Is there a way of knowing from the hardware/chipset if the hdmi out will work?
Does this work with Intel HD3000 uma graphics?

That's something that would be difficult to test with a live cd in a store.

I appreciate that you asked for *good*, instead of *best*, which is so much more a subjective criteria that it really wouldn't be worth responding to.

Although your requirements will indeed accept a wide variety of recommendations here, I would like to mention a couple of points that you might want to consider accordingly, since these are major factors aside from simply the ability to run Linux.

First, you would be hard pressed to find a laptop or computer of any kind that won't run Linux, or some other UNIX. With the efforts of Debian and NetBSD, the answer really is almost always, "YES", when the question is "Does it run....*?".

Next, I think that one should look at the CPU itself, before you even consider brand or which model numbers are best supported at this time - since virtually all machines are increasingly very well supported as time passes (considering the Open Source development curve).

For example, Would you prefer an AMD or an Intel box?

Next, you have presented a price point - a price point that will easily produce scores of netbooks w/Atom processors out of the box as well as a plethora of used high end multi-media laptops. You can find dozens of relatively powerful laptops for $399 -$599 w/warranties that rival the original warranties offered for them when they were new - at a thousand to $1500 less than they were two or three years ago.

A requirement that many folks don't consider when either asking or answering a question like yours is, "Do you want a laptop that doesn't pay for another copy of Microsoft Windows?".

It doesn't even occur to many people that when they buy a laptop in the spirit of running and supporting Open Source software, that you are actually paying Microsoft anyway.

When you purchase your laptop for Linux, does Microsoft care? Are they rooting for you? Are they just as happy that you chose Linux as someone else who intends to run Windows? Are you contributing to the Payroll in Redmond?

For me, this third point is probably the most important - at least when considering a new laptop. If I'm running UNIX, I most certainly don't want to pay for Windows, or contribute to Microsoft in the process. From there I typically disqualify about 85% of the vendors, because Linux really does run on pretty much everything.

ASUS, Sager, and MSI are great hardware platforms, yet you still have to be careful that a Windows license hasn't been paid for by the vendor - it isn't always obvious and you have to perform due diligence (If this is an important consideration for you).

I've included a screenshot that looks innocent enough, "Gee, Windows is included free!" NO, you are paying for it - even though you intend to run Linux instead.

This means that irrespective of the fact you are running Linux, you're paying for a copy of Microsoft, and so therefore statistically, you're part of the Windows running public, contributing to the silly fight that Microsoft has waged against free and open source software.

I'm including a link, below, which addresses these concerns, and you can indeed find vendors that haven't simply paid for and then stripped Windows from the machine, y3t the page is somewhat out of date and there are inaccuracies.

The political tides continue to ebb.

http://mcelrath.org/laptops.html

In Continuing, let's address the issue of whether purchasing an old laptop that originally included a Windows operating system is actually paying for a copy of Windows.

There's nothing you can do about whether the original vendor paid for a Windows license, but buying a recycled, used laptop w/o an OS doesn't have to entail buying yet another copy of Windows.

Pay attention to that, and many HPs and Lenovo's, etc., are sold without supporting yet another Windows installation.

You might pay a bit more for a machine whose vendor hasn't paid for a Microsoft license, but if that is the cost for the privilige of not promoting the continuance of an operating system you're not going to use then that is an acceptable expense, IMO.

Here's a few more links to peruse:

http://www.usedlaptops.com/

http://www.laptopsunder.net/

http://www.usedlaptopcomputers.com/

http://laptops100.com/

the list goes on and on...

There's also Pricewatch - if you're mostly concerned with the cost alone:

http://www.pricewatch.com/notebooks/

And finally, if you buy a laptop from a vendor that has paid for a copy of Windows by virtue of your purchasing said laptop, you may even want to consider making that Windows purchase a wash by also actually purchasing a copy of Linux too:

Support Linux by purchasing a subscription


I hope that helps

Attached Thumbnails

 

Bare metal machines, including laptops can cost more money then those with M$ installed. The mystery confounds me. All major manufacturers have signed their souls over to the dark side in Redmond. Accept it.

Geek Squad will be more then happy to format and wipe the hard drive for you, for a little extra $$. Of course, the install media can nuke the entire drive as well. Just follow the menu.

I would look at hardware more then brand names. I'd get something that is NOT bleeding edge.

Generally I build AMD laptops with Nvidia processors. Add as much RAM with the highest speed that you can afford. After selecting which distro you want to try, be sure to download both the 64 bit and 32 bit versions. If the 64 bit version works with all your needs and hardware, use it. At Best Buy, the laptops themselves have the type of CPU, graphics and so on. The Intel CPUs also work, but I think you pay more for them.

Personally I would avoid Celerons, Samprons, ATI graphics, and anything else to exotic. Keep it simple. The lower end processors are just slow. The ATI graphics can work serious mischief when trying to get it to work with Linux. NVidia graphics is totally idiot proof. Thats why I like it.

I would not think of using any other laptop for Linux except an IBM Thinkpad. Not only are they built very rugged for business and home use, but they are also compatible with most distros. For example, I have been running Ubuntu 10.10 for quite some time and it works perfectly out of the box. I've also run at least a dozen other LiveCD distros and they also run quite well. You can get a really good refurbished Thinkpad on eBay for well under $500. I've owned 3 Thinkpads - an R51 and two T61s. I recently purchased a T61 on eBay for under $200 and it runs well. After using Linux for nearly 2 years, I will never go back to Windows! Best wishes with Linux!

It is no mystery, it is simple economics, they might sell one bare system for every 1000 Windows systems they sell, if that. The higher the quantities they produce, the lower the overall costs so the cheaper they can sell them.

They still have to image the hard drives, since their deal with MS dictates that every system must come with an OS, even if it is not Windows, so it isn't like they are skipping a step of manufacturing. This is why you see systems with FreeDOS and the useless Linpus Linux (not Linpus Lite that came on the Acer Aspire One), not because anyone wants to use those OSs, but because there must be something on the drive.

Also, all of that wonderful 30 day trial crapware they put on Windows systems, they don't just do that to be annoying, they do it because companies pay them to do it. So that offsets the cost of the license even further.

There are software programs at Best Buy that erase hard drives and securely delete data. Quite a few types exist. If something has a bootable CD-Rom or USB stick included, it is well worth the price.....


..... even if you can nuke a hard drive and put something else on it.