Slashdot Mirror
Toshiba Introduces A 17"-Screen Laptop
George Wright writes "Toshiba have announced a monster of a laptop with their Satellite P25. Seems they've decided to copy Apple's idea of fitting a 17" LCD on a laptop, but have ended making a true aircraft carrier in doing so. Notable "features" are the 2.8GHz P4, the 802.11a/b and the 10lb weight (!!!). Still a relatively low resolution though :("
That sucker looks HUGE, and yet they still haven't put a numeric keypad on it. What's the deal with that?
Well, as a desktop replacement, this unit will probably be pretty capable. It would be ideal for a primary office machine that you could take home from time to time and on occasional business trips. However, if it were to be carried on frequent trips or taken home every day, an ultraportable with a docking station would be a better bet.
"Want in one hand and spit in the other and see which one fills up first." - My Dad
Most people want a faster/quiter/cheaper home pc, yet no companies seem to be interested in this option
You can't make money on those, you only make money on high end systems -- putting an extra 200$ on the cost (for profit) is much easier on a 2k machine than one that costs 500 bucks. (at least, if you want it to sell)
Reminds me of a circa 1986 Compaq suitcase with dual 5.25" floppy drives. I guess the 17" LCD is better than the green or orange monochrome (can't remember what color it had), but boy is that thing big.
Most people want ...[snip]...yet no companies seem to be interested in this option.
I don't know if I buy that. I mean, companies are all about providing what people want. If they weren't... well, their competitors would do it and they'd be sunk. I think it's rather like the discussions of software reliability versus software features: we all say we want reliability, but it's the feature list that makes us open our wallets. That's why developers make feature-bloated, unreliable software.
Besides, there's plenty of low cost computing to be had out there. I'd be surprised if the average personal computer sold today is over $800. It's just that these boxes don't represent technology innovations/improvements. The high-end systems occupy that role, almost by definition. So you don't hear about some new whiz-bang, revolutionary computer that costs $599... because there's nothing to report: it's a computer, it does what computers did last year but a little faster and a little cheaper. No, what you hear about is the $2000 machine that truly represents a New Thing.
You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
It is a standard size, just not one you recognize because you don't work in the film industry editing 16x9 video.
You're kidding right? Have you even seen their sales figures for this system?
Absolutely. If you're developing a really large web site with Dreamweaver, it's much easier to work with a large monitor. Same thing with any of Macromedia's products, really. I mean I guess it's graphic-esque work, but with any application, it's always nice to have lots of room to work with. Especially if you're testing web pages in 3 or 4 browsers at the same time.
"Want in one hand and spit in the other and see which one fills up first." - My Dad
Well I agree with you on most of your point.
17" Laptop is what I think is the limit on what can be considered portable. Unless they can start folding the screens to get 21 when it is open and 17 when it is closed. But the way that most laptops are used is that they will carry it to work and open it up on a desk and work with it. Then they go home and put it on their desks and play with it. 21" is getting beyond good protability as well as 19" A laptop should never be much bigger then a standard newspaper flolded in half.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
I still don't get why go up in size and then barely go up in resolution.
while you claim that 1440x900 is "nice" - I can get 1400x1050 on my 15" screen of my laptop right now. And I currently don't like it - I want one of the new laptops that can do more than that -there are plenty of laptops out there that go higher. I want to be able to fit more on my screen - not just have everything look bigger.
Why do you go up in screen size but not increase the resolution? I don't see what the point is.
There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
Apple weight: 5.4 pounds
Uh no, the 17" Apple weighs in at 6.8 lbs.
The ratio of people to cake is too big
My guess is that it would appeal to the same type that buys a 21" CRT and then sets the resolution to 640x480 (I have heard of old people doing this). I also think that they are trying to lure in clueless people that don't really realize that LCD have a wide variation in quality. Toshiba puts in a big screen, but uses a lower quality so that it is cheaper. Meanwhile, the clueless people drool over a big screen without noticing dimished quality.
I've got a mind like a steel trap - it's got an animal's foot stuck in it.
This introduction of 17 laptops is just an adoption of SUV culture where bigger is supposedly better. My boss who is a mac fanatic, picked up a 17in powerbook not long after it came out. I haven't seen him bring it out once yet, he still uses his older 800mhz 15 with a big crack in the ti case. The 17 is simply a monster to carry and I know Mac fanboys will blab on about how companies are copying Apple's "innovations" but sticking a 17in LCD in a laptop is not innovation, its a step back.
Floppy drives should no longer be manufactured and all unused floppy disk should be placed in a large pile and burned. Exsisting floppy disk can be kept for archival purposes, but since they're floppies they should probably have their data transfered to something worth having it on.
Here's the starting point of a nice little rant on the subject.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
Screw a number pad. When are we going to see one of these laptop behemoths with something akin to an ERGONOMIC keyboard?! I mean, there's plenty of room to split the keyboard down the middle and spread it out diagonally.
... but no one has made that move yet.
In fact, the first thing I thought of when I started seeing 17" screens is that there SHOULD be room to expand the keyboard and give us something approaching ergonomic
Easy. Laptops are the future. I used to think they'd be horribly annoying, but then I got one. It's an old Thinkpad pentium II I bought when it came off corporate lease. I started using it with wireless ethernet for day to day use, and now I turned my desktop into a file server and never touch it.
I can bring it into the living room when i'm playing video games, or into the kitchen when i want to try out a recipe i found on google. I can even save the page of yahoo! travel and bring it to the airport when my parents are coming to town when i pick them up.
"Sure," I hear you shouting, "but what about paper?" I rarely touch the stuff. And when I do, I usually lose it. Printer ink is expensive. Sure, call me lazy. Sure, call my thinkpad a crutch. I could say the same about your paper and pen. It's just a different paradigm.
my 13.3 inch screen may not be huge, but it's an LCD flat panel with a compact pentium 2 system attatched to it that does most of what I need it to. Desktops are for gaming and for family workstations, now more than ever. The need for a fast desktop system is once again relegated to the CAD and 3D imaging industries as computer speed has outpaced the public need. A computer is an appliance, as many of us are apt to forget. It's important to remember that it's more useful when you can move it from room to room without difficulty. Now that the main obstacle of wired networks has been overcome for most people's purposes, laptops are at a severe advantage everywhere but price.
And as you mentioned above, laptops are faster and run cooler than desktop PCs.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Well, the laptop percentage went up because the absolute number of desktop sales was going way way down. Apple's machines were stuck at at 166 MHz FSB, and otherwise weren't much faster than machines that were a year or so old.
Now that the Freaking Awesome G5 machines are about to be released, the absolute number of desktop sales should increase massively, reducing the laptop percentage. With the new machines shipping in September or so, I'd expect that Apples 2003H2 laptop sales to drop to 20% or something (while still showing reasonable growth in absolute numbers).
My video compression blog
Toshiba wants to sell a $2k+ product, but they only show one crappy 150x150 image. Am I the only one who would like to see at least 640x480 from all sides?
English usage is different to yours, a corporate entity is treated as if it were a plural because it's assumed to encompass more than one person's thinking.
English is English, American a foreign tongue.
That was classic intercourse!
1: selling cheaper PCs means people get fired. That's why I build them for my friends who cannot afford them otherwise and usually give them a better computer than they could have gotten for twice as much out of an OEM like Dell or Gateway (and yes, I use good parts...Soyo motheboards, athlon chips, micron ram, and so on). People need to go back to the friendly neighborhood PC shop method of buying computers.
2:Companies should be spending more money on their computers systems than they are doing...if they need new computers. Most companies do not...penitum II in the office is plenty for MS Office.
3:There are large fixed costs involved in computers...for the OEMs and hardware manufacturers. But designing a gaudy case and bloated multimedia keyboard is not the kind of cost that the consumer should be forced to swallow.
4:Technology is controled by relatively few, and that's how Taiwan keeps the american companies' pricing in check (Viva VIA motherboard chipsets!)
5:Cost isn't an issue as much as people think it is...people don't upgrade because most people don't need to.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Because Apple spends many many R&D dollars in making their entire system work together beautifully. They are in control of the entire set of hardware components and the logic board architecture... They also are dealing with processors that are incredibly energy efficient and take up a lot less real estate in silicon. Couple this with Steve Jobs' urge to put everything in the box on a tiny overengineered scale, and add in the lack of legacy ports and you get a much finer design. Also ... Toshiba is lazy and isn't really trying hard... as all PC makers are... lazy and complacent... nothing new happens in the x86 world... a PC is a PC is a PC... there is nothing to distinguish one box from another.
Why is this notebook 10lbs, and Apple can design one 3 lbs lighter?
I might be able to tell you why. I have the 15" screen Toshiba Satellite 2805-S603, which is just a few inches smaller. Toshiba builds their laptops like tanks. Mine has done a belly flop onto a hardwood floor more than once from the desk. Without crashing or interrupting my desktop applications.
At my work, Toshiba laptops may be regarded as a little bigger, but they take abuse. I have seen them slide off the vehicles onto the floor and strike fixed objects. They still work. That's important, because no one has got into trouble or lost their job for destroying a laptop. That 3 pounds is mighty nice insurance.
I like the fact that they actually use the extra space for a numeric pad on the keyboard, whereas the Toshiba just wastes the extra space.
It wouldn't surprise me if Apple and Toshiba decided to excluded the numeric keypad from their 17" laptops because it forces the user to be off-center when they use it, or to put their right hand at an angle. Something like that would drive me crazy.
Wild Eeep!
2.5" drives have never been fast
IBM(?) just recently announced 7200rpm 2.5" drives within the past month or so
Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
I own two Toshiba laptops, and I think they are the best PC laptops currently available. However, my impression of Toshiba is that it is ignorant at times.
For example, there are buttons on the front of the laptops that operate with very, very little pressure. They start Windows Media Player whenever you accidentally press them.
I called Toshiba support to ask them about an error I found in the manual of each of the laptops. Toshiba technical support a) did not have a computer to test, and b) could not fix the error in the manual by calling someone in the company. Toshiba technical support seems to be VERY separate from the rest of the company, and seems to have no power to serve customers. Before I bought the laptops, I asked about the maximum resolution of the video card when used with an external monitor; Toshiba technical support could not help me, even after several calls and an acknowledgement that the manual was faulty.
On the good side, Toshiba uses nVidia video chips, and the chips use the standard nVidia drivers. They work great with an external monitor at 1600 x 1200 and 75 Hertz resolution. Very, very nice. They work with IOView KVM switches.
I have a Toshiba Satellite 5105-S607, and it's got a 15" screen that can do 1600x1200. This 17" does 1400x900? Strikes me as very odd that it's got a LOWER resolution, unless they're using a lowered-bitprint LCD to keep costs down. It would be interesting to see if they go to a higher resolution screen in a few months with a higher price.
I also miss the cPad that my S607 has - the touchpad has a small LCD under it that can be used for things like changing the logo under it, as well as used as a keypad, a calculator, a signature capture device and (with a download) a theramin simulator. It's sufficiently odd as to be very amusing, and can be very useful in some situations.
Brazil has decided you're cute.
If you look at the dpi (dots per inch) of each display, they *are* keeping the display resolution the same while increasing the display *size* (as well as aspect ratio). There are alot of constraints in selecting the pixel dimensions of the screen, and, past a certain point, increased dpi doesn't buy you much (except for additional eyestrain).
12"(diag) Powerbook: 1024x768 -> 7.2"x9.6" -> 106.7 dpi, 1.33 aspect ratio
15"(diag) Powerbook: 1280x854 -> 8.325"x12.5" -> 102.58 dpi, 1.5 aspect ratio
17"(diag) Powerbook: 1440x900 -> 9"x14.4" -> 99.9 dpt, 1.6 aspect ratio
the difference between the 12 and 17 inch models is (106.67-99.9)/106.67 ~= 0.65, or a 6.5% reduction in dpi. I think the idea was to try to maintain dpi while increasing display area (two pictures at the same zoom level should be the same physical size on each screen). I would imagine that the 17" model was designed to have a 16:10 aspect ratio to fit the 16:9 widescreen video with some space left on the screen (for controls or whatever).
Lower speed drives are nessesary in laptop computers because the drives have a tendancy to be jarred much more often than a desktop drive.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Uh, I don't know where you got that idea. Companies are about MAKING MONEY. Period.
Customer satisfaction is not necessarily part of the equation unless the product is new and differnet and you've got to woo consumers into buying it. All the big PC makers have pretty similar offerings. Even if they are not providing what people want and they're making money and keeping the shareholders happy, they'll happily continue doing it. The market is quite homogeneous except for the diamond in the rough that is Apple. The current business model of providing the 'latest' comptuers and hyping them with adversiting has worked for many years. It's tried, tested and true. And it's quite unlikely that one of the big PC makers will have the balls to break out of a pattern that is known to make money, even if it would increase customer satisfaction. Their boad of directors would eat them alive.
Remember, it's 'raising shareholder value,' Not products or customers.
Or maybe they're also all about convincing people of what they want and then giving it to them. :) I agree with your points, but I'm not sure we have the same amount of faith in the free market.
Karma: T-rexcellent.
Add to that the fact that the Pentium CPU is about four times larger and dissipates three times as much heat.
That is actually probably the driving reason why no PC laptop can even come close to Apple machines in size and weight.
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
Why do PC Notebook components require 3 extra lbs!??
I'll tell you why; look at the specs. This isn't a Centrino or even mobile P4. This appears to be the full bore desktop edition 2.8Ghz Hyperthreading P4. Tthe difference in weight is obviously the CPU heatsink.
Hey,
:). e.g. Companies need to spend more money on teaching business to IT staff and IT to business staff for one...
.NET ?
Your comments (imho) make you sound like you know very little about the business side of computing.
1. Cheap PCs mean job losses... That is very basic economics... which I am not going to go into right now.
2. computer SYSTEMS. A computer system is more than just the PCs running office
3. Its called "product differentation". If you don't like it don't buy it and companies will get the message... fact is many people buy those computers or they wouldn't be restocking the shelves.
4. Its called " Barriers to entry ". Which means starting up a business is too high expensive or to risky or you are simply not allowed to for legal reasons.
5. People look at what the computer can do... Big drawcards in the last few years have been Internet (esp E-Mail) and GUIs. Ooh and lets not forget DBMSs ( Database Management Systems e.g. M$ Sql or MYSQL ). Whats next for people to spend money on...
At the end of the day... companies arn't looking to sell pcs to everyone who needs ( or wants ) one. Its actually a bad thing if everyone can afford a PC.
Lets say people need 80 million pcs a year... the price that everyone can afford is $500 per PC. But if they sell them at $800 per pc, yes they would only sell 60 million.... but 60 m * $800 > 80 m * $500.
So the idea is to sell expensive PCs to those who can afford them ( the 60 million ) and cheaper PCs to those who can't. Thats why there will always be DELL etc.. selling over priced pcs with fancy " multimedia keyboards " to make them seem expensive.
Well also the Apple 17" laptop is a 17" widescreen... which is smaller than a "normal" 17" screen. People complain about the high price of Apple hardware, but then complain how crappy PC hardware is in comparison. You can't have it both ways. Any PC maker can make a laptop that's as nice as a Powerbook, it would just cost $4000 and anyone who's gonna spend that much on a laptop will probably just buy the Mac anyway. Also, keep in mind that Apple has more control over hardware than PC manufacturers do. Most PC laptops are just rebranded Taiwanese things anyway. No need to spend money on R&D.
1400x900????? WTF? I have a 15" laptop with a much more useful screen: 210,000 useful little pixels better. And it cost less.
I understand that steve jobs has vision issues and likes his pixels big, but the NEC guys can't all be like that - or at least have accepted vision correction.
Dell has the right idea: 1920x1200 pixels in a 15.1" display. Now that's useful. Pixels.... mmmm pixels. All I want is pixels. More pixels.
By far the most stunning image reproduction I've ever seen, in any format (including large format transparencies) is the 9 megapixel IBM glass (like this)
mmmmm.... more pixels.
It'd be OK for my laptop, but I wouldn't want it in my home.
Assuming it's not a monopoly, of course ;-) We all know that MSFT has been ingoring its customers for years but they still remain quite profitable.
What I'm saying is that since the PC Market is pretty much homogeneous among manufacturere, it's just a monopoly among a few big companies who satisified to sit on their business models.
On the other hand, in a market where normal competitive forces are allowed to run free without stupid or illegal tinkering, then I agree with what you have said.