Slashdot Mirror


Intel Launches Next-Gen Atom N450 Processor

MojoKid writes "Intel has unveiled its next-generation Atom N450 processor, and a review of the new Asus Eee PC 1005PE netbook that houses it shows decent gains in performance and lower power consumption. The Atom N450 has been re-architected similar to Intel's other notebook processors in that it now has an integrated memory controller and graphics core on the CPU itself. In addition, Intel's serial DMI (Direct Media Interface) now replaces the system bus to the Southbridge IO controller. From a performance standpoint, the Atom N450 single core chip offers a nice performance gain versus previous generation Atom CPUs and it appears Intel has dual-core variants of the chip on the horizon as well."

165 comments

  1. So... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is the new integrated graphics core a descendant of intel's much maligned; but well supported in linux, GMA950 line, or is it another take on the HD-media-accelerating-but-dear-god-the-drivers-oh-why-does-it-hurt GMA500 stuff?

    1. Re:So... by sznupi · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is, supposedly, X3150, so basically the same part that's in G31. 3100/X3100? Anyway, seems it's "proper" Intel GMA, with good Linux support.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The graphics core doesn't provide H.264 or VC1 acceleration.

      Basically, it's worse than useless for HTPC use, or casual web surfing use in a netbook or nettop, especially now that Flash accelerates H.264 with hardware.

      Oh, "net"book. Web Surfing. YouTube HD/etc. Arse.

    3. Re:So... by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That was my first thought..No accelerated anything, crappy performance on anything more than rendering a basic webpage, totally lame. I also wonder if they could have picked WORSE timing with the FTC investigating and EU already fining them.

      I mean first the have to cut a 1.25 billion dollar check to AMD for rigging the game with OEMs through bribes and threats, they shut out Nvidia from the newer chipsets leaving them to rot on LGA775 and making themselves the only game in town for the new sockets, and now integrating their shitty GPU, which of course will make it even easier to cut Nvidia's ION out of that market as well. WTF Intel? Do you really want a MSFT antitrust bust added to your company?

      This seems to me to be the absolute WORST timing they could have come up with for this release. They should have waited until AMD came out with Bulldozer (which doesn't compete in the same market as Atom) and then popped out the new chips, so they could say "see? We are just doing what the other guys are doing!" but instead this looks more like trying to drive another nail into the independent chipset market, at least to me, and I wouldn't doubt the FTC and EU takes a close look as well. Stupid move Intel, stupid move.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    4. Re:So... by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      They should have waited until AMD came out with Bulldozer

      Or waited for Nvidia's ION2 chipset, rumored to have a version for VIA's Nano (which ought to be able to compete in the same market as this Atom).

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    5. Re:So... by walter_f · · Score: 1

      Fortunately, the integrated graphics in the Pine View architecture, called GMA3150 (targeted at netbooks) is a descendant of the Linux-friendly GMA950 line. The basic design of the 3150 isn't even new, it goes back to 2007.

      On the other hand, the GMA500 is not closely connected to the 950 to 3x00 line. There are people who insist that not the hardware is to be blamed for the poor usability under Linux, but the (crappy) drivers provided by Intel for this GPU.

      Whether this will be confirmed some day or not, until then here's a list of netbooks to be avoided by Linux users because of GMA500 (list probably incomplete):

      "MSI's Wind U115 Hybrid, Sony's VAIO P series, Fujitsu's Lifebook U820, ASUStek's Eee PC 1101HA, Dell's Inspiron Mini 10 and Inspiron Mini 12, Acer's Aspire One 751, ASUStek's EeePC T91 tablet, Sony Vaio X series, Nokia Booklet 3G, and the OQO 02+ are some examples of netbooks using the GMA 500 US15W."

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA#GMA_500

    6. Re:So... by BikeHelmet · · Score: 1

      It's the GMA500 line. I know because I read quite a bit about PowerVR and their SGX cores employed in ARM SoCs that TI/Samsung are putting in cellphones. Intel licensed PowerVR's designs and stuck them into their stuff. Somewhere along the line they tacked on DirectX support. PowerVR's GPUs only natively support OpenGL 2.0 and OpenGL ES 2.0/1.1. Because the drivers are new (unlike GMA950 and PowerVR SGX) they're also shit.

  2. Midnight Blue? by Yvan256 · · Score: 5, Funny

    (photo) Asus Eee PC 1005PE In Midnight Blue

    What Midnight Blue? Oh, you mean underneath all those stickers? Seriously, why do non-Apple laptops always look like Nascar, erm, cars?

    1. Re:Midnight Blue? by anss123 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They get paid for the stickers. What annoy me more are the 1 million and 1 slightly different models; I would have preferred a slightly inferior but well supported (by the community as well as the company) model like the 700 was in the past.

    2. Re:Midnight Blue? by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful
      My guess is that it's a variety of factors:
      • Apple, having such a strong design culture, is the only manufacturer who realizes these stickers make your computer look cheap and stupid.
      • Apple's design culture is often about minimalism, and so they probably wouldn't put extra symbols or stickers on their computers even if it didn't look cheap and stupid.
      • Apple is just about the only laptop manufacturer who can't be bullied by Microsoft into putting any kind of "Microsoft certified" sticker on it.
      • Apple customers are less likely to be casual about their attachment to the brand. If you're a Dell customer, you might not think twice about buying an HP. If you're an Apple customer, buying an HP instead is a little more noteworthy. Therefore, they don't have to try to compete by advertising energy star compliance or the latest Intel chip. An awful lot of Apple customers couldn't care less about which Intel chip is in their computers.

      There are probably more, but that's off the top of my head.

    3. Re:Midnight Blue? by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Stickers can be always removed...what's really frustrating is that many otherwise fine laptops come in glossy finish.

      That might look good on an equipment which sits on the shelf in your house...or in shop. But terrible for something which is meant to be routinely touched by hands and kept in usual bag with other stuff.

      Guess it just shows that such manufacturers care more about how it looks in shop...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    4. Re:Midnight Blue? by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      ASUS isn't too bad in this regard as a lot of their other eee's are done in a matte finish.

    5. Re:Midnight Blue? by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I just bought one of the new HP Envy laptop and was presently surprised at the lack of stickers. Its just an HP logo on the back, similar to apple. In fact, the entire thing pretty much was just ripped off from Apple - keyboard design, body construction, multi-touch mousepad, you name it. Even the packaging was slick and minimalist, just like an apple. (Pricier than a PC, but way more bang for your buck than a similarly priced macbook pro). And no, not a window's certified sticker in sight - oh snap, maybe its not actually windows certified!!!!

    6. Re:Midnight Blue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Because unlike pretentious Apple fanboys, most people care more about a computer being cost effective and able to do what is needed. Its the reason why PCs and not Macs own most of the market.

    7. Re:Midnight Blue? by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 4, Informative

      Once you have removed the stickers, you are often left with difficult to remove adhesive gunk on the laptop. An easy way of removing the gunk without damaging or scratching the surface is to spray a little silicone based lubricant in the area and wipe with a paper towel. It quickly wipes off and the silicone lubricant won't damage plastic like petroleum based lubricants (like WD-40) sometimes do.

    8. Re:Midnight Blue? by Tetsujin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Because unlike pretentious Apple fanboys, most people care more about a computer being cost effective and able to do what is needed. Its the reason why PCs and not Macs own most of the market.

      Why does cost-effective, capable hardware imply a need for a billion stickers on the casing?

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    9. Re:Midnight Blue? by instantkamera · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I just checked the HP Envy out, it is EXACTLY like a macbook. They didnt even try to hide it.
      Still, I applaud the rip-off. It shows, at the very least, that they understand how ugly the rest of their lineup is.
      The guy who said "NASCAR" was right on the money. No other term quite embodies the black-hole-of-suck that is PC laptop design.

    10. Re:Midnight Blue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      * PC customers are capable of removing the the stickers.

    11. Re:Midnight Blue? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Because they probably get a discount for some of the stickers. (That's certainly why they put bloatware on there - the bloat developers pay the computer manufacturers to bundle it.)

    12. Re:Midnight Blue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WD-40 is not a lubricant

    13. Re:Midnight Blue? by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Because they probably get a discount for some of the stickers.

      Well, sure, but go up three posts in this thread and it looks more like AC is arguing that the stickers make it go faster... :) The stickers, by themselves, do not make the machine better. I think there's a fair case that they make the machine worse, at least until they are removed.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    14. Re:Midnight Blue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then why is the very first listed application on the can that I have, "LUBRICATES: moving parts such as: * Hinges * Wheels * Rollers * Chains * Gears"?

    15. Re:Midnight Blue? by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      Because they want the sales?

      I used to work in bicycle shops doing repair and sales. We *never* sold WD-40, and always recommended against it's use ( at least as a chain oil ). It was not very good for that. Technically, it may be a lubricant, but it is not a very good one. It was designed to displace water ( WD - Water Displacer ). It you want something like a penetrating oil, something to drive out water, to clean, WD-40 is probably very good at those. Light lubrication? Maybe. I wouldn't, myself.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    16. Re:Midnight Blue? by rrohbeck · · Score: 2, Informative

      I prefer orange oil based cleaners. They are often marketed as label or gum removers.
      Not only do they smell good, they also don't damage plastics. Oh and they're also a great insecticide and will keep ants away because all insects hate the smell - after all the oil is the oranges' natural defense.

    17. Re:Midnight Blue? by jittles · · Score: 1

      My Dell XPS 1530 laptop did not come with any stickers on it at all. I think the laptop looks relatively nice, too. Maybe not as fancy as a Mac Book Pro but it won't burn your leg if you accidentally touch the machine to your skin, either.

    18. Re:Midnight Blue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HP Envy

      In fact, the entire thing pretty much was just ripped off from Apple

      At least it is appropriately named. Pathetic.

    19. Re:Midnight Blue? by MadUndergrad · · Score: 1

      Wait, they call it the Envy? Any more subtle, HP, and you'll be calling it the "we're still cool! really!"

    20. Re:Midnight Blue? by johno.ie · · Score: 1

      Perhaps he should have said that WD-40 is a very bad lubricant. A good lubricant will stay on the hinge/axle/gear for a long time and continue to lubricate it. WD-40 will actually remove existing lubricants from a part and cause it to seize up quicker than not using the WD-40 in the first place. You should always relubricate a part with the proper grade of grease or oil after using WD-40 on it. Don't believe everything you read, including this.

      Try this, rub your thumb and forefinger together, there shouldn't be much friction due to natural skin oils and moisture. Spray a drop of WD-40 on your thumb/finger and do the same thing again, you should feel your fingerprints rubbing off each other and increased friction.

      --
      872835240
    21. Re:Midnight Blue? by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

      new HP Envy laptop

      I have seen this computer. What bugs me: the extra column of keys, very normal looking and feeling keys, beside the typical Tab-caps lock-shift-control. If you search for the shift key, you could end up starting a calculator window. Miss the tab key? You just started a web browser. Miss the Esc? Now you started your mail program. Kudos to Windows 7 for letting me start 100 browsers without cauing bizarre behavior. Why do well-designed machines always end up with completely rediculous annoyances--because no matter how much moolah is soaked from you, dear purchaser, you must come to hate it enough to want to buy a better one. You would think that spending double for a computer entitles you to hassle freedom, but instead it just proves how desperate you have to be to spend so much.

      --
      Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
    22. Re:Midnight Blue? by indi0144 · · Score: 1

      also, it's good for removing thermal paste and deep cleaning heatsinks.

    23. Re:Midnight Blue? by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 1

      Those aren't too bad for me - I've yet to hit one goign for a tab or caps, shift, etc. The biggest flaw in terms of layout is the esc key, which is one over from where it should be. The key in its place starts help. You can reassign the left column keys to do what you want, so they could just be no-ops I guess. I'd prefer a better layout for the page keys, but I've yet to see a laptop do it right without being full sized, so I guess I'll just live with it.

  3. Still chokes on flash? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Intel and Adobe both have completely dropped the ball, but right now it's Intel that's in trouble. The only "netbook" I know that can handle fullscreen flash is the LT3013u; At 12" and $350 it hits the price point okay but misses size. Still, it's at least got a 720p display, which means it has to do more than most of the competition to even break even — it does better than that.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Still chokes on flash? by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you think Flash sucks on Windows then obviously you've never seen it run on Mac OS X. Adobe is a complete disgrace on that OS.

    2. Re:Still chokes on flash? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3

      If you think Flash sucks on Windows then obviously you've never seen it run on Mac OS X. Adobe is a complete disgrace on that OS.

      That's okay, I can experience how much it blows on Linux. Using the 32 bit flash for Linux in a 32 bit firefox or in 64 bit firefox with a little help, on my Athlon 64 X2 4000+, was about like using it on my Acer Aspire D250 (1.6GHz Atom, old type.) Using the 64 bit flash on that machine was more like using it on a 1.4 GHz Thunderbird or something. Now I have a Phenom II 720 and I can just barely watch fullscreen flash video, and flash games perform worse than a Core Duo T2600 with Windows XP. Adobe hates Linux as much as they hate Mac OS.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Still chokes on flash? by jo42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Have you ever even considered that the problem isn't the hardware, but the [lousy, crappy pile of rancid sheep dip] software known as "Flash"?

    4. Re:Still chokes on flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you think Flash sucks on Mac OS X then obviously you've never seen it run in Linux. Adobe is a complete disgrace on that OS.

    5. Re:Still chokes on flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Intel and Adobe both have completely dropped the ball, but right now it's Intel that's in trouble. The only "netbook" I know that can handle fullscreen flash is the LT3013u; At 12" and $350 it hits the price point okay but misses size. Still, it's at least got a 720p display, which means it has to do more than most of the competition to even break even -- it does better than that.

      Thankfully Adobe has finally started working on hardware acceleration for their Flash video decoding. Check out the 10.1 betas to see how it's coming along. Still a ways to go, but it's a hell of a lot better than it's been.

    6. Re:Still chokes on flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would anyone run a browser in 64bit mode?

    7. Re:Still chokes on flash? by Big+Boss · · Score: 3, Funny

      Doesn't Firefox need more than 4GB these days?? :D

    8. Re:Still chokes on flash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I certainly do, especially since the 64-bit Flash plugin is stable on the distro I use. The day I can disable multilib is the day that I can reduce wasted hard disk space.

    9. Re:Still chokes on flash? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2, Informative

      On the other hand Flash Player for linux is the only x64 flash player out there.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    10. Re:Still chokes on flash? by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone run a browser in 64bit mode?

      Why not?

      I don't have a good reason, personally, for my decision to run 64-bit versions of any software I use, if it's available. I made the switch to the AMD64 platform rather late (last 2008) - by which time a lot of the problems had already been solved. I've never had to run the 32-bit Flash plugin on my 64-bit processor, for instance.

      I don't know if there's any practical benefit to running a 64-bit build of the Browser... Running a 32-bit build on a 64-bit kernel would get me 4GiB of virtual memory space for the process - do I actually need more than that? I couldn't tell you. And is the cost of a 64-bit build (64-bit integers and pointers everywhere, larger instructions as well I suppose) significant? Again, couldn't say. I run a 64-bit build because I want to run a pure 64-bit system, that's all, really.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    11. Re:Still chokes on flash? by mounthood · · Score: 1

      I installed Flash through the website with the "Ubuntu Partners Channel" on 9.10 and it was really easy. The partners channel looks like just another apt source. It'll be interesting to see if upgrades "just work".

      --
      tomorrow who's gonna fuss
    12. Re:Still chokes on flash? by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      The latest versions aren't too bad. I've never seen more thna 1GB even with many windows and tabs open.
      On 3.1 I have seen over 2GB.

    13. Re:Still chokes on flash? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Why would anyone run a browser in 64bit mode?

      It's an issue of speed. I want flash to run as fast as possible, because it is a dog. So I want 64 bit flash. Might as well have a 64 bit browser to go with it. 64 bit flash on Linux (beta only) is indeed substantially faster than 32 bit, at least on the two systems I've compared on (Athlon 64 X2 4000+, and Phenom II 720. Other details available on request.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:Still chokes on flash? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      You should look into the latest AMD Neo based Netbooks. My local Walmart has started carrying those and I was quite imprssed at how well they do multimedia, which shouldn't be surprising as they are an ULV Athlon with a Radeon GPU for video.

      At an average price of $450 IMHO they are a really good deal for a Netbook with some real performance. After playing with one I would certainly go with the AMD other the Atom, which to me feels slower than my old 1.1GHz Celeron. Plus this, like most Intel IGPs, is frankly crapola. You would think they would have figured out how to do decent multimedia acceleration by now.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    15. Re:Still chokes on flash? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone has argued in this thread that Flash is not a gigantic piece of crap. On the other hand, it's an absolute necessity for the use of many websites. If I want what they've got, I need flash. I don't use flash on my website, if that makes you feel any better.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    16. Re:Still chokes on flash? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I'm definitely not buying any more single-core Atoms. I got an Acer Aspire D250 and it's something of a dog. I may be reselling it to someone to whom that won't matter, though. Then I got the LT3013u which has ATI GPU and 1.2GHz Athlon 64. No powersaving in the main linux kernel yet, but it's coming... so right now it's running flat-out. It's still within reasonable norms for temperature though, and still gets about 3h45m on the battery, which is enough for my current purposes. I'm running Karmic on it, and look forward to Lucid.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    17. Re:Still chokes on flash? by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      My MSI Wind U100 running Windows 7 has no problem running full-screen movies from Netflix or Hulu. I also frequently play full-screen MP4 movies that I've ripped from DVDs with absolutely no performance problems.

      Your problem might be your OS, not the hardware.

    18. Re:Still chokes on flash? by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      After having to work on customer's Atom netbooks I just can't see why folks like the things. Yeah they're cheap, but so is an old P3 laptop which would frankly give a better experience than the Atom. I swear running an Atom based netbook side by side with my old 1.1Ghz Celeron the decade old Celeron felt snappier than the Atom. And the Nettops are even worse. For the same money I could build a nice Sempron or Athlon that with cool & Quiet wouldn't use much more than the atom and more to the point wouldn't want to make me pull my hair out.

      As for your Gateway LT3103u here is some nice benchmarks you may be interested in reading. From the looks of it if I get a netbook I will want an AMD Neo based one. And since AMD has opened up the code I'm sure it won't be long before the AMD netbooks will have good support in Linux. I can't blame you for switching early though, as I wouldn't wish Vista Home Basic on my worst enemy...eeeew!

      Question: Have you tried any other distros besides Ubuntu on it? Because I always seemed to get better performance off of PCLinuxOS or Xandros Business on laptops over Ubuntu, probably because of Ubuntu always being bleeding edge. And with PCLinuxOS and their MiniME it is easy to have a custom OS for your Netbook. They not only have the usual Gnome and KDE, but also LXDE(great for laptops IMHO) XFCE and E-17. You might want to give one of them a spin, just to see if it runs better on your gear.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    19. Re:Still chokes on flash? by BikeHelmet · · Score: 1

      Adobe hates Linux as much as they hate Mac OS.

      They also hate Windows. Youtube seems to lock up for ~0.5 seconds every 12-15 seconds, on my computer.

      And yet if I download the video and play it in MPC-HC, it runs beautifully... with 5% CPU usage.

    20. Re:Still chokes on flash? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The biggest problem right now is some stuff that's not in the mainline kernel yet, like Cool n' Quiet support for Athlon L110. Once it makes it in, Ubuntu will be as good as anything else. I'm used to it these days, and have no desire to think about anything else at the same time. If Ubuntu were more bleeding edge it might support my CPU :)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    21. Re:Still chokes on flash? by msgyrd · · Score: 1

      I've only ran OSX on a single core Atom/GMA950 machine (built for the purpose of OSX), but found it to be fine.

      Obviously it's no media center or number crunching machine, but it browses the web wirelessly, handles non-HD Flash and all normal website Flash, and will play back non-HD videos without a problem. It runs Photoshop and Eclipse without problems. Loading apps is slower than my quad-core box, and it gets bogged down with intense multitasking, but it's not miserable either. It would even run VMware Fusion + an ubuntu virtual machine at a level I'd still call responsive.

      I'm genuinely curious, where is your bottleneck? What OS's are you using? Is it a problem of expectations? I've been nothing but happy with the performance for the $180 in parts.

    22. Re:Still chokes on flash? by msgyrd · · Score: 1

      Old P3 laptop = 12lb ugliness, crap battery life, no wireless.
      New Atom netbook = 2.5 lb sleekness, +6hrs battery life.

  4. Finally proper platform by sznupi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Now only few other pieces of the puzzle in the quest for ultimate ultraportable.

    Pixel Qi screen, for even longer battery life and legibility in sunlight.

    With lower temps & power draw of Pinetrail it might be also possible for netbooks to become routinely cooled passively.

    Also just for me and other faithful...uhm...clit ;p (plus preferably as close in overall form to original Lenovo S10 as possible, it was actually very nice) Can't help it, playing Diablo2 in a cathedral during organ concert, on a cemetery on 1 XI night (it looks like this here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wszystkich_swietych_cmentarz.jpg ) and in a train while sitting next to some nuns are things I simply must do. And with touchpad that's not really possible.

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:Finally proper platform by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Clits have been deprecated because they wear out. They just can't take any abuse whatosever and you're always having to buy replacement covers for them. The glidepad, on the other hand, is only hard on your fingerprint, and those are a liability anyway. :)

      I've actually done a bit of point and click gaming with a glidepad, it's not too bad. A FPS, on the other hand, is basically a gigantic fail. If not a mouse, I need a trackball for that. I had the original marble, whose ergonomics better suited my bear paws, but the trackman wheel is pretty amazing. I've used mine resting on my leg while sitting on the couch, and it's quite workable in that configuration. Don't put it on the seat next to you though, you'll fuck up your wrist.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Finally proper platform by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Clits have been deprecated because they wear out. They just can't take any abuse what so ever...

      Just because your girlfriend isn't into S&M.

    3. Re:Finally proper platform by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      "Clits have been deprecated because they wear out. They just can't take any abuse whatosever and you're always having to buy replacement covers for them. The glidepad, on the other hand, is only hard on your fingerprint, and those are a liability anyway. :)"

      Bullshit, I've used quite a few decade-old Thinkpads, and not a single one had problems with the trackpoint.

      I can understand preferring a trackpad, but a decent trackpoint/nipple/clit (I actually haven't seen any usable ones except on Thinkpads, TBH) won't wear out with regular use.

    4. Re:Finally proper platform by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clits have been deprecated because they wear out.

      There's also the fact that eraserhead pointers suck horribly for controlling anything. The reason nobody ships them is because they are not good. The reason nobody wants them is because they are not good. They are bad pointing devices and anyone who wants one should feel bad.

    5. Re:Finally proper platform by Teun · · Score: 1

      I feel just the contrary, all my Toshiba laptops have (had) a trackpoint clit and the next laptop wil again be chosen because it'll have one. The control is so much better than with these silly space-hogging and impossible to control trackpads.
      Because of the improved form factor I'd love to see a netbook without a trackpad.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    6. Re:Finally proper platform by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      There's also the fact that eraserhead pointers suck horribly for controlling anything.

      I have found them to be the most usable device in a moving vehicle on a bad road, if you turn down the sensitivity. Sometimes, there's simply nothing else that will do. However, those times are very rare, especially as compared to the number of times I've accidentally moved the mouse pointer while trying to type.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For 2 years now I've been reading that ARM netbooks with awesome battery lifes are just around the corner.

    So, where are they? Newegg lists exactly *zero* of them. No local store in my entire city of 500K people has a single one - I have called around to verify this. Not one!

    I'm aware of the "alwaysinnovating" thing, but for various reasons I don't like it, and anyway it's just a beagleboard.

    Where are the dozens of choices in different configurations that were supposed to hit the market? First we heard Q408. Then we hear Q409. Well, Q409 is about over... At some point I'll give up and just buy a damn Atom based one.

    1. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by makomk · · Score: 1

      Microsoft seem to have been quietly killing them off, since unlike the Atom ones they can't run Windows. Some of the usual suspects had prototypes which were rapidly yanked.

    2. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      At the moment, available arm processors are still behind the atom in performance by a fairly large margin, and ahead in power consumption by a similar margin. The current top of the line arm chip is the cortex-a8 used in the beagle board and gumstix systems-on-a-chip. When dual core and quad core arm cortex-a9 processors become available, that might change.

      We are currently in the "roll your own" stage of development for arm machines.

      Buy a beagle board or a gumstix, attach it to an lcd, mini keyboard and battery, now install one of the handful of linux operating systems available for it and you have an arm netbook.

      http://beagleboard.org/

    3. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      Correction, the top of the line is currently the Snap Dragon.

    4. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buy a beagle board or a gumstix, attach it to an lcd, mini keyboard and battery, now install one of the handful of linux operating systems available for it and you have an arm netbook.

      Right... that'll go over big with the general public, so I'm sure to see that kit available at newegg and bestbuy any day now.

      Point is, there was headline after headline proclaiming that 2009 was going to be the year of the ARM netbook, and by 2012 that 20 or 30% of the entire netbook market would be ARM based. That simply isn't going to happen if the answer is "buy your own components, get yourself a CNC milling machine and design a case for them, and fashion your own netbook".

      People are always quick to blame MS and Intel, but the problem is more that their competitors keep dropping the ball.

    5. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      I see it stated by wikipedia "The Snapdragon application processor core is called Scorpion and is similar to the ARM Cortex-A8 core."

      However, I also see that snapdragon is powering windows mobile phones. This means that it can not be an ARM chip as windows mobile will not run on ARM chips.

    6. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by bflong · · Score: 1

      Windows *mobile* runs on ARM cpus.

      --
      Why is it so hot? Where am I going? What am I doing in this handbasket?
    7. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      On further investigation, looks like WinMo can run on an arm. But I still can't find any official word that snapdragon is ARM.

    8. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by jabjoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dude you are being an idiot.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapdragon_(processor)
      First line:
      "Snapdragon is a name of an architecture of a family of chipsets with an ARM-based CPU."

    9. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Buy a beagle board or a gumstix, attach it to an lcd, mini keyboard and battery, now install one of the handful of linux operating systems available for it and you have an arm netbook.

      Right... that'll go over big with the general public, so I'm sure to see that kit available at newegg and bestbuy any day now.

      Wait, that's your complaint? Not that building and setting up your own machine would be a pain in the ass, but just that the kit wouldn't be popular with the general population, and wouldn't be available on Newegg?

      Point is, there was headline after headline proclaiming that 2009 was going to be the year of the ARM netbook, and by 2012 that 20 or 30% of the entire netbook market would be ARM based. That simply isn't going to happen if the answer is "buy your own components, get yourself a CNC milling machine and design a case for them, and fashion your own netbook".

      People are always quick to blame MS and Intel, but the problem is more that their competitors keep dropping the ball.

      Well, really, building your own ARM netbook isn't the answer to ARM netbooks being "the next big thing". It does sound like a fun project, actually (I think I'd start with an old EEE case or something) but, yeah, I really don't think a build-your-own-ARM-netbook would make for a successful popular platform...

      But that's the other big problem with ARM netbooks: binary compatibility. People generally want IA-32 compatibility (whether they immediately realize it or not) - and a lot of people want to run Windows or Mac OS X and their usual collection of applications. This is the basic pattern we saw with the second round of EEEs and such - there were the Linux versions that could do a bunch of stuff, had a good web browser and Open Office and so on, but to a lot of people these machines were worth more if they were running Windows. I think when people saw that netbooks could be used as ordinary laptops, that's what they wanted. From a Windows user's perspective, a Windows netbook is more useful than a Linux netbook because the Windows netbook can do everything the Linux netbook can, plus it can run Windows software. Now, going back to the ARM netbook thing - going to an ARM processor, one burns that bridge. Such a machine would presently be doomed to be forever surrounded with warnings and caveats. "This is a nice machine, but you can never ever run Windows on it, it won't work." If this machine is on a shelf next to a machine with an IA-32 processor, the IA-32 machine has a distinct advantage. From most people's perspective, there's something that IA-32 machine can do that the ARM can't: It can run all their IA-32 software. Even running Linux, there are a few pieces of software I use that are specifically IA-32... Hardware drivers and WINE are the main examples. This is why my lovely G4 powerbook is gathering dust instead of running Linux - it would have been a pretty feeble Linux environment, not having decent drivers for the video chipset or the wireless card...

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    10. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      No, I just am not taking wikipedia as truth. It isn't a valid source for research and nowhere does it state what ARM architecture it uses. Qualcoms snapdragon page does not state that snapdragon is an ARM cpu. I have found a grand total of one blog article, in reference to an Asus snapdragon eePC that was only shown for one day that even mentions ARM in association with snapdragon, and that article is also filled with innuendo that microsoft forced Asus to withdraw the netbook.

      If you have some real references, please do show them. I welcome it, I really do.

    11. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by jabjoe · · Score: 1

      Atom is ahead in performance, no denying that, but it's not clean cut as it's not by much and it is hard to compare as they eat instructions very differently. But just to be clear, the ARM is much further ahead when it comes to low power consumption and cost. If you free of Windows you are free of x86, then you are free to balance power consumption, cost and performance, which means ARM or MIPS win every time. In fact you could cheat, and fit multiple ARM cores and come out on top with performance whilst still coming out on top with cost and power consumption. That's how big a difference we are talking.

    12. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by jabjoe · · Score: 3, Informative
    13. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by jabjoe · · Score: 1

      Binary compatibility is a non-issue if your free of Windows. I'm happy with my SheavaPlug. Be happier still when I can have a decent ARM netbook. I don't need Windows, Wine or not. The idea of a virtual machine Wine client with native Wine server interests me, but only technically.

    14. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by Nadaka · · Score: 1
    15. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      You could say the same thing about the home computer before 1980, the acorn atom and sinclair zx80 were only available in kit form. And before that, much more self fabrication was required.

      Right now, you can:

      A: build it yourself with hobby parts.
      B: wait till someone makes a big enough investment to get mass production off the ground.
      C: try to scrounge up enough capital to get it going yourself. These guys are doing just that http://www.alwaysinnovating.com/home/index.htm

    16. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by jabjoe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wikipedia is worth more trust than you give it. I've never actually found Wikipedia to be wrong. It's always seams to be the person stating Wikipedia is wrong, that is wrong. Stats seam to bear that out comparing it with other more established encyclopedias. When I have found it to be lacking, I've added to it, but not actually found it wrong, yet.

    17. Re:meanwhile, where are the ARMs? by ZosX · · Score: 1

      Seconded. An article about george w. bush might have some inconsistencies in it on wikipedia, but a page about a cpu? Why would anyone lie or make up stuff about that?

  6. RTFA, please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    RTFA: "The graphics core is a basic DX9 instantiation that is a kin to Intel's GMA500 graphics core in the previous generation Intel 945G chipset"

    1. Re:RTFA, please by nxtw · · Score: 3, Informative

      RTFA: "The graphics core is a basic DX9 instantiation that is a kin to Intel's GMA500 graphics core in the previous generation Intel 945G chipset"

      Makes no sense: the 945G and variants had a GMA 950.

    2. Re:RTFA, please by TeknoHog · · Score: 2, Informative

      RTFA: "The graphics core is a basic DX9 instantiation that is a kin to Intel's GMA500 graphics core in the previous generation Intel 945G chipset"

      I have a 945GM system whose graphics part is called GMA950. It uses the common opensource Intel drivers. On the contrary, GMA500 aka Poulsbo is the problematic one with closed drivers.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    3. Re:RTFA, please by MarcQuadra · · Score: 2, Informative

      That doesn't make any sense. The 945 chipset uses the GMA950, the GMA500 is actually a totally-outsourced PowerVR chip. The 'native' Intel chips (i810 through G45) are all tatally supported by Intel's open-source drivers, the GMA500 is almost impossible to get working in Linux.

      The new built-in N450, D410, and D510 graphics chips are based on the GMA3100, if I recall, they're even called 'GMA3150'. That means they're supported by open-source drivers (and possibly by Mac OS X!), but the performance is bad enough that even Google Earth will make you want to cry.

      They really should have used the G45 series of graphics for these things, instead of the G33. They're -worlds- apart in functionality and performance.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  7. Re-Architecting English by dwm · · Score: 3, Funny

    The Atom N450 has been re-architected ...

    Wow -- I guess it was waaaaay too advanced to merely be "re-designed".

    1. Re:Re-Architecting English by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, the architecture changed: No more FSB, which also means no more alternative chipsets. The only chipset available for the new Atoms is Intel's one-chip NM-10. Other changes are not really architectural changes but would not have been possible without the abandonment of the FSB architecture: The analog video output is limited to 1440x1050 and the LVDS port for the LCD only drives up to 1366x768. Intel would not have dared crippling the chip so seriously if manufacturers could circumvent it by using a different chipset and a separate graphics core.

    2. Re:Re-Architecting English by digitalhermit · · Score: 2, Funny

      They're just trying to be more precise. Doing so incentivizes brand awareness action-takers with post-current paradigms and forward-looking product models. A mere "re-design" would incorporate less-than-best-practice message exposure methodologies whereas a "re-architect" or architecture secondary optimization message distribution implies ground-up re-envisioning.

    3. Re:Re-Architecting English by gregarican · · Score: 1
    4. Re:Re-Architecting English by formfeed · · Score: 2, Funny

      But once they control the south bridge, who can stop them from destroying the Shire?

  8. Not impressed by Itchyeyes · · Score: 1

    This would be a whole lot more interesting if Intel didn't have a pretty solid track record of producing some of the worst GPUs on the market. Perhaps the performance and power gains are more than I'm expecting, but from my perspective this seems like a pretty transparent move to cut Nvidia out of the netbook chipset market, and consequently cut down on consumer options on how they want to configure these types of machines as well.

  9. Intel and Linux by Enderandrew · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Intel has been tearing apart their Linux graphics stack and rewritting it for the future. For a while, that meant poor performance during the rewrite, but it really is getting better. Intel is really helping push DRI2, GEM, TTM, UXA, etc.

    At least Intel does their development in the open. Didn't Intel also contribute code to Moblin to optimize Moblin performance on their hardware? I'd like to see some more general kernel enhancements for these processors. Any speed increase over Windows on the most common netbook processor is a huge win.

    Chrome OS is already fast. If Intel can help make it faster when comparing it side-by-side to 7, it only helps Linux adoption on the whole.

    I also have a small tangental question. I always hear about huge performance gains that can come from properly writing code to take advantage of SSE2,3,4,etc instruction sets. I also hear that almost no one does write code to take advantage of these instruction sets. If Intel really wants to push their hardware, why not write such optimizations for the Linux kernel?

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    1. Re:Intel and Linux by TeknoHog · · Score: 2, Informative

      I also have a small tangental question. I always hear about huge performance gains that can come from properly writing code to take advantage of SSE2,3,4,etc instruction sets. I also hear that almost no one does write code to take advantage of these instruction sets. If Intel really wants to push their hardware, why not write such optimizations for the Linux kernel?

      The kernel doesn't do much CPU-bound processing. It is math and media libraries where these vector instructions would be actually useful. You can already have some of their advantages using a decent compiler. Basically, that means different binaries for processors with different capabilities, so your average binary distro is not going to have any fancy instructions. I suggest trying Gentoo if you actually want to use your modern CPU.

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    2. Re:Intel and Linux by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be fair to assume anyone running a 64-bit distro has a procesor capableof SSE4 insturctions? Write the code to take advantage of these instruction sets, but only enable them on your 64-bit binaries then.

      I'm no low level programmer, but I assume IO and CPU scheduling are math intensive enough. If SSE instructions really boost video encoding, what about encryption algorhythms, or file systems?

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    3. Re:Intel and Linux by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 3, Informative

      Your post completely missed the original poster's point - the Intel GMA500 is a major outlier in terms of Linux support.

      The GMA950 series is well supported by Linux (with the exception of the re-architecture issues that hurt Ubuntu 9.04 so badly).

      The GMA500 is simply minimally supported in Linux and all indications state that it will stay this way. The GMA500 graphics core was outsourced to another company, as was driver development.

      As to SSE2/3/4 - They only benefit for certain operation types. Most kernel ops won't benefit, and also, using SSE usually means hand-coding in assembler - compilers that generate good vector SIMD code are rare. The kernel developers tend to prefer to avoid hand-coded ASM whenever possible.

      However, I do recall that RAID checksumming code and memcpy() were once implemented using MMX to improve them, so these sections might benefit from SSE (and might already do so.)

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    4. Re:Intel and Linux by bfields · · Score: 1

      Intel has been tearing apart their Linux graphics stack and rewritting it for the future. For a while, that meant poor performance during the rewrite, but it really is getting better.

      As the original poster points out, none of this applies to the GMA500, which is supported by a different driver--a proprietary binary driver, and not a very well-maintained one at that, if reports are true.

    5. Re:Intel and Linux by Virak · · Score: 2, Informative

      The various SSE instruction sets provide SIMD instructions, which is an acronym for "single instruction, multiple data". As the name suggests, they allow you to perform operations on multiple pieces of data with a single instruction. SIMD is great for media applications, where you often have to do the same mathematical operations over and over again to lots of data at once, however pretty much all of the stuff that happens in a kernel is logic-heavy tasks that only deal with single pieces of data at a time, and thus can't really take advantage of these instructions in any way.

    6. Re:Intel and Linux by FreonTrip · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Certainly not. No AMD CPUs prior to the Phenoms support SSE4.x; nor did any Intel chips prior to the 45nm switchover (later Core2 CPUs). MMX, i686, SSE, and SSE2 are the baseline for all AMD64-capable CPUs. Subsequent instruction sets have been added to various architectures in a willy-nilly fashion, and with varying levels of per-clock performance depending upon the chip being discussed. I can't really speak for the utility of putting SIMD code to work in non-multimedia related code, but it seems to be a trend across the board.

    7. Re:Intel and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your post completely missed the original poster's point - the Intel GMA500 is a major outlier in terms of Linux support.

      The GMA950 series is well supported by Linux (with the exception of the re-architecture issues that hurt Ubuntu 9.04 so badly).

      The GMA500 is simply minimally supported in Linux and all indications state that it will stay this way. The GMA500 graphics core was outsourced to another company, as was driver development.

      As to SSE2/3/4 - They only benefit for certain operation types. Most kernel ops won't benefit, and also, using SSE usually means hand-coding in assembler - compilers that generate good vector SIMD code are rare. The kernel developers tend to prefer to avoid hand-coded ASM whenever possible.

      However, I do recall that RAID checksumming code and memcpy() were once implemented using MMX to improve them, so these sections might benefit from SSE (and might already do so.)

      all kernel code is integer, i think most SSE instructions are float based.

    8. Re:Intel and Linux by jittles · · Score: 1

      No, it would not be fair to assume that at all. Most Intel Core Duo Quads in the LGA775 form factor do not have SSE4 capabilities. At that time you had to buy a XEON or other high end quad core to get SSE4. These processors are quite happy to do 64-bit OS's.

    9. Re:Intel and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't it be fair to assume anyone running a 64-bit distro has a procesor capableof SSE4 insturctions?

      No, I'm running a 65nm Intel Core 2, which goes to SSSE3, not SSE4. Moreover, AMD's first 64-bit CPUs only support up to SSE2.

      If SSE instructions really boost video encoding, what about encryption algorhythms, or file systems?

      Linux implementations of encryption and checksum algorithms do take advantage of SIMD instructions.

    10. Re:Intel and Linux by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If Intel really wants to push their hardware, why not write such optimizations for the Linux kernel?

      Well, the point has been made already: that stuff doesn't happen in the kernel. Here's the followup; if there's optimizations to be done, often they can be done by the compiler. Intel does of course have a snazzy compiler which produces (on average) better performing executables than does gcc. On the other hand, gcc's focus tends to be x86 and now x86_64, so it's not bad either. In the other cases, they belong in an external library; libraries involving sound, graphics, and video are likely candidates for improvement with SSE or MMX functions. Recompiling these libraries for your architecture can potentially provide significant performance improvements. When I build any kind of intensive software I use -march=barcelona in my CFLAGS which is supposed to turn on automatic optimization for all that stuff. The resulting executable should be useless on any lesser architecture, but it's for stuff that goes into /opt or /usr/local anyway. It's not terribly difficult to rebuild packages from their source for your architecture on many systems; gentoo, of course, turns on it.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:Intel and Linux by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

      At least Intel does their development in the open.

      I assume this is directed towards NVIDIA and AMD/ATI. If so, then yeah...it's easy to develop in the open when you have nothing to hide. Last I checked, Intel wasn't anywhere near NVIDIA and ATI/AMD in the GPU arena; their GPUs that can do little more than render composited desktops. Intel is able to do open development because they know very well that their competitors are already years ahead of what they're capable of, thus they don't have a lot of fear of their trade secrets being used against them by their competitors.

    12. Re:Intel and Linux by Eil · · Score: 1

      I always hear about huge performance gains that can come from properly writing code to take advantage of SSE2,3,4,etc instruction sets. If Intel really wants to push their hardware, why not write such optimizations for the Linux kernel?

      In general, SIMD extensions like MMX, 3DNow, and SSE are application-specific. You can't just sprinkle them into the kernel code and get a magical system-wide speed boost. In the case of both MMX and SSE, the additional instructions allow a programmer to execute certain kinds of code faster. Generally, this means graphics rendering, video games, or audio/video encoding/decoding. Many Linux applications already do take advantage of SIMD extensions when compiled for the x86 platform. MPlayer is the most obvious one that I can think of, but I'm sure there are others.

    13. Re:Intel and Linux by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      I've got a friend who used the Open64 compile to rebuild his Gentoo system (on a AMD64 CPU). Aside from ATI related issues with video, he said it was observably faster by about 50%, and 30% faster in the simple benchmarks. Either way - even if it's a 20% improvement in one area - that's an incredible boost.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    14. Re:Intel and Linux by Agripa · · Score: 1

      all kernel code is integer, i think most SSE instructions are float based.

      The poster probably meant SSE in a general way. SSE2 supplanted MMX by extending the MMX instructions to operate on the larger (128 bits versus 64 bits) XMM registers instead of the x87 floating point register stack. Power of 2 integers from 8 to 64 bits are supported.

    15. Re:Intel and Linux by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

      Correct. SSE is MOSTLY float-based, but each iteration of SSE has contained a limited number of integer instructions added to the mix.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  10. Who actually needs this? by John+Betonschaar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you'd ask me: it's still a slow piece of crap that has no particular place in the market if it weren't for (consumer) Microsoft Windows being x86-only, and now it's even worse than the original Atom since you get a crappy Intel GPU for free.

    In the low-power segment: you are still better of with an ARM chip if you don't need Windows (it consumes less power), another x86 SoC if you absolutely need Windows but don't need anything else (which also consume less power) or a Via Nano if you are a consumer who likes Windows a lot but only do a little browsing and email (they are faster and comparable in terms of power consumption).

    In the HTPC/Media center segment: the Atom + Nvidia ION platform was great, low-power/low-performance CPU with a GPU that does all the video decoding and OpenGL. Now you get an Intel GPU that is *still* not able to do full video-pipeline accelerated GPU decoding. Better get yourself an old Atom, or hopefully in the future a Via Nano + decent GPU.

    In the Netbook segment: with the performance of the original Atom being nothing but abysmal unless you only use Notepad, you really want a Celeron ULV anyway. It's a much better design, in a whole different performance class than the Atom, and you don't get any of the stupid restrictions Intel puts on using the Atom.

    In the embedded segment: you don't need x86 compatibility at all, so ARM would be your 1st choice.

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I really don't see the point of a crippled and slow x86 CPU with a design based on 10-year old technology, which is forcibly coupled to an IGP that isn't able doing much more than rendering your desktop...

    1. Re:Who actually needs this? by ElSupreme · · Score: 1

      I agree 100%. Atom processors are a combination of stuff that I don't want. Too slow to do anything. So who cares about battery life.

      --
      My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    2. Re:Who actually needs this? by TheKidWho · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They're cheap, that's the point behind them.

      Also, it seems like ION will still be usable, but in a slightly revised form for the Pinetrails.

      Don't exaggerate, the Atom isn't THAT bad.

    3. Re:Who actually needs this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Its quite refreshing to read someone who admits they may be missing something. For most uses the advantages of an integrated GPU (i.e. lower cost, less power, improved reliability, etc) outweigh any performance reduction. Highly compressed mp3 music is very popular despite alternative formats with better fidelity. It is the good enough syndrome. A Mazda has good enough acceleration; you don't need a Corvette. Or to put in another way, the second five hour battery operating hours in a notebook is worth far less than the first five hours.
      Don't choose marketing as a career.

    4. Re:Who actually needs this? by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think Intel is crippling it to keep from killing higher margin notebook sales.
      From AnandTech
      "The integrated GMA 3150 graphics hasn’t been used by Intel before, it’s a 45nm shrink of the GMA 3100. It’s technically a DX9 GPU running at 400MHz, however as you’ll soon see - you can’t really play any games on this platform. The GPU only offers hardware acceleration for MPEG-2 video, H.264 and VC-1 aren’t accelerated."

      No H.264 or VC-1 hardware support means poor performance.
      Then add this.
      "Max output resolution is also limited. The best you can get over a digital connection (HDMI/DVI) is 1366 x 768, over analog VGA you can do 2048 x 1536 (only 1400 x 1050 on the N450). It’s a curious coincidence, Poulsbo also had a 1366 x 768 digital output limitation. "
      What??? No 1080p support over HDMI?
      Well so much for a media PC.

      AMD/ATI or Via+Nvidia really need to start pushing Intel in this market. I would love to see a good ARM solution because I do think it is a better platform for Netbooks and Nettops than Intel. The big problem is getting full Flash performance out of it and that is only a software issue.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    5. Re:Who actually needs this? by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      The only way I can see Ion working is if it's treated like any other discrete GPU - attached via PCIe, and overriding the integrated graphics.

      That's not exactly cheap.

    6. Re:Who actually needs this? by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      I agree 100%. Atom processors are a combination of stuff that I don't want. Too slow to do anything. So who cares about battery life.

      A fast processor is useless if you haven't got power to run it... The really nice thing about my EEE is I can take it places - it's light enough to comfortably carry it around, and it's got enough power that I can get several hours of use out of it... Like 4-5 hours of actual usage, compared to the three or so I could get with my Powerbook - doesn't sound like much but in practice it's a big difference.

      It is too slow to do a fair number of things - for instance, Youtube and Hulu (i.e. Flash video) playback is poor, and combined with the weak-ass GPU it's not much good for games or real-time 3-D animation. But it's good for web browsing, and it's powerful enough for most of what I want to do with it - playing video, running Blender, running gEDA PCB, writing code and so on.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    7. Re:Who actually needs this? by ElSupreme · · Score: 1

      Yeah but there is a middle ground between Atom and the fastest Core2 you can put into a 'laptop'. You can get low power fast processors and get 4-5 hours of battery easily.

      Look at the X200S by lenovo.

      --
      My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    8. Re:Who actually needs this? by b0bby · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have read that there's also the possibility of adding a Broadcom decoder chip to offload the work of video decoding, which might allow 1080p video while keeping power consumption low. That's what I'd like to see in my next netbook.

    9. Re:Who actually needs this? by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      Yep, unless Intel gives Nvidia a DMI license, that's pretty much the only way.

    10. Re:Who actually needs this? by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sometimes I get the impression you're just trying to find fault, if it's so "abysmal unless you only use Notepad", why do you care about the "stupid restrictions"? The Atom is about two things really, price and battery life. The Atom it's a much smaller, much less handpicked chip than any of Intel's very highly priced ULV editions. And sure you can get better workhorses for your money, but not lower power than the N450 having a 5.5W TDP for CPU+memory controller+GPU with a sub-watt additional chipset.

      It's horrible as a gaming machine. It's horrible as a HTPC. But it's a solid improvement over itself on the things it was already doing, by which I mean the two above and not performance. Even more so on the nettop side where the 90nm 945GC GMCH and 130nm ICH7 was a complete joke bringing the total up to a 45W TDP, with the new chip you see a 40% reduction to 25W going from a 330 to a N510. Though I'd still go with a 330 + Ion for that since it'll be a better HTPC, they're at least getting there.

      I have a 330 + Ion and it still sucks for gaming, bringing up the frame rate from "frozen" to "pathetic" on lowest settings doesn't change that. What these new processors lack is H.264 decoding, but there is supposed to be a third party chip for that still there'll be no 1080p output so I guess it's pass as a HTPC, but that'll solve it for netbooks that want to see it on the included display. I think this is a solid release that'll dominate the netbook market.

      ARM? Yeah, if you don't need Windows, don't need WINE, don't need virtualbox (who cares if it's dog slow on an Atom if it solves your one outstanding must-have, rarely used app?), w32codecs, dual boot or any other application who nobody bothered to test/fix on ARM. For example I don't think there's the nVidia blob that makes my Atom 330 / Ion such a nice HTPC, so one argument you use really kills the other. I see that this one doesn't fit my use case, but I can see it fitting many other people's...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    11. Re:Who actually needs this? by tool462 · · Score: 1

      with a design based on 10-year old technology

      Wow, complaining about 10 year old tech? I'd hate to hear what you have to say about Unix!

    12. Re:Who actually needs this? by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Yeah but there is a middle ground between Atom and the fastest Core2 you can put into a 'laptop'. You can get low power fast processors and get 4-5 hours of battery easily.

      Look at the X200S by lenovo.

      With a 6-cell battery (which, I'm guessing, is what you need for actual 5 hours use as opposed to spec'd), it weighs about 50% more than my 901... Of course, that may be a result of other components' weight, such as the hard drive, rather than just the battery... (judging by the weight difference between the 6-cell and 9-cell versions of the X200, that's probably the case...)

      I guess I'd probably be inclined to agree that the Atom may not be the best point on the power consumption/processing capabilities curve. What I haven't seen, however, is the combination of small form factor, light weight, decent price, and good battery life in a non-Atom machine... Any machine's a compromise, I suppose - in my case I think compromising the power of the CPU and GPU was a better deal than any of the other factors... Though, who knows? In a future purchase I might want to move to something more similar (from a hardware/form factor standpoint) to my old 12" powerbook or the X200... bigger and heavier than the 901 but more powerful, too.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    13. Re:Who actually needs this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a horrible idea that should have been replaced by Plan 9 decades ago and instead we are stuck with this legacy junk of an OS which somehow manages to still be better than the alternative (Windows, that is, as OS X is Unix, too). Read up on Plan 9 if you don't see why Unix is a horrible design which is totally broken by only going half-way on its leading principle of "everything is a file". Plan 9 is what Unix should have been. Luckily some Plan 9 features (like Unicode support and /proc) have made it into modern Unix OSes, but most of them are still missing.

    14. Re:Who actually needs this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have read that there's also the possibility of adding a Broadcom decoder chip to offload the work of video decoding, which might allow 1080p video while keeping power consumption low.

      Yup, as referenced in The Tech Report's review (and Intel's system diagram):

      • "The GMA 3150 can assist the decoding of plain old MPEG2 video, but that's about it. Intel recommends using an auxiliary video decoder chip, available from third parties like Broadcom, to facilitate HD video playback."
    15. Re:Who actually needs this? by BikeHelmet · · Score: 1

      In the HTPC/Media center segment: the Atom + Nvidia ION platform was great, low-power/low-performance CPU with a GPU that does all the video decoding and OpenGL. Now you get an Intel GPU that is *still* not able to do full video-pipeline accelerated GPU decoding. Better get yourself an old Atom, or hopefully in the future a Via Nano + decent GPU.

      Atom N330 + Ion looks very nice for a netbook. Beefy enough to be a primary computer if your life demands constant travel.

      In the Netbook segment: with the performance of the original Atom being nothing but abysmal unless you only use Notepad, you really want a Celeron ULV anyway. It's a much better design, in a whole different performance class than the Atom, and you don't get any of the stupid restrictions Intel puts on using the Atom.

      But unless you get an expensive CULV, you don't get the GPU horsepower. GMA4500 blows.

      I will appreciate this N450 if it kicks netbooks under $200-$250 new.

    16. Re:Who actually needs this? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      I think you might be exaggerating just a bit. They're at least as fast as a Pentium 4 with 1Gb of RAM (IE similar specs). The dual cores are pretty snappy, too. Even with Intel graphics, it's enough for something like Hulu.

      Yes, if you do a lot of multitasking (such as installing things while browsing) they'll bog down a bit. But they're acceptable systems and will meet 90% of peoples' needs.

      Personally, I'd rather have an ARM based netbook, but where am I going to find one of those? The only ones I've seen have - at best - 256Mb RAM and a 400MHz CPU. That's enough to do some things, but certainly not more than 1 or 2 tabs in a modern browser.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    17. Re:Who actually needs this? by ZosX · · Score: 1

      My laptop is not too big to lug around. 14", 5lbs. Not bad at all. It is also pretty powerful. 2-3 hours of battery life isn't all that great, but how often do I need to use a laptop for more than 2 hours where there isn't a plug around? I've sat by the river and watched a few movies on it in the past. Now the crappy 15" athlon laptop I used to have with no internal battery really kind of sucked........

    18. Re:Who actually needs this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but does it work in Linux? Given Broadcom's crappy Linux wireless support, I would assume not. The Ion, however, does work in Linux.

  11. I knew I should have waited! by stakovahflow · · Score: 1

    Doh! What can you do? I guess I'll just have to wait until I kill this netbook thingy before I upgrade to the delectable do-hickey, with the whatchamacallit... Oh and the thingy-majig... Gotta go spend money... Need new netbook... Mmm.

    --
    Holy happy hippy crap!
    1. Re:I knew I should have waited! by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you buy this one there's another one waiting in the wings to piss you off after you buy it.

      --
      No sig today...
    2. Re:I knew I should have waited! by stakovahflow · · Score: 1

      Figures... Gotta love consumerism, eh? LOL!

      --
      Holy happy hippy crap!
  12. Netbook question by Murdoch5 · · Score: 0

    I'm starting my next term in university and were going to use a program called Orcad to do PCB layout and design and Matlab. Now I'm pretty sure that Matlab would be to much for a netbook but what about PCB design? does any one know if you could use a program like Orcad on a netbook. By far the biggest power horse of a program is Matlab but it's best saved for my desktop anyway.

    1. Re:Netbook question by InsaneProcessor · · Score: 1

      Try a 12" Nano based netbook for Lenovo. It rung Designer with no problems.

      --

      Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
    2. Re:Netbook question by phil-trick · · Score: 1

      If you want to do PCB design, do yourself a favour and get a display with a minimum resolution of 1280x800.

      You need the vertical space for layouts and design. If you can get a higher resolution display, go for it, as it makes it WAAAAY easier for design.

      Also, see if you can borrow a netbook from someone to try for a few days. I find them infuriatingly sluggish, even with a fresh install of Windows XP or linux.

      You can get good value laptops now for not a huge amount more money than a netbook.

      If you have to go for a netbook, get an nVidia ion based netbook, preferably with a dual core atom, like the N330, as you will see way better performance from it.

      Phil

    3. Re:Netbook question by Murdoch5 · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the info, no I don't need a netbook I was just wondering if it would work. I have to use Windows on the book. Which sucks because personally I hate windows because it doesn't have the preformance I like or want but I can make due

    4. Re:Netbook question by stokessd · · Score: 1

      You want as much screen real estate as you can get. These tiny "LCD watch" resolution screens suck for any real-world work. Sure a netbook can be handy for travel, but for serious tasks like PCB design, you want pixels, and more than a thimble-full. I do PCB design with protel (altium or whatever protel turned into), and I do it at 1920x1200 and I would love twice that. You don't want to stare at the world through a toilet paper tube.

      Sheldon

  13. "decent gains"? by SlappyBastard · · Score: 1, Troll

    So, I assume performance-wise this mean going from the equivalent of a 700 MHz P3 to a 1 GHz P3.

    Sorry, but truth be told, the balance of performance and power consumption right now favors using the Pentium Dual Cores. The Atom is a niche product that works best with stuff like cash registers.

    --
    I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
    1. Re:"decent gains"? by Nadir · · Score: 1

      I have built an atom-based htpc with a zotac ion motherboard and it does exactly what I want: fanless h264 decoding. A bit more than a cash register can do.

      --
      --
      The world is divided in two categories:
      those with a loaded gun and those who dig. You dig.
  14. MEET THE NEW ATOM !! SAME AS THE OLD ATOM !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe The Who did that one already.

  15. PS. by sznupi · · Score: 1

    Wiki says it's 3150; from the in-house Intel line: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA#GMA_3100

    And we all know wiki doesn't lie...

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
    1. Re:PS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Goddamn, its Wikipedia, not just "wiki". You should understand the difference here in Slashdot.

  16. Power use? by MSG · · Score: 1

    That all sounds nice, but have they built a system that draws less power than a comparable Athlon 64 system?

    1. Re:Power use? by bhtooefr · · Score: 3, Informative

      Even the original Atoms used less power than the most power-efficient single-core AMD platform.

      Platform TDP for the Yukon platform (RS690E northbridge, SB600 southbridge) ranges from 19 watts with a 1 GHz Sempron, to 26 for a 1.6 GHz Athlon. (29 for a dual-core 1.6 GHz Turion.) The most efficient Athlon-based Yukon is 1.2 GHz, and platform power consumption is 24 watts.

      Platform TDP for the typical N270+945GSE+ICH7M is 11.8 watts, N450+NM10 is 7 watts. Granted, the Yukon stuff doesn't really compete with the Atom, it competes with Intel CULV.

      CULV has a 14.5 watt chipset (GS45, ICH9M) TDP, add 5.5 watts for single-core, 10 watts for dual-core CPUs.

      Oh, and I'll toss the VIA Nano in, it fits somewhere between the Atom and the CULV and Yukon platforms in performance.

      The fastest current Nanos for netbooks are the U2225 and U2250, both at 1.3 GHz (the U2250 is at "1.3+ GHz") and 8 W TDP. (IIRC, though, the Nano is significantly faster than Atom.) The matching VX800U chipset has a 3.5 W TDP, so 11.5 W total platform TDP - less than the old Atom platform.

      The upcoming U3200 is at 1.4 GHz (and even faster than the clockspeed implies, apparently,) possibly 5 W TDP, and 2.3 W for the VX855, so 7.3 W platform TDP.

  17. Did you bother reading the article? by Joce640k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Look again at the bit where it says "battery life"....

    In the real world outside Slashdot not everybody is hung up on their 3dMark scores. In fact very few people are, judging by the fact that Intel GPUs outsell both NVIDIA and ATI combined.

    --
    No sig today...
  18. (OT: Trackman marble gaming) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I had the original marble

    I had a Trackman Marble FX... (the one with the rather large ball).
    Man I kicked ass in Quake 2 CTF with that thing. Unlike a mouse, it's easy to hold it perfectly still even with huge gain (high mouse speed setting), and then adjust aim with a slight strafe. Makes for good railgunnery. You know you are doing something right when people start calling you a bot. :->

  19. I'm still waiting for a 1024x768 screen by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    Who cares about the CPU? Gimme more pixels, preferably non-glossy.

    Have people still not figured out that the glossy screens are crap ... or does the magpie syndrome still dominate purchasing decisions?

    --
    No sig today...
    1. Re:I'm still waiting for a 1024x768 screen by bhtooefr · · Score: 1

      Widescreen makes sense for form factor reasons, too, so don't expect 1024x768 any time soon. 1280x720 and 1366x768, that's slowly starting to appear.

      As for glossy screens, they're cheaper, and the margins are so slim on these things that I doubt you're going to see matte unless it's a "high-end" netbook (or just a straight-up CULV machine.)

  20. Linux Back in the Netbooks? by Stregano · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So do we finally get Linux and Unix distros back in the netbooks instead of XP? Oh God do I hope so.

    --
    The world is how you make it
  21. Nice perfomance gain ... but only in certain areas by thesandbender · · Score: 1

    Read the review carefully. While memory performance improved substantially, cpu multimedia gains were marginal and integer performance actually degrade (although just a hair).

    The platform is not meant to be a processing powerhouse but to say it showed "a nice performance gain" (implying overall) is a little misleading.

  22. historically it went like this! by nimbius · · Score: 2, Insightful

    asus: we have a great new product called the 'netbook' that will revolutionize the way people use laptops, and it runs linux!

    Microsoft: we can fix that.

    asus: oh...well, it still revolutionizes the way people connect to the internet and some day it will support googles os!

    intel: we can fix that...

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  23. "Memory copy", cries the nit picker by Mathinker · · Score: 1

    pretty much all of the stuff that happens in a kernel is logic-heavy tasks that only deal with single pieces of data at a time, and thus can't really take advantage of these instructions in any way.

    There is one SSEx function which is useful for the kernel, namely, load/store of 128-bit registers for copying and moving memory around.

    1. Re:"Memory copy", cries the nit picker by Virak · · Score: 1

      And various cryptographic things (and somewhat relatedly, checksums) can take advantage of SSE stuff to various extents. And probably other little things in rare situations. Thus why I said "pretty much all" instead of simply "all".

  24. Windows CE netbooks exist by tepples · · Score: 1

    Windows CE netbooks exist. Windows Mobile, a distribution of CE for PDAs and smartphones, runs just fine on ARM. So I don't see what's stopping a company from putting a Windows-brand operating system on an ARM netbook.

    1. Re:Windows CE netbooks exist by badran · · Score: 0

      The linux version will run and look just like a DESKTOP linux machine. Cannot say the same about Windows CE...

  25. But I like the stickers! by formfeed · · Score: 1

    I know own a hammer, that says "designed for Widows XP"

  26. Flash is so 1990's by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1

    Why run flash at all? Try patronizing sites that support better video technology and maybe even open standards.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    1. Re:Flash is so 1990's by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Why run flash at all? Try patronizing sites that support better video technology and maybe even open standards.

      When they have the content I want, I will. In the mean time, I need flash video if I want to watch what I want to watch.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  27. IA-32 addiction by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

    Binary compatibility is a non-issue if you're free of Windows.

    I am, and it isn't...

    I mean, in theory, binary compatibility isn't an issue for me. In practice, when I've tried it, there was always some nice bit of software that was partially coded in IA-32 assembly, or that had platform-specific optimizations - or, like I said before, non-libre software like drivers or whatever for a piece of hardware in my system... Or maybe someone has a nice, closed-source app for Linux and they only build for Intel. Apart from things like critical drivers (video, audio, network) or bits of software like Flash, there's not a lot tying me to the Intel architecture - but I swear, there's always something.

    --
    Bow-ties are cool.
    1. Re:IA-32 addiction by jabjoe · · Score: 1

      Depends greatly what you trying to do. I'm amazed at how much just works with the SheevaPlug. It proves the open source model to me, if you have the source it can be ported, and much has. Check out: http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/arm/

      Flash and ARM shows up the problem with closed-source, things only gets ported if those with the source think it's worth it. With Flash there is a ARM port though, least looks like it's in the repository. But I'm not using my SheevaPlug for X stuff. Hopefully Flash can be replaced with Gnash or Swfdec while HTML5 comes in, really shouldn't be the case something that's taken as a big a role as Flash is controlled by Adobe (better than MS though).

      As I said, I'm really looking forwards to my ARM netbook, OpenPandora looks like a possible, but really I really want it to be able to HD video comfortably. Same with the BeagleBoard, so close to being my perfect media pc!

  28. Die, Intel GMA, Die! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The last thing I want is yet another device with GMA graphics on board, and now they're integrating it to the CPU? Thanks but NO THANKS!

  29. what's the point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they improved memory bandwidth on a slow CPU that already had more than it needed? Looks like it still gets whooped by a ULV 90nm Pentium-M, let alone a ULV 45nm Core 2 Solo. BTW, let me know when Intel develops an integrated graphics core that can run Half-life 2 as smoothly as a GeForce 2.

  30. Easy question, easy answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > If Intel really wants to push their hardware, why not write such optimizations for the Linux kernel?

    Because there's no consumer demand for Linux?

    Just a guess, but the numbers bear it out. Linux has a market share below 2%, and has steadily lost more and more users to OSX (and now they can lose to Windows 7 as well- it's teh all about teh choice!).

    Meanwhile, Windows' market share has remained pretty steady at around 96%... meaning that most of the OSX "Switch" gains have come from... you guessed it... Linux users.

    So given all that, spending money to improve Linux usage seems like either a waste of money, or a vanity project. Either way, Intel would be better off stacking all that money up, and lighting it on fire. At least watching the money burn would provide entertainment.

  31. ARM Linux != desktop Linux by tepples · · Score: 1

    The linux version will run and look just like a DESKTOP linux machine

    Linux for ARM won't run non-free binaries designed for Linux for x86, such as Flash Player. No tube for you.

    1. Re:ARM Linux != desktop Linux by PenisLands · · Score: 0

      Mr D.E.Y,

      You may be able to view youtube via swfdec or gnash. Jeremy Frickin' Wilson.

  32. GMA500 = PowerVR by DrYak · · Score: 1

    The GMA500 graphics core was outsourced to another company, as was driver development.

    For the record, it's a PowerVR5 core, designed by Imagination Technology. This thing has a near-monopoly in the embed world (specially coupled with ARM chips). It's a distant descendant of the PowerVR2 that powered Sega DreamCast and the PowerVR3 that powered Kyro PC graphic cards. It functions in a radically different maner.

    It's not a raster-engine like every single other graphic card (card draws one polygon after another sequentially. multi-GPU is accelerated by either dividing the screen among GPU or having alternate GPUs renreding alternate frames), instead it's Tile-based deffered rendering (remotely reminiscent of ray-tracing : for each pixel on a tile, the GPU determines which of the polygon is visible and only draws that pixel. The method has lower memory, bandwidth and power requirement - thus better suited for the embed/low power environment. And lends itself more easily to parallelization : several core can work each on a separate tile).
    Design difference between different chips makes it difficult to just slap some modifications on a given driver and use it with a different hardware(*). Given the radically different design in Tile-rendering, it's even more so. So, although usually Intel pushes strongly in favor of opensource drivers, they couldn't easily re-write their own and open-source them, they had to rely on PowerVR's binaries.

    ---

    (*): or used to be so. That's exactly what the new Gallium3D/TTM/DRI2 stack in Linux and BSD, and to some extent WDDM in Windows attempt to mitigate.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  33. Whom would the user blame? by tepples · · Score: 1

    You may be able to view youtube via swfdec or gnash.

    Which violates how many U.S. patents? Preinstall the open-source H.264 decoder and MPEG-LA could have the netbook stopped at the border. And for SWF objects that happen not to work on swfdec or gnash, whom would the user blame?

  34. Laptop mobility by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

    My laptop is not too big to lug around. 14", 5lbs. Not bad at all. It is also pretty powerful. 2-3 hours of battery life isn't all that great, but how often do I need to use a laptop for more than 2 hours where there isn't a plug around?

    <shrug> I had roughly the same specs with my Powerbook before I got the EEE... Going to conventions was one of its main "mobile" uses for me, playing games and videos and such, or internet usage if I needed info... That was a pretty regular thing for me for a while, and it was more of a "charge when I get back to the hotel room" kind of situation. I also didn't especially like carrying around 5 lbs of laptop all day, it did get to be a drag. I think the EEE is noticeably lighter and even though the battery life is less than double I feel much less dependent upon the AC adapter than I was with the powerbook.

    Personally I put a very high value on mobility when it comes to mobile devices. It's no good having the thing be "mobile" if I leave it home, or run out of power too soon.

    --
    Bow-ties are cool.