Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Rosa Golijan
Email | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Email
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Kyle VanHemert
Email
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email
Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/17/09
I'm fairly convinced that the increased heat and limited airflow in a laptop is murder on the parts (and thus good for the computer sales industry) but can find no definitive study on the topic. #laptops
11/17/09
11/17/09
but seriously, what you're thinking surely must be the case. This trend here even backs you up with netbooks, the even smaller computer, having a higher failure rate. So many components packed into ever shrinking cases just increases the self destruction factor of these things, but that's business. We can't give you those light bulbs that never burn out just yet. #laptops
11/17/09
11/17/09
Why not get more power, more reliability, and more upgradeability for the same price, if mobility is a non-issue? #laptops
11/17/09
Scientists, Graphic Artists, photographers, video, 3d artists, engineers......
Yep, they all use desktops. Not to mention the larger widescreen monitors are nicer to use than any laptop monitor on the market. Desktops are the most flexible, upgradable, and cost effective way to do computing. The only spot they fail is the whole portability thing. #laptops
11/17/09
11/17/09
Not to mention how many ARE reported in the first place. #laptops
11/17/09
[en.wikipedia.org] #laptops
11/17/09
That may have made sense or it may have sounded convoluted and senseless. (I've been up all night working on a scientific realism essay so I'm delirious, sorry) #laptops
11/17/09
And, yes, @nathan.hornby008: , it would be nice if confidence intervals were provided. They state in the report that they used a random sampling of 30,000 of their warranties, no indication of the distribution among the brands. (which we could infer ourselves from the confidence intervals) It's entirely possible that their random sample of 30,000 contained only a few dozen Apples. #laptops
11/17/09
11/06/09
Personally I haven't seen LCD blur since around 12-15ms response times became the norm. I see MPEG artifacting and trailing, and even dim afterimages in HDMI signals on PS3 and 360, but motion is not an issue. #motionblur
11/04/09
11/04/09
11/04/09
10/06/09
Apple and OSX infuriate me sometimes though. Over the past few weeks 4 out of the 5 people in my household got iPod Touchs/iPhones (I'm the 5th). As I programmer I figured that since I have access to a wealth of dev machines now I might try some app programming. I then learn that Apple in their infinite wisdom (read: dickishness) have locked app development to OSX.
Well screw you Apple, I'm not interested enough in your platform to buy a new machine for.
END RANT
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
15% of 12% = 1.8%
10/05/09
He writes "of the 12% of homes with a Mac, less than 2% are Mac-exclusive."
... the "of" means that the "12% of homes with a Mac" becomes 100% of the subset in which he's distinguishing between Mac-exclusive vs. Mac+PC.
100% (the 12% subset of homes with Macs) - 85% (the % of that subset with Mac + PC) = 15% (households that are Mac-only within the subset of homes that have at least one Mac).
Also, if you go beyond the math, doesn't it also make common sense: if only 2% of Mac-owning households were Mac exclusive, that would mean virtually everyone with a Mac would also have a PC. That doesn't seem to be true in real life, but an 85% (mixed) / 15% (exclusive) split among Mac owners is credible.
10/05/09
John writes "of the 12% of homes with a Mac, less than 2% are Mac-exclusive."
But the study says "Of those 12 percent, nearly 85 percent also own a Windows-based PC."
Wouldn't that mean of the 12% of homes with a Mac, a little more than 15% are Mac-exclusive (not 2%)?
10/05/09
Another way of looking at that is 10.2% of homes with computers own both a MAC and a Windows based computer.
10/05/09
10/05/09
But of the subset of households that own Macs (12% of total households, or 100% of households with Macs), if 85% of them also own PCs, that's 85% of 100% of the households with Macs, leaving 15% not 2% of the subset of households with Macs exclusively Mac.
No?
10/05/09
10/05/09
(my emphasis. he didn't say total homes, he said homes with a mac, which gives the wrong stat).
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
10/05/09
*Yes I know Macs can get viruses/worms too.
10/05/09
10/05/09
Yesterday I wanted to watch an out of market football game that I couldn't get here in MN. Bootcamped into Vista and loaded up Sopcast/TVU Player. I've been looking for an OS X version of something like that for a bit but I can't seem to find anything like it-especially one that lets me record what I'm watching.
*And if you want some other examples-browse Lifehacker on a daily basis. You always see some nice software that they come across and the first sentence will read Windows Only. It's not all the time-they have others that say "OS X only/Linux only". One aspect I LOVE about OS X is the amount of freeware made for it. It's second to none (except linux, blah blah blah)
10/06/09
I know these are specific issues, and it has gotten a LOT better in recent years. I know basic users can get away with just mac, but to suggest that anyone can do anything they need to do on a mac is a bit shortsighted.
10/05/09
10/05/09