Vista is OK but uses a lot of resources on your computer. You can always install XP yourself once your get the notebook.

As far as economical with lots or speed, memory, etc.. it's usually hard to come by so if you want something economical you'll have to sacrifice some of those other requirements.

I have an HP myself -- HP Compaq 8510w [h10010.www1.hp.com] -- and it is very nice for what I need.

Thanks for help.

I think ~15" monitor is better than 17" and HP notebooks are better than Dell. But what is quality difference in HP notebook and HP Compaq notebook?

I don't understand why Lenovo is costliest.

Presently, I've a Dell notebook; I donno why people say good about HP for Dell but Dell is performing nice to me for 3 years and I think, I should consider Dell also, if for same thing, Dell is lesser price than HP. My budget is around $700, I don't want to waste much on electronics because its becomes cheaper continously.

I heard a lot of great feedback about Sony Vaio but I guess it is for graphic, multimedia artists, for non-developers, non-programmers.

What's best depends on what you want to use it for and how much you are willing to pay.

For me, it pretty much has to be Dell because they are virtually the only manufacturer of laptops with matte screens (instead of silly glossy screens). However, if you only work in soft light or are happy to see your own reflection, your choice is wider.

Kaled.

My need is for software development and programming.
So, a very fast machine (this means speed of processor, memory, bus) is good for me.

I hope Dell would be good for me because HP are costly, my budget is $700 and its not wise to spend too much on electronics.

Well, would like to know if opting Fedora core lieu Windows while purchase is possible? And will latest version of Fedora core is a good choice for a Windows addict? I'm a programmer so our remote machines or servers are always Linux, never Windows but for client machines or development of programs, we always use Windows XP.

My need is for software development and programming.
So, a very fast machine (this means speed of processor, memory, bus) is good for me.

That's what I do. Unless you are developing software that is specifically targeted at high-end machines, you don't need one yourself. However, if your development software is memory-hungry, be sure to cover that. You should also consider getting 64bit Vista and dual-booting with 32bit Vista and XP.

Kaled.

Thanks Kaled.

I also wanted to know is it possible if I keep Fedora Core 9, Win XP SP2 and Win Vista in multi-boot laptop.

Actually, I think Fedora Core is good to keep.
I'm though not sure about Windows Vista and what version, if or why it is needed for me?

Skip the multi-boot and grab a copy of VMware or Virtual PC from Microsoft. You can run multiple OSs off of the main OS without all the rebooting hassles.

64 bit Vista is fine for the main OS. You can run everything else off the virtual machine.

You can run multiple OSs off of the main OS without all the rebooting hassles.

VMware will be good for me as this is required in my current project also. [For e.g., once our server was down showing IP 0.0.0.0, someone did some VMware thing, and it got non-zero IP, it started working.]

I'll find out VMware information on Google search and with laptop vendor. If you can point me some links, it will be more easy. Actually, I heard VMware thing just 10 days before, when I got introduced into recent project, so I'm not knowing it.

Many thanks Bill.

When I ran some tests with Virtual PC, I concluded that if an operating system supports the hardware, it's better to dual-boot. Certainly, if you are developing graphic-intensive software, virtualized hardware may not be good enough. From memory, I think Virtual PC graphic "hardware" is based on an S3 chipset circa 1995.

Now, if I needed to test under Windows 98, Virtual PC would be perfect (because Windows 98 won't recognise modern hardware).

Of course, Virtual PC has other advantages, such as being able to create an isolated virtual machine for security purposes, but that's another discussion altogether.

Kaled.

Thank you Kaled.

This may be off topic but still: Can someone point me some links about Virtual PC, VMware and related networking/ hardware concepts?

I don't know anything about VMware and networking etc. ;- )
I'd been always at my desktop, in my job :- <

I've not tried VMWare but here's a link for Virtual PC
[microsoft.com...]

I only tried it fairly briefly. It worked quite well, ok for testing most stuff probably but I wouldn't want to use it when doing proper debugging work. It does some clever stuff like mapping wireless adapters into standard network adapters, but I can reboot in a couple of minutes and I mostly know where compatibility issues are likely to arise so I don't find I need it.

However, don't let me put you off, you may find you absolutely love it.

Kaled.

I've been using VMware for years and run it all day, every day. That's my sandbox for apps I don't want to let loose on my main machine. I also use it for testing software on different language OSs. It's great for trying things out as you can emulate different hardware setups or OS installs and then clone them out ad-infinitum.

The VMware site has a large and active community forum that could be a good resource for you.

I read that VMware are market leaders, doing better than Microsoft in machine virtualization, but do they provide free software to developers?

I hope, we're talking about making our simple personal use XP machine into a Virtual machine, so what should I download from [vmware.com...] ?

I pay for VMware workstation. I hear that the server version is free and does a good job.