yep, completely missed by a mile. i thought they were suppose to be laptops where you buy w/o thinking about it. i guess i'm sticking with the first gens!
Totally agree on that one, its really ashame that they say a 200 dollar laptop, bring a 300 dollar laptop, and now there coming up with a 549 dollar laptop? WTF
The 9" screen is very desirable but not $200 desirable. I bought the 701 because it was cheap and cheerful. It hit a sweet spot for price and performance. The screen was pretty tiny but it was workable with tweaks.
I don't get the price disparity for the 900. It should just be the 701 with a larger screen and perhaps a $30-40 premium for getting it.
Besides, isn't the next gen meant to be based on Atom? In which case the 900 is
The 900 also has an additional 8GB of storage (16 for the Linux Version). They're charging more for that.
Unfortunately, I don't think people want that. I'd pay $449 for the 900, and I think a lot of people would. I wouldn't care if it only had 4GB of storage, because I can pick up an 8GB SDHC card for $30 if I want more space.
By bundling the 9"screen with the unnecessary storage, they're ensuring that I buy neither the 701 nor the 900.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Chris @ May 7th 2008 4:48AM
$550? holy crap!
I think Asus have missed that point here. What made these so appealing was the price not the hardware. You can go buy a real laptop for that money.
$300-$350 is where it should be.
TeddyLikesComputahs! @ May 7th 2008 4:59AM
yep, completely missed by a mile. i thought they were suppose to be laptops where you buy w/o thinking about it. i guess i'm sticking with the first gens!
700 FTW!!!
Mic2000 @ May 7th 2008 5:19AM
Totally agree on that one, its really ashame that they say a 200 dollar laptop, bring a 300 dollar laptop, and now there coming up with a 549 dollar laptop? WTF
But still i want one (A)
DrXym @ May 7th 2008 6:25AM
The 9" screen is very desirable but not $200 desirable. I bought the 701 because it was cheap and cheerful. It hit a sweet spot for price and performance. The screen was pretty tiny but it was workable with tweaks.
I don't get the price disparity for the 900. It should just be the 701 with a larger screen and perhaps a $30-40 premium for getting it.
Besides, isn't the next gen meant to be based on Atom? In which case the 900 is
Phil @ May 7th 2008 10:09AM
For this price I'd pick up the hp mininote, more storage, better shell/keyboard. hell, faster processor too!
Mike Cerm @ May 7th 2008 10:15AM
The 900 also has an additional 8GB of storage (16 for the Linux Version). They're charging more for that.
Unfortunately, I don't think people want that. I'd pay $449 for the 900, and I think a lot of people would. I wouldn't care if it only had 4GB of storage, because I can pick up an 8GB SDHC card for $30 if I want more space.
By bundling the 9"screen with the unnecessary storage, they're ensuring that I buy neither the 701 nor the 900.