Samsung's Pine Trail-boasting N220 netbook spied in France

We've been seeing a fair amount of netbooks equipped with Intel's Pine Trail platform since they were announced early last week, and it looks like we're going to be seeing at least one from Samsung in the very near future. This one -- the N220 -- was just spotted in France. The 10.1-incher packs (as you'd expect) an Atom N450 CPU, GMA 3150 graphics, 1GB of RAM, a 250GB hard drive, b/g/n WiFi and Bluetooth, plus a webcam and a 6 cell battery which should supposedly get around eleven and a half hours of battery life. It comes with Windows 7 installed, and as you can see from the photo, one of the available colors will be glossy green. It's going for 350 euros in France, so, if the price stays comparable when (and if it) hits North American soil, we can expect it to cost somewhere in the realm of $500.

[Rusty Shackleford Posted Dec 29th 2009 5:56PM]

I lost the game.

[One Love Posted Dec 29th 2009 9:51PM]

Shouldn't it be called the N450?

[schmidt1985 Posted Dec 29th 2009 6:04PM]

11 1/2 hours of battery life. Yeah I believe that when my shit turns purple and smells like rainbow scherbert.

[jafoman Posted Dec 29th 2009 6:11PM]

@schmidt1985 Considering the Asus Eee PC 1005PE running the same processor got over 10.5 hours of battery life in Engadget's review, maybe you want to take back your idiotic comment.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/21/asus-eee-pc-1005pe-review/

[GeneralRoderick Posted Dec 29th 2009 6:48PM]

@schmidt1985

I thought it did already...

[schmidt1985 Posted Dec 29th 2009 6:53PM]

@jafoman
Yeah, just like my macbook pro gets 7 hours of battery. If you believe that your the idiot.

[daytripper Posted Dec 29th 2009 7:07PM]

@schmidt1985

It does get 7 hours, if you don't do anything with it after you unplug it.

[N900 Posted Dec 29th 2009 8:14PM]

@schmidt1985 You're so full of fail. My 1008HA gets a good 6hrs and 40 minutes, though advertised as 8.5. If the N220 gets about 9 or 10, not advertised, who gives a shit? Because it still gets in a full day of computing. Enjoy your shit sherbet.

[jafoman Posted Dec 29th 2009 9:59PM]

@schmidt1985 I guess you're saying Engadget's reviews are full of shit. Why do you even visit this website? To troll?

[Ebzy Posted Dec 29th 2009 10:02PM]

@schmidt1985
I've got a sammy n140 and it does do 11 hours of battery on standard use. Although it gives a mere 8 hours when having multiple programs and an antivirus running. So I'll believe that the battery is this good.

[schmidt1985 Posted Dec 31st 2009 11:18AM]

@Ebzy
Just to prove my point you are not getting what they rated it at? Again its not different then charter selling me 16MB internet when in REAL LIFE I get at best half of that. I just want specs to be honest. If you have to have your computers screen turned all the way down, not have apps open, and not use WIFI to get those results then the battery life just mean anything.

[schmidt1985 Posted Dec 31st 2009 11:20AM]

@N900
Again not what the specs are saying thanks for proving my point like most everyone else that is bashing me. I want HONEST specs and pricing. If the average consuming isn't getting close to what is said on the box then eventually they are going to stop believing you. Stop with the high school drama and put some points out there. All calling someone name is doing is making you look more childish.

[schmidt1985 Posted Dec 31st 2009 11:21AM]

@schmidt1985
And yes I can't type or spell want to make some more fun of me? LOL bring it on. At least a real man can admit his problems.

[westell220 Posted Dec 29th 2009 6:25PM]

I just don't see this generation of netbooks succeeding, not with the large list of new ULV processors in notebooks for 50 dollars more, and not with a barely bumped up increase in performance.

But i think Netbooks might find a niche in the small segment of the market that would sacrifice, power for a few more hours than ULV's, and still want a low cost.

[Parias Posted Dec 29th 2009 7:13PM]

@westell220

Wow, fascinating theory. Never heard anything quite like it...

[kiranmk2 Posted Dec 29th 2009 6:48PM]

As above, everyone seems to have forgotten the purpose of netbooks - to be cheap. Getting the price down rather than increasing features should be the emphasis.

[daytripper Posted Dec 29th 2009 7:10PM]

Weren't netbooks supposed to be way south of $500 (around $350)?

[WhatGeeksDotCom Posted Dec 29th 2009 7:36PM]

@daytripper Agreed. I think $300 - $350 should be at the high end $250 - $299 mid range, and $146 - $249 lower end (yes they make $146 netbooks with decent specs ->( http://laptops.techfresh.net/aojies-cheapest-10-inch-netbooks-introduced/ )

[daytripper Posted Dec 29th 2009 8:25PM]

@WhatGeeksDotCom
Yeah, I would understand if for $500 you would get a better cpu (this atom seems like an n270-80 rehash) and Ion. This thing still has 1 gig of ram for pete's sake.

If they knew Pine Trail's gpu sucks ass then what's the point of releasing it. If it's to save more power then that makes sense, but if you need to rely on a 3rd party vendor to do 1080p isn't that a catch 22 (you need extra power to run the chip)? My guess is that Pine Trail was created to cock block Ion.

[CommentsTroll Posted Dec 29th 2009 7:39PM]

350€ means it'll cost $350 in the US, not $500. There's pretty much always a 1:1 ratio for electronics.

[(Unverified) Posted Dec 29th 2009 8:45PM]

the background color of this page is white

[BigD145 Posted Dec 29th 2009 8:02PM]

Intel graphics sucks donkey balls.

[(Unverified) Posted Dec 29th 2009 8:45PM]

sucks donkey kong's balls?

[N8Sayer Posted Dec 30th 2009 4:08AM]

If it does what it's supposed to, it really doesn't matter, does it?