Topics

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:
    https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/
 
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 refreshed. 
 
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?
 
--Debee


Gene
 

I don't have the technical knowledge to answer your question.  If this isn't useful to you, it may be to others.  Have you tried using sites with scripting turned off?  If you don't need it on to do what you want to do on a site, the site may be faster and more responsive.  Also, what browser are you using?  Some people say one or another browser is faster.  I'm not sure that is correct or, if it is for some people, I'm not at all sure it is for all users.  But those are things you might want to experiment with.
 
Gene

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:26 AM
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:
    https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/
 
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 refreshed. 
 
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?
 
--Debee


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

Well I'm about to embark on this myself, so this is interesting. I guess it depends what you do and where the slow down happens.
Using my current desktop I find an I5 four core and 8 gigs of ram with the 250gig ssd is pretty good on the web with nvda. Yes some sites can be extra slow, but to me this seems to be that some idiot has decided to code the web site that way. I do not need to access the slowest sites, strangely these seem to be newspapers sites, and I suspect that this is all the scripts and ads on them. Some do allow you to more or less run them with scripts off and ad blockers on and they then work much faster.
Unfortunately with this current trend toward UIA and how slow this is in Windows at the moment, and the trend toward browsers that do not allow screenreaders to hook into them and hence have to resort to a slower way of doing things its obvious to me that your item here is probably going to end up being correct eventually. I mean we have already just seen nvda have to remove a feature as at present the only way to make it work slowed some software down too much. Unfortunately Narrator is not the answer either as it seems to be slow all the time to me.
Its much as it has always been in the beginning, we had 8 bit machines that ran what we wanted to run and some even had voices. and as we have gone along with more complexity, speeds memory, storage graphics etc have all had to increase as these days its impossible to hand code in assembler for fast code so everyone relies on compiled languages which use stock routines to do stuff and interface with the main code DLLs of windows or whatever.
Now of course we also often need a keyboard with more keys than the average laptop has, and we need to often turn off the current trend in using the function keys as controls for monitors or shortcuts for internal laptop things.
The world on the one hand is becoming more accessible in some ways, but also very complex and in the case of computers, our usage is so specialised nobody actually tests mainstream computers with access software running to do common tasks, they are all paired down to a price point.
I shall have to see what I end up with, but if anything interesting is found, I'll post it for others, but as with many things, some will undoubtedly disagree and say, no do it this way.
I'd like a numeric keypad on the keyboard, as I hate too many multi use keys and concert pianist key combinations. I'm not the young guy I was and its no use pretending I'm as good at this as I was!
Brian

bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Deborah Armstrong" <@DebeeArmstrong>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 4:26 PM
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:
https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/

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 refreshed.

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?

--Debee


Tyler Wood
 

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 already!

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: nvda@nvda.groups.io
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:

    https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/

 

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 refreshed. 

 

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?

 

--Debee

 


 

One thing is for sure. You need at least 6 or 8 gb of ram. Netbooks no longer cut it, at all. You could possibly find some refurbished computers on Amazon.


I have an Asus netbook with 4 gb of ram (not expansible), 500 gb hard drive, 2.16 ghz dual-core Intel Celeron processor. Graphics and audio are built-in. I need to get a new computer, as well. I'm interested in this discussion for that reason.





On 11/30/2017 11:26 AM, Deborah Armstrong wrote:
** 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:
    https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/
 
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 refreshed. 
 
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?
 
--Debee


Don H
 

I think it is important to get at least a Intel I3 processor or its AMD equal. If you can't afford a higher Intel processor you will find fast AMD processors cheaper and just as good as Intel.

On 11/30/2017 12:16 PM, Governor staten wrote:
One thing is for sure. You need at least 6 or 8 gb of ram. Netbooks no longer cut it, at all. You could possibly find some refurbished computers on Amazon.
I have an Asus netbook with 4 gb of ram (not expansible), 500 gb hard drive, 2.16 ghz dual-core Intel Celeron processor. Graphics and audio are built-in. I need to get a new computer, as well. I'm interested in this discussion for that reason.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 11/30/2017 11:26 AM, Deborah Armstrong wrote:
** 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:
https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/
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 refreshed.
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?
--Debee


Rui Fontes
 

Hello!


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
2
# of Threads
4
Processor Base Frequency
1.00 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency
2.60 GHz
Cache
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!

Regards,

Rui


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 already!

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: nvda@nvda.groups.io
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 refreshed. 

 

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?

 

--Debee

 



 

Hi.
We discussed this before but since we are talking about laptops I wanted to express my consirns again. 

I don't know what happens with the soundcards on laptops these days, or if it is just driver issues but for a lot of models nvda doesnt work well with them.
And I am talking about espeak which is light weight. I don't want to imagine what is going to happen with hi-q tts.

On several laptops, I heard nvda not being able to incorborate. 
For example the beginning or ending of sentences might be cut, or when doing things quickly such as typing, you hear some clicks between the letters as you type.
The problem could be fixed, if we disable audio enhunsments. The problem is that some manufacturers disable this option so we get stuck.
Another possible fix is to disable the manufacturer audio driver and install the generic audio driver from microsoft, but this way we are loozing some of the quality of the sound the laptop can provide such as the bass or some loudness of the audio.

I am very disapointed with the laptops these days because a laptop might have the best specs, but we don't really know if it has got a nice soundcard with good audio drivers unless if we buy it and play with it but it might be too late to change it if we find a problem.
Good luck finding a new laptop.
I hope you find a good one.
Lenovo laptops seam to have the most sound issues with nvda but i have seen hp and toshiba laptops to act a bit strange as well sometimes.

I don't know about del. One of my friends recently got one and she is happy so far.
Nikos

On 30 November 2017 at 20:33, Rui Fontes <rui.fontes@...> wrote:

Hello!


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
2
# of Threads
4
Processor Base Frequency
1.00 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency
2.60 GHz
Cache
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!

Regards,

Rui



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 already!

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: nvda@nvda.groups.io
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 refreshed. 

 

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?

 

--Debee

 




 

Well to be honest I am finding this hard.

Now for  600 bucks here you can get an hp with 8gb ram, an i5 processer duel core and an ssd as well as internal graphics and it will just work.

Ofcause for the user that is using this she does not use office of any sort, mostly web based apps, the only things installed on her system bar drivers, are my screen reader, 7zip, ccleaner, and cdburner xp as well as libreoffice.

But it works reasonably.


About actual laptops, toshiba used to be the go to system for me.

An ssd or a hard drive, a nice cpu, etc, etc, etc.

New firefox just doesn't cut it, chrome sort of does but it has become a bit slower.

With toshiba on its last legs, I can get what I have but not much more than that.

From my research, hp seem to be able to do 2-6gb video cards dedicated and depending on your processer get a reasonably fast clip with battery charge and the like.

For me a gamer though I need and really still like large disk storage as well as maybe an ssd and dedicated graphics.

With toshiba models are limited.

Asus is another option but I have heard support is not that good for the blind to use though I have an asus board and it works well enough.

Gegabyte could be an answer but there is no hardware vertualisation, hp mostly works and I have gotten used to the system.

Ofcause they all have their drawbacks refreshrates and the like.

For me an old timer all the new models are throwing me.

Being a gamer I want to customise what I have, basically I want everything as maxed as I can get it.

Sadly I really would like to customise my recovery software I got with it, that would be windows, and the drivers but nothing else.

You can get good deals but in new zealand well lets just say no customs unless you use lenovo and with all their spyware and dells issues with speech I just don't know anymore.

No one uses standard audio and that means that with short things with speech it will suck.

On the other hand, audio like games and music will absolutely rock.

On 1/12/2017 5:26 a.m., Deborah Armstrong wrote:
** 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:
https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/

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 refreshed.

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?

--Debee


 

That explains why firefox just doesn't work for my 2 core gen3 cpu with 4gb ram that well.

Saying that games are also getting into higher and higher spec and in some ways well I am frustrated by it I am sort of happy.

To long have we been able to get away with underpowered technology.

Streaming content data and the lot take more than they need to.

I just hope we have the options to not be multicore, its why I switched to waterfox over firefox for now.

ANd its why I don't leave resilio on all day long and limit the use of the system cores so its not a drain.

On 1/12/2017 6:22 a.m., Tyler Wood wrote:
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 already!
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: nvda@nvda.groups.io
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:
    https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/
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 refreshed.
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?
--Debee



 

Sadly its become clear a couple things.

Laptop speakers have gotten smaller and smaller.

To the point where without some sort of effect software which can be sadly installed over the drivers and not uninstalled even without drivers, to make the sound better.

This can really mangle speech because its a bit to short for effects to work right.

Speech is not designed for effects at the best of times.

Now you play music on those cards or something and they are coool.

Try to play the things without sound you will find the speakers really bad, its what I found my aunt's hp doing.

I mostly work in a quiet environment else I'd need effects to.

On the plus side if you disable effects windows spacial audio should bring sound up to what it should sort of be without much issues as long as you are on those speakers.

The issues don't have any effect on headphones or in some cases external speakers.

Most sound cards are realtech so the latest generic drivers do work in a more stable fashion.

However fact is the sound cards control panels really suck.

Maybe in gaming laptops you could get away with it.

In the old days laptops had full speakers not little pinholes.

So you didn't need all the effects, sadly with most of the hd cards including off the shelf usb ones they all suck to some degree.

Now some are really bad with everything but if you run music or a game through them they rock speech, well it depends.

Creative cards are choppy but not to bad unless you have effects on.

Hp are not to bad with effects at default values.

Creative if you can program them just right can sound really good if you do it just right.

But not everything is that good, del's wavemix and toshiba's srs premium are the most suckfull thing I have used.

Dts effects at default are quite good for what they are though.

You do get slite fade in of speech but it actually makes speech improve a bit  double that with spacial audio and drop the volume a little even better.

On 1/12/2017 10:21 a.m., Nikos Demetriou via Groups.Io wrote:
Hi.
We discussed this before but since we are talking about laptops I wanted to
express my consirns again.

I don't know what happens with the soundcards on laptops these days, or if
it is just driver issues but for a lot of models nvda doesnt work well with
them.
And I am talking about espeak which is light weight. I don't want to
imagine what is going to happen with hi-q tts.

On several laptops, I heard nvda not being able to incorborate.
For example the beginning or ending of sentences might be cut, or when
doing things quickly such as typing, you hear some clicks between the
letters as you type.
The problem could be fixed, if we disable audio enhunsments. The problem is
that some manufacturers disable this option so we get stuck.
Another possible fix is to disable the manufacturer audio driver and
install the generic audio driver from microsoft, but this way we are
loozing some of the quality of the sound the laptop can provide such as the
bass or some loudness of the audio.

I am very disapointed with the laptops these days because a laptop might
have the best specs, but we don't really know if it has got a nice
soundcard with good audio drivers unless if we buy it and play with it but
it might be too late to change it if we find a problem.
Good luck finding a new laptop.
I hope you find a good one.
Lenovo laptops seam to have the most sound issues with nvda but i have seen
hp and toshiba laptops to act a bit strange as well sometimes.

I don't know about del. One of my friends recently got one and she is happy
so far.
Nikos

On 30 November 2017 at 20:33, Rui Fontes <rui.fontes@...> wrote:

Hello!


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
2
# of Threads
4
Processor Base Frequency
1.00 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency
2.60 GHz
Cache
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!

Regards,

Rui



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 already!

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 <@DebeeArmstrong>
*Sent: *November 30, 2017 10:26 AM
*To: *nvda@nvda.groups.io
*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:

https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-
accessibility-on-windows/



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 refreshed.



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?



--Debee







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

Is there a n equivelance chart somewhere for what Intel and AMD systems are roughly the same as each other?
Brian

bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don H" <lmddh50@...>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] OT: selecting a new laptop is more difficult than before


I think it is important to get at least a Intel I3 processor or its AMD equal. If you can't afford a higher Intel processor you will find fast AMD processors cheaper and just as good as Intel.

On 11/30/2017 12:16 PM, Governor staten wrote:
One thing is for sure. You need at least 6 or 8 gb of ram. Netbooks no longer cut it, at all. You could possibly find some refurbished computers on Amazon.


I have an Asus netbook with 4 gb of ram (not expansible), 500 gb hard drive, 2.16 ghz dual-core Intel Celeron processor. Graphics and audio are built-in. I need to get a new computer, as well. I'm interested in this discussion for that reason.



------------------------------------------------------------------------


On 11/30/2017 11:26 AM, Deborah Armstrong wrote:
** 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:
https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/
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 refreshed.
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?
--Debee


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

Well I do notice huge differences between SSD and normal hard drives. this desktop has an SSD for the os and programs but I also have a traditional hard drive for backups and other data, and its amazing how you start to notice the delays if you are moving stuff to and from the physicl drive.
At our Talking Newspaper studio that machiine, a little older than mine hads a normal drive and only 4 gig of memory and glitches and hiccups are always going on, even though the processor is the same. Sad really that one has to say it, but its becoming minimum standards to have i5, 8 gig and ssd for anything you want to do any serious work on.
Brian

bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Governor staten" <@Govsta>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 6:16 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] OT: selecting a new laptop is more difficult than before


One thing is for sure. You need at least 6 or 8 gb of ram. Netbooks no
longer cut it, at all. You could possibly find some refurbished
computers on Amazon.


I have an Asus netbook with 4 gb of ram (not expansible), 500 gb hard
drive, 2.16 ghz dual-core Intel Celeron processor. Graphics and audio
are built-in. I need to get a new computer, as well. I'm interested in
this discussion for that reason.



------------------------------------------------------------------------


On 11/30/2017 11:26 AM, Deborah Armstrong wrote:
** 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:
https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/
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
refreshed.
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?
--Debee


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?
Brian

bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

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


Hello!


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
2
# of Threads
4
Processor Base Frequency
1.00 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency
2.60 GHz
Cache
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!

Regards,

Rui


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
already!

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 <mailto:@DebeeArmstrong>
*Sent: *November 30, 2017 10:26 AM
*To: *nvda@nvda.groups.io <mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io>
*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:

https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/

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
refreshed.

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?

--Debee


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

Yes I intend only to try laptops where I can hear the screenreader running as a portable app in store.
A friend of mine, sighted has a dell and asked me to sort somthing out for him. I had to plug in an external sound box to get it not to chop off the end of every bit of speech. It also lagged terrible on the internal card. its almost as if its back to just cludging any old junk in for the sound on a laptop.
Brian

bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nikos Demetriou via Groups.Io" <nikosdemetriou=googlemail.com@groups.io>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] OT: selecting a new laptop is more difficult than before


Hi.
We discussed this before but since we are talking about laptops I wanted to
express my consirns again.

I don't know what happens with the soundcards on laptops these days, or if
it is just driver issues but for a lot of models nvda doesnt work well with
them.
And I am talking about espeak which is light weight. I don't want to
imagine what is going to happen with hi-q tts.

On several laptops, I heard nvda not being able to incorborate.
For example the beginning or ending of sentences might be cut, or when
doing things quickly such as typing, you hear some clicks between the
letters as you type.
The problem could be fixed, if we disable audio enhunsments. The problem is
that some manufacturers disable this option so we get stuck.
Another possible fix is to disable the manufacturer audio driver and
install the generic audio driver from microsoft, but this way we are
loozing some of the quality of the sound the laptop can provide such as the
bass or some loudness of the audio.

I am very disapointed with the laptops these days because a laptop might
have the best specs, but we don't really know if it has got a nice
soundcard with good audio drivers unless if we buy it and play with it but
it might be too late to change it if we find a problem.
Good luck finding a new laptop.
I hope you find a good one.
Lenovo laptops seam to have the most sound issues with nvda but i have seen
hp and toshiba laptops to act a bit strange as well sometimes.

I don't know about del. One of my friends recently got one and she is happy
so far.
Nikos

On 30 November 2017 at 20:33, Rui Fontes <rui.fontes@...> wrote:

Hello!


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
2
# of Threads
4
Processor Base Frequency
1.00 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency
2.60 GHz
Cache
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!

Regards,

Rui



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 already!

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 <@DebeeArmstrong>
*Sent: *November 30, 2017 10:26 AM
*To: *nvda@nvda.groups.io
*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:

https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-
accessibility-on-windows/



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 refreshed.



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?



--Debee







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

So have we any idea why speech is affected but game and other sounds are not?
Could a screenreader use a different approach to get around the issue. say hold a channel always open for example?
Brian

bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shaun Everiss" <@smeveriss>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2017 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] OT: selecting a new laptop is more difficult than before


Well to be honest I am finding this hard.

Now for 600 bucks here you can get an hp with 8gb ram, an i5 processer duel core and an ssd as well as internal graphics and it will just work.

Ofcause for the user that is using this she does not use office of any sort, mostly web based apps, the only things installed on her system bar drivers, are my screen reader, 7zip, ccleaner, and cdburner xp as well as libreoffice.

But it works reasonably.


About actual laptops, toshiba used to be the go to system for me.

An ssd or a hard drive, a nice cpu, etc, etc, etc.

New firefox just doesn't cut it, chrome sort of does but it has become a bit slower.

With toshiba on its last legs, I can get what I have but not much more than that.

From my research, hp seem to be able to do 2-6gb video cards dedicated and depending on your processer get a reasonably fast clip with battery charge and the like.

For me a gamer though I need and really still like large disk storage as well as maybe an ssd and dedicated graphics.

With toshiba models are limited.

Asus is another option but I have heard support is not that good for the blind to use though I have an asus board and it works well enough.

Gegabyte could be an answer but there is no hardware vertualisation, hp mostly works and I have gotten used to the system.

Ofcause they all have their drawbacks refreshrates and the like.

For me an old timer all the new models are throwing me.

Being a gamer I want to customise what I have, basically I want everything as maxed as I can get it.

Sadly I really would like to customise my recovery software I got with it, that would be windows, and the drivers but nothing else.

You can get good deals but in new zealand well lets just say no customs unless you use lenovo and with all their spyware and dells issues with speech I just don't know anymore.

No one uses standard audio and that means that with short things with speech it will suck.

On the other hand, audio like games and music will absolutely rock.





On 1/12/2017 5:26 a.m., Deborah Armstrong wrote:
** 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:
https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/

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 refreshed.

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?

--Debee


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

Hang on though, some games have speech in them and that is not clipped or faded. Maybe a kind of bias of the channel is what is needed on some sound cards. To me, being a purist, I think any kind of manipulation of sound that affects certain sounds over others is a very bad idea, its like the way pop radio uses brick wall limiting and then we wonder why the young people do not know what good sound is like.
Brian

bglists@...
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Shaun Everiss" <@smeveriss>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2017 8:36 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] OT: selecting a new laptop is more difficult than before


Sadly its become clear a couple things.

Laptop speakers have gotten smaller and smaller.

To the point where without some sort of effect software which can be sadly installed over the drivers and not uninstalled even without drivers, to make the sound better.

This can really mangle speech because its a bit to short for effects to work right.

Speech is not designed for effects at the best of times.

Now you play music on those cards or something and they are coool.

Try to play the things without sound you will find the speakers really bad, its what I found my aunt's hp doing.

I mostly work in a quiet environment else I'd need effects to.

On the plus side if you disable effects windows spacial audio should bring sound up to what it should sort of be without much issues as long as you are on those speakers.

The issues don't have any effect on headphones or in some cases external speakers.

Most sound cards are realtech so the latest generic drivers do work in a more stable fashion.

However fact is the sound cards control panels really suck.

Maybe in gaming laptops you could get away with it.

In the old days laptops had full speakers not little pinholes.

So you didn't need all the effects, sadly with most of the hd cards including off the shelf usb ones they all suck to some degree.

Now some are really bad with everything but if you run music or a game through them they rock speech, well it depends.

Creative cards are choppy but not to bad unless you have effects on.

Hp are not to bad with effects at default values.

Creative if you can program them just right can sound really good if you do it just right.

But not everything is that good, del's wavemix and toshiba's srs premium are the most suckfull thing I have used.

Dts effects at default are quite good for what they are though.

You do get slite fade in of speech but it actually makes speech improve a bit double that with spacial audio and drop the volume a little even better.





On 1/12/2017 10:21 a.m., Nikos Demetriou via Groups.Io wrote:
Hi.
We discussed this before but since we are talking about laptops I wanted to
express my consirns again.

I don't know what happens with the soundcards on laptops these days, or if
it is just driver issues but for a lot of models nvda doesnt work well with
them.
And I am talking about espeak which is light weight. I don't want to
imagine what is going to happen with hi-q tts.

On several laptops, I heard nvda not being able to incorborate.
For example the beginning or ending of sentences might be cut, or when
doing things quickly such as typing, you hear some clicks between the
letters as you type.
The problem could be fixed, if we disable audio enhunsments. The problem is
that some manufacturers disable this option so we get stuck.
Another possible fix is to disable the manufacturer audio driver and
install the generic audio driver from microsoft, but this way we are
loozing some of the quality of the sound the laptop can provide such as the
bass or some loudness of the audio.

I am very disapointed with the laptops these days because a laptop might
have the best specs, but we don't really know if it has got a nice
soundcard with good audio drivers unless if we buy it and play with it but
it might be too late to change it if we find a problem.
Good luck finding a new laptop.
I hope you find a good one.
Lenovo laptops seam to have the most sound issues with nvda but i have seen
hp and toshiba laptops to act a bit strange as well sometimes.

I don't know about del. One of my friends recently got one and she is happy
so far.
Nikos

On 30 November 2017 at 20:33, Rui Fontes <rui.fontes@...> wrote:

Hello!


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
2
# of Threads
4
Processor Base Frequency
1.00 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency
2.60 GHz
Cache
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!

Regards,

Rui



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 already!

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 <@DebeeArmstrong>
*Sent: *November 30, 2017 10:26 AM
*To: *nvda@nvda.groups.io
*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:

https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-
accessibility-on-windows/



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 refreshed.



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?



--Debee








Tyler Wood
 

Keep in mind AMD has just released their ryzen mobile processors, so that should be interesting. Similar to Intel, it will be Ryzen 3 = intel i3, ryzen 5 = intel i5, ryzen 7 = intel i7.

In these modern days, hard drives truly limit the speed of a computer. If you can afford it, even if it takes a little longer to save up, go for something with a solid state drive. You’ll never go back again. Even a cheap windows tablet with a 64 gb ssd is going to beat the socks off of that huge i5 with a 1 tb spinning hard drives in booting up, general snappyness around windows. Web browsing not so much but even so the solid state drive is what makes or breaks a computer and is why you can get by with a core i3 or equal from AMD.

Sean has a good point about soundcards these days, too. And even with headphones on it can still be painful with speech – so try and play with them in the store using narrator.

 

 

From: Brian's Mail list account via Groups.Io
Sent: December 1, 2017 4:29 AM
To: nvda@nvda.groups.io
Subject: Re: [nvda] OT: selecting a new laptop is more difficult than before

 

Is there a n equivelance chart somewhere for what Intel and AMD systems are

roughly the same as each other?

Brian

 

bglists@...

Sent via blueyonder.

Please address personal email to:-

briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff'

in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----

From: "Don H" <lmddh50@...>

To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>

Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2017 6:23 PM

Subject: Re: [nvda] OT: selecting a new laptop is more difficult than before

 

 

>I think it is important to get at least a Intel I3 processor or its AMD

>equal.  If you can't afford a higher Intel processor you will find fast AMD

>processors cheaper and just as good as Intel.

> On 11/30/2017 12:16 PM, Governor staten wrote:

>> One thing is for sure. You need at least 6 or 8 gb of ram. Netbooks no

>> longer cut it, at all. You could possibly find some refurbished computers

>> on Amazon.

>> 

>> 

>> I have an Asus netbook with 4 gb of ram (not expansible), 500 gb hard

>> drive, 2.16 ghz dual-core Intel Celeron processor. Graphics and audio are

>> built-in. I need to get a new computer, as well. I'm interested in this

>> discussion for that reason.

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>> 

>> 

>> On 11/30/2017 11:26 AM, Deborah Armstrong wrote:

>>> ** 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:

>>> https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/

>>> 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 refreshed.

>>> 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?

>>> --Debee

>> 

>

>

 

 

 

 


Sarah k Alawami
 

I have a machien wiht 32 gigs of ram and an I think i5 4ghz processer and 6 gig graphics card. It rocks and nvda runs just swimingly on it.

Take care

On Nov 30, 2017, at 10:16 AM, Governor staten <govsta@...> wrote:

One thing is for sure. You need at least 6 or 8 gb of ram. Netbooks no longer cut it, at all. You could possibly find some refurbished computers on Amazon.


I have an Asus netbook with 4 gb of ram (not expansible), 500 gb hard drive, 2.16 ghz dual-core Intel Celeron processor. Graphics and audio are built-in. I need to get a new computer, as well. I'm interested in this discussion for that reason.





On 11/30/2017 11:26 AM, Deborah Armstrong wrote:
** 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:
    https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/
 
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 refreshed. 
 
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?
 
--Debee


tim
 

You AMD equal to Intel is wy off, because I7 is 7 gen, I5 is 6 gen and I3 is 8 gen. Anything below this is slow and very out dated. Now only the I7 supports hyperthreding and the I5 only has quad turboboost and the I3 is only dual core.
So I5 or better is good with Intel.
now AMD just go by the processor speed.
Now if your building a box like I am now. You try to get that CPU as high as you can in a already built box to lower the cost. If your just getting something like a Dell it don’t really matter your going for price.
Now I’m just wanting everything except drives and ram. I can get those cheaper then a Dell box has and better. 

On Dec 2, 2017, at 1:33 AM, Sarah k Alawami <marrie12@...> wrote:

I have a machien wiht 32 gigs of ram and an I think i5 4ghz processer and 6 gig graphics card. It rocks and nvda runs just swimingly on it.

Take care

On Nov 30, 2017, at 10:16 AM, Governor staten <govsta@...> wrote:

One thing is for sure. You need at least 6 or 8 gb of ram. Netbooks no longer cut it, at all. You could possibly find some refurbished computers on Amazon. 


I have an Asus netbook with 4 gb of ram (not expansible), 500 gb hard drive, 2.16 ghz dual-core Intel Celeron processor. Graphics and audio are built-in. I need to get a new computer, as well. I'm interested in this discussion for that reason.





On 11/30/2017 11:26 AM, Deborah Armstrong wrote:
** 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:
    https://www.marcozehe.de/2017/09/29/rethinking-web-accessibility-on-windows/
 
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 refreshed.  
 
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?
 
--Debee