The Inspiron 2200 is fairly well built and felt quite solid, especially compared to the Compaq offerings.  The unit has the most subtle and arguably sleek design out of the bunch, being completely constructed out of black plastic.  While the Gateway and Compaq designs make use of silver of varying shades and sometimes mixing in black, Dell's design is a lot more plain, and honestly, it works a lot better.  The design of the Inspiron 2200 is far more likely to age better and just has a lot less going on.  The Inspiron 2200 accepts that it isn't going to be the best looking laptop, especially not at this price point, while the others try too hard. 

The only downside to the Dell's exterior appearance is that the black plastic, despite having a matte finish, can show oils from fingerprints without much difficulty.  If you can get over that (and/or deal with the cleaning aspect), then it's a bargain for a better looking notebook.

 

With the display closed, the Inspiron 2200 is, overall, the thickest notebook in this roundup, measuring in at 1.46".  The overall footprint of the notebook is more reasonable, however, at 13.0" x 10.6". 

The Inspiron 2200 had the absolute brightest display out of all 5 of the notebooks in this roundup. Unfortunately, the notebook only comes with a 14" XGA display, so although it may be bright, it isn't the highest resolution.  That being said, most fonts/font sizes are far more legible on the Dell's 14" XGA screen than the higher resolution displays used by the widescreen Compaq and Gateway competitors. So, if you aren't used to or comfortable with smaller text sizes, Dell's XGA display may not be a bad thing. 

In terms of brightness, the Inspiron 2200 at its brightest setting measured in at around 180 nits, while the rest of the systems were only able to hit in the 120 - 140 nit range; in other words, the difference is noticeable. 

Dell Inspiron 2200 Dell Usability
Comments Locked

50 Comments

View All Comments

  • Hacp - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    x200 graphics with/o dedicated memory.

    If you get x300 graphics with some dedicated memory, it should play some of hte latest games at halfway acceptable settings. Just dont' expect to be playing FPS smoothly though, but RPGs/rts should be fine. Racing should be fine too.
  • manno - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    me
  • LoneWolf15 - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    Interesting to note that even without Speedstep, the Celeron-M still has better battery life. Then again, didn't Intel change some designs in transistor-switching to make battery performance better even at full speed?

    One comment, more to notebook manufacturers: Where the heck is my Trackpoint mouse? I can't stand touchpads, which require me to take my fingers off the keyboard to use, when a trackpoint can be used almost simultaneously. I can type 75-80wpm, and don't find touchpads very efficient for this reason (my older but top-of-the-line-when-released Latitude C840 has both devices). Somebody, please bring back the Trackpoint!
  • Hacp - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    Also, why do you have to take your fingers of the keyboard to use the touchpad? I keep one hand on the keyboard, and one hand on the touchpad when using my computer. Rightclick is tap top right corner, leftclick is tap anywhere on the touchpad that doesn't involve the top right corner.
  • Zorba - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    I too hate touchpads and miss the old mouse sticks. I always rub the touchpad with my arm when typing and usually end up clicking some where I don't want to. It also takes me much longer to navigate with a touchpad and I usually accidently click something because I change the amount of pressure on the pad (I know you can turn the clicking off, but I still don't like the pad). It is a personal preference but I would like to at least be given the chance to pick between the two.
  • matthewfoley - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    Yeah, well I hate the mouse sticks. Who cares.
  • Zorba - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    The point the original poster and I were trying to make is manufacturers should include both devices, which a lot of them used to do.
  • Hacp - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    The battery life difference is most likely due to the ATI chipset and integrated graphics, which uses more power than intel EE.
  • Tamale - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    page 9's link to page 10 is shot
  • Tamale - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    nvm :]

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now