I have to disagree there. Most laptop "manufacturers" don't even make their own laptops. Laptops are like people, under the skin, they're all pretty much the same, just as we are. No matter what brand the laptop is, whether it's Acer, HP, Dell, Gateway, Lenovo, Compaq, ASUS, eMachines, Alienware, MSI, Toshiba or Packard-Bell, they're all made with the same internals from Intel, AMD, VIA, ARM, nVidia, ATi, Seagate, Hitachi, Western Digital, Foxconn, etc. They're also ALL MADE IN CHINA which means that most likely that they didn't even design the thing to begin with, they just bought the rights to a Chinese design, threw their name on it and marketed the hell out of it in North America. As an example of what I'm talking about, here's a "little" (read: MASSIVE) company that few people have heard of called Quanta Computer:
http/www.quantatw.com/Quanta/english/product/qci_nb.aspx
They are the largest manufacturer of laptops in the world. How is this possible when we never see Quanta-brand laptops? Obviously, they sell in bulk to the "OEMs" who have them cosmetically customised to have their brand and colours. Ever wonder why laptops tend to look more or less the same except for colour and name? Now you know. It's the same with most industries these days. HannStar is a gigantic maker of LCD panels, monitors and TVs but few people have heard of them. I only know this because I used to work for TigerDirect and therefore I've learned a lot about the marketing BS in the industry. This person says that Acer makes low-quality laptops. I actually prefer Acers because they tend to have the least number of proprietary crap built into their hardware compared to most other "makes". This is probably because they try to keep as many common parts between Acer, Gateway, eMachines and Packard-Bell (The four "brands" that Acer owns) as possible.
Having said all that, it really boils down to what you want to do and the budget involved. See, I bought my Acer Aspire 5565 for $500CAD with the A8-3500M and could have purchased a similar machine with the i5-2410QM for about the same price but any Intel-based machine at that price point will have the proverbial "Albatross around your neck", a.k.a. Intel Graphics. I have Intel graphics at work in my Lenovo workstation and even when only using XP Pro and Internet Exploder, the screen stutters just from scrolling. I find that Intel graphics (especially because their drivers work about as well as a wooden nickel) can ruin the experience by making the computer appear to run slower than it really is. For a good all-around laptop at the $500 price mark, you really can't miss with the A8-3500M. This is simply because the A8 has good CPU performance with stellar GPU performance while the i5 has stellar CPU performance with god-awful GPU performance. This makes the A8 far more versatile, especially for gaming. It's like this, some CPU-intensive software might run slower with the A8, but it WILL run. On the other hand, despite the stellar CPU performance of the i5, a lot of GPU-intensive software (games, for instance) will NOT run. This reminds me of a girl I knew who couldn't even get TheSimsOnline to run on her Intel-based laptop simply because it had Intel Graphics. She had a C2D T4400 with (I think) the Intel GMA 3500HD and it wouldn't run. Meanwhile, my old laptop with an AMD Athlon 64 2650e and ANCIENT Radeon X1200 graphics ran TSO just fine. In this day and age, the quality of the GPU is proving to be almost as important as the CPU. The fact that the Radeon HD 6620G is built onto the A8 die also means it literally sips wattage so the battery is approximately tripled compared to the older AMD mobile offerings.