Re: OT: selecting a new laptop is more difficult than before

Brian's Mail list account <bglists@...>

Yes I agree, its a shame but almost any access tech immediately, means at least one more core and an ssd I foound on desktop tests. Also don't modern laptops seem to get hot these days?
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rui Fontes" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] OT: selecting a new laptop is more difficult than before


1 - Don't choose anything else than SSD devices. They are much more fast
than any other!

2 - For processor, it depends a lot when you want to replace it and how
much you want to spend...

If you want to spend only a few hundresd dollars, maximum 400 USD, you
and replace it in 2a 3 years, you are well with a processor like
Intel(R) Core(TM) m3-7Y30 CPU, like my hybrid laptop have along with 4Gb
of RAM.

# of Cores
# of Threads
Processor Base Frequency
1.00 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency
2.60 GHz
4 MB SmartCache

3 - If you don't want to change laptop so soon, you must choose a better
processor, like I3 or I5, at least 8Gb of RAM and nothing else than a
SSD device!



Às 17:22 de 30/11/2017, Tyler Wood escreveu:

This summarizes exactly how I feel today.

I shouldn’t need a crazy fast machine. However, when I’m on a machine
with a mechanical hard drive or slower processor, I can tell the
difference the second I start using it. It still functions, but my
general assumptions get in the way. I get impatient. Come on, move

This is why I went overboard in my new desktop, which should arrive in
December. Dell xps 8930 with a core i7 processor. I may not need it,
but with the advancements in computer technology and how screen
readers are, instead of becoming lighter on processor usage, are
seemingly more dependant on them, I figure I should get as much power
as I can while I can. My thoughts are a core i3 processor, 8 gb of ram
and a decent solid state drive should get you where you want to go.
The problem is when you want more than a 128 gb drive. You have to pay
for the i5 or i7 processor, thus making the machine even more
expensive. Also, in 5 years, that i3 may be ancient history. It seems
things are taking off at breakneck speed rather than slowing down as
far as advancing goes. Soon all applications are going to be
multithreaded if they’re not already and you want as many threads as
you can squeeze out of it in the future. Dual core with hyperthreading
just isn’t going to cut it in even 4 years – and if it does, it’s
going to be on the edge of it. Maybe this is just my paranoia talking,
but you never know.

*From: *Deborah Armstrong <>
*Sent: *November 30, 2017 10:26 AM
*To: * <>
*Subject: *[nvda] OT: selecting a new laptop is more difficult than before

** This was also cross-posted to Cavi-discuss ***

As a screen reader user, I'm finding selecting a new laptop is more
difficult than ever before. I'm very curious to see what others think,
so please post your thoughts.

It used to be that I didn't feel I needed a super fast computer,
because I wasn't editing video. And nowadays if you look at reviews of
laptops, you'll see that people who edit photos, use CAD systems,
create art or engage in heavy gaming need fast machines. But for those
who just surf the web, read email and do some light word processing,
reviewers maintain that a slower and cheaper laptop will work just
fine. In fact, reviews of chromebooks are often mixed in with reviews
of inexpensive Windows laptops for just that reason.

In 2012 my Acer netbook (An AO-756) was the fastest ultraportable I
could buy for under $500. Its processor, a 1.4GHZ Intel Celeron 877
was a dual core from the Sandy Bridge family -- the slowest one in
that family, but it wasn't a much slower Atom. It had a reasonable
fast 500GB hard drive. I added 8GB of RAM making it even more useful
at running multiple tasks efficiently. I could use Word, Excel and
Outlook without latency and of course I did a lot of web surfing.
Compared to the computers at work, it was a bit slower, but like the
reviewers said, it didn't matter, since I didn't do computation-heavy
tasks at home.

What's changed today might best be covered in this post:

which discusses how screen readers access the web. Today, if I have to
work with a dynamic website, my little ACER is unbearably slow,
despite my having carefully maintained it so it doesn't run
unnecessary background tasks, and so that Windows is regularly fully

I am convinced the problem is not so much that the PC is slow, but
that the screen reader has become a palace built on a shack's
foundation. It needs everything it can squeeze out of the processor to
handle the new, dynamic web. Seems both NVDA and JAWS fail miserably
on slower processors.

But if a task does not depend on a screen reader, the machine is still
fairly fast. For example, when I OCR something in Kurzweil 1000, the
laptop is just as fast as my much more powerful desktop computers at
work. And running something like Handbrake is indeed slower on my
laptop but not so slow it cannot be used. A video that takes an hour
to convert on my desktop at work might take fifteen extra minutes on
the laptop. Handbrake is often used as an informal benchmarking tool.

But where instant responsiveness counts, my Netbook falls short. I
expect to hear something when I press a key. Often, today, I don't --
seems like I am always waiting for the screen reader to pull itself
together and find the focus, or cope with a dynamic partial page
refresh, or the next column in the spreadsheet, or read my next email
in Thunderbird.

The Acer actually got fractionally faster when I upgraded to Windows
10, but even so, I mostly wait after pressing a key to hear something
read back to me.

My work computers which run Core i7 Pentiums respond immediately, even
though they are saddled with far more background tasks required by my job.

So if I were to trust reviews, this claim that for the kinds of things
I do at home on the laptop I don't need a very powerful machine, I'd
buy something with an Atom processor, a 128GB SSD and 2GB of RAM.
Clearly that would result in a machine that's even slower than my
existing laptop. Plus, it would have a quarter of the storage!

I guess the dilemma I'm struggling with here is how to avoid spending
a fortune and still get an ultraportable that has no latency when I
use a screen reader.

What do others think?


Join to automatically receive all group messages.