http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/ Engadget Comments for http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
ooooh Engadget boner, time for 40 posts and 70000 pictures]]>Mar 18th 2008 9:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 9:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 9:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 11:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
Celeron doesn't refer to the architecture of the processor, simply Intel's division of budget products.

These Celerons, in particular, will be single-cored C2D's with disable features and less cache. It's still faster than a VIA processor with doubly multiplied clock and twice as much cache.]]>Mar 19th 2008 12:14AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 9:13AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 9:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 12:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
"Celeron doesn't refer to the architecture of the processor, simply Intel's division of budget products.

These Celerons, in particular, will be single-cored C2D's with disable features and less cache. It's still faster than a VIA processor with doubly multiplied clock and twice as much cache."

Also, what about cost? How much was a similarly spec'd laptop in 2004?]]>Mar 19th 2008 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 9:13AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 11:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 9:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.classmatepc.com) a little bit and call it good.... makes sense.]]>Mar 18th 2008 9:30AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
I weep for the future.

There must be more creative ways to show discontent.]]>Mar 18th 2008 9:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
Meh.]]>Mar 18th 2008 10:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:20AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 11:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 11:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 11:20AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
Mike D. Meh Scholar.]]>Mar 18th 2008 11:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 11:55AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
Reality is, I have been using the word quite a bit since 2002-2003 when I first heard a lot of others using it. I have seen, in my experience, the word being used less often. However, the word isn't an uncreative way of showing discontent. Meh is just "The verbal equivalent of a shrug of the shoulders" to quote one of the top posts on Urban Dictionary for the word. What's your problem with it? Meh is yet another word/phrase from one of the best animated television shows, The Simpsons, we use in our everyday lives.]]>Mar 18th 2008 12:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 9:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
]]>Mar 18th 2008 9:52AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:10AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 11:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
Processor spec is low but the 9" screen and hard drive sound nice. Sometimes you just want that extra storage space. Flash RAM or SSD would be great for durabilty but cost and the lack of impact on battery savings don't seem to justify. I wish someone would do an "instant on" feature like some of the Asus motherboards.

Anyways...competition is good and lets hope this helps to drive down costs and improve features.]]>Mar 18th 2008 10:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
storageeffect.com]]>Mar 18th 2008 10:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 11:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
storageeffect.com]]>Mar 18th 2008 10:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
A 15" screen etc. makes for a more powerful computer you can even make get it cheap but it's a PIA to lug the thing around.

Horses for courses - I don't want or need 15" and dual core for webmail and word processing...
]]>Mar 18th 2008 10:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
You still have to boot the OS, deal with the cramped screen and keyboard, navigate the start menu and use windows explorer, spell check, view large attachments... none of which run nicely with 900MHz of Celeron goodness under the hood.]]>Mar 18th 2008 11:15AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.dell.com/content/products/category.aspx/notebooks?c=us&cs=22&l=en&s=dfh

Check it. I kept going back every month or so over a 6 month period before I found one I liked. Oh yeah, it also has the ATI Radeon 1150. It's shared ram, but at least I can play WoW on it when I take it out of town.]]>Mar 18th 2008 12:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 10:56AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 11:57AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
The next laptop will be small and light. I can either spend $2000 for a 2.5 lbs Dell or $400 for something like this. Clear choice, considering it will be used exclusively for classroom notes and web browsing. The old laptop will be used for couch surfing, and the desktop for everything else.]]>Mar 18th 2008 11:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
This is a cheap laptop therefore it is not going to be slim and even though it has a 9" screen it has a lot of plastic around it so probably takes up the same amount of space as a 14" laptop. It is going to be made of cheap large heavy parts and the specs are probably worse than your current laptop, of which you have already complained about having poor performance (even though you admit to only web surfing and taking notes with it).]]>Mar 18th 2008 12:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 11:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/
I do not care about the performance, as I mentioned, but if I'm going to have the weight I would want performance. Instead I got the weight for nothing.]]>Mar 19th 2008 10:52AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/18/is-this-intels-netbook/Mar 18th 2008 7:40PM