Greg Chapman wrote:
> You appear to be confusing Netbook and Notebook.
Not confusing, comparing. And apart from the missing optical drive the
netbook comes out trupms when compared to a not quite so new notebook,
and that includes the twice as big hard drive.
> do make them impractical for extensive graphics,
> video and audio work,
And how many people actually do any of those on any kind of machine
except when gaming?
> simple word processing, spreadsheet and similar applications.
Quite, though TeX and big databases can be far from simple and in my
case there is some radiocarbon dating, presentation, geographical
information system, not to forget scanning, OCR and PDF-making.
It was in the early seventies, when you could compare serious work
computers and limited low power hobby home computers, today serious work
is at the lower end of power requirements and gaming at the top.
Around 1979 I wrote down the specs of the big central computer in the
Cologne university computing centre. I can't find it right now, but I
believe it was surpassed by about the 486 generation of PCs.
As to data, yes I have 15 GB of music, 150 GB of radio plays, and 15 GB
of family media, but my biggest serious database, the whole earth
elevation from satellite data, is about 20 GB. So you need to have a
strange frame of reference to call a hard disk limit of 160 GB small.
Of course marketing will tell you otherwise ...