 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| So for $100 less, you get a markedly lower-DPI screen that's 40% dimmer, a slower CPU, hotter running, and a worse chassis. Almost no one's going to be slapping multiple external monitors on either of these. If they did, they might run into the problem where the Acer is often limited to 640x480: https://community.acer.com/en/discussion/733442/have-a-new-a... That is not remotely in the same category as the Neo. |
| |
| ▲ | chocochunks 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You get twice as much RAM, twice as much storage. 4x faster storage too. You get a full sized HDMI port. You can do multiple monitors if you need to. It has a fan for better sustained performance. You can plug in a flash drive, mouse, monitor or other external peripheral without a dongle. Oh, and it's actually COOLER running than the Neo. The Neo costs a $100 more, needs a $30 dongle to connect to 90% of the stuff people have, has half the RAM, half the storage, slower storage. Has considerably worse I/O. But has a better screen and build quality comparable to a MacBook Pro from 2007. It's different compromises. Personally I'd rather have more RAM, storage and IO than a prettier case and better screen. | | |
| ▲ | janalsncm 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | You don’t need to buy Apple adapters. You can buy a $10 usbc to hdmi adapter off Amazon and it’ll work just fine. Same thing with the USB A ports. Not really selling point imo. | | |
| ▲ | chocochunks 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Apple's official HDMI adapter is $70. I was already talking generic. | |
| ▲ | kstrauser 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Or just use a Thunderbolt cable to send video, power, and USB to a newer monitor with a single cord. That’s my work setup and I’d never go back. And yeah, USB A? I got a cheapo C-to-A hub for my dwindling number of legacy devices. There’s no remaining upside to A. | | |
| ▲ | chocochunks 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | On the Neo that doesn't support Thunderbolt? Or on the Acer that supports USB4 and might actually work with the hub? It's a weird choice to pair with a budget laptop since monitors that support that are usually several dollars extra... |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | underlipton 6 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Can we please not have The Verge-tier PC/Mac slap fights on HN. Thanks. |
|
|
| ▲ | philistine 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You're proving the point. The computer you found wins on the specs page for sure. But the proof is in the pudding; Apple makes money hand over fist because they focus on reasonable specs, and quality. The thing that kills a modern laptop is not a slow CPU or RAM on the chip; it's a cheap chassis that breaks. That's what makes people change their computer. |
| |
| ▲ | chocochunks 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Apple wins on the perception of being a luxury brand. That's it. | | |
| ▲ | janalsncm 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It’s not just about perception. Apple doesn’t load your computer up with crapware and ads from the five different companies in the supply chain. They got away with it forever because at $600 there was no competition. I would say it’s more that Microsoft will make your $600 feel cheap, Apple will make it feel respectable. | | | |
| ▲ | gopher_space 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I have thirty years worth of old laptops in a closet. The macs all have hinges that still work. It’s nice to own things designed to not fall apart after a few years. | |
| ▲ | kstrauser 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That, and having a machine at this price point that people aren’t horrified to use. | | |
| ▲ | chocochunks 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | What makes it horrifying? Plastic? Is the only thing that's important the material it's made out of? I think there's many use cases where the Acer would be less horrifying to use than the Neo. Which device would be better for running a Linux VM for CS class homework for example? | | |
| ▲ | kotaKat 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Hypervisor.framework on the Mac, personally. | | |
| ▲ | chocochunks 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | With half the RAM? | | |
| ▲ | ryandrake 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | A vanishingly small number of end users (both PC and Mac) care about how much RAM they have. I'd be willing to bet that at least 75% of PC and Mac laptop owners couldn't even tell you how much RAM they have, or they mistake hard disk storage for RAM or vice versa. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | yourusername 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The screen is also much worse. 60% SRGB coverage 1920x1200 300 nits vs 97% 2408x1506 500 nits.
I'd pick the macbook neo for $99 extra. |
|
| ▲ | thrawa8387336 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Should be at least 4X the RAM and 4X CPU cores, just to run Windows at a comparable speed. |
