Chromebook or laptop

EveryWhere

benson1980 wrote: »

Quite often I will cast a stream to my tv and then browse the internet, to answer the question above

So something completely different.
You aren't playing the video on your Chromebook. You are casting it to your TV.
I was writing about playing Full HD video on the Chromebook and it stuttering.

I have no argument with you at all. I'm simply putting these points forward on behalf of the OP.
The OP asked the question on a technical forum and I'm putting forward my technical arguments and opinions.
You are welcome to put yours forward too. I take no offence whatsoever.:cool:

benson1980

EveryWhere wrote: »

So something completely different.
You aren't playing the video on your Chromebook. You are casting it to your TV.
I was writing about playing Full HD video on the Chromebook and it stuttering.

I have no argument with you at all. I'm simply putting these points forward on behalf of the OP.
The OP asked the question on a technical forum and I'm putting forward my technical arguments and opinions.
You are welcome to put yours forward too. I take no offence whatsoever.:cool:

No. When you stream something, you can cast the streaming tab to your chromecast.

No idea about HD stuttering. Again I stream loads of 1080p videos and have no problems

EveryWhere

benson1980 wrote: »

No. When you stream something, you can cast the streaming tab to your chromecast.

No idea about HD stuttering. Again I stream loads of 1080p videos and have no problems

No, my friend. You are confusing Streaming and Casting.

benson1980

EveryWhere wrote: »

No, my friend. You are confusing Streaming and Casting.

I'm not your friend and it is definitely streaming. And casting said stream.

arciere

EveryWhere wrote: »

The problem is that you can get a far superior devices these days for the same price.

And that's what I said too, but this is not a battle. No one here said that Chromebooks are more powerful than 'normal' laptops. If they did, you could argue that, but honestly it always looks like you are at war with all the people that prefer something different than you do.
That being said, I'm not going to post in this thread anymore, I don't think there's anything valuable I can add to the discussion.

EveryWhere

benson1980 wrote: »

I'm not your friend and it is definitely streaming. And casting said stream.

Now you are complaining about me using pleasant language. Once again it demonstrates that you are bringing personal emotions into a technical discussion.

No, it is not Streaming. You don't know what you are talking about, so you attempt to obfuscate.

The TV is streaming the content. The Chromebook is Casting, If you are playing the content on the Chromebook via an Internet connection, then you would be Streaming on the Chromebook. You are not, the content is being Streamed on the TV.
Just like NetFlix, Amazon Prime etc You are streaming the content. So if you are playing NetFlix content on your Chromebook, you would be streaming.
But you are not, you are simply casting.

I know all about it as someone gave me their old Chromecast.

EveryWhere

arciere wrote: »

And that's what I said too, but this is not a battle. No one here said that Chromebooks are more powerful than 'normal' laptops. If they did, you could argue that, but honestly it always looks like you are at war with all the people that prefer something different than you do.
That being said, I'm not going to post in this thread anymore, I don't think there's anything valuable I can add to the discussion.

I agree.
The question is Chromebook or Laptop? My argument is that there is no point nor advantage to a Chromebook.
Nothing personal.
I am arguing about an inanimate object. You are sore because your 'advice' was also the subject of scrutiny by other members, including myself.

benson1980

EveryWhere wrote: »

Now you are complaining about me using pleasant language. Once again it demonstrates that you are bringing personal emotions into a technical discussion.

No, it is not Streaming. You don't know what you are talking about, so you attempt to obfuscate.

The TV is streaming the content. The Chromebook is Casting, If you are playing the content on the Chromebook via an Internet connection, then you would be Streaming on the Chromebook. You are not, the content is being Streamed on the TV.
Just like NetFlix, Amazon Prime etc You are streaming the content. So if you are playing NetFlix content on your Chromebook, you would be streaming.
But you are not, you are simply casting.

I know all about it as someone gave me their old Chromecast.

It streams on the chromebook as well.

EveryWhere

benson1980 wrote: »

It streams on the chromebook as well.

The suggestion was that you were Streaming on the Chromebook at the same time as Browsing. This is not the case.
You then described Casting from the Chromebook to your TV and Browsing at the same time.
Two completely different things.

Either way, you can do exactly the same thing with any laptop.

My point is only that there is no benefit to the OP spending a similar amount for a vastly inferior Chromebook, as they would spend on say this Dell Latitude E7240 Ultrabook for £180

Intel Core i5-4200U CPU 3M Cache, up to 2.6GHz
4GB DDR3 RAM
128GB SSD Hard Disk
12.5" Full HD Touchscreen with Webcam
Sim card slot for data roaming
UK Keyboard
UK AC Adapter Supplied

I'm shocked that they are even cogitating on the matter.

The Chromebook in question has no Touchscreen, vastly inferior hardware, no SIM slot, eMMC as opposed to SSD proper, standard TN HD screen, as opposed to Full HD IPS Touchscreen.

Perhaps that makes it more clear as to why I am astounded that they are even considering the paying of much the same for such a vastly inferior Chromebook.

You have to remember that this is a technical forum, not just a forum for personal opinions.

So I will happily argue the technical points.

Here an example of a review of the IPS screen again a standard TN panel, the likes of that is installed to the Chromebook;

It is needless to say that the Full HD display of the E7240 Touch is orders of magnitude better than the modest original 768p screen. Potential buyers must be aware that they are not only getting a denser display for more screen real-estate, but also touchscreen capability, edge-to-edge Gorilla Glass NBT, a superior IPS panel, better viewing angles and a much brighter display with better colors and higher contrast. Texts and images are incredibly crisp and rich as a result that moving back to the less expensive TN model would feel like a cruel punishment.

Aside from the obvious productivity benefits of a higher resolution, the more powerful display backlight should not be underrated. At a measured average of almost 400 nits, the E7240 Touch is almost twice as bright as a standard E7240 (388.6 nits vs. 210.8 nits). Furthermore, this was accomplished without significantly affecting black levels, which in turn means a contrast level twice as high for the Touch model (682:1 vs. 334:1). When combined with a higher pixel density (176.23 PPI vs. 125.37), watching HD videos on a Dell business notebook is more fun than it ought to be.

wilson1973

I ended up looking at a 14" chromebook,but then have had a change of heart as this Dell does look good and I did want a nice screen,it's a little smaller but I suppose that makes it that little more portable,I have contacted the vendor and enquired about the condition of the unit.
I think I'm so used to windows the chromebook could lead to me pulling out whats left of my hair,I did note in quite a few ads on Ebay some people were selling nearly new chromebooks as they couldn't get their heads around the OS,some people are better with change than others