|
|
#1
10-06-2005, 04:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
dell 9300 vs. 6000
i know both of these support wuxga screens with 1900x1200 resolution. but is it worth the extra $$$ for the 9300's 17" screen vs. the 6000's 15.4" screen if they both have the same reso? does the extra 1.6"s of screen really help the eyes or is the 9300 just too damn bulky? any other benefits to shelling out extra $$$ for the 9300? i would only be using it for poker. any thoughts would be helpful...
|
|
#2
10-06-2005, 04:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: dell 9300 vs. 6000
I have the 9300 and am quite happy with it. I think if the physical screen was smaller, at that resolution things would be too tiny for my taste. I haven't seen the 6000 in action though. You could always go the cheaper route and return it if you don't like the size of the display.
|
|
#4
10-06-2005, 06:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: dell 9300 vs. 6000
I also have a 9300, and am quite satisfied with it. I love the screen resolution, and feel that the same resolution on a smaller monitor would squeeze things too much. I haven't had a problem reading text or playing poker on this machine, but feel I may have a problem on the 6000 (but have never actually tried it).
It is a bit bulky compared to most other laptops, but I still carry it with me pretty much wherever I go. Buy a nice backpack designed for 17in screen laptops and you'll be fine. It actually weighs less than the 15in powerbook I used to use.
|
|
#5
10-06-2005, 07:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: dell 9300 vs. 6000
I have a 9300 with the WXGA+ screen. Nice computer, but with this screen you can't get more than one table without overlap. Two tables aren't bad, though, with only slight overlap. I have been considering getting the 6000 with a WSXGA+ screen because I believe you could get 4 tables without overlap. Anyone know if that is true? Or would this require the WUXGA resolution on a 15.4" screen? For me, the WUXGA display on a 15.4 inch screen makes everything way too small.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
