COMMENTARY--Last week's report that laptops outsell desktop PCs did not make me happy. Don't get me wrong: I love laptops. I just don't think they should replace desktops as our primary computers. Here's why.
I was not thrilled last week to see that sales of notebook computers are now larger than the sales of desktops.
Not that I don't understand the attraction. Notebooks are, after all, romantic computing--in the sense that notebooks allow you to take your computer to someplace more romantic than your office. That is, as long as it's a romantic place indoors--notebook screens don't work outside, at least not for me.
So I guess taking a notebook to sunny Bora-Bora to write my columns on the beach is out of the question (and my travel budget).
Thanks to the wonders of Wi-Fi, I can now sit here in my easy chair writing this column in my den. I could take it down to the Starbucks over by the mall--except that the town I live in is so small that our Starbucks (of which there are two) aren't yet "wired" for wireless. But the coffee shop downtown is, and I could head there if I really wanted to get out of the house.
But what if I left my notebook there by accident? While a thief might (or might not) have trouble getting at the data on the machine, one thing is certain: I would have no access to the data. What would this cost me?
That's just one of the downsides of notebook computing--and, therefore, one of the reasons I don't think portables should replace desktops as our primary PCs.
Of course, it's possible to lose data on a desktop. But I think the average desktop is a much more secure data repository than the average notebook. Why? Besides the omnipresent danger of loss/theft, a notebook is also much less likely to be backed-up than a desktop. And, though I can't prove it, the rough-and-tumble nature of laptop life does seem to do in their hard drives faster than a placid desktop existence.
Microsoft hasn't done much to help in this regard. It would be nice, for example, if when I plopped my laptop on the desk, it would automatically synchronize files with one or more desktop machines, which themselves would background sync among themselves. That way, I'd have copies of my important files living on all my machines; if one machine crashed, I'd still be covered. To me, a computer that never loses a file is real "trustworthy" computing.
While Redmond doesn't love us enough to do all it could to prevent data loss, Cupertino apparently does. Apple already offers data backup through its iDisk online storage service. Yes, the service costs money, and, no, it isn't perfect. But every morning at 2:00 a.m., all my important documents are backed up to Apple's server in the sky.
Later this year, Apple will enhance iDisk to automatically make background copies of files while you are working, essentially doing a real-time synchronization of your important information. I already use iDisk as a repository of stuff I simply can't afford to lose, like chapters of the book I'm working on.
There are PC-based services that do this, though I doubt any are as integrated into the operating environment as Apple's. The only one I can recommend from personal experience is Connected. I'm also a big fan of CMS Peripherals's automatic backup system, which backs up Windows machines or Macs and can, in some cases, create fully bootable copies of your desktop or notebook hard drive.
Yes, you could always buy an external hard drive and back up your laptop using traditional utilities. But that violates the principle that the best protection just happens, regardless of what you do.
There's something else about notebook computing that bothers me: Companies that give employees notebooks instead of desktops. For the security reasons I've already mentioned, I'm not wild about the idea of hauling your work computer to and from the office every day. Yes, companies could back up these machines, but I doubt many make the effort.
It is also a real pain to realize you left the notebook at home, just as you sit down in the office. If given the choice, I'd rather opt for a desktop at the office, and work at home using either my own desktop, notebook, or both (as my budget allowed). That's how much I like finding my work computer already there when I arrive at the office.
My work machine should be set to store my files on a network server, which automatically gets backed up, making a hard-drive crash much more survivable than it would be otherwise.
You know why I think laptops are outselling desktops? Because they wear out faster and need to be replaced more frequently. Desktops, on the other hand, can be used pretty much until they rust--or until Microsoft provides enough new OS or application features to convince buyers to upgrade.
One way Microsoft could do that: Follow in Apple's footsteps and make data harder to lose.
What do you think? Should notebooks replace desktops? Have you made the switch -- or the switch back? Let us know at edit@zdnet.com.au.
The company i work for has all of our applications (including Office) on a Citrix server. I use my laptop at home with my cable internet connection to log onto the server, and do all my work, and save all my work, to the network drives in the office.
This way, i don't (and actually) cann't save any files locally. The only limitation to this, is i have to be online to work, i still find it a very convinient way to work