Look, we've always been fans of these low-cost ultra-portable computers which Intel dubbed "
netbooks" long after they debuted. However, we never really saw them as anything more than a niche device. A niche initially filled by the
not-quite $200 Eee PC much to the delight (and surprise) of ASUS. The success was in large part driven by the price (less than $300) and network centric design (small SSD, fast boot, simple OS, and WiFi) of these 7-inch ultra-portable laptops. Today, however, everything changed. Specs are on the move upward with pricing now firmly at $500 and beyond -- retail ground currently held by full-featured, 15-inch, entry-level laptops from Dell and others.
So we ask you, dear readers, do you have a fistful of Benjamins ready to throw at a new Atom-based netbook or do you see today's
flurry of announcements as a bunch of nonsense driven by manufacturers who've taken their eyes off the collective ball?
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
konshuss @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:05AM
eyyyy!
konshuss @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:09AM
i mean, eee!
Juice @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:33AM
That's good.
OnlyShawn @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:07AM
pics or it didn't happen. Oh, wait...that's an authentic picture above, isn't it?
joey @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:10AM
I feel the focus has been lost. After the initial success, now companies including Asus want to build bigger more costly machines. Keep the focus on these notebooks as well as the price south of $300 and this segment will be sustainable.
Creep the price closer to $500 and you will loose sales to entry level 14/15" notebooks.
Chuckles McGee @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:17AM
"Jumping the shark" isn't the right choice of words for what's happening. "Growing out of their niche" is probably more appropriate.
Dolemite @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:22AM
Chukles, but what happened is that they became way too expensive way too quickly, and with only marginal screen and speed bumps.
OneLove @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:05AM
joey, the focus was always MONEY. Nothings changed.
Sheldon @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:15AM
I think there is a three way balance on laptops: features, cost and battery life. I'd be happy with a laptop that meets any two (three is clearly the ideal but quite a challenge). The better laptops seem to hit two.
MBA is a reasonable cost and battery life but sucks on features, Sony's ultraportables hit the features and battery life but have huge prices, even the original Eee hit (reasonable) battery and cost but clearly lacked features in an effort to cut costs.
My biggest annoyance is that these newer "netbooks" or "ultraportables" barely get one of the three areas; the new Eeees have a poor battery life and high price (but maybe more reasonable features). If I want it only for surfing the web then I don't care about features but do care about price and battery life as it is I can tick the same two boxes with more features on a slightly larger device called a "laptop".
Hrumph.
Frederik @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:40AM
That makes me wonder whether MBA could be categorized as a netbook at all. I honestly wish that Apple could bring something for the size of 12". In fact, I do miss the 12" PowerBook which I still consider to be an engineering marvel. It is the smallest screen size that could still accommodate a full size keyboard. With an 11" screen, you probably get a 95% keys which I don't really like because my fingers started to get cramps if I had to squeeze them a little bit tighter. A 13" screen just doesn't give that kind of chic appeal in my eyes. I hope that Apple will introduce some fresh products in WWDC to bring back the good old time of the past.
maxwell.corbin @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:37AM
Frederik, where have you been man? Fat bezels are BACK BABY! Yeah!
Um, what I meant to say was that the 12" screen on the powerbook g4 was a 4x3 ratio while modern screens are 8x5. Doing some quick math this means that the horizontal width of the 12" powerbook's screen is 9.6". Now using that as my leg, I constructed a 8x5 rectangle, then I measured its diagonal crosscut (which is how screen size is measured). the result was 11.096" or just 11.1". So the largest possible screen that would be able to fit into case designed to just be able to squeeze in a full-size keyboard is 11.1".
t3_slider @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:55AM
MBA is a reasonable cost?? Can I borrow some of your money please?
Frederik @ Jun 4th 2008 1:05AM
maxwell.corbin,
Not bad for the calculation that you did. I did try some math on my own (also based on the assumption for a 4:3 ratio on a 12" screen) and I found that the longest diagonal possible for 16:10 (or 8:5 as you have simplified the ratio) is a 11.3" screen. Well, I guess the best thing that I could do is to find a 11" portable that won't give me cramps.
Telanis @ Jul 25th 2008 2:19PM
It is in fact 11.32.... good work?
Backwards People @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:17AM
Time Warner Cable is now setting up tiered downloading for Beaumont, Texas users.
Why not report on the real news that is affecting us? Oh right...
Joe Dombrowski @ Jun 3rd 2008 12:37PM
Try here: http://beaumont.engadget.com. All the Beaumont specific news that affects all of us!
Todd @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:19AM
Or have UMPCs already jumped the shark because of bluetooth keyboards connected to smart phones? ( Will the 3G iPhone support bluetooth keyboards? )
BTW Best. graphic. ever.
Frank @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:43AM
Amen brother! but probably not quite we still need to be able to connect a phone to a real monitor.
kinezo @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:19AM
I think the EEE was a good start, but it wasn't quite right for me. The keyboard is just too small for me to do real typing/programming on. The Macbook Air is very close to what I want, however, it missed the price point for me by about $1300 ;)
In come these $500 "netbooks" with almost full size keyboards, still around the 3lb mark and more than powerful enough for my needs.
I'd take a 3lb netbook at $500 over a low end dell 15" any day. My criteria is that they keyboard needs to be big enough, the screen resolution needs to be high enough (1024x600 is good enough for what I need it for) and it has to be cheap enough ($500 or less).
With all these Atom based ones, I can finally say check, check and check! The question now is, which one will I like better? The HP mininote? The MSI Wind, or Dell's offering? I'll have to get my grubby hands on one before I decide.
On a side note, the tie breaker would be the power brick it comes with. Why can't people design power bricks like Macbooks? How hard can it be to make something nice and portable?
Just my $0.02 (CAD)
Pochi @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:29AM
"The keyboard is just too small for me to do real typing/programming on."
You really, really are not supposed to be using these for "programming." I believe you are missing the point of these products entirely.
kinezo @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:04AM
But it's basically what I do with my notebook now. It's my dev. env. away from my desktop. It need not be ultra powerful (I'm not a 3D game programmer, I'm a web developer). And it's especially important that I have it to show clients progress etc.
All I have on my laptop is your standard LAMP stack. I work in vi so basically 2 xterms is all I need. On a separate desktop, firefox is open.
How is this NOT a good product for my use?
novaraz @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:26AM
@Pochi
The "point" of any computer is what you need it to do. These netbooks would be ideal for my type of programming (scientific research), where all of your jobs are submitted to a remote cluster. Since thats the case, all you need is a keyboard, internet connection, and CPU capable of running a shell and text editor. That sounds exactly like a netbook to me.
Pochi @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:33AM
@kinzeo
"I'm a web developer... and it's especially important that I have it to show clients progress etc...."
I can't imagine developing a website on some of these subnotebooks with resolutions capping at around 1024x600. Are you connecting a projector to it to show your clients and then bumping that to 1024x768 or something more common? Can these do that?
@novaraz
"The "point" of any computer is what you need it to do."
No kidding. And that's exactly what I am talking about. I don't think these tiny laptops are what he should be interested in for what he wants and/or needs to do, especially if keyboard size is an issue for him.
Dubb @ Jun 3rd 2008 12:17PM
Well I planned on buying one for these exact purposes.
@Pochi
"I can't imagine developing a website on some of these subnotebooks with resolutions capping at around 1024x600"
I base all my sites around 800x600 standard, in Web Development you want to build your site around the lowest standard resolution. Makes it more accessible to everyone.
I believe it has a vga connector on the side, so yes, you can hook it up to a projector.
I don't plan on doing any heavy 3D work, I'll save that for the more powerful desktop. Just image manipulation and coding.
The Wind and HP Mini-Note got great marks for keyboard, so I know I'm looking at those. I'm waiting for the HP Mini-Note to go VIA Nano and then compare benchmarks between the Wind and Mini-Note before I buy anything. The Dell one has that funky right shift key, which just kills it, I don't think I can get used to a shift key like that.
Pochi @ Jun 3rd 2008 12:48PM
"...in Web Development you want to build your site around the lowest standard resolution."
Which is 1024x768. Set your monitor for 800x600. Now browse the internet to all of the pages you'd view during the course of a normal day. The vast majority are going to have you scrolling all over the place.
Jesse S @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:48PM
So because there is a lot of bad design on the internet (and there is a lot...much more bad than good), that makes it ok to not have a set 800px width or one that expands with the browser window?
Dubb @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:23PM
That's my point Pochi, if you design from the lowest point, your website will look good (non-scrolling) on low resolutions and high resolutions. I'm still pretty old school, and last time I checked it was 800x600, but the times have changed.
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp
Even using the latest standard, which is 1024x768, these 1024x600 resolution Subnotebooks are still a good coding/web design choice for developers on the go.
Pochi @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:56PM
No, I definitely see your point. SOME people still use 800x600. That chart you linked, it says that like 86% of people are rocking 1024x768 or higher - and 6% unaccounted for (wtf).
I'd rather give those 86% (maybe more) a better experience and let the 8% stuck in 800x600 scroll around a bit.
But we're off topic now. =)
BobTurbo @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:24AM
I have a fist full of benjamins.
EricR @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:26AM
I wish I had a fist full of benjamins.
Stealth @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:25AM
Over $500 and they would be jumping it. If they can continue to up the specs and maintain prices at or below that, the only thing that will be in problems are entry-level notebooks since people will obviously go for the "cuter" laptops then a clunky looking "cheap" one.
Billy Gun @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:27AM
Sunday, Mondey Happy Days!
bobgorila @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:28AM
I think the focus of this market segment should be battery life, size and weight, with a just-enough-to-get-the-job-done philosophy regarding computing power that allows the price to stay low.
That said, I welcome the larger 9 and 10 inch screens of this new crop, since 7" was too small for most folks.
Hopefully a cheaptop will be Jobs' One More Thing next week~
Billy Gun @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:29AM
Sunday, Mondey Happy Days!
Frun @ Jun 3rd 2008 1:12PM
Looks like someone has a case of the "Mondey's"
phanbouy @ Jun 3rd 2008 1:22PM
i believe you get your ass kicked sayin somethin like that, man
waffles @ Jun 3rd 2008 1:26PM
if at first your joke doesn't succeed...
THJ @ Jun 6th 2008 9:29AM
You can dust it off and post again, post again...
Jaymez @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:30AM
I can buy a really nice Dell Referb for the cost of these mini laptops. A machine that I can upgrade without a problem. Sure, it's not some kind of gaming machine, but, neither are these minis.
I'd buy a mini just for the hell of it if I could get one under $250.
jorvay @ Jun 3rd 2008 1:25PM
you absolutely could. But If you were like me, you wouldn't want anything to do with a BIG, heavy, clunkly, low-end laptop. Before the EEE hit the scene, I spent a good chunk of change to get a small notebook to compliment my stable, powerful, but stationary PC. These things are perfect for those of us who don't want to lug a lot of weight when we're on the go, and if we need more power, we understand that desktop PCs offer way more power and functionality per dollar.
Of course, if you're looking for only one computer to do it all, and you want some portability, then the low-end dell notebook is perfect.
BdgBill @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:31AM
The thing that got me excited about the Eee was the 15 second boot time. I'm looking for something small and light with a REAL browser. The "mobile editions" of websites are totally useless to me.
I also like the ruggedness that comes with the SSD.
My regular laptop is a 17" 3 GHZ 8lb monster that takes about 6 minutes to boot and is way too big to use in an airplane seat. I want something small for sitting in Starbucks, the plane, standing in line etc.
Confused @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:45AM
Your 3Ghz laptop take 6 MINUTES to start up????
You need to delete some of your startup programs....
I have a 2.4 Ghz laptop running Vista and it takes less than a minute (timed it at about 50 seconds) from a cold boot to running Firefox (FF set to auto start).
Jesse S @ Jun 3rd 2008 3:05PM
Boot time is only affected by ram and hard drive speed, guys...(And the OS, of course.)
Slick @ Jun 3rd 2008 3:36PM
And the CPU speed, of course.
And your startup programs, of course.
And your BIOS settings, of course.
And your boot manager settings, of course (if applicable).
musicman @ Jun 8th 2008 8:04PM
CCleaner, clean up your startup and everything else, makes your machine a shitload faster. Very noticeable effect, just from removing useless startup programs, cleaning temp files, and cleaning registry.
6 minutes is ridiculous.
Ypoknons @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:31AM
No at all. They're cheap ultraportables, and if you want the $400 price point, you can buy the 701. Even at a $500 price point (MSI Wind) they're reasonable second computers.
If you want a cheap standalone you'd want a Dell or HP $700 anyways - bigger screen, size.
Guy3001 @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:44PM
na, i want a small (my 12" powerbook died) but not too small, good-looking laptop for surfin n word processing that doesn't cost a bomb.
that just didn't exist before the eee - you were looking at around twice the price or more for an ugly dell. I think the wind's spot-on, it looks ok, it's even got a decent HD to store the odd movie download, and it can easily fit in my work bag without sending me to the shoulder doc. and ram up to 2gb - happy days.
God bless netbooks i say.
Jumping the shark? When the hell are we even gonna be able to buy any netbook that ain't an eee (er, a wind is what i mean) - it's all announcements and no products on shelves so far.
and where did the G10IL go?? want.
Homeboy @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:34AM
SSD?? None of the low cost laptop come with SSD, but they do come with EMBEDDED MEMORY. It's not the same thing since SSD has the benefit of being memory in a removable enclosure.
Flubber @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:37AM
It would be nice if Asus would tell us when the 901 is going to be available. Especially since the 900s seem to have vanished from the shelves.
SwiftAusterity @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:37AM
My opinion is to keep driving the price lower for these things. We need to come out of here with something very like the original dream for the OLPC machine. Somewhat durable, easily modified (no stupid un-screwable bolts, accessible internal layout) with very low power needs and network centric.
The EEE has come the closest, but even ASUS is straying from the path they originally set out. People need to be cleansed of the mindset that they need to buy a laptop that can play Crysis at 50 fps on max settings when all they're really going to do is use safari/firefox/opera/IE to watch youtube videos in the airport, monitor their e-bay auctions and send some e-mail.
The bigger is better attitude is entirely wasteful at this stage of the game.