How important are the aesthetics of a computer in your buying decision?

After reading The Pulse on the HP ENVY 15 and HP ENVY 17, published on Wednsday on the www side of the operation, I began to think about the importance of aesthetics in the computer buying decision. I own two laptops, an Acer Aspire 8943G that I purchased and a Dell Latitude E6420 that was given to me for work. I love the Aspire. I wanted a full desktop replacement with powerful video capabilities, a huge screen, good gaming potential and a full size keyboard. (Alright, full disclosure, I bought it in July of last year because my 5 year old desktop couldn’t run Fallout 3). That said, I think it’s a sharp looking computer. Even though its big (10 lbs), the design is sleek, almost like the aluminum wing of a plane and the burnish metal keyboard with raised keys is comfortable and looks cool. Would I have bought it if it was a simple black box? Yeah probably, as long it had the other features I wanted; but I enjoy the looks I get from people when I pull it out. It’s a sharp looking machine.

So how about you? How important was the look of your laptop when it came down to the buying decision?

 

The look of the laptop is one of the most important factors when purchasing.
Hence why I've owned an alienware and a mac.

 

I like simplicity in design, but I do not set that ahead of taking away performance. But if a laptop was absolutely hideous, I would prefer something that looked nicer!

 

I'm largely of the same mind. Cool aesthetics matter to a point as long as the functionality is there, but really crappy design would hinder my purchase of the computer.

 

Aesthetics do matter to me, but I like functional and understated aesthetics. Thinkpads, Elitebooks, and some of the Dell Business systems are attractive to me for that reason. For the same reason, I dislike Alienware, Toshiba, and some of the gamer systems from MSI and Asus.

 

I'm pretty sure everyone values looks to a certain degree no matter how "functional" they claim to be. In fact, in the NBR review threads I see lots of comments a laptop's design when people like or don't like it for example

And technically, looks will mesh with other properties too. For example, the choice of a metal finish for a laptop will affect how it looks but also how it feels to the user tactile-wise. Same with a laptop's form factor: that is a functional but also aesthetic factor.

I value looks and design for a laptop and for many products I buy nowadays, but not to the point of it overshadowing the product's function so same applies to laptops. I want a size, finish, form factor and shape that appeals to me as a user because I wanna not only use my laptop but enjoy using it too. I won't pay double for it obviously, but I'm willing to shell out a bit more if overall the product appeals to me more and has the same/similar functionality

 

Any laptop over 1.25" thick just looks too 1990's. The only exception to this, in my opinion, are the Alienware laptops.

 

Looks are moderately important to me but I would choose performance over aesthetics any day (that is if I had to choose). I figure I would be looking at the screen more often than the laptop as a whole anyway.

 

Aesthetics are a tie-breaker for me. I won't get inferior components just for the aesthetics, but if two different machines offer me what I want utility-wise, I'll go with the better-looking one.

 

I totally agree with those sentiments.

I'll also say that I don't find car-like, in-your-face designs like Alienware and the Asus G-series attractive at all. They look like they try too hard to look different. My ideal laptop aesthetics are sleek, elegant designs like the Apples and new Samsungs. If those aren't to be had within $100 of something of absolutely identical performance though, I'll go mundane form over function any day.

 

It's all subjective, but personally, I like something bold and dramatic. The monolithic wedge-on-wedge shape of my Vaio F. Alienware. The leather-and-aluminum mix of the old Studio XPS 16. The Dell Adamo. And yes, the Asus G74SX.

Likewise, for tablets, I prefer the unusual-and-distinctive look of the Sony Tablet S to your typical iPad or Samsung Galaxy Tab.

Most of all, I'm glad there's a variety on the market, from Thinkpads to MBPs to Alienwares. It'd be a boring world if all laptops looked the same.

 

Simplicity for me, Clevo P150, looks professional with great components

 

Quite important, specially when my job requires me to do presentations or be deployed to a client's office. an alienware / msi / asus gaming laptop just grabs too much attention.

now if only the sleekness of the Vaio Z or MBP could be offered with the configurations of the clevo/sager then that would be the perfect machine for me

 

Hard to pack that much firepower into a system that's not built around its cooling system. And hard to make it sleek if it IS built around a substantial cooling system.

 

Interesting to me that you thought of the impact your laptop would have when brought to a client's office. I don't have that concern, but it does make sense and that aesthetics like understatement are indeed very important.

 

Completely agree. I would rather buy a dull (gray suit) laptop than a Las Vegas styled one. As much as I like to game on it I do happen to actually work and I can't see myself using a machine that looks like a Christmas Tree on a business meeting. I can't justify buying two laptops just because one of them is too flashy to be used on daily basis.

So my take on aesthetics is- not important unless too flashy or plain ugly.

 

ive actually been moving away from aesthetics being a deciding factor especially when form and function are improved. for examples:

more or less replaced MBA with an x220 .... why? better cpu/gpu and battery life. I sacrificed the aesthetic for no need to pack adapters or a charger which negates weight difference.

Elitebook 8740w & 8760W. rather plain to look at but I get certified drivers with firepro and quadro GPU, better customization, support and well built machine

Panasonic toughbook CF-30 & CF-19, simple can we say ugly but indestructible, and great battery life.

the odd part.... my work is all about design and looks that is done on these machines. Ive been finding the expression " fugly but functional beats pretty, polished and pointless." really applies when it means paying bills vs. non critical

 

I have never cared for aesthetics... at all. I am all about the functionality, and as long as a computer can do that, I am happy. As a matter of fact, I tend to prefer plain-looking computers with no brandings or markings.

 

Personally I rank importance as follows: Performance, Reliability, Build Quality, Visual Design.

 

Agreed with roxshot's order of preference here.

Although I'll only add that most of the machines I buy are for "business use".

 

Ill second here as well.

 

Aesthetics aren't important to me at all. I dislike the look of Thinkpads but for this generation, it has the best overall hardware (W520: not getting IPS like w/ M4600 or 8560w since I preferred HD+ resolution, best battery life, cheapest, supports mSATA), so I replaced my aging home Acer notebook.

 

Good distinction. For business use, I don't care. For home use, I want my computer to be attractive, just like I want my couch and my desk and all my other furniture to be attractive.

 

I agree, Alienware laptops seem geeky to me so do Asus. I do find the new MSI GT7 series attractive, the design is sleek and different but not outrages like the Alienwares. When it comes down i would spend more in a laptop with a design that I like than one that I don’t like even if they have the same performance. This is mostly because when I buy one I keep it for 2-3 years and I don’t want to be stuck with a laptop that I think it looks ugly.

 

What if your business use and home use are one and the same