Which Chromebook should a new user buy?
Chromebooks have become extremely popular, with numerous models appearing on Amazon's list of bestselling laptops. Customers are so interested in Chromebooks that Amazon has added a helpful Chromebook Buying Guide to steer them toward the model that might be right for them.
But with all of the choices available, it can still be somewhat daunting for a new Chrome OS user to find the right model. A redditor recently asked which model Chromebook he should buy and got some helpful answers.
Thegreatdigitalism asked his question about Chromebook models in the Chrome OS subreddit:
I've been looking into a Chromebook. Because I am heavily invested in the Google ecosystem and because my work recently made the switch to Google for business I think it's pretty safe to get a Chromebook on the side. I once owned a chromebook: the Samsung XE303, but the performance was awful and Chromeos wasn't really that great back then, but Chromeos seems very good right now.
I'll be using it for the following things:
Webbrowsing (Unexpected!)
Office for work and college (Office Online/Google office)
Watching Netflix and 1080p videos on Youtube (without stuttering)
Being very mobile with it
So I've compiled the options below:
Acer Chromebook C720: 11", bad display, decent performance, cheap
Toshiba Chromebook 2: 13", good display, less performance, more expensive
Wait for a better Chromebook to be released.
Which one is the best choice according to you? Should I get one of these or should I just wait until there is a Chromebook with good performance and a good display?
His fellow redditors shared their thoughts about various models of the Chromebook:
Xiao: "Both are good choices. If there is no rush, you could try waiting newer devices. Apparently, two new chromebooks with backlit keyboards might be released.
Have you looked at the Acer CB13. It has a non-IPS 1080p screen and an Nvidia K1. Or, the Acer C910. It also has a 1080p screen (but its 15inches).
If you are set on one of the two cbs you listed, then you should weigh what is more important to you: display or performance."
Jarec707: "The Acer c910 and Acer 15 (4 gb, IPS models) have a pretty good mix of speed, battery life and decent display. They are quite big, however."
MamaD: "From what I have heard about the Acer C720, either that or the Toshiba CB2 would be a pretty good choice. I have the CB2, and I do a lot of streaming from it to my Chromecast and I never have any problems. It never lags, stops, or anything. The display is amazing. The only time I really run into problems is when I have 5+ tabs open. It is really a great price for what you get, even if it is a little more expensive than the Acer."
Unsurebutwilling: "I'd say you can go ahead and buy the Chromebook 2 - it (supposedly) can do everything you want it to do and looks beautiful. I can't see how you need more power for what you'll be doing with it. Watching Netflix on the C720 is only OK if you are the only person watching, because of its very bad viewing angles.
There are at least two devices rumored to come out with backlit keyboard, but these will most likely be not as cheap as the Chromebook 2 and will hopefully be a little higher spect, since I'm in the market for a mid-high end chromebook that's not straight up $1000."
Deadlywoodlouse: "I often see people mentioning the Dell Chromebook 11 on here as a better built alternative to the C720. From the consistent amount of praise they receive on here, any of the three would be a good choice. As others have said, I'd wait until the others are announced, it won't be too long; and as /u/XiaolinJudaism[1] said, you have to decide whether display or performance is more important."
Fishwithadeagle: "I don't know what your requirements are for screen size, but I would definitely recommend going with some form of an ips display. The chromebook 15 and the toshiba chromebook 2 both have this. I personally have the chromebook 15, and it seems to be one of the best displays that I have used."
Lostdata: "I have had the Toshiba Chromebook 2 for awhile, its display and battery life are great. I don't see a need for the added performance in a Chromebook. I also have linux installed via crouton so I can play with my android phones and some other things like musicbrainz picard. Works great."
The history of Apple versus Linux and open source
Apple has always had an...er...uneasy relationship with the open source community, and it goes back quite a bit in terms of years. The VAR Guy has an overview of the sometimes tense history between Apple, Linux and the open source community as a whole.
...relations between the Cult of Mac and the Cult of Tux—that is, the Linux community (not to mention the other, smaller segments of the free and open source software world)—have not always been completely peaceable. And that's by no means a new phenomenon, as I'm discovering as I research the history of Linux and the Free Software Foundation.
The ill will dates to at least the late 1980s. By June 1988, GNU, the project launched by Richard Stallman to build a completely free Unix-like operating system whose source code would be freely shared, was strongly criticizing Apple's lawsuit against Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) and Microsoft (MSFT) over what Apple claimed was improper copying of the "look and feel" of the Macintosh operating system. If Apple prevailed, GNU warned, the company "will use this new power over the public to put an end to free software that could substitute for commercial software."
Despite his more laissez-faire attitude toward most issues, Linus Torvalds, the creator of the Linux kernel, was no less charitable in his attitudes toward Apple than Stallman and GNU had been. In his 2001 book "Just for Fun: The Story of an Accidental Revolutionary," Torvalds described meeting with Steve Jobs circa 1997, at the latter's invitation, to discuss Mac OS X, which Apple was then developing but had not yet released publicly.
The pros and cons of Snappy packages
Snappy packages are a way of changing software installation in Linux to more closely resemble that of OS X and Windows. But the idea of Linux using such package management has caused some controversy in the community. Jeff Hoogland examined the pluses and minuses of snappy packages in a recent article on IT Toolbox.
For those who are not familiar, the goal of Snappy packages are to bring Windows or OSX style software installers to Linux. As opposed to software having to be compiled against specific versions of shared libraries the operating system has, Snappy packages will allow developers to package the specific versions of dependencies their application works best with to distribute with their application.
The good:
- Snappy Packages allow end users to more easily access the latest versions of the software they want, without doing things like adding third party software sources to their computer.
- Users can easily roll back / change between different versions of software if they need a specific one.
- Software creators will have an easier time debugging issues for end users because they will know exactly which dependency versions the user has installed.
The bad:
- Redundancy will be the biggest draw back to this style of packages. The idea of shared libraries that traditional Linux package managers provide prevent 100 different copies of library XYZ from being installed on your computer, thus saving space. With Snappy packages even if two packages have the same dependency, they will each house their own copy of it.
- While it will be easier for software creators to support the packages they create, Snappy packages will likely be more complex to support from a Linux distribution stand point.
- Snappy Packages allow end users to more easily access the latest versions of the software they want. Wait – wasn't that under the good list? This point is actually a bit of a double-edged sword. Users getting more software from third party sources more easily means it is easier to trick people into installing malware. Always remember to only install software from trusted sources – regardless of your OS.
Chromebooks have become extremely popular, with numerous models appearing on Amazon's list of bestselling laptops. Customers are so interested in Chromebooks that Amazon has added a helpful Chromebook Buying Guide to steer them toward the model that might be right for them.
But with all of the choices available, it can still be somewhat daunting for a new Chrome OS user to find the right model. A redditor recently asked which model Chromebook he should buy and got some helpful answers.
Thegreatdigitalism asked his question about Chromebook models in the Chrome OS subreddit:
I've been looking into a Chromebook. Because I am heavily invested in the Google ecosystem and because my work recently made the switch to Google for business I think it's pretty safe to get a Chromebook on the side. I once owned a chromebook: the Samsung XE303, but the performance was awful and Chromeos wasn't really that great back then, but Chromeos seems very good right now.
I'll be using it for the following things:
Webbrowsing (Unexpected!)
Office for work and college (Office Online/Google office)
Watching Netflix and 1080p videos on Youtube (without stuttering)
Being very mobile with it
So I've compiled the options below:
Acer Chromebook C720: 11", bad display, decent performance, cheap
Toshiba Chromebook 2: 13", good display, less performance, more expensive
Wait for a better Chromebook to be released.
Which one is the best choice according to you? Should I get one of these or should I just wait until there is a Chromebook with good performance and a good display?
His fellow redditors shared their thoughts about various models of the Chromebook:
Xiao: "Both are good choices. If there is no rush, you could try waiting newer devices. Apparently, two new chromebooks with backlit keyboards might be released.
Have you looked at the Acer CB13. It has a non-IPS 1080p screen and an Nvidia K1. Or, the Acer C910. It also has a 1080p screen (but its 15inches).
If you are set on one of the two cbs you listed, then you should weigh what is more important to you: display or performance."
Jarec707: "The Acer c910 and Acer 15 (4 gb, IPS models) have a pretty good mix of speed, battery life and decent display. They are quite big, however."
MamaD: "From what I have heard about the Acer C720, either that or the Toshiba CB2 would be a pretty good choice. I have the CB2, and I do a lot of streaming from it to my Chromecast and I never have any problems. It never lags, stops, or anything. The display is amazing. The only time I really run into problems is when I have 5+ tabs open. It is really a great price for what you get, even if it is a little more expensive than the Acer."
Unsurebutwilling: "I'd say you can go ahead and buy the Chromebook 2 - it (supposedly) can do everything you want it to do and looks beautiful. I can't see how you need more power for what you'll be doing with it. Watching Netflix on the C720 is only OK if you are the only person watching, because of its very bad viewing angles.
There are at least two devices rumored to come out with backlit keyboard, but these will most likely be not as cheap as the Chromebook 2 and will hopefully be a little higher spect, since I'm in the market for a mid-high end chromebook that's not straight up $1000."
Deadlywoodlouse: "I often see people mentioning the Dell Chromebook 11 on here as a better built alternative to the C720. From the consistent amount of praise they receive on here, any of the three would be a good choice. As others have said, I'd wait until the others are announced, it won't be too long; and as /u/XiaolinJudaism[1] said, you have to decide whether display or performance is more important."
Fishwithadeagle: "I don't know what your requirements are for screen size, but I would definitely recommend going with some form of an ips display. The chromebook 15 and the toshiba chromebook 2 both have this. I personally have the chromebook 15, and it seems to be one of the best displays that I have used."
Lostdata: "I have had the Toshiba Chromebook 2 for awhile, its display and battery life are great. I don't see a need for the added performance in a Chromebook. I also have linux installed via crouton so I can play with my android phones and some other things like musicbrainz picard. Works great."
The history of Apple versus Linux and open source
Apple has always had an...er...uneasy relationship with the open source community, and it goes back quite a bit in terms of years. The VAR Guy has an overview of the sometimes tense history between Apple, Linux and the open source community as a whole.
...relations between the Cult of Mac and the Cult of Tux—that is, the Linux community (not to mention the other, smaller segments of the free and open source software world)—have not always been completely peaceable. And that's by no means a new phenomenon, as I'm discovering as I research the history of Linux and the Free Software Foundation.
The ill will dates to at least the late 1980s. By June 1988, GNU, the project launched by Richard Stallman to build a completely free Unix-like operating system whose source code would be freely shared, was strongly criticizing Apple's lawsuit against Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) and Microsoft (MSFT) over what Apple claimed was improper copying of the "look and feel" of the Macintosh operating system. If Apple prevailed, GNU warned, the company "will use this new power over the public to put an end to free software that could substitute for commercial software."
Despite his more laissez-faire attitude toward most issues, Linus Torvalds, the creator of the Linux kernel, was no less charitable in his attitudes toward Apple than Stallman and GNU had been. In his 2001 book "Just for Fun: The Story of an Accidental Revolutionary," Torvalds described meeting with Steve Jobs circa 1997, at the latter's invitation, to discuss Mac OS X, which Apple was then developing but had not yet released publicly.
The pros and cons of Snappy packages
Snappy packages are a way of changing software installation in Linux to more closely resemble that of OS X and Windows. But the idea of Linux using such package management has caused some controversy in the community. Jeff Hoogland examined the pluses and minuses of snappy packages in a recent article on IT Toolbox.
For those who are not familiar, the goal of Snappy packages are to bring Windows or OSX style software installers to Linux. As opposed to software having to be compiled against specific versions of shared libraries the operating system has, Snappy packages will allow developers to package the specific versions of dependencies their application works best with to distribute with their application.
The good:
- Snappy Packages allow end users to more easily access the latest versions of the software they want, without doing things like adding third party software sources to their computer.
- Users can easily roll back / change between different versions of software if they need a specific one.
- Software creators will have an easier time debugging issues for end users because they will know exactly which dependency versions the user has installed.
The bad:
- Redundancy will be the biggest draw back to this style of packages. The idea of shared libraries that traditional Linux package managers provide prevent 100 different copies of library XYZ from being installed on your computer, thus saving space. With Snappy packages even if two packages have the same dependency, they will each house their own copy of it.
- While it will be easier for software creators to support the packages they create, Snappy packages will likely be more complex to support from a Linux distribution stand point.
- Snappy Packages allow end users to more easily access the latest versions of the software they want. Wait – wasn't that under the good list? This point is actually a bit of a double-edged sword. Users getting more software from third party sources more easily means it is easier to trick people into installing malware. Always remember to only install software from trusted sources – regardless of your OS.
No comments:
Post a Comment