Lerianis

You would be surprised. I used to have to juggle 5 drives back when USB 3.0 drives that were relatively inexpensive were only 1TB in size. Now with 4TB drives it is getting a lot less necessary admittedly (even less now that I use a BlueTooth mouse) but more USB 3.0 or even USB-C ports would be awesome to have 'just in case' a relative or friend wants to use my laptop as a charging station for their devices.

https://www.amazon.com/VivoBook-i7-8550U-Processor-GeForce-Backlit/dp/B07661CYPD Not only USB 2.0 ports (it has a type-C and a USB 3.0 on the other side of the laptop) but I was just imagining "Why not swap out those old USB 2.0 for USB 3.0?"

Actually, no. I recently talked with a friend who works for Acer designing laptops and he stated that USB 2.0 ports are not much cheaper than 3.0 ports today hardware and material wise. They are pretty much comparable. That is when I started thinking "Why don't they just drop USB 2.0?"

Seriously? Could Microsoft not send out a version of Windows 7 that natively supports USB 3.0? I cannot imagine it would be that hard to include a 'generic' driver that allows USB 3.0 to work in Windows 7 during installation.

The title pretty much says it. From what I have seen there is really no reason for USB 2.0 ports on laptops and desktops other than companies are trying to cheap out on the ports since any device that works with USB 2.0 or 1.0 will work in a USB 3.0 port. So why do manufacturers still insist on putting in USB 2.0 ports instead of USB 3.0 ports? Just seems stupid to me though there is the chance that I am missing something here other than "USB 3.0/3.1 is expensive!" which I do not believe is true. I understand why Thunderbolt 3 is not replacing USB 3.0 and USB-C: The chip to control Thunderbolt 3 is still relatively expensive..

Yeah, I forgot to mention that I was thinking of buying an external 4K monitor for playback of the videos in question. Thank you for the response, ItsTheDuckAgain.

https://www.amazon.com/VivoBook-i7-8550U-Processor-GeForce-Backlit/dp/B07661CYPD The link above is to the laptop I am thinking of buying. I was referred to this model of computer by a friend who touted its easy upgradability as one of the best points of this laptop judging by the specs alone and the price. However I am leery of buying it because of one thing. The thing that has kept me from buying a gaming laptop for years since my father and I split the cost for a Gateway P-7811FX: The graphics chip. I have looked on video card benchmark and it seems to only have about 30% of the power of a GTX 1080 desktop card. That said: I am not planning on doing gaming above 1080p (for a laptop I believe that 1080p is good enough since the screens are a maximum of 17 inches unless you get into uber-laptops). I am interested in specifically having a laptop that can play Assassin's Creed Odyssey in 1080p with a minimum of 50fps (any lower and I notice the stuttering). Will the graphics chip be able to handle this and if so will I have to turn off all the 'bling' in the game in order to get those minimum FPS? I also have some 4K videos that I would like to watch which my Gateway (big surprise) just cannot handle and even my newer Acer bargain bin laptop cannot handle even with the improvements to the chips since the P-7811FX came out. Will this graphics chip be able to handle that? Thank you to anyone who responds to this and a big thank you to LinusTechTips for having this awesome forum. I have already had it pull my rear out of the fire numerous times.

Ah... so it was me expecting too much from TeamViewer. I thought that it might boil down to that. Thank you for your help. That said, does anyone have an application that is designed for this purpose? Preferably free but if I have to pay up to 50 dollars for the app, I would be more than willing.

Okay, I know this is not the usual situation for people but I run Android emulators specifically BlueStacks 4 on two of my 3 PC's. One is a Toshiba P50 with an i5 processor and 4400 Intel Graphics and 12GB's memory and another is a Acer A5-571-5552 with the same processor and graphics as the Toshiba machine and 4GB's of memory. I was looking into using TeamViewer 13 to control the two laptops I use for basically Android machines. I signed up for an account, got all three of my computers connected to the account, booted up TeamViewer 13 and BlueStacks on the Acer and tried to control the Acer computer using it. Almost immediately I saw framerates in BlueStacks even though the graphics processor was hardly being touched by BlueStacks and TeamViewer 13 (highest GPU usage was 50% and that was an anomalous one, the average was closer to 35%) drop from a good 60fps down to a extremely laggy 15 or less fps. I thought "Okay... perhaps this is due to the lackluster amount of RAM on the Acer!" Booted up the Toshiba, did the same things, tried to control it from TeamViewer... same story. This is when I started getting a little suspicious about "What in the world is going on here?" After exiting TeamViewer on both computers, it was instantaneous: I went back up to 60fps in BlueStacks, the games I was playing (Strike Force and Dragon Blaze) went back up to the FPS I had come to expect. Restarted TeamViewer and even without remoting into the system, the FPS instantly went down on both computers to 15fps. Has anyone else had this issue with TeamViewer 13 even when using the 'super speedy' settings? I mean the last time I had behavior like this from an application (admittedly I have never used any other remoting software before) it was found to have mining software that was put into it by a malicious actor. I have contacted TeamViewer about this behavior using their forums but have not heard anything back though the forum thread has not been locked.