Slashdot Mirror
Designing The Ultimate Netbook
Harden writes "TrustedReviews has an interesting take on what the 'Ultimate Netbook' ought to be. From the article: 'How to solve a problem like the netbook? To my mind, despite nearly every manufacturer taking a stab at the thing, none has yet quite distilled my idea of what the Ultimate Netbook would be. This is partly because, until recently, not everyone had a clear understanding of what a netbook was meant to do, but also because manufacturers have all been far too busy jostling for market share to put a lot of thought into the finer details.' What would your Ultimate Netbook include?"
one that can transform into either a Decepticon or a Hooker bot, and is smart enough to know when to turn into each of those.
Monstar L
The Netbook needs to be cheap. Preferably in the $150-250 range. It should have a low to medium-end CPU, at least 256 MB of RAM and should run Linux (or if it has a high-end CPU at at least 512 MB of RAM, XP). It should have Wi-Fi out of the box, and a decent video card. It should have a minimum of 3 USB ports, and should be relatively shock resistant.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
A Macbook nano. $699, 10" screen, dual-core Atom, 2 GB of RAM, 64 GB flash drive, 6-cell removable battery, Airport/Bluetooth, Snow Leopard; no CD/DVD drive. Many manufacturers already have models similar to this; with subnotebook sales at an all-time high it's only a matter of time before Apple jumps onboard.
Take off every sig. For great justice.
Why is it that the 'original' netbook - the XO1 - can get 9-10 hours of battery life, even with a basic NiMH (rather than Li-ion) battery, and yet all the followup netbooks seem stuck at 4 hours tops? Even with the new ultra-efficient Atom processor, most new netbooks seem to have a relatively heavy power draw. I wish somebody would sort that out.
"I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
Everyone has different needs and tastes. Some want a smaller package at the cost of features and screen size. Some of us want a little more hardware available and can't see a 7" screen anyhow. Many Japanese would be happy with a 4" netbook even if it had a 200Mhz arm processor. Most Americans would complain. This is why Asus etc have so many models and sizes. Trying to jam everyone into one model is like Henry Ford with the model T. He lost market share because he thought one car would be enough choice for everyone.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
I'd say the ultimate netbook would be a slightly ruggedized version of the Lenovo X61s I already own, plus the built-in 3G that I wish I had ordered. (not that 3G via a USB 'modem' is bad)
For that matter, how about an X200s? Starting weight of 2.5 pounds, but a 'real' computer. The only disadvantage here is that they are expensive, but the article said 'ultimate', not 'ultimate when compromised to make it cheap'.
ERROR: Null
The Psion clamshells seemed pretty popular in their day. I don't understand why that form factor went away and didn't come back! One of these with a color screen, a modern processor, WiFi and running Linux would definitely appeal to me.
Netbooks at the moment seem like the worst of both worlds - too large to be conveniently portable, too underpowered to do serious work, too small to be productive for heavily keyboard oriented stuff. They're light at least - but I don't really follow why that's a big deal. Obviously I'm wrong because Netbooks are popular. I just don't quite understand it.
--- These are not words: wierd, genious, rediculous
The good things about the netbook market are affordability, GNU/Linux and free software. Microsoft and Apple do not really have systems for that range.
An Apple Netbook wouldn't be affordable and it would include the usual Apple restrictions and digital rights violations. No, thanks.
Lightweight (under 1.5kg including the power supply), 12h+ REAL battery life, built-in 3G modem, trackpoint or a *properly* calibrated touchpad, a sturdy case - steel hinges (but NOT steel fastened with screws to a plastic frame), titanium alloy or carbon fiber underside and cover - and proper space utilization (if there's space for a full-sized keyboard because the notebook is widescreen, then put this goddamned full-sized keyboard there, not a "normal" laptop keyboard and 10cm of padding on each side). Oh, and a matte screen. Glossy is OK for desktop monitors in a controller environment, laptops are being used where it's often impossible to eliminate direct, bright sources of light that make using a glossy screen almost impossible.
Actually, I think I've just described something similar to my X60, which is a very good design as far as mobility is concerned, but could be improved anyway. Sadly, I couldn't find anything better yet - Eee is nice but underpowered for my needs (no, not gaming) and too small (12.1" is optimal for me), Vaio feels too delicate and too easy to break, while HP subnotebooks are fine at first, but there's something about them that puts me off.
Disclaimer: this has nothing to do with the "desktop replacement" kind of notebook, which definitely has its place (small apartments, dorm rooms etc.), but is, in my opinion, out of scope of this discussion.
This is Slashdot. Common sense is futile. You will be modded down.
I read the article. I got about 2 paragraphs in and read this little gem:
Since when the hell was the iPhone the definitive Phone? I'm honestly not trying to troll here, but it's widely documented that although it's great for web browsing and such, the actual phone aspect of it fails on nearly all points. It doesn't do MMS, it doesn't have bluetooth for anything other than headsets - hell, the shitty Windows Smartphone I had 4 years ago did everything the iPhone does today (and more), with the only exceptions of a multi-touch screen and 3G (Because it wasn't widespread back then). Honestly, what am I missing here?
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
An Apple Netbook wouldn't be affordable and it would include the usual Apple restrictions and digital rights violations.
You're talking about Apple circa 1992. The MacBook is quite affordable and doesn't have any "digital rights violations" that I can see.
But I would be very happy with the following:
an Atom based machine, with
a USB host port, and an
SD card slot,
GPS,
Wifi,
Bluetooth etc,
5 hour battery life
All in the form factor of an A4 sized(maybe even A5) iphone like device. Ie Glass screen, solid build, slim design.
If i need a keyboard for the thing i can use a bt one. It would be perfect for reading books, maps, basic games, browsing. And fit into a pack or bag nicely
Oh, and finally, it would run Linux of course
(if the price was around the 500AUD mark, it would be fantastic, but twice that would also be tolerable :)
Software
easy access to more software and large repositories already activated.
All for £100-£150 ($200-$300)
Most Damage is done by people who are AWAKE
Ultimate netbook: Second hand IBM ThinkPad X40.
* Full size keyboard vs eeePC's absurdly unsable plastic thing.
* Very good screen quality vs eeePC's wristwatch reject.
* Over 4h battery time running Xubuntu (I timed this with average use, this is *not* with the notebook sitting idle).
* Not much bigger than the eeePC, and still very light at 1.2kg.
* Super durable vs eeePC's plastic trashy case.
* Half the price of an eeePC.
I wish people would cut out this rubbish Netbook phase. Netbooks, at the moment, are overpriced reject hardware.
Until a netbook is at least as powerful as a 3 year old laptop, has usable input/output peripherals and is durable enough to take anywhere (after all, that's the point of the size, right?) then netbooks will be in my mind a total waste of time and money.
I hate printers.
They have. It is called the Air. Just because it is large, doesn't mean it is not a netbook. I think the definition of netbook is wrong in that it requires something under a certain size screen (9-11 inches depending on who is talking).
Fits in nicely with average price range too...
But..But... It would be... environmentally friendly! Yeah, that's it! How can you not see that whatever Apple does is ultimately good for all of us?
My ideal notebook would not be Intel architecture.
Let's face it, designing a notebook around an Intel processor is like designing a bicycle around a V8 truck engine. Even recent attempts to make them low-power are laughable; the Intel Atom may draw an unheard-of 4 watts, but the new generation of ARM chips have about the same processing capabilities and draw *0.3* watts (plus you get a DSP and a PowerVR 3D accelerator for free).
The only possible reason for wanting an IA32 processor is if you're going to run Windows; which is fine, if you want to do that, but I don't. So why should I, and all the people like me, be restricted to having to using hardware that's crippled by the need by a ludicrously power-hungry processor and all the heat-dissipation hardware necessary to make it go? I have an Asus eee 701; it has a *fan* in it. That's simply absurd in a machine that size.
Lose the Intel processor, and it'll be cheaper, lighter and you're probably quadruple the battery life...
1. They need to be cheap. Very cheap. They should be cheap enough that they could be given away much like USB memory sticks are today. A high-end netbook should cost no more than $20. Lower-end models should cost no more than a few dollars.
2. They need to be powerful to run all the new whiz-bang Web 2.0 stuff and any other application that someone might want to run. The Atom processor may be fine for now, but newer netbooks will need four- or eight-core processors to handle loading web pages. When I press the power button, I want to be ready to go instantly. My first computer booted up in five seconds and it had a 1 MHz (that's megahertz, not gigahertz) processor. With the processors we have now, a computer should be ready to go before I take my finger off the power button.
3. They need connectivity. Cheap or free Wi-Fi or WiMax so that they can perform their primary function -- loading web pages.
4. They need to be small. Very small. I should be able to fit one comfortably in my shirt pocket.
5. They need a large screen to view websites without having to scroll all the time. A 17-inch screen should be minimal with a 19- or 21-inch screen preferred.
6. The battery needs to last a long time. Even using the wireless connectivity continuously, these things should run for a year or more on two AA batteries.
7. They need to be durable, yet stylish. I should be able to take it from the job site to the coffee shop. They need to be dust- and water-proof. Maintenance should only consist of a wipe-down with a wet rag to clean off any dust or dirt. I should be able to stick it in the dishwasher to clean it and it should be able to survive being washed and dried with my clothes if it gets forgotten in a pocket.
8. They need to be dead simple to operate. Someone operating one of these things should not need a CS degree. The interface should be navigable by a 3-year-old. It should not require an easily-lost external mouse or keyboard, but it should have expansion ports (preferably USB) to add one or both if desired.
If components are interchangeable, they can be mass produced, and the price of them would fall.
If you can buy cheap, interchangeable components, and build your own, fat profit margins for laptops for Dell, Lenovo, Apple, etc. would disappear.
Buy building their own, non-modular laptops, they can sell products that differentiate their features from other companies: lighted keyboards, extremely thin, whatever.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Bingo. On top of what the parent said, it should also be small (less than 12.1" screen) and lightweight with a battery life of at least 3 hours.
Bingo. On top of what the parent said, it should be small (less than 7.2" screen) and lightweight with a battery life of at least three hours...
Seriously, the best laptop I've ever had was a Toshiba Libretto 100CT. It had a screen resolution of (if I remember correctly) 1024x600, a perfectly usable (though small) keyboard, and mine ran Debian. It did everything I wanted of it, well - it even ran a full Oracle 8 database - and it fit easily into a coat pocket.
If I was designing a netbook now I'd start with the Libretto form factor, use solid state memory for backing store (definitely no hard disk) and finish it with about 2mm of rubber all round, for splash proofing and increased shock protection. It would run Ubuntu (possibly the netbook special build) and weigh not more than the Libretto - which is to say 910 grammes.
If Toshiba could build that machine in 1996, it shouldn't be difficult to do the same now, with solid state storage and better battey life. A Netbook - or a Libretto - is not meant to be your main computer. It's meant to be something you have with you virtually all the time. It needs to be robust because it's going to take knocks. It needs to be small, otherwise it's awkward to carry. It needs to be light for the same reason. If it doesn't have the graphics or the horsepower to run Crysis, well, frankly, I can live without.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Couldn't disagree more. A full size notebook is not good enough for people who want a netbook. If you've ever flown coach, the reasons are obvious. With a typical laptop, if you place it on your tray table and open the screen to a comfortable viewing angle, the edge of the screen neatly tucks in where the tray table was with very little extra space. This becomes a problem only when the person in front of you leans back and your screen gets compressed between the back of the seat and the tray table. In a panic, you have to yank the computer out of there or risk the screen breaking.
I desperately want a laptop that is about 1.5 inches shorter off the table when fully open so that it isn't at risk when using it on a tray table. A netbook would be perfect for that. Here's what I want in a netbook:
There's my list as a frequent traveler. In other words, a size-reduced (screen-border-reduced) MacBook with ExpressCard, no optical drive, and an Atom CPU instead of a Core 2 Duo CPU.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Apple has entered this field; it's called the MacBook Air. It's expensive, it's heavy, and it has limited connectivity options.
For heaven's sake folks, the Air isn't a Netbook - its a regular 13.3" widescreen form-factor laptop (which is about the minimum size for a full-sized keyboard and better-than-XGA display) that's been made super-slim, and then made to look even slimmer by clever design. Its aimed squarely at well-off Mac users who want a small laptop to supplement their iMac, don't want a MacBook Pro (pretty, but relatively hefty) but fancy something a bit more "executive" than the regular MacBook. Its no power-house, but it has considerably more grunt than most netbooks. The connectivity is stripped out because it is assumed that you'll use WiFi and Bluetooth (there's a clue in the name). The seriously expensive SSD option is intended to give HD-equivalent capacity. Its main competitors would have been smaller, sexy and equally expensive ultra-compacts, and the killer features would have been the keyboard, and that it slipped into a briefcase designed for A4/Letter documents better than a smaller-but-thicker computer. Yet, somehow, the reviews always put the Air head-to-head with the $300 EEE PC 701, rather than $3000 worth of carbon-fibre bonsai from Sony.
Just for the record, I own 0 (zero) MacBook Airs and 1 (one) EEE PC 701 (and am tempted to upgrade to a 901) - but I just find the comparison bizzarre.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
It's still pointless to compare new to used though. Give it time and you'll be able to pick up used eeepc's for cheap too.