1,492
edits
Difference between revisions of "ASUS Vivobook Pro 14 15 OLED"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
ASUS Vivobook Pro 14 15 OLED (view source)
Revision as of 12:25, 12 April 2022
, 12:25, 12 April 2022→Review
Andrei.boiu (talk | contribs) m (→Review) |
Andrei.boiu (talk | contribs) m (→Review) |
||
| Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
The storage selection is decent but it does not feature high performance SSDs but low-end PCIe NVME choices that are only slightly better than SATA models, being, again, far from the PRO moniker. It is true that affordable SSDs can be present on the lower end models, but the top of the line one should have a much better one. Just as important, 1TB SSDs seem quite on the low side for video editors, the 2TB choice should have been present. | The storage selection is decent but it does not feature high performance SSDs but low-end PCIe NVME choices that are only slightly better than SATA models, being, again, far from the PRO moniker. It is true that affordable SSDs can be present on the lower end models, but the top of the line one should have a much better one. Just as important, 1TB SSDs seem quite on the low side for video editors, the 2TB choice should have been present. | ||
The chassis seems reasonably well made but it does not have a frame stiff enough to improve survivability. Also, the lower case bends slightly when using the keyboard, making the typing experience not that pleasant, despite the overall good performance of the keyboard itself. The trackpad feels smooth and sensitive, being comfortable to use and generally precise enough. As is standard with most laptops, it is large and support multiple gestures. The sound system is decent, but falls short of expectations for a Harman/Kardon tuneup. The speakers sound reasonably fine but there is a clear lack of space and bass output while general reproduction does not shine in any other way. Microphone input is somewhat better than on some laptops, but still far behind even mid-range phones of 5 years ago. The integrated camera video quality is very poor, not having full HD resolution and being far from even cheap front smartphone cameras. | The chassis seems reasonably well made but it does not have a frame stiff enough to improve survivability. Also, the lower case bends slightly when using the keyboard, making the typing experience not that pleasant, despite the overall good performance of the keyboard itself. The trackpad feels smooth and sensitive, being comfortable to use and generally precise enough. As is standard with most laptops, it is large and support multiple gestures. | ||
The sound system is decent, but falls short of expectations for a Harman/Kardon tuneup. The speakers sound reasonably fine but there is a clear lack of space and bass output while general reproduction does not shine in any other way. Microphone input is somewhat better than on some laptops, but still far behind even mid-range phones of 5 years ago. The integrated camera video quality is very poor, not having full HD resolution and being far from even cheap front smartphone cameras. | |||
The port selection seems very poor for a pro laptop. There is no reasonable explanation for designing the laptop with 2 USB2 ports and a single TYPE A USB3 port. The USB2 ports have a too poor performance to be used in most cases and especially so on a laptop designed for work. Even 8 years ago some 12 inch laptops had 2 USB 3 ports, so there is no excuse for delivering a laptop with a single USB3 Type A port. | The port selection seems very poor for a pro laptop. There is no reasonable explanation for designing the laptop with 2 USB2 ports and a single TYPE A USB3 port. The USB2 ports have a too poor performance to be used in most cases and especially so on a laptop designed for work. Even 8 years ago some 12 inch laptops had 2 USB 3 ports, so there is no excuse for delivering a laptop with a single USB3 Type A port. | ||