Samsung's ultraportable Q40 is pretty in pink

Proving once again that people seem to be willing to overpay for underpowered gadgets that could possibly be seen as "fashionable," Samsung has released a new £1,300 ($2,460) notebook whose main (read: only) selling point is its bright pink exterior. At this price point we'd expect to see words like "Core Duo" and "GeForce" on the spec sheet, but the new 12.1-inch Q40 only manages to throw down a disappointing 1.2GHz ULV Core Solo processor, just 512MB of RAM, a scant 60GB hard drive capacity, and those integrated Intel graphics which will only please gamers who are into Minesweeper and Sudoku. Still, you are getting a built-in DVD burner and Windows XP Professional as the operating system, so this lappy isn't a total lost cause. Although the shiny Q40 is available exclusively at PC World, we have a feeling that you'll soon be seeing it in the hands of celebutantes worldwide, and perhaps even being given away as a door prize on a future episode of My Super Sweet 16.

[Via Shiny Shiny]

[Vinni @ Aug 13th 2006 8:40PM]

that's quite a hunk of junk....but in pink!

[Serpent @ Aug 13th 2006 8:51PM]

Where the hell is Apple's baby MacBook Pro?

We need some 11 or 12 inch action in the Pro enclosure!
Just make sure it has a Core 2 Duo ;)

[Realdickfitswell @ Aug 13th 2006 10:38PM]

i dont get it 13" is perfect i dont understand why people are demanding 12" like 1" really makes a diffrence wow.

[Zadillo @ Aug 13th 2006 11:26PM]

Umm, why are you judging an ultraportable based on the specs alone? Of course you aren't going to fit a Core Duo or a GeForce graphics card into something like this. Look at the specs though.... 1.15 kg, 52.2mmx205mmx21mm.

The Samsung Q series is competition for stuff like the Lenovo X60 or Sony TX.

What you're paying for in the ultraportable class is the incredibly light weight and the smaller dimensions. Obviously if those things don't matter, the same money could get a more powerful machine wrapped in a larger and heavier package.

I just don't understand the comment about what you'd expect to see at that price point, because it makes it sound like you're ignoring the fundamental reason why this costs so much, and why it does have things like a Core Solo and integrated graphics.

Just look at any of the subnotebooks over at a place like Dynamnism.com. The people buying these ultraportables are buying them BECAUSE of their ultraportability, and because their needs for these machines are more than served by the hardware at hand (i.e. they aren't buying these things to play FEAR on).

[Jason @ Aug 14th 2006 12:22AM]

Russell, I forgive your arrogance. Zadillo, I believe you are mistaken in your arguement.

Allow me to clarify why.

According to you Zadillo, the Q40 is in direct competiton with both the Lenovo x60(s), and the Sony TX. For the purposes of the arguement at stake, I will only reference the Lenovo brand as it most clearly demonstrates the point.

Price point of Q40 => 2,400
Price point of "comperable" Lenovo x60(s) => 1,600 (as of 8/14/06)

Dimensions: (depth)
Q40 => 21mm at thinnest measurement
x60s => 20mm at thinnest, 35mm at thickest)


Weight:
Q40 => 2.53 lbs (with or without battery?)
x60(s) => 2.7 lbs without battery, 3.6 with extended life battery)

So now that it is clear that there is no world of difference between the two, might I also add that you WILL find a Core Duo processor on the Lenovo, as well as the option to include up to 100GB HDD, and a fingerprint reader if that tickles your fancy. All this will last you 8 hours of usage (best out of ALL US bound laptops as of yet).

http://reviews.cnet.com/4321-3121_7-6543924.html?tag=cnetfd.sd

Given the above, doesn't this beg the question as to why the cost of this particular samsung is far beyond that of its closest competitors when infact, by its hardware credentials & specifications, in the same "weight-class" mind you, it is inferior.

The author/editor was most entitled to his inquisition, so Russell perhaps you owe Evan Blass an apology.

[Dx @ Aug 14th 2006 12:23AM]

Agreed, Zadillo. It's the price for portability.

"The new 20 gig mp3 player from ~~~ is pretty low on specs. You'd expect at least a 15 inch screen and 180gig hard drive. Lack of DVD burner is dissapointing."

[5ftassassin @ Aug 14th 2006 12:25AM]

Probably would have been better served to point out that the TX models at that price point offer alot more bang for your buck.

Please gamers? Let me know when you can get a note book that is under 3 LBS that can run F.E.A.R at a decent frame rate. Then again if this was an Apple product the forums would be filled with nothing but praise.

[5ftassassin @ Aug 14th 2006 12:45AM]

If this laptop where to be sold in the U.S. it would be far cheaper than $2400. The Europeans always complain about how cheap things are in America and how they get shafted. For instance the Vaio TX 770p in the United States is $2400 dollars.
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start?CategoryName=cpu_VAIONotebookComputers_TXSeries&ProductSKU=VGNTX770PTK1&TabName=specs&var2=

While the same speced model TX in the Uk is 1700 pounds which is over $3200.
http://vaio.sony-europe.com/view/ShowProduct.action?product=VGN-TX3XP%2FB&site=ite_en_GB&pageType=Overview&category=VN+TX+Series

So you really cant look at that model and say hey $2500 dollars is crazy for those specs. Everything costs more in Europe, so my guess if the product was offered in the U.S. would be between $300-700 less for those specs.

[Zadillo @ Aug 14th 2006 1:11AM]

Jason, you are right, I was actually wrong to use the Lenovo X60 as an example. The TX series though is much closer.

Either way, I don't think my fundamental point was incorrect. In fact, I think you proved it for me. The X60 is less expensive than either the Sony TX or the Samsung Q40 precisely because it isn't QUITE so ultraportable (as you noticed, it has larger dimensions and is significantly heavier). But the X60 still does cost more than some other laptops, and people who buy the X60 are also buying it for RELATIVE portability.

The X60 is able to include a Core Duo and a larger hard drive precisely because it has a larger form factor and more weight to it. Although note that the X60, unlike the Sony TX series, still requires an external docking bay for it's optical drive (which adds extra expense and extra size and weight).

People who demand the lightest possible laptop with the smallest possible dimensions pay the premium for laptops like the Samsunq Q40 (or the earlier Q30), or the Sony TX, or any number of similar laptops (again I'll point you to dynamism.com for other examples in this range).

So no, I don't think my fundamental point was incorrect. I think I was wrong to include the Lenovo X60 as if it was in the same class as the TX or Samsung Q30/Q40 though. It really isn't. But it is a good example of a middle ground, and the Lenovo X60 is still a good illustration of a laptop that costs more because of its size rather than its specs. It just happens to cost less than these other ultraportables because it isn't quite as small or light, while still being smaller and lighter than the typical notebook.

[Zadillo @ Aug 14th 2006 1:15AM]

5ftassassin, actually, the TX3XP/B is the latest version of the TX series. It is newer technology, and thus more expensive, than the TX770p. The two most notable differences are that the TX3XP features an Intel Core Solo processor, while the TX770p features a Pentium M. The TX3XP also features Intel GMA 950 graphics, compared to the GMA 900 graphics of the TX770p.

[Jason @ Aug 14th 2006 2:19AM]

Touche Zadillo!

I still take unrest with the exorbitant difference in price between what could effectively be one in the same (x60s and the Q40).

I would also like to point out that while you may be able to shave one pound (would be interested in meeting the person that this matters too) you sacrifice some of the speed. Perhaps this speed hinders productivity, and perhaps you might be better off stepping out of the ranks of the "ultra-portable" in order to boost it. This takes place all the while beefing up those shoulders/wrists (however you choose to carry your "ultra-portable") with that +1 pound. You can also take pleasure in the fact that you'll be laughing all the way to the bank. (at least with the 500 or so you saved by making a "smart" decision)

I guess it really comes down to preference, and preference, amoung other things, is in the eye of the beholder.

[nnam @ Aug 14th 2006 4:19AM]

This machine is really underloaded at the stated price. The colour alone is not enough for the cost.

[dan @ Aug 14th 2006 5:06AM]

I think that the laptop is a bit high-priced, even taking into account that it's an ultraportable, but it's not unreasonable. Maybe there's a small premium for color, but that's besides the point - the kind of person who uses this sort of laptop - do they really want to sport bright pink?

[Peter @ Aug 14th 2006 6:08AM]

I like notebook, but it seemed that this color is not suitable for male, maybe for female.

[Peter @ Aug 14th 2006 6:12AM]

Haha, and one of our products (metal dome arrays - http://www.metal-domes.com ) are even used in Notebook, but not in this Item. These parts are under keyboards, while you click the keyboards, the dome arrays are pushed, then close the circle.

[Peter @ Aug 14th 2006 6:13AM]

:-(
Where's my previous comments?

[Pete @ Aug 14th 2006 6:57AM]

Like someone else just said they have seemed to alienate a part of the market and that is men, I would wear the occasional pink top but when it comes to I pink notebook I do not think so

[Kevin Cannon @ Aug 14th 2006 7:05AM]

Why are you surprised that people would pay money for a gadget that's "fashionable" and looks good?

That's exactly what we do with everything else.

There was a time when shoes and clothes were purely funcitonal too, but now as technology becomes more unbiquitous and adopted by mainstream consumers more and more then fashion-technology will become commonplace.

[halc @ Aug 14th 2006 7:39AM]

Of course many people are going to be willing to pay more for visually appealing goods.

Why would they not?

To put it another way around:

Why on earth is somebody willing to pay extra for fugly laptops, just because they have hardware that is considered to be über?

Really, get a grip people.

Just because you have no sense of visual aesthetics, doesn't mean others don't have and that companies won't cater to those that do.

[PodMonkeys @ Aug 14th 2006 8:03AM]

Heres my 2 cents.
I have a 10.6" Averatec with 1.1ghz P-M ULV, and intel graphics. WoW runs at 9-12fps, but it is playable. Even at 600Mhz, its not all that slow of a machine. I even do my web comic photoshopping on it. Specs aren't always everything. Ultraportables usually aren't purchased to do desktop work.

[Zadillo @ Aug 14th 2006 8:16AM]

Jason, to be honest, I don't personally know the kinds of people that it matters to. But from what I've heard at least, the market is basically going to be people who a) have the money to afford it, or can get their company to expense it and b) want something that is as light and thin and small as possible because they carry it around with them everywhere and travel a lot, and even the difference between a 2.7 pound notebook and a 3.7 pound notebook makes a difference to them).

There's also a secondary market there of just gadget-freaks, etc. who don't necessarily NEED an ultraportable but like the appeal of the super-small size. To an extreme I think Sony and Samsung are hoping some of those people will also buy stuff like the Sony UX180p and the Samsung Q1.

And there's clearly also some sort of "fashion conscious" contingent that would buy this more as a fashion statement, but I'm not quite sure how well that would actually work; I mean, I still don't think we're at a point where any sort of laptop is considered a "fashion accessory" just yet.

[Zadillo @ Aug 14th 2006 8:19AM]

"Like someone else just said they have seemed to alienate a part of the market and that is men, I would wear the occasional pink top but when it comes to I pink notebook I do not think so"

Is this really serious? I mean, do you actually think Samsung was making a pink Q40 because they thought it would have broad market acceptance among men and women? It's a pretty safe bet that they made this exclusive pink Q40 pretty much with women in mind. And probably for the reason I mentioned in my last post; because they want to try and expand the market for ultraportables beyond what currently exists.

[jaydee @ Aug 14th 2006 8:46AM]

OK, electronics manufacturers, please take note. I am female. I buy computers and gadgets and all that good stuff. I use them, daily. And I ... hate ... the color ... pink. Seriously, please, guys, either use a little imagination, or ask some actual women what colors they actually like.

[Borneo Brothel @ Aug 14th 2006 11:50AM]

Geeks

[iheartpink @ Aug 14th 2006 6:06PM]

Jaydee, I'm a female as well, and I love pink. Not all women hate it. (Maybe the ones who read engadget and are closer to nerds and can't afford to be girly.) I think this is a good market to target, especially since most women aren't hardcore gamers, and don't need that much hard drive space or a Core Duo processor. There are so many laptops now, the point is to differentiate from competitors. I think Samsung did it on this one.

[quiwi @ Aug 15th 2006 1:23AM]

Actually, by the specs it looks like the q40 is basically a pink q30 (which btw is a good ~1 1/2 years old now anyways). As a side note, the q30 came in blue or red (which I would like better anyway)

The rebranded dell latitude x1 feels like a steal at ~1200 USD when I bought mine back in Feb. (Unfortunately they've stopped selling it through small business and the large business price is now $$$)

[atv 4 wheeler @ Apr 21st 2007 12:07AM]

I am using a table computer now, I want to buy a notebook but have no idea of it.I have check many here ATV dealer ATV dealer and Electric boat dealer
, but have no idea. the introduction of yours is a good product to think about.