People just don't understand how good desktops are, right?

On my flight yesterday, when I pulled out my full tower Ryzen with 2x 3090 GPUs, I got told that the power outlet on the plane seat shouldn't be used for my 1200W power supply.

And yet, the same flight attendant said nothing to the macbook user a few rows over who was clearly plugged in. Frankly, it's appalling how few people understand that a cheaper desktop is comparable to a laptop.

I mean, unless you are an extreme outlier, you spend more time on the ground than on an airplane. Why would you optimize for working on an airplane over your typical workday?

For me personally, 99.9% of my work is done at my desk (1), so why not have a more powerful, upgradeable, repairable computer to work with?

(1) I'm not hip enough to work from coffee shops

I agree with you. When I travel I just take a tablet for some reading on the flight and maybe some light HN reading before bed. To do actual work, I kind of like my split keyboard, mouse, and 32 CPUs. I don't bother trying to get a ton of work done on the road; if I need to talk to someone in another state or country for work, we have video conferences now.

It's amazing how much shit you get on HN of all places for sitting at your desk programming.

> extreme outlier

Contrary to popular myth, not all of us live and work in a basement. Myself and many people I know, my non-technical girlfriend included, use our laptops all around the country and in multiple other countries.

I do agree about upgradeable and repairable, which is why the Framework laptop is getting pretty attractive. But there's still nothing that compares in performance and portability to my M1 Air.

Right, that's why they said "outlier". Most people aren't going all around the country and multiple other countries. Most people sit at home on a computer, and sit at work on another computer.

Like you, I am also an outlier, using my MacbBok all over Hades.

That also suggests that modern tech workers who have a hybrid work arrangement are outliers. That's getting to be a pretty large group.

Heck, even before COVID, my previous company only gave out laptops. Those things would get moved all around the office - from desk to desk, to multiple conference and meeting rooms, home, etc. This has been the norm for at least 5 years in my experience.

From my experience it's better to use both laptop and workstation. When I'm normally working I use the comfort/performance of the workstation, when I'm on the move I can use the portability of the laptop.

Basically all developers I know have "hybrid work arrangement", working some days from home/travels and some from office. They all remotely connect to their workstation at work either from their home computer of from laptop when traveling.

Maybe it depends on type of development or age of developers, but I'm not 20 anymore and laptop is an ergonomic nightmare. If you want to use it for a longer period of time and avoid health issues you should get an external keyboard/mouse/screens anyway. Which means you just recreated workstation, but it costs more money, has worse performance and all kinds of issues while connecting so much stuff to it.

We all had external keyboards, mice, and multiple monitors on our desks. The only time we were ergonomically constrained was when we were mobile. But we could be mobile at a moment's notice, and with all our stuff still running.

Now what I really would like is a high quality, low latency complete remote system. I got pretty close to this with a recent experiment, but it took a good bit of effort (and I still had some weird issues). It was great in that I could go to any computer with enough power to drive a browser, remote into my server "desktop", and continue right where I left off.

If that could get perfected, I would probably switch to an iPad Pro with optional keyboard.

> Most people sit at home on a computer, and sit at work on another computer

a) You don't know what most people do.

b) I would add that those of us that are in a hybrid mode e.g. working equally from home and work are given laptops specifically because we are expected to use the same computer in both environments.

a. Sure I do. It's pretty easy to reckon. I don't see "most" people traveling across the country and countries on a regular basis.

b. Sure, but again, that's a minority of even the professional demographic. Now, if you're thinking the developer demographic, sure I might agree with you, but that's not what OP said.

They don't need to travel across the country to need a laptop.

I have two data points for you:

The company I work for does little dev work. 99% of the people have laptops. They don't travel cross-country, mostly work in the office. But they also need to move to conference rooms, work from home, etc. We only have to handle one PC per person this way, instead of figuring how to handle their own personal PC when at home, etc. These are mostly "non IT people". Sure, you can argue they don't need the power of a desktop anyway. Which is absolutely correct.

I have a friend who does "actual dev work" working for an "actual software company". Java and C++, so they actually require powerful machines to compile (at least more than my company), etc. They used to have big-ass Xeon workstations. Those were replaced with some kind of Dell laptop [*] with a bunch of cores and RAM. He also basically never travels for work, but can now easily work from home without installing the company crap on his own PC. My friend is much happier with this arrangement.

Both companies provide multi-monitor setups with external keyboards and mice, so the comfort part of a desktop is still present when they're sitting at their desks.

---

[0] They look like the XPS line, but seem somewhat thicker and don't have the XPS logo.

You think a minority of professionals are going to the office full-time ?

Because in Australia at least that is not what is happening at all.

Occupancy levels in the CBDs of our major cities are still well below pre-COVID averages.

I wonder how energy prices are going to change that. If someone needs to pay $1000 a month to heat their homes all day in the winter because of WFH, I can see that tipping over lots of folks to go back to the office.

If that becomes an issue, I think it's reasonable that companies will start providing extra money to remote workers to cover operating costs. After all, those same companies will need to lease less office space (meaning lower costs for space and electricity).

The only use case for a laptop is when you are travelling across the country? What sort of bizarro argument is this?

My work is done almost 100% at a desk, in different rooms of my home depending on the season (some get too cold or too hot) or on a whim. A desktop won't do. And sometimes I really take my laptop to somewhere else.

Different strokes for different folks and all, but it's hard for me to imagine this. I have 3 large monitors, so even if I had a laptop I would want to move those around as well.

After working with large monitors, I don't know how anyone gets serious work done on a laptop screen.

I do have a laptop, but it is relatively inexpensive and used mostly as a thin client to my desktop (as others have mentioned).

Edit: I will also add, I like having a dedicated space for work. This prevents work from creeping into my life everywhere in my house. I can't be on the couch, watching a movie, and have the urge to work - I'm not in my work space!

I mostly agree with you, in that I usually find working on only a laptop screen frustrating and love having a dedicated work area.

But it depends on the task I do. For example, I quite enjoy working from my parents' garden when it's nice outside and if I do some focused work. Like reading some "long-form documentation" (where I don't need to follow it along as I apply it) or when I do some routine sysadmin work.

I have a big monitor (don't like having multiple monitors) at my parents' house, with a dedicated desk in a "work area". I also have this at home. And I also have this at the office. It's much more comfortable to move around these locations with a laptop than it would be to haul around a desktop, or have multiple desktops and having to keep them in sync. When I need actual horsepower, I have a Xeon workstation at my house, and my work allows me to leverage it remotely if needed. Guess what? I basically only turn it on for games.

This is all getting rather stupid. Laptop aren't for serious work? What planet are you on? You like stationary devices because you like to compartmentalise your life. Well thats great for you, but it's hardly normal.

I mostly work outside in an Adirondack chair, so for me, it does make sense to optimize for mobility.

I don't have a Mac though... Dell XPS 13 running Ubuntu works great for me. Never had an issue with the three I've had over the years.

> For me personally, 99.9% of my work is done at my desk

And for many of us their computer is not used exclusively at a desk.

It's also used at work, on a couch, on a plane, in bed etc.

Yeah. Only thing I'll add is that I use my laptop as a thin-client, so I don't ever find myself pining for more power. Works great for watching YouTube, editing text and SSHing into my desktop via Tailscale when I want some more power. Using my Macbook in the same way is just more of a hassle, but that's probably because I don't use iCloud/the App Store...

You don't have to travel much at all before a laptop is essential.

And at that point I'd imagine it's way easier to optimize for mobility, for a vast majority of people - unless they're working entirely in virtual workspaces/the cloud - in which case a laptop is perfectly fine anyway.

I too don't get this transition to working on laptops. What a crappy form factor. I do have two of them - and they get used about 2 hours per month on average.

I actually understand the subjective differences for people to choose a desktop over a laptop.

But I really don't get your point about form factor. Using, external monitors and adding a keyboard and mouse to a laptop is a non-issue.

If you add external monitors, keyboard and mouse you just recreated non-mobile work environment that costs more money and has worse performance than workstation.

A non-mobile work environment, but unplug one cord and you can take the laptop part to meetings, including offsite, you can travel with it, work from the coffee shop or roof or park, keep working if there's work being done on your office (painting or whatever) so you can't be in there at the moment, if you usually work in a corporate office but WFH some days you still have the same machine, can take it to co-workers' desks to show them stuff without having to screen-share and having both workstations together at once, which can be nice in some situations. Built in UPS is sometimes handy, too—no power-offs because you kicked a cord.

I'm not arguing against desktops for people who like them but this "I don't understand laptops" stuff (several posts, not just this one) is bizarre.

This site is just becoming ridiculous. You understand what a portable device is right? That you can UNPLUG the laptop from the external monitor and still use it.

But you do understand that owning a desktop does not preclude also owning a laptop, right?

I have a desktop, and a laptop used as a thin client. The laptop can be inexpensive or have nice features (like a touchscreen), while the real power, storage, etc, is on the desktop.

Not often you see someone use their own argument against themselves. Why buy a desktop with a thin client laptop (that are not in anyway cheap) when you could just buy a standalone laptop.

This isn't even an argument, the decades of the laptops continued popularity say enough.

My machine is way too valuable to risk traveling with is the primary reason. Another is that laptops are noisy due to fans.

My desktop is just a host for several VMs. If I actually need to travel with one of those "computers", I just shut down the VM and copy it's image from my NAS to my laptop.

If you are still buying a laptop for your stated reason, then you haven't embraced virtualization as a developer.

Your personal sensitivities about travelling with a laptop are not shared by the majority. Laptop fans are in no way noisy enough to cause a distraction for yourself or others.

Making a VM copy from a NAS every time I decided to step outside and work say on the back deck in a different environment with trees and some sun is anything but convenient.

There seems to be a perpetuation falsehood in these discussions that the only time you would need to use a laptop is when travelling a substantial distance from home, which can not be anymore further from the truth than is possible.

Lastly, laptops are not the sole domain of developers and you don’t need to ‘embrace virtualization’ simply because it exists.

Would you be surprised if I told you that laptops have ports that allow for external devices like a display/keyboard/mouse.

Would it also surprise you that people would prefer a device that they can be used anywhere, rather than a fixed location.

The only way you could not get this transition is if you've never had to go anywhere outside your home.

Next time bring a portable battery.

It is pretty appalling. Much better to go through the hassle to bring my portable, solar rechargeable 1200 watt power generator onto the plane than it is to fork over the extra cash for those silly little lap warmers.

You should have shown her the daisy chain of 5v lithium batteries you used to power it. That really puts the stewardess in bitch-mode

Is a desktop whose price doesn't include any display really the best comparison you could come up with for a discussion of laptop display repairs?

The beauty of the desktop is that you can buy a display that fits your budget and needs. A desktop monitor that's equal to a typical 1080 laptop display can be had for $150. If you need something better, you can spend more but very few people will need to spend more than $500.

If it breaks, you plug in a new one at 1/3 to 1/2 the cost of the laptop repair with the only downtime being how long it takes to drive to the store.

This is like saying that you don’t think formalwear is a good deal because your Costco jeans are more durable. Desktops are great, I heartily recommend using them instead of laptops for most people, but it’s not especially revelatory to point out that laptops make design trade offs to hit their size & battery trade offs.

Actually it really isn't.

The more expensive something is the higher the ongoing costs to maintain it. It's the same case with cars where more expensive ones are also more costly to maintain and fix.

When people buy a more luxury item, it's because there is something about the item that they value where no cheaper equivalent exists. MacBooks certainly have several such features: quality of display, ecosystem integration, form factor, battery life, speakers, aesthetics... These things might not be the same things you value, but for those who care it's just as important. This is also why some people buy luxury cars and others just get the cheapest whatever that gets them from A to B.

FWIW, I run an HP Ryzen laptop that cost me just $350. But I do so because the 2h battery, non-HDR (and probably not even 100% sRGB) 1080p screen, lackluster speaker, and "borderline serviceable" trackpad don't bother me at all. I would not buy a MacBook as it offers no features I care about at a significantly higher price, but I respect people who do buy MacBooks because they fit their needs.

There’s lots of things that are more expensive and last longer with no maintenance. There was an entire thread yesterday about how stuff doesn’t last as long and sometimes if you can afford it, you should pay 7x for a Vitamix or KitchenAid.

I’m not sure this compares to luxury cars, since MacBooks more than ever are more like appliances. So it’s arguable that paying more should get you a more durable product.

I mean there’s loads of people who have pre-shitty keyboard MacBooks that have lasted years. I have a great 2012 MBA that still works great and I paid a premium for it then. I’d be happy to pay a premium again for a similarly long lasting computer. You’re also paying the apple premium so that if something goes wrong, they fix it with little fuss. Something I have also used over the years.

Not saying more expensive things don't last longer, just that usually it is not proportional to the price difference (and that's fine).

If you really want to compare, if I got a similar spec-ed MacBook to what I need, I'd have to spend easily $4k+. That means I can outright write off my current cheapish laptop 10+ times over the entire lifetime of an equivalent Macbook and I'd still be in the green.

Premium products are premium because you need them to do something that no other device can. Durability _could_ be a premium selling point for some stuff (tools for example), but for electronics and cars it almost never is. OTOH, I'd happily concede if someone wants to spend $3k+ just to get the better monitor or better battery life on the Macbook.

That's how I feel about bikes. I like that enthusiasts get the really nice fancypants stuff. But if I'm gonna be doing my own maintenance, and riding for durability along with functionality, then the lower end stuff ends up being more for me than the latest & greatest.

Yeah, I have a friend who has a nice fancy carbon fibre bike meanwhile I just have a random no-name brand because it does everything I need it to do for commuting and I don't care that it weighs several kilograms more...

Honestly, if I had broken the screen, this seems like a fair cost for a new display like this. Apart from the the cost, I'd also like to mention the repair process (via mail at their Houston repair facility) was very speedy. I got a quote within hours of them receiving the product, and it was shipped the next day after I approved. The supervisor mentioned that if they ever set up a repair program for this issue, they will refund the fee.

Now, if only they could also fix the audio crackling issue that me and many other users are experiencing... (https://www.reddit.com/r/macbookpro/comments/s4r1m5/macbook_...)

Wow you praise Apple even after they screwed you! The cult of Apple is still going strong!

Edit: parent was made to pay 800 dollars for a screen breaking which wasn't his or her fault, but still goes on to say "they said they might refund it later" and "the repair was quick". The rationalisation is painful to read.

To be clear, it's completely unacceptable they are charging for this repair. My intent was to give some perspective on how the repair process went overall, I needed the device back for work.

While apart from the cracked screen issue the hardware is amazing in my opinion, the overall software issues make using macOS painful sometimes (processes running at high CPU -- now mostly offloaded to the efficiency cores, WebKit views having issues loading, anything syncing to iCloud sometimes not working, sometimes working on the 2nd try, Messages/Apple Mail search only finding some of the messages, audio crackling issues with wired headphones/AirPods/built-in speaker, etc.)

I had a warranty on my Lenovo laptop included for which a guy came to my house and replaced the defective part at no extra cost - within 3 days of reporting it and almost 3 years after buying the laptop.

The laptop cost me around 1200 Euro in total.

> if I had broken the screen

But the whole point is that it's Apple's fault that these screens are breaking, not the users'.

What boggles my mind is why you didn't get a computer with a Centrino Core 2 Duo with an integrated graphics card.

> Ryzen 7/RX 570

At this point just buy yourself a couple of used computers.

May I ask how long the battery lasts on your your Ryzen 7/RX 570 Linux PC?

You can last a "full day" on AAA batteries. A manageable configuration is likely double-suitcase with copper link, each contains 10000 Alkaline AAA batteries.

A CMOS battery lasts probably something around 5 years.

Does it scale down your graphics and sound to look like Tiger handheld LCD games when you're gaming on the CMOS battery?

I plug it in just the same way I'd do with a gaming laptop.

The cheapest comparable desktop display costs $1500 (27 inch)...