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?"

9 of 354 comments (clear)

  1. Easy by antifoidulus · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

  2. Cheap. by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  3. Power Consumption / Battery Life by lobiusmoop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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."
    1. Re:Power Consumption / Battery Life by ThinkingInBinary · · Score: 5, Informative

      The XO gets its 9-10 hours of battery life when reading ebooks by turning off everything but the LCD and DCON (display controller). The system goes into suspend-to-RAM but leaves the screen on so you can read it. If you use this with the screen in reflective mode (no backlight) it can last a hell of a long time. Doing anything else, though, it gets a normal 2-4 hours of battery.

  4. Re:An Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  5. I actually RTFA... by neokushan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I read the article. I got about 2 paragraphs in and read this little gem:

    we're still waiting for the Apple iPhone of netbooks - the example that blows all out of the water and sets a new benchmark for all to follow.

    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
    1. Re:I actually RTFA... by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Honestly, what am I missing here?

      What specheads usually miss: The secret sauce is usability not specs. Other smartphones can do the same things - on paper. Many people don't buy non-iPhone smartphones because they think those phones are too complicated to use.

      The same might go for the netbook marked - people are talking about RAM amount, price range, 3G etc. Maybe a better user experience would be a good idea? How about a piece of easy-to-use software on a USB thumdrive that allows you to set up a home network complete with sharing? A _lot_ of people with netbooks also have a desktop. If they could access photos, movies, documents on their desktop then that might be a good idea. Or maybe even sync between those computers?

      --

      Stop the brainwash

  6. A non-Intel processor by david.given · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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...

  7. Netbooks by edbob · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.