laptop audio

Re: "I am not convinced that there is a decline in built quality either"

If you have been taking apart a variety of models made over a 15-year
period, your doubts about that would disappear very quickly. They don't
build them like they used to. It's only partly cost related, the
pressure to make things smaller and lighter (and, especially, thinner)
also contributes. The circuitry, the ICs and other components, are not
the problem. It's the overall mechanical assembly, everything from the
thickness of the motherboard and the thickness of the foil traces to the
all-plastic (thin, cheap plastic) cases. The build quality is not what
it used to be. Again, the problem is not the components (which includes
the hard drives), it's how those components are assembled.



BillW50 wrote:
> In news:hclr0h$thk$,
> Barry Watzman typed on Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:34:06 -0500:
>> I have worked for laptop manufacturers, service laptops and teach IT
>> (specifically A+ certification and networking courses) at a local
>> college.
>> I disagree with the part of your post which stated "components that
>> are underspecified or are not tested for value accuracy"; but I do
>> agree with "today's laptops are much more poorly built than older
>> models".
>>
>> The differences are not components or specifications, but rather what
>> I call "build quality". The decline in "build quality" comes from
>> pressure to cut down on cost, weight and size, all of which contribute
>> to systems that are electrically well designed but which are
>> mechanically flimsy and of inferior quality compared to the way that
>> laptops were built 4 to 8 years ago.
>
> I don't know... as computers are always going to get more powerful and
> less expensive over time. And I am not convinced that there is a decline
> in built quality either. As laptops have also improved over the years
> too. Like getting rid of florescent lamps and inverters and trading them
> for a row of bright LEDs. Which are much more reliable and not as
> sensitive to shock.
>
> Speaking about not sensitive to shock, we are only a few years away from
> SSDs replacing old mechanical hard drives. I too also believe this is
> far better than the older method. And speaking of mechanical hard
> drives, these too have been improved over the years. Some even sport
> anti-shock features. They have also increased in capacity and also
> dropped in price.
>
> Take my old Epson PX-8 built back in 1984. I like to think of it as the
> first netbook. As it is about the same size and shape. But the display
> is terrible and it is heavy. Besides it is very limited compared to
> today's standards. Although it is well built, nonetheless. Although it
> also cost $2000 (including the RAMDrive and extras) back then. I do love
> the Epson's keyboard, but for that price you should get a great
> keyboard. Even then and now though, I would have traded it for one of
> today's netbooks in a heartbeat. ;-)
>

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:34:06 -0500, Barry Watzman
<> wrote:

:>I have worked for laptop manufacturers, service laptops and teach IT
:>(specifically A+ certification and networking courses) at a local college.
:>
:>I disagree with the part of your post which stated "components that are
:>underspecified or are not tested for value accuracy"; but I do agree
:>with "today's laptops are much more poorly built than older models".
:>
:>The differences are not components or specifications, but rather what I
:>call "build quality". The decline in "build quality" comes from
:>pressure to cut down on cost, weight and size, all of which contribute
:>to systems that are electrically well designed but which are
:>mechanically flimsy and of inferior quality compared to the way that
:>laptops were built 4 to 8 years ago.

I'll have to agree with you there. My last 10 years of employment
before retiring around 3 years ago was as a senior tech at a Toshiba
Premier ASP. I was there when Toshiba made the transition from
notebooks being designed and built by Toshiba to notebooks being
speced by Toshiba and being designed and built by Compal. This was
followed by Toshiba using other Taiwanese ODS like Inventec, Quanta
and ASUStek.

During the Toshbia designed and built days we saw more notebooks in
for service that had software issues and not failed hardware. Once
they went over to the ODMs we saw just the opposite. Either outright
hardware failures like the rear mounted ac adapter jack that was
soldered directly to the system board and easily broke off damaging
the system board beyond normal repair or poorly designed cooling
systems that were all but impossible for the end user to keep clean
and working correctly. Also virtually all the class action lawsuits
that Toshiba was hit with in those days were about ODM designed and
bult models.

me/2

In news:hcnkd7$kcu$,
Barry Watzman typed on Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:53:40 -0500:
> Re: "I am not convinced that there is a decline in built quality
> either"
> If you have been taking apart a variety of models made over a 15-year
> period, your doubts about that would disappear very quickly. They
> don't build them like they used to. It's only partly cost related,
> the pressure to make things smaller and lighter (and, especially,
> thinner) also contributes. The circuitry, the ICs and other
> components, are not the problem. It's the overall mechanical
> assembly, everything from the thickness of the motherboard and the
> thickness of the foil traces to the all-plastic (thin, cheap plastic)
> cases. The build quality is not what it used to be. Again, the
> problem is not the components (which includes the hard drives), it's
> how those components are assembled.

Well I have been taking them apart for the past 15 years. And yes, I
have seen what you are talking about. Although not everything has gone
that way. For example, Asus President didn't want the EeePCs to have
that cheap feeling. So they made sure it had great solid lid hinges. And
that was a weak point of laptops even some 15 years ago.

Another trick Asus did to save on weight was to use the keyboard as a
heatsink. As why add a heatsink when the keyboard would work too? I
believe this was another great idea. Although the PCB are indeed very
thin.

--
Bill
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
Windows XP SP2

In news:,
me/2 typed on Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:47:09 -0700:
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:34:06 -0500, Barry Watzman
> <> wrote:
>
>>> I have worked for laptop manufacturers, service laptops and teach IT
>>> (specifically A+ certification and networking courses) at a local
>>> college.
>>>
>>> I disagree with the part of your post which stated "components that
>>> are underspecified or are not tested for value accuracy"; but I do
>>> agree
>>> with "today's laptops are much more poorly built than older models".
>>>
>>> The differences are not components or specifications, but rather
>>> what I call "build quality". The decline in "build quality" comes
>>> from
>>> pressure to cut down on cost, weight and size, all of which
>>> contribute
>>> to systems that are electrically well designed but which are
>>> mechanically flimsy and of inferior quality compared to the way that
>>> laptops were built 4 to 8 years ago.
>
> I'll have to agree with you there. My last 10 years of employment
> before retiring around 3 years ago was as a senior tech at a Toshiba
> Premier ASP. I was there when Toshiba made the transition from
> notebooks being designed and built by Toshiba to notebooks being
> speced by Toshiba and being designed and built by Compal. This was
> followed by Toshiba using other Taiwanese ODS like Inventec, Quanta
> and ASUStek.
>
> During the Toshbia designed and built days we saw more notebooks in
> for service that had software issues and not failed hardware. Once
> they went over to the ODMs we saw just the opposite. Either outright
> hardware failures like the rear mounted ac adapter jack that was
> soldered directly to the system board and easily broke off damaging
> the system board beyond normal repair or poorly designed cooling
> systems that were all but impossible for the end user to keep clean
> and working correctly. Also virtually all the class action lawsuits
> that Toshiba was hit with in those days were about ODM designed and
> bult models.
>
> me/2

Well I know what you both are saying. But not everything was too rosy
back then either. As what about the old Toshiba 1950CS 486 laptops built
in '94? Toshiba didn't have fans in them yet and in a few years the
power regulators cooked themselves to death.

Or what about my Toshiba 2595XDVD laptops ('99 era)? Both of them would
just suddenly freeze up about twice a week. I would lose all of my
unsaved work. That was really annoying as I killed power and rebooted.
Even Linux users complained about it. So it wasn't Windows. Years later
I discovered all one has to do to unlock the computer was to hit the
Function key. Boy I wish I had known that years earlier. :-(

--
Bill
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
Windows XP SP2

You touched on a couple of things that I've noticed, as I also work
mostly on Toshiba (followed by Dell, Gateway and Lenovo).

Actually, I had more problems with AC adapter sockets on motherboards
themselves back in the old ("Toshiba built") days. That is the one --
the ONLY -- area where I think things got better (almost all later
Toshibas mount the DC input jack on the case rather than the motherboard
and have a short cable to the motherboard). The sockets still fail,
which is a user error (mechanical stress), but now you can replace the
socket without having to replace the motherboard (or remove and replace
a component soldered to the motherboard).

However, I've seen a HUGE number of motherboard failures in Toshiba
units that I didn't used to see. Apparently (because I don't do this
work myself, but I talk to the people I send motherboards out to) the
motherboards themselves are now so thin and flexible that the BGA
soldering of the chipsets to the motherboard fails. And I see a LOT
more problems with Toshiba units in this regard than with some other
brands (the A105 and A135 were particularly bad ... a huge number of
motherboard failures).

Another big issue -- and one that is pushing me away from Toshiba,
frankly -- is problems caused by overheating. The same guys who replace
BGA chipsets on motherboards tell me that occasionally they can just
"reflow" the chipset and it fixes the BGA connections. BUT, too often,
the chipset itself is fried by overheating. The chipsets have heatsinks
also, in most modern laptops. But when the cooling system fails (e.g.
the fan and heatsink become clogged with dirt, dust and hair), the CPUs
handle it relatively gracefully (they "throttle" themselves and prevent
their own destruction) but the chipsets don't handle it so well and are
often destroyed. Not a huge difference between Toshiba and other brands
in that regard, EXCEPT .... Dell and Lenovo and even Gateway provide a
door (removeable panel) on the bottom of the laptop explicitly for
cleaning the CPU cooling system (heatsink and fan). Toshiba used to do
that in some older models (the A40's, for example), but in the newer
units (again, starting, it seems, with the A100/105 series) they don't.
THERE IS NO WAY TO CLEAN THE CPU HEATSINK AND FAN, other than a total
disassembly of the unit (remove the motherboard from the case, because
the CPU is now on the bottom of the motherboard in most units). Of
course, this never happens, and we have, again, a huge number of
motherboard failures. [When I do disassemble a unit, it's not unusual
to find a couple of CUBIC INCHES of "hairball", often so bad that the
fan blades no longer are even capable of turning.]

What's sad is that this stuff is just plain dumb. There is no reason
for it, it doesn't really save anything, but "that's the way they are".

For no apparent reason.


me/2 wrote:

>
> I'll have to agree with you there. My last 10 years of employment
> before retiring around 3 years ago was as a senior tech at a Toshiba
> Premier ASP. I was there when Toshiba made the transition from
> notebooks being designed and built by Toshiba to notebooks being
> speced by Toshiba and being designed and built by Compal. This was
> followed by Toshiba using other Taiwanese ODS like Inventec, Quanta
> and ASUStek.
>
> During the Toshbia designed and built days we saw more notebooks in
> for service that had software issues and not failed hardware. Once
> they went over to the ODMs we saw just the opposite. Either outright
> hardware failures like the rear mounted ac adapter jack that was
> soldered directly to the system board and easily broke off damaging
> the system board beyond normal repair or poorly designed cooling
> systems that were all but impossible for the end user to keep clean
> and working correctly. Also virtually all the class action lawsuits
> that Toshiba was hit with in those days were about ODM designed and
> bult models.
>
> me/2

"Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
news:hcnkd7$kcu$...
> Re: "I am not convinced that there is a decline in built quality either"
>
> If you have been taking apart a variety of models made over a 15-year
> period, your doubts about that would disappear very quickly. They don't
> build them like they used to. It's only partly cost related, the pressure
> to make things smaller and lighter (and, especially, thinner) also
> contributes. The circuitry, the ICs and other components, are not the
> problem. It's the overall mechanical assembly, everything from the
> thickness of the motherboard and the thickness of the foil traces to the
> all-plastic (thin, cheap plastic) cases. The build quality is not what it
> used to be. Again, the problem is not the components (which includes the
> hard drives), it's how those components are assembled.
>

The dimensions that you refer to for the motherboard are a function of the
frequency of the signals that the traces are required to convey. As the
various clock speeds rise, the traces have to become narrower to minimise
the series inductance. At the same time the traces have to be closer to the
ground plane to allow the signals to propagate with the minimum of
reflections. This points to thinner motherboards with narrower traces. I
agree with you about the plastic mouldings though. Breakage is all too
common, but worse is the tendency for the lid to crack around the hinges
precisely because there is unsufficient meat to withstand the flexing as the
lid is opened and closed.

>
>
> BillW50 wrote:
>> In news:hclr0h$thk$,
>> Barry Watzman typed on Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:34:06 -0500:
>>> I have worked for laptop manufacturers, service laptops and teach IT
>>> (specifically A+ certification and networking courses) at a local
>>> college.
>>> I disagree with the part of your post which stated "components that
>>> are underspecified or are not tested for value accuracy"; but I do
>>> agree with "today's laptops are much more poorly built than older
>>> models".
>>>
>>> The differences are not components or specifications, but rather what
>>> I call "build quality". The decline in "build quality" comes from
>>> pressure to cut down on cost, weight and size, all of which contribute
>>> to systems that are electrically well designed but which are
>>> mechanically flimsy and of inferior quality compared to the way that
>>> laptops were built 4 to 8 years ago.
>>
>> I don't know... as computers are always going to get more powerful and
>> less expensive over time. And I am not convinced that there is a decline
>> in built quality either. As laptops have also improved over the years
>> too. Like getting rid of florescent lamps and inverters and trading them
>> for a row of bright LEDs. Which are much more reliable and not as
>> sensitive to shock.
>>
>> Speaking about not sensitive to shock, we are only a few years away from
>> SSDs replacing old mechanical hard drives. I too also believe this is far
>> better than the older method. And speaking of mechanical hard drives,
>> these too have been improved over the years. Some even sport anti-shock
>> features. They have also increased in capacity and also dropped in price.
>>
>> Take my old Epson PX-8 built back in 1984. I like to think of it as the
>> first netbook. As it is about the same size and shape. But the display is
>> terrible and it is heavy. Besides it is very limited compared to today's
>> standards. Although it is well built, nonetheless. Although it also cost
>> $2000 (including the RAMDrive and extras) back then. I do love the
>> Epson's keyboard, but for that price you should get a great keyboard.
>> Even then and now though, I would have traded it for one of today's
>> netbooks in a heartbeat. ;-)
>>

The answers have certainly given me plenty to think about. I shall take a
"tinny" cd along to the store and ask to hear it played. If the sound is
not too bad then I think that I shall stick with the Acer.
I have speakers that I use with my present laptop but that is clumsy; they
are powered from mains; I see that some nowadays are powered from a usb
slot.
Thanks again.




"Richard Bonner" <> wrote in message
news:hch86p$er5$...
> Stewart () wrote:
>> I want to buy a new 15" laptop and one of the main criteria is that it
>> should produce reasonable quality sound when we are listening to the bbc
>> iplayer, dvds etc..
>
> (Snip)
>> The Acer laptops are shown as having dolby sound but I am not sure if
>> this makes a difference. it is not easy to try them out in a store
>> otherwise I would take along a cd and listen to that.
>
> *** I would think that any salesperson would allow customers to try
> out audio if it means a sale.
>
>
>> Does anyone know of a brand that has reasonable sound output? My price
>> range is between £450 and £550.
>
> *** The likelihood today of getting decent sound in anything in that
> price range is low. They make them as cheaply as possible. If you want to
> get a pro model, they might sound better but will cost you considerably
> more.
>
> I think the suggestions here regarding external speakers may end up
> being your best solution as far as sound goes, but would reduce
> portability, and would extend the set-up time. )-:
>
> --
> Richard Bonner
> http://www.chebucto.ca/~ak621/DOS/

I was referring to the THICKNESS of the copper layer, not the WIDTH of
the traces (I was also referring to the thickness of the board material
itself (the fiberglass)). While there is some slight issue with regard
to frequency, this is primarily a quality issue, and when the layers get
very thin, they are more prone to being cracked if the circuit board is
flexed.

Even so, the dimensions have very little to do with the frequency of the
signals. Not nothing, but not that much.

[A good example is Gigabyte modern Core i5 and i7 motherboards, which
make a specific point of their "3 oz copper" ((weight of copper per unit
of area) which is quite thick as circuit boards go) and thickness ....
and these are clearly higher frequency boards than laptops.]


M.I.5¾ wrote:
> "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
> news:hcnkd7$kcu$...
>> Re: "I am not convinced that there is a decline in built quality either"
>>
>> If you have been taking apart a variety of models made over a 15-year
>> period, your doubts about that would disappear very quickly. They don't
>> build them like they used to. It's only partly cost related, the pressure
>> to make things smaller and lighter (and, especially, thinner) also
>> contributes. The circuitry, the ICs and other components, are not the
>> problem. It's the overall mechanical assembly, everything from the
>> thickness of the motherboard and the thickness of the foil traces to the
>> all-plastic (thin, cheap plastic) cases. The build quality is not what it
>> used to be. Again, the problem is not the components (which includes the
>> hard drives), it's how those components are assembled.
>>
>
> The dimensions that you refer to for the motherboard are a function of the
> frequency of the signals that the traces are required to convey. As the
> various clock speeds rise, the traces have to become narrower to minimise
> the series inductance. At the same time the traces have to be closer to the
> ground plane to allow the signals to propagate with the minimum of
> reflections. This points to thinner motherboards with narrower traces. I
> agree with you about the plastic mouldings though. Breakage is all too
> common, but worse is the tendency for the lid to crack around the hinges
> precisely because there is unsufficient meat to withstand the flexing as the
> lid is opened and closed.
>
>>
>> BillW50 wrote:
>>> In news:hclr0h$thk$,
>>> Barry Watzman typed on Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:34:06 -0500:
>>>> I have worked for laptop manufacturers, service laptops and teach IT
>>>> (specifically A+ certification and networking courses) at a local
>>>> college.
>>>> I disagree with the part of your post which stated "components that
>>>> are underspecified or are not tested for value accuracy"; but I do
>>>> agree with "today's laptops are much more poorly built than older
>>>> models".
>>>>
>>>> The differences are not components or specifications, but rather what
>>>> I call "build quality". The decline in "build quality" comes from
>>>> pressure to cut down on cost, weight and size, all of which contribute
>>>> to systems that are electrically well designed but which are
>>>> mechanically flimsy and of inferior quality compared to the way that
>>>> laptops were built 4 to 8 years ago.
>>> I don't know... as computers are always going to get more powerful and
>>> less expensive over time. And I am not convinced that there is a decline
>>> in built quality either. As laptops have also improved over the years
>>> too. Like getting rid of florescent lamps and inverters and trading them
>>> for a row of bright LEDs. Which are much more reliable and not as
>>> sensitive to shock.
>>>
>>> Speaking about not sensitive to shock, we are only a few years away from
>>> SSDs replacing old mechanical hard drives. I too also believe this is far
>>> better than the older method. And speaking of mechanical hard drives,
>>> these too have been improved over the years. Some even sport anti-shock
>>> features. They have also increased in capacity and also dropped in price.
>>>
>>> Take my old Epson PX-8 built back in 1984. I like to think of it as the
>>> first netbook. As it is about the same size and shape. But the display is
>>> terrible and it is heavy. Besides it is very limited compared to today's
>>> standards. Although it is well built, nonetheless. Although it also cost
>>> $2000 (including the RAMDrive and extras) back then. I do love the
>>> Epson's keyboard, but for that price you should get a great keyboard.
>>> Even then and now though, I would have traded it for one of today's
>>> netbooks in a heartbeat. ;-)
>>>
>
>

I was referring to the THICKNESS of the copper layer, not the WIDTH of
the traces (I was also referring to the thickness of the board material
itself (the fiberglass)). While there is some slight issue with regard
to frequency, this is primarily a quality issue, and when the layers get
very thin, they are more prone to being cracked if the circuit board is
flexed.

Even so, the dimensions have very little to do with the frequency of the
signals. Not nothing, but not that much.

[A good example is Gigabyte modern Core i5 and i7 motherboards, which
make a specific point of their "3 oz copper" ((weight of copper per unit
of area) which is quite thick as circuit boards go) and thickness ....
and these are clearly higher frequency boards than laptops.]

M.I.5¾ wrote:
> "Barry Watzman" <> wrote in message
> news:hcnkd7$kcu$...
>> Re: "I am not convinced that there is a decline in built quality either"
>>
>> If you have been taking apart a variety of models made over a 15-year
>> period, your doubts about that would disappear very quickly. They don't
>> build them like they used to. It's only partly cost related, the pressure
>> to make things smaller and lighter (and, especially, thinner) also
>> contributes. The circuitry, the ICs and other components, are not the
>> problem. It's the overall mechanical assembly, everything from the
>> thickness of the motherboard and the thickness of the foil traces to the
>> all-plastic (thin, cheap plastic) cases. The build quality is not what it
>> used to be. Again, the problem is not the components (which includes the
>> hard drives), it's how those components are assembled.
>>
>
> The dimensions that you refer to for the motherboard are a function of the
> frequency of the signals that the traces are required to convey. As the
> various clock speeds rise, the traces have to become narrower to minimise
> the series inductance. At the same time the traces have to be closer to the
> ground plane to allow the signals to propagate with the minimum of
> reflections. This points to thinner motherboards with narrower traces. I
> agree with you about the plastic mouldings though. Breakage is all too
> common, but worse is the tendency for the lid to crack around the hinges
> precisely because there is unsufficient meat to withstand the flexing as the
> lid is opened and closed.
>

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 19:54:40 -0500, Barry Watzman
<> wrote:

[snipped]

:>What's sad is that this stuff is just plain dumb. There is no reason
:>for it, it doesn't really save anything, but "that's the way they are".
:>
:>For no apparent reason.

Not to sound cynical but to me there is a very apparent reason. Built
that way they will, in most cases, work fine until the end of the
usual 1 year warranty period. Once it's no longer the manufacturer's
problem they would just as soon you buy a new unit than pay to have
one repaired. For example, that's why in quite a few cases the cost to
have a display or system board replaced is greater than the original
cost of the notebook. One thing I did notice in my 10+ years of
working exclusively on Toshiba is that the "business class" notebooks
that typically came with a 3 year warranty tended to have much fewer
hardware issues than the "consumer class" notebooks that typically
came with a 1 year warranty. Also the business class systems were the
last to get turned over to the ODMs at which time the standard
warranty dropped to 1 year on quite a few of them.

BTW, I'm still using a 7 year old Toshiba 5205 that still works as
good as new except for 1 speaker failing. It has a 2.4ghz mobile P4,
1gb RAM and a 1600x1200 WXGA display. Other than having to use the
standard vga driver it runs the windows 7 rc about as good as it ran
the original windows xp pro. There is no windows 7 support for some of
the proprietary stuff like the SD card slot, the bluetooth module, the
select bay card reader or the select bay tv tuner so eventually the
factory software will be going back on.

me/2