Slashdot Mirror
New AMD Processors Aiming Between Laptops and Netbooks
An anonymous reader writes with an article about AMD's Conesus chip, suggesting that it is intended to compete with Intel's Atom for the netbook market. However, CNet reports that AMD is eschewing that form factor in favor of something larger, yet still more portable than a traditional laptop. Quoting:
"AMD's strategy seems solid, in my opinion. Go for a segment that is bigger and better than Netbooks. The ultraportable category (the MacBook Air being the best example) is full of attractive but expensive designs. Why not work with PC makers to offer an ultrathin, ultralight, full-featured 13-inch notebook that is priced a lot less than $1,800? Why not $600 or $700? In addition to the conventional criticism of Netbooks (small screens, tiny keyboards), an underrated fact is that many users eventually get the feeling that they're stuck with an underpowered laptop."
Doesn't anyone proofread anything anymore?
GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
Don't you mean Via Nano?
Microsoft stroke deals with hardware vendors to limit capacities of their netbook products. Asus is trying to pull off this market and sell bigger (and a bit more expensive) products. Are they scared that too many people will learn that a netbook is enough for them ?
an underrated fact is that many users eventually get the feeling that they're stuck with an underpowered laptop
... games? Who knows... I think it's the same mentality that gets dual/quad CPUs in desktops that are used for spreadsheets and browsing. More power to AMD to sell their products - just as long as it comes with a screen resolution upgrade.
I have a new netbook with Intel's Atom chip in it (Lenovo Ideapad) and it isn't underpowered so much as just underfeatured. For the screen, it isn't the size but the resolution; Fujitsu manages to put 1280x800 in their even smaller Lifebook models but that doesn't explain the 6x cost difference. It'd be nice to have a firewire port (I have a FW video camera and external drives) and a DVI instead of analog VGA. Other than that, the thing is perfect so it's close enough. Some people will want more CPU power for
I'm actually inclined to agree with AMD's stance on this. Incidentally, I think this is the original article that all these other news sources are paraphrasing and it has more information.
You are undoubtedly right that now netbooks are available people who were previously stuck at full laptop level but only need a netbook will migrate. And we're seeing that. But not all the people who buy a netbook will find it suits them in the end. I was very tempted to get one, nearly did, but eventually decided that nice though the Eee PC looked, it ultimately wasn't quite powerful enough for my needs. The supposed advantages of netbooks / mininotebook are excellent portability, battery life and cheapness. But they're not actually that cheap - they're priced too high. Oh, they're cheaper than modern laptops, but UK£300 for an Asus Eee PC (about $US450, probably cheaper outside the UK), is still a significant purchase for most. Significant enough that spending an extra £150 / £200 for something obviously more powerful (and with more screen real estate), is less of a factor. For most people, the decision is more likely to be based on the portability (battery life is getting pretty good for full laptops these days and places to plug them in more commonplace, so less of a concern). Netbooks are more portable, but they're still not exactly mobile phones. And at the same time, laptops are getting lighter. A student who walks around with a netbook all day long might benefit from this, but a travelling salesman in his car, or a holidaying Slashdotter on the train... I think a lot of people prefer the power and the screen size of a laptop.
Netbooks seem to have done well because they are a new market segment and people who naturally fall to that segment are shifting from laptops or getting in for the first time now. Or because they're new and they're trendy. But what AMD are reporting is that actually sales compared to laptops are fairly small and there is also an uncommonly high level of returns on netbooks which suggests people realising they don't suit their needs either. We're also seeing a failure of the principle of the netbooks by their manufacturers as they implicitly concede that there is a demand for more power by releasing increasingly expensive and more powerful netbooks - a sign that they are trying to overlap more with the bottom end of the laptop market.
So netbooks - certainly have their market, but AMD might well be right to focus on real laptops where they may well take a strong lead over Intel. AMD have had their ups and downs, but most of those downs have been due to either not having as much money to throw around as the giant Intel, or sheer luck (Intel's Israeli lab unexpectedly turning up an unforecasted power boosting design). In terms of strategy, AMD have usually been pretty strong turning out, if not always the most powerful chips, usually the best price to performance ratios.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
Why would anyone but a bussiness person want a netbook? Just asking not stating. Presumably bussiness folks want to check e-mail, corporate calanders, catch a movie, and show power points. They will never program, do calculations on the road with them so how much power do you need. If you need to program or present calculations wou want a big screen and big KB anyhow, plus a fast CPU and battery to match. So it's gonna be bigger. Net books only need slow cpus right?
Why would anyone but a bussiness person want a netbook?
Why would a business person want one in the first place? They are not large enough to stand out among the cubicle desks and their small speakers are not nearly powerful enough to echo their tacky startup sounds to their whole floor.
Anyone with ubiquitous network access? They're called netbooks for a reason.
I have plenty of storage and processing power elsewhere, I don't need battery sucking features on my portable terminal.
Netbook == PADD with a keyboard.
Opportunity knocks. Karma hunts you down.
Why would anyone but a bussiness person want a netbook?
I like my eee because:
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Anyway, can't you just Skype over a 3G chip if it's that important to you?
Right now, my laptop is my 'main' computer. It takes 4-5 minutes to pack it up and bring it somewhere, plus it's heavy. An EEE I could just carry along, no hassle. Why have it? Simple, org-mode in Emacs!
There is already a player in the ultraportable market: Intel Ultra Low Voltage (ULV), which currently powers all the sleek models from Apple, Toshiba, Sony, Thinkpad, etc.
Article says, "Delivering a more powerful dual-core processor (such as AMD's Conesus) for this segment would also turn some heads".
Sorry, if you deliver a more powerful processor at a higher TDP, you are no longer in the ultraportable segment, per se. The AMD Conesus will not fit into Macbook Air or its competitors. Instead, it will go for the slightly larger but still small laptops, where Intel is again already the dominant player with its LV (Low Voltage) CPU.
Note, Intel with its superior process technology and power management tends to be more competitive in both segments than it is in the standard desktop/notebook space.
I've been saying this for a very long time. I bought a second hand X40 and it serves me far better than a netbook would, was cheaper than one, is more durable, has a full size excellent keyboard, full size screen and is only slightly larger.
I hate printers.
Bulk, rather than weight, is also a factor.
I recently bought an Acer Aspire One. I get around by bike, and I found that my Laptop, a 13" MacBook + Brenthaven sleeve, was taking up most of the space in my pannier. A netbook, with no padded case, leaves a lot more room.
I think you're right about the UK price, but Linux netbooks are GBP 200-220 and I'm sure that competition, catalysed by AMD's entry, will drive the prices down over the next 12 months.
Yes, no one want somethings in between notebooks and desktops.
Because AMD actually knows it's shit, it designed this Conesus chip for the market in between notebooks and _netbooks_.
You're right about the "underfeatured" angle, but that's only visible now because of the ever-rising prices of these devices.
What happened in netbooks to cause this is that Asus did a "bait and switch" on consumers. (And of course all other manufacturers followed.)
The original Eee PC was announced at a very low price, almost competing with the increased price of the OLPC, but ever since then the company has been adding features and raising model prices to the point where this product series is no longer the same thing, but is now a low-end laptop instead. And when compared against a low-end laptop, it's clearly underfeatured.
This is inevitable, because the whole point of netbooks was long battery life, low weight and low prices, and you can't have any of those when extra features suck power, add weight and raise cost!
So yes, this whole market niche is in danger of becoming a dodo, but it's entirely due to crummy marketting / product design moving the price point upwards instead of downwards. At $150 or $120, lack of features becomes irrelevant or even a bonus, since it extends battery life.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
High-powered, high-priced ultra mobiles have always been there - I bought a very expensive Toshiba back in 2002 which is pretty near as small and light as you can get given the screen and keyboard. Atom opened up a whole new market exactly because these ultra-mobiles are cheap enough to buy as alternatives, not replacements or to completely new markets which probably explains the higher returns. A lot of the statements in the article is plain old bullshit, like the "failure of the principle". It's like saying compact cars are a failure because people also want semi-compacts instead of full-sized cars. The laptop producers have been fighting heavily for margins but Intel has huge margins on the Atom, do a little die size math and you'll see that they sell for far more than Core 2 Duos/Quads in terms of $/mm^2. And the sales are so far beyond expectations that Intel, you know that semiprocessor production giant, had trouble delivering.
The alledged market AMD is claiming is there can be snuffed out by Intel at any time, they have the chips to do it but are keeping the prices on the high-powered ultra-mobile chips very high. The Core 2 Duo T-series will easily cost you 3x as much as desktop chips for clockspeed parity, for example at 2.5GHz you can get a 170$ E7200 or a 510$ T9300. Sure it would be very nice of AMD to come in and help push prices down, but Intel could slash the T9300 to 2-300$ in a heartbeat and essentially close any gap that might have been between netbooks and laptops.
Yes, for a certain range AMD still has good value products as that's where they have to be as challengers, but don't confuse market realities with how they're doing financially or technologically. However that range has been growing slim, with better chipsets to match the Atom they're fighting a losing battle on the lowest end, they have lost the high-end desktop and laptop market long ago and nehalem has a heavy dose of server-oriented improvements. Intel's been hitting all their high-margin strongholds and just delivering "value" desktop/laptop processors has very poor margins. Intel can keep up their tight tick-tocks and weather this recession, I'm not sure AMD can even with this restructuring.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I'll have to disagree on the "program" part.
I have an Acer Aspire One, with the awfully named Linpus distro on it. After making it boot to xfce instead of the very limited Linpus GUI, installing geany, blender, Krita (had problems with gimp sadly:/, code::block and pygame, the AA1 turned out to be great for on the road coding.
If you're like me and you prefer to code some minigame fast, instead of playing sudoku or solitaire while traveling, a netbook is just the thing to have. The keyboard of the AA1 is big enough to type blind (and I have big fingers) and the resolution isn't THAT bad if you decrease the font's size.
Admittedly, the Atom is not particularly powerful, the 512MB ram are less than stellar and the intel onboard gfx sucks donkey anus, but it should be enough for most applications if you're not actually trying to debug the LHC's main control program and it provides a good incentive to code in a CPU/mem efficient manner.
The small size and low weight (combined with a genius traveler trackball and a 16GB SSD card) means I can even code while leaning against a wall, or in a very cramped bus, and that I can just take it with me everywhere .. just in case I might have to wait for some time somewhere.
Oh ... And it's a tech-girl magnet. Too bad there aren't many where I live though ;)
"DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
These are precisely the sort of computers that hikers look for.
Ummm, maybe. It depends on what you mean. I ride a bicycle to work. I could never take a full sized laptop on the bike but I sometimes take the eee. I wouldn't want to take it all the time though.
If I am camping in my van I would definitely take the eee, but if I am out in the bush walking for days on end I wouldn't take it because it still has too much weight to justify carrying.
http://michaelsmith.id.au