Slashdot Mirror
Why Ultrabooks Are Falling Well Short of Intel's Targets
nk497 writes "When Paul Otellini announced Ultrabooks last year, he predicted they would grab 40% of the laptop market by this year. One analyst firm has said Ultrabooks will only make up 5% of the market this year, slashing its own sales predictions from 22m this year to 10.3m. However, IHS iSuppli said that Ultrabooks have a chance at success if manufacturers get prices down between $600 to $700 — a discount of as much as $400 on the average selling price of the devices — and they could still grab a third of the laptop market by 2016."
iPad.
Funny that Apple sell so many retina MacBook Pros, MacBook Airs when they're the most expensive machines you can buy in those form factors. Could it be that a race to the bottom, cutting corners to reduce costs, ISN'T what people want? What happened with Netbooks again?
Lack of on-machine storage.
Most early ultrabooks only had at best 128 GB of SSD memory, which is kind of cutting it close after you load Windows 7 and Office 2010. Why do you think Apple chose to include over 500 GB of SSD memory on some of their new MacBook Pro models?
But now, with SSD technology rapidly improving, I'd say within 18 months you will see "convertible" touchscreen Ultrabooks running Windows 8 Professional with 512 to 1024 GB SSD storage standard with the latest super-efficient Intel "Core" CPU's, and those will definitely be vastly better-selling.
a netbook on steroids. guess they forgot netbooks sold on there price point not there power. they tryed this before and it was a total fail. the overpriced netbooks with good gpus in them etc nobody bought. guess they think giving it a new name will matter.
From my experience: people who buy laptops tend to fall into two categories:
A: I want a laptop as cheap as possible that still functions for basic things.
B: I want a laptop that can play 3d games on
From my experience, people would rather buy two 300$ laptops than one slim 600$ laptop.
Compared to a Windows laptop of equal specs, they're much more expensive. Compared to an Apple Macbook Air - they're around the same price, if not more expensive in some cases.
As far as I can tell it's basically a more powerful netbook, which is really just a less powerful laptop.
I guess that makes an ultrabook a laptop.
I'm at the point that unless I get the same specs as apple for like half the price i will buy a Mac.
All the crap pc makers lost my trust a long time ago
I spent $1100 on a 13"Mbp last year and the closest pc counterpart was about $1000.
What the title said.
All laptops will be so-called "Ultrabooks" in a couple of years.
An "Ultrabook" is just a dumb (very dumb!) marketing term for a laptop made with the latest generation of parts. So what if people are buying up old stock rather than new stock. They'll get around to the new stock sooner or later.
And anyway, I was just at a big box electronics store today, and most of the portable computer products on display were regular laptops. It doesn't appear that the distribution has really penetrated deeply yet.
And on a personal note: These "Ultrabooks" look awfully flimsy. If I'm going to drop $1000 on a computer, I'd rather not do so on something which looks like it belongs in the bargain bin. Perception counts for a lot, and thinner isn't always better.
A 256GB HD, 4GB RAM, and a low resolution display just doesn't cut it for brand new hardware these days. It's rare (and expensive!) to find Ultrabooks with better specs than this.
Ultrabooks look nice - but if they're less powerful than my current hardware, why would I want to change?
Apparently, it's a trademarked Intel name, because the article referenced in the summary said:
Devices such as HP's $579 Sleekbook - which runs AMD's chips, so can't be called an Ultrabook
I always thought Ultrabook was a generic term for a more powerful netbook (or a notebook in a smaller formfactor), but apparently it's Intel specific.
Hey Charlie, if you're on Slashdot, would you like to comment on your blistering excorication of Ultrabooks?
13" is just too small for a laptop display.. I have a thin 15.6" laptop with an ssd (dell xps 15z) and i love it.
i dunno if a ultrabook will ever take over the old laptop desine. if you put a big quad core cpu and a huge gpu in a ultrabook you will have a melted book. they will be in the same line as the slim laptops are the low speck bunch.
There's a lot of netbook haters out there, and I understand why. Truth is they weren't the right thing for everyone.
I found two great niches for them - children and physically active people on the go.
First of all - children. The first netbook I every bought was one of the 7" eeePC's on that was on Woot.com with a 4GB card SSD. The SSD was so small the included OS couldn't even run its own updates out of the box. I put an ultra small version of Linux and SNES on it (came with a heftier Linux), stuck in a 32 GB SD card - instant portable movie and game machine for my daughter. A couple of years later I upgraded her to a 10" Acer similar to mine and my niece and nephew now have the 7" one. You can fit a lot of movies on a 32 GB SD card if you use the PSP or iPod preset in Handbrake.
Second niche - myself. I bike places, as often as I can. I have a small backpack that's big enough to carry my bike tools, a netbook, and some accessories/other crap I need for my commute to work or just about anywhere else. I BMX a lot and I don't like to carry a bunch of extra garbage I don't need. For coffee shop Internet use - including work responsibilities when I'm consulting - every thing I have to do on the road can be done on my 10" Acer Aspire. I've had two chain related failures on my BMXes while this thing was in my backpack, I wound up tumbling down the road both time my little Aspire took the beating better than I did. Sure a tablet fills this niche for most people, but I like a keyboard and mouse. That being said if Google does come out with a Nexus 10 I'll probably get that and use my old mini Apple bluetooth keyboard on it.
I drool over Ultrabooks - I really want one. Fact is they cost too damned much and they won't fit my physically active lifestyle - I would have to switch to a bigger backpack for more than about a 12" screen, maybe a bit bigger but I don't want to push it too much. Intel's greed - not the kind that motivated them to release Ultrabooks but the kind that made them strong arm manufactures into killing netbooks to do it - is a large part of why they aren't taking off well enough.
If they stopped their excessive manipulation and gave control back to the manufacturers they may see a surge in Ultrabook sales.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
That is correct. They have to have certain Intel processors in addition to meeting height, weight, battery and storage performance guidelines.
I haven't bought a new laptop because I'm holding out for a real external GPU solution. I've seen vilink but it's fairly rare to find a laptop with a PC card slot anymore.
When I consider that I have a 4 year old Asus Eee, which cost only $350. Has a replaceable battery, and harddrive and it runs just as good as it did when I first got it. Then think of paying $1,000 for what is in essence a 'disposable laptop' What do these companies /think?/ We're in a depression, people. Where only the rich who can get a new car, every-time their ashtrays are full can get a ultrabook.
Bring back the netbooks, then we'll talk.
Why I won't buy a tablet. Basically it's an expensive toy, and to do any real work on them you need a keyboard. Which makes it what? You guessed it.
An expensive Ultrabook (or laptop).
sure its not as slim or as light, it doesnt have as much battery life, but shit, its cost 40 bucks on ebay, why would I want to spend a pile of money on a obsolete computer no matter how sexy it was?
Seriously? 900 bucks for a 13 inch dell ultrabook? I got a 15.6 inch 2.5ghz i5 with twice the ram and a TB hard drive for 499$ at the dell refurb outlet for my mediocre work computer, and it has one scratch across the windows sticker on the bottom.
Apparently it's supposed to be a smallish laptop, with emphasis on performance(must have SSD, must have good battery life) and small size, which according to the "choose two out of three" rule means it obviously cannot be cheap. Which means that a "non-ultra" laptop with the same performance and a bit more weight/size costs around $600, while the ultrabook costs $1000.
What they did not think of and what now causes the slow sales is that the price makes ultrabooks a LUXURY item. Most people will look at the ultrabook and think "well, it sure looks nice, but here I can get about the same performance at a couple hundred dollars less". Or, if they DO have the money, they will go buy a Macbook, because "Apple" still has higher bragging value than "Asus" or "Samsung".
It's because the MacBook Air is so good.
An Intel Ultrabook circa 2012 is basically a Mac Book Air 2008+
If you were to show ~most~ people a Mac Book Air and then a typical Ultrabook, they could not tell the difference (in the hardware).
Procrastination; I'll think of a sig tomorrow.
It's what happens when marketing people want to say "MacBook Air clone".
I had to get a laptop a couple of months ago when ultrabooks were getting all the attention (I was replacing my 13 inch laptop). For about $400 got a very nice Lenovo 14-inch laptop with Intel i5 and a DVD ROM. I really wanted a computer to be slimmer and didn't want a DVD drive, but couldn't find it unless I would go with some ultrabook which I seriously considered.
The ultrabooks had:
* Less processing power. In fact, there was no ultrabook at the time to match the power of the mobile i5 processor in a regular notebook.
* Less video connectivity options
* Fewer USB ports
* Worse screen
On a positive side, they were a tiny bit slimmer. Comparing that I could get a slightly thicker laptop without any of those issues for less than half of the price of ultrabook, so I went with a regular 14 inch notebook and installed SSD drive in it. It beats any ultrabook in terms of performance and connectivity and yes, for LESS THAN HALF of the price of ultrabook. No surprises here that they are not selling.
There's no such thing as "illegal download"
Average Android tablet going price $200 and provides the same mobility features that most users care for check/respond to emails, surf the web, read ebooks magazines and entertain ( games, movies, news etc). It is a rich satisfying eco system at a price point that is affordable.
Thanks, I did not know that.
Apparently, it's a trademarked Intel name, because the article referenced in the summary said:
Devices such as HP's $579 Sleekbook - which runs AMD's chips, so can't be called an Ultrabook
I always thought Ultrabook was a generic term for a more powerful netbook (or a notebook in a smaller formfactor), but apparently it's Intel specific.
Its trademarked but used in the same way as generic cola is called Coke, generic paracetamol is called Panadol/Tylenol (depending on which country you live in) and any CPU in the late 90's was called a Pentium regardless of whether it was Intel or AMD. Basically it's just made it's way into popular usage and Intel would be stupid to try to fight it.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
People pay a premium for Macs because they are well marketed and "pretty."
PCs have to be budget machines in comparison, and they will make up on the numbers game. If I am looking at a $1200 Ultrabook or a $1200 MBA, and the MBA has better specs... why the hell would I go to an Ultrabook when I can put Windows on my MBA and have it run just as well, in a prettier package?
The benefit of undercutting on price is that if Microsoft can convince people that Windows 8 is better than OSX, they have a very valuable proposition for retaking some of those they lost. I'm not saying they will... but it's a game they can play. If only Windows 8 was better than it is... I mean, I like it in terms of Metro but it's very jarring between that and the untouched "desktop" interface. They really could have done a better job. Maybe Windows 9?
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
any CPU in the late 90's was called a Pentium regardless of whether it was Intel or AMD.
Not on any of the mailing lists or web pages that I ever visited. Maybe it was an Australian thing?
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
1) can someone define what an ultrabook is in terms that the average consumer can understand?
2) has anyone else noticed that 90% of the computer users in the world use it only to web-surf, watch videos, or listen to music?
3) has anyone else noticed that mobile phones facilitate web communication for 90% of typical consumers?
i may be exaggerating a bit with those 90% figures, but it seems bleedingly painfully obvious that an ultrabook is neither a particularly defined niche nor revolutionary in anyway.
there IS a market for a high-end notebook (creative types), but Apple has (had?) it cornered due to the presence of certain software like Logic and Final Cut.
(they HAVE taken this market for granted and began to piss it away, however, with their "we make devices and mac users can fuck off and start acting like mobile phone users" aka loss of firewire, app store, lion, etc...)
That mythical huge profit zone between a new ipad and the classic IBM Thinkpad.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
... without the Evil.
I purchased a refurbished ultrabook for $550 solely because of the discounted price. If it hadn't been discounted from $1000 I would never have even been able to consider it. It's a mighty machine though, and I don't have to carry a charger with me to class (I used it 4-5 hours per day).
I can't imagine why they wouldn't have mass adoption, except for the price, which is the whole discussion :p
We all know that the reason for Apple's success is marketing. Intel has failed so far in this department, but they have a brilliant campaign going in Japan that they should expand worldwide. Their commercial articulates the value of the Ultrabook and how it will contribute to people's computing experience. Check it out here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVdlkv5heqk
Translation available here.
And yet the out sell all of apple's laptop line. How is that a failure?
Mostly we just call the stuff paracetamol. Using recent brand names for generic products in this day and age is a sign that the marketing industry has you by the short'n'curlies.
Who in their right mind is going to get up one morning and say "Hey! I need an UltraBook(TM, probably)!!!". They'll just look for a suitable portable computer that fits in their price/features/performance range. What the effin maker calls it is neither here nor there. If they need a badge to validate their purchase, then they're just buying a fashion accessory.
p>What they did not think of and what now causes the slow sales is that the price makes ultrabooks a LUXURY item
The people I've been talking to who can afford ultrabooks have been avoiding them because of the SSD drive rather than the price. Max hard drive space on an ultrabook with SSD is 256 GB, which isn't enough for people who have gotten used to having 500 GB to 1 TB on their laptops.
Having said that, I love my ASUS zenbook - especially when travelling.
You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
I pay a moderate amount of attention to tech stuff. I subscribe to Wired and I check out Slashdot regularly. I've never heard of an Ultrabook.
A netbook that is priced like an expensive laptop.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
My sister is a teacher, she had a list of features she considered essential in her laptop.
1. Numeric keypad
2. RJ-45 connection for LAN's, I don't think the ultra books have this
3. She wanted a right angle power connector because the old one that comes straight out eventually started fraying.
It was hard to find a laptop with all three.
Haven't all creative types jumped ship from Final Cut since they turned it into "iMovie deluxe"?
Circumcision is child abuse.
No, PC makers have been trying to sell premium something like a netbook at a premium price over regular laptops for years. I remember when Microsoft and Intel first started to try and sell the world on the idea of UMPCs in 2006. When Asus came out with the Eee PC in 2007 it took the wind out of those sails for awhile, the Intel decided to try and revive the idea in 2011. It will not work any better this time around then it did the first time. For the price they are trying to sell these for, most people want the full capability of a PC, which requires a larger screen. There just aren't that many applications which require enough processing power to justify the high cost of these that doesn't also require more screen real estate than these can provide.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"MacBook Air clone".
Given that the Air was a clone of the late 2000s ultraportable corporate machines such as the Dell D430, I'm not sure what you're saying.
As somebody who was just in the market for an ultrabook and ended up running away, let me tell you why the ultrabooks don't sell. The ultrabooks best but narrow market are people who are willing to pay a premium for a combination of good performance, light weight and long battery life. PC manufacturers want to sell a lot of ultrabooks, so they compromise an all three points and as a result loose in competition with their other offerings. Netbooks and tablets offer comparable or even better battery life for 3-4 times less money. Regular laptops offer significantly better performance for 30 to 50% less.
I was looking for a ultrabook with 8GB RAM, 256SSD and no dedicated video card (the onboard intel 4000 chips are perfectly fine) for about $1600. How hard could it be? RAM is so cheap that shipping costs more than the chip and SSD prices have come down to a buck per GB.
After couple of months of trying I gave up, bought myself a Lenovo X230, swapped the hard drive with 512GB SSD and brought the RAM to 16GB. The bill came to more that $1600 but I am happy with the result. I would have paid more if a PC maker would have bothered to offer a comparable system.
My definition was a somewhat smaller notebook, 10-12" or so, with top end components... as opposed to bottom barrel component netbooks.
IBM X-series thinkpads would be the holotype, I think... can't think of anyone else that did that first.
Why Ultrabooks Are Falling Well Short of Intel's Targets
Because my company just got me a "new" laptop that was 2 years old already when they bought it 2 years ago, a Lenovo dual-core. At least that's an upgrade from the single core I used to have. Ooooh. It also has 2 gig of RAM.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
netbooks using Intel chips and/or Microsoft software also had those limitations put on them. The difference is that netbooks started with GNU/Linux on them and the name was coined in the open. I should clarify something, those limitations were put on netbooks once Microsoft and Intel got their paws in on the market. Most likely they didn't want cheap hardware and software to eat into their profits and setting those limitations did a nice job at killing that market. Win for Microsoft and a win for Intel.
The tablet sector is yet another attack vector against these two but so much more entrenched with Apple's iPad and ARM hardware. But they are still trying very hard. IMO
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
I don't think those exist yet. You have to choose your brand of evil.
I, for one, despise the 1366x768 resolution that has plagued our net/notebooks and ultrabooks. Where I live I cannot find a higher resolution notebook for a decent price; to get some decent resolution I must hook (who'd have thought just ten years ago?!) my TV to the notebook. Apple products at least have good resolution, but they still are overpriced and underspecced.
Stupidity is an equal opportunity striker.
Fellow slashdotter Bill Dog
did you do to Virtual Box to make it unstable. I do all the Linux development for my Firefox Plugin in a Virtualbox VM (which means lots and lots of flash and HTML5 video) and I've never once crashed it.
:P So not a fair comparison.
Now, getting OSX into a VirtualBox takes an act of God, but then again you're not suppose to do that in the first place
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
A registered trademark of Intel Corporation :D It's a thinner than average laptop with a slower-than-average low-volt chip and an above-average price tag.
Just "gittin-r-done," day after day.
any CPU in the late 90's was called a Pentium regardless of whether it was Intel or AMD.
Not on any of the mailing lists or web pages that I ever visited. Maybe it was an Australian thing?
Nope, Normal people just called them Pentiums. You're problem is that you were using a mailing list (which meant people probably knew the difference) AMD K6's were advertised as Pentium II's in print (it was the 90's, print was still a big thing) up until they got caught, then they just called it "Pentium 2 equivalent" (Even AMD marketed it as such)
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
I recall we called the AMD chips K5/K6's.
They're tablets but they can run basically anything because they're Windows-based and they're very fast, get insane battery life, and weigh like 2 pounds. No CD drive, okay, but at least you can actually type on them, unlike a tablet. I had a Toshiba Portege in my shop and it was so fragile-seeming, nobody wanted it. I had to sell it for half its retail value! I got it for 1/4 its retail value used but still, lol. The only reason people aren't picking up really nice ones like the new Samsung model is they're $1300 freaking dollars!!!!! For that money I'd lug around a Toshiba Qosmio, not some underclocked piece of crap, lol.
I don't remember them doing so in Computer Shopper (which I regularly read at the time).
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Thinkpad X-series are the original ultrabooks. I can't imagine ever buying anything else for a portable, full-power pc.
I have a desktop a laptop and several hand held.
Sorry but good is more than good enough.
Until you make something that gives the holy shit did you see that. .... I am done.
I aint budging I bought 8080 8088 286 386 486
Ordinary "netbooks" like the EeePC 1000 are quite competent computers for $275. How much computer do you need to carry around? I run Firefox, Thunderbird, LibreOffice, LTSpice and Autodesk 123D on mine. It will play video. What more do you need?
Apple touchpads are significantly better than the competition. And the difference isn't just "drivers", it's the OS and the hardware combined. For whatever reason, Apple's secret sauce when it comes to this kind of responsiveness, palm rejection and silky glass feel is unmatched. I've always been a fan of the "nipple" trackpoint, but once I started using my Unibody Macbook in '08, I have literally never been able to find anything from a different vendor that's comparable.
Why, when a MB Air is not even the most expensive kit in the "ultrabook" market, would anyone go for anything else? These days you can virtualize apps pretty easily - The only Windows software I rely on - Outlook 2007 on my Macbook using crossover and it works fine. For everything else, Virtualbox or VMWare does the trick (including ubuntu server appliances for my non-work projects).
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
I've never understood why one would want to do that, given that OS-X, having FBSD as the userland, has everything that Linux has, minus the headaches of missing drivers & making it work. If one can afford an Airbook, then there is no reason to replace the OS that comes w/ it w/ one where one would get all the issues there are w/ X, compounded w/ all the other issues there are w/ ALSA, Pulseaudio, Networking, GNOME 3.x and what have you.
The main reason people want Linux or any Unix is to get the CLI utilities, which one gets w/ OS-X, since it's a certified Unix, nothing less.
Ever since the first "portable" computer that weighed something like 17lbs, laptops keep getting thinner, lighter and more powerful. An ultrabook is just a thinner lighter laptop. Maybe people see through the marketing bullshit. Ultrabooks are not some "class" of computers, they are just laptops, thin light ones. Which is wonderful, but it ain't ultraful.
Given that the D430 and Air came out at about the same time, I don't see how either one could be the clone of the other. (The D430 was announced a few months before the Air, but unless you think that Apple or anyone can design and manufacture a computer in a few months, the Air can't be a clone of the D430)
There is more computer to be had for less money. Intel Integrated graphics are still crap.
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
Who wants a 13" 16:9 with a resolution only slightly greater than their cell phone?
I think it'll be a long time before I upgrade my 16:10 laptop or 5:4 monitor. I have a TV to watch media. On my computer I want to work which involves reading code, documentation and log files.
Hopefully Intel will still to recognise 'consumers' want 16:9 glossy touchscreens with low resolution and a UI like "oogah punch this tile". Whereas 'producers' need something different in order to create stuff.
Intel are well known for this scam. Their Centrino platform was that last incarnation of this where they too as cheap and crappy processor they could make and couple it with Wifi card and sell it for as much as they can to the uneducated public for as much as they can.
Why I don't use my MB Air quite as often anymore when I'm on the go
I got myself a 13" MB Air about a year ago. In terms of usage patterns it's the best thing I've owned since the Highscreen Pocket PC back in 1994. I can carry it wherever I go without any hassle as with a regular notebook. It weighs 1,3 kg, which is less than half of my 15" Dell. In a nutshell, it's the best computer for a developer who's on the move a lot.
Then I got myself a 7" HTC Flyer Android Tablet in February this year. Not because I needed it, but because I knew it's was the best non-apple tablet around I had considered getting into serious android development at the time.
It turned out that while the iPad letterbox format doesn't appeal to much to me as a portable device, the 7" 16by9 format is just the right thing for a tablet. On the go I am currentyl using the Flyer more than the MB Air. You can't develop that good on it (I haven't tried yet, but I presume) but for surfing, reading, watching movies and listenning to music the form factor are just right. It's a tad sluggish but I'd guess that Android 4 and the new super-cheap multi-core devices such as the Nexus 7 eliminate that problem.
Conclusion:
To me it looks as if Ultrabooks very quickly are falling into that compareatively narrow gap of portable developer and expert machines and that small form-factor tablets will rule the portable computing device market from here on out. Add keyboards, solid word processing and useable printing to Andorid, and maybe ASUS Transformer like devices will take yet another bit of the market.
My 2 cents.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
I've actually been drooling over the prospect of an "ultrabook" ever since I saw the Macbook Air, and have been shopping for one ever since to load Linux on. However, there has always been at least one fatal flaw with every single model I've seen that has kept me from breaking out my wallet: bad keyboard, bad trackpad, trackpad too close to keyboard (which is where I rest my thumbs), bad screen, not enough USB ports (when useless take up too much space), crappy wi-fi, pittance of RAM, too small of a hard drive, underpowered CPU, glossy screen.
There have been a couple that have come close, the latest ASUS offerings and the Samsung series 9 ultrabook seems promising. But nothing good enough yet to make me open up my wallet.
I'm probably condsidered the ideal candidate for buying an ultrabook in most marketing focus groups or whatever (youngish professional, knows IT, eye for good design, good job, disposable income, needs to use windows for at least some of my work and pleasure) and when I first saw the press releases of Intel wanting to do the "windows laptop" right, I felt a glimmer of hope; a year ago the wintel laptop situation was dire; nothing but 1366x768 glossy TN panels, laptops were getting bigger and bigger (the 11-12" form factor I loved so much appeared to have vanished completely), battery life was either stagnant if you paid through the nose, or diminishing if you bought consumer level.
Let's rewind a bit and see how we got here. Back in 2009, I bought my second personal laptop (my first was a 14" HP I bought from work), a cheap-as-chips ultraportable Acer 1810TZ, riding high on the netbook wave. Shitty TN screen, mediocre build quality, but tiny, weighed absolutely nothing, perfectly adequate CPU/GPU for almost everything apart from number crunching and games, and got me 7 hours of web browsing on a single charge. Got to rely on the exceptional battery life, took it with me everywhere and soon fitted it with a 160GB Intel SSD which I had left over from another build, it utterly flew and I was getting 8 hours of web browsing out of it.
Three years later and the CULV processor is beginning to drag its heels and the 4GB of memory is starting to become a limitation, and firing up more than one VM would drag the system to a crawl. Brilliant, says I, thinking I can get one of these new spiffy premium-grade laptops which'll have all the swanky features that have been so lacking elsewhere.
But no. The smallest ultrabook (or approaching it) I could find was the Lenovo X220 at a shade over 12". Nice screen with an IPS upgrade (although still average resolution), decent battery life. But after trying one out... utterly, utterly terrible, unusable touchpad with no physical buttons. Mouse button chording was no longer possible (I grew up on three-button mice), and right-clicking and drag-dropping went from second nature to a crapshoot. Unacceptable.
Let's try Toshiba, I've always rated their business laptops and they've always put good emphasis on battery life. Bought the missus an R830 to replace her Acer clunker; feather light magnesium alloy chassis, nice-ish screen (although 1366x768 on a 13" is still ugly to my eyes), really nice machine for her needs. Their smallest ultrabook was the Z830 (and now the Z930) - same meh resolution, mushy keyboard, but still good battery life and Tosh are still seemingly one of the only manufacturers putting physical buttons on their touchpad as well as including an ethernet port. But no user-replaceable battery and I'm not entirely satisfied with a 13" screen. So I keep looking.
Asus, Acer, Dell, Lenovo and HP all kept coming up short for one or more of the above reasons - although mostly the eternal prevalence of these interminable no-button touchpads. Hell, it's even mentioned in the reviews that the touchpads are "temperamental" but "we didn't think it was much of an issue"... how can the pointing device on a laptop not be an issue?! Half of the ultrabooks available don't even pass the 6hr battery mark.
I've eventually settled on the HP Elitebook 2170p, an 11" business laptop but not an ultrabook because it's slightly thicker than my 1810TZ. The cost was ludicrous, especially for a still-crappy 1366x768, but at least it's on a (thankfully matte) 11" so I can only see the pixels if I'm close to it (does anyone even make 1440x900 panels in 11"? Don't think I've ever seen one). But the small increase in thickness doesn't affect it's portability, for me at least, one jot and the six-cell battery gets me 9.5hrs of webbage, replacing that and other components is a doddle (HP charge an arm and a leg for upgrades, as does everyone I guess, so it's fitted with aftermarket memory and SSD). Added bonuses include a WWAN module and a clit mouse, a really nice backlit keyb
Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
Tell you what, put a Dell D340, a MacBook Air, and some "ultrabooks" next to each other, and then come back and tell me which of these actually look like each other.
Sure, they have been trying to sell "something like" that for a long time.
But now they are selling MacBook Air clones, specifically.
Intel repackaged up garbage end user machines that have been doing the rounds as business machines for years, and then raised the prices to 3-4 times the price. The benefit was 'thinness'. Thats it.
The problem with this whole ethos is that Intel is busy wrecking its own platform. Intergrated garbage gfx for years - race to the bottom. Wrecks machines in terms of application development and fundamentally ruined it as a gaming platform (Oh its kind of come out the other side now, but not because of anything Intel did.)
The entire PC platform and all the companies within it need to realise that they are on death row. Thin pointless gutless PC's *will* be simply eradicated by thin gutless tablets. And the tablets are better at being thin and gutless, but use less energy. Unless the PC goes back to being a platform that has real value. So make sure its got heavy compute, Cuda - OpenCL, serious GFX punch, decent CPU, and the best application layers. Stop shipping garbage. I really mean it. Stop doing it, or die. Simple horrific choice.
Being thin as your only solid reason for existance was the most fucking stupid thing to eminate from Intel in 30 years. Oh - and thanks for removing half the useful ports, meaning the difference between a laptop and tablet choice gets thinned again. No pun intended.
We`re all equal
The MacBook Air is merely another one of the overpriced netbooks. The fact that people are willing to buy it because it has the Apple logo does not mean it is any better of a product than the others.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Why do they have to be equipped with a razor blade as a front edge? I want to use laptop while laying down in a sofa or bed, but current models are not suitable as they cut my arms. In the mean while I'll continue using Eeepc 901 and an old IBM laptop and desktop machine for any real work.
And yet, Apple has its problems:
http://apple.slashdot.org/story/12/10/03/0357223/apple-acknowledges-iphone-5-camera-flaw
I don't understand why this is so hard for manufacturers: machines should just work. If they don't, they should be swapped out (same way we'd do it in a corporate IT environment) for a working one.
Of course, there's a downside to that. If a user is incompetent, they're going to become a loss for the company on the second swap or support call. You'd have to use a blacklist to keep out the unable.
I'm not impressed by the world of PC clones, but the saving grace is that they're cheap; you don't pay the overhead for great service. The downside is that they're roll-it-yourself, not quite as extreme as Linux boxes, but in the middle. You have to configure it for four hours to remove crapware, install basics like WinRAR (which is still awaiting registration... alas), and get it set up so a human can use it.
But it's cheap, and in the long-run, that's a bigger driver of the market than luxury gear like Apple sells. In fact, Apple has steadily been reversing its position from being a maker of independent hardware, to being a maker of slightly nicer PC hardware, made in the same Chinese plants that Dell used to use.
The two business models -- cut-rate clones versus custom hardware -- have converged, mainly because neither one could do it all. Clones are chaotic, the bazaar not the cathedral, but they get the job done. The problem is that no one is accountable for making sure their design and software are consistent, and no one is ultimately responsible for getting them working. That is shifted to the user. You can pay more for a Mac, but as the link to their service woes above shows, they're not perfect either, and because there's only one company, you have few options if they don't want to help.
Now I'm outta here before someone makes the obvious Libertarians-are-PCs-Totalitarians-are-Macs argument. Godwin in -1 seconds.
Costs the same as a Mac Air and comes with ...
Windows?
I'm paying a premium to run an ugly, insecure, bloated piece of crap? Why?
This will be downvoted to Flamebait, but here goes:
Ultrabooks are neat. There's no denying that.
However, in terms of the daily tasks the average user does (email, office apps, web) the ultrabooks offer nothing new. They do however offer smaller screens and often more delicate machines for a much higher price.
The iPad and its ilk succeeded because they made laptops less cumbersome; tablets are just easier to carry around and you can whip them out and get started quickly without a whole lot of setup. Netbooks did sort of as well, for a certain segment of the population. I doubt laptops will go away until we have a highly functional keyboard replacement.
The suggestion to drop prices is kind of brain-dead.
Translated, that says to basically bring ultrabook prices down to those of current mid-level laptops. Seems to defeat the point of making high-end hardware, but in another six months, they can just re-use last year's ultrabook designs.
Intel and co. don't make a good case for WHY you should pay TWICE as much for one. I have a couple of 1 and 2 year old Lenovos and Toshibas at home and they're pretty good. I'd be hard pressed to understand how paying TWICE as much for something would be TWICE as good.
The machines come with cut corners: low resolution displays, low RAM, low disk space. I want one for work, but until I can get a 1920x1200, 8-16GB RAM and 256-512GB of SSD, it won't be that good of an option for me.
I really want a no-dedicated-GPU laptop, which Ultrabooks fit nicely in dimensions, weight and using the latest Intel chips, but the corner-cutting that was done on them makes them unusable for anything serious.
yo, don't you know its all about the pentiums?
who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
It's almost as if there's more to good design than meets the eye... as if Apple actually did some hard work before they introduced the MacBook Air four years ago, rather than just looking at a competitor's product and saying "Thin, silver, wedge-shaped... yeah, we can do that!" and popping out some piece of shit a few months later. And careful, strategic supply-chain planning and management doesn't enter into it at all.
Nah... Apple's success is just due to a) marketing and b) legions of fanbois and style-obsessed sheeple. Yeah. Just keep telling yourself that.
Remember when you were a kid and watched people who were good at stuff and it looked easy? And a grown-up told you "they're really good at it and they make it look easy"? Nope--all lies. If something looks easy, it is, and if they're successful, they're just lucky. No skill is needed at all to become a great artist, designer, surgeon, stunt cyclist, manager, president, juggler, programmer...
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
None of which has anything to do with the fact that pretty much all the computers called "ultrabooks" are clones of the MacBook Air.
Maybe they'd be doing better if they weren't named something stupid like, "Ultrabooks." Talk about a super-generic, utterly meaningless name.
1.) Lack of 1080P or higher resolution on base models, particularly unacceptable due to the high price of Ultrabooks.
2.) I don't need nor want a large laptop, I would much rather have a netbook sized device with 1080P resolution.
3.) Tablets offer higher resolutions and greater flexibility for half the price.
And they also seem to have the stupid chicklet keyboard. I suppose it was designed to save weight, but it really just makes me say "Why?". The keyboards on the ordinary laptops were just fine, and most people have grown accustomed to the key spacing. Now, it's all different.
My Asus netbook has 10.5hrs by manufacturer. I generally (because I keep WiFi off) get 12-13 hours.
Subject: Your search - ultrabook Linux preinstalled - did not match any shopping results. ( on Google shopping )
No Wounder the things do not sell, people want an Operating System that works. "Silly Rabbit" Windows if for Gamers not real people.
ps. Google even suggested the search string.
You will most often lack page up/page down keys on an Apple computer, and end/home, making it a pain in the ass to scroll through documents, web or Unix terminals. Even the book pro retina is like this. It even lacks Ins and separate Del keys you find on a netbook. So don't buy a mac if you like to use the keyboard for anything that is not text input.
I call them latops and now netbooks (corrected), but the nice ones do not have Intel at all, when I can find them because salesmen do not like to sell them and do not resupply them; while the rest are kind of awkward and too big. So? Where is the surprise? Like the market does not want to sell and the OEM companies do not want to find them when stolen (from you, that is). Pity I can no longer find the XP ones...
It's Intel's trademark for a MacBook Air clone. Intel has a $200 million dollar subsidy for pc makers. But in order to qualify you need to adhere to some very specific set specifications. This includes a lot of size and minimum hardware. PC makers have a very hard time competing with Apple because they have a modular configuration system designed to support a very deep product line. Because of that the internals are much bigger than Apple. Whereas apple has a very shallow and focused product line. More focus, smaller, etc.
Now don't confuse this as an anti-Apple move by Intel. Intel's problem is Windows has an ARM version. PC makers started taking the easy way out and started competing with Apple using Non-Intel CPUs.
I do reasonable size development on a macbook air with external monitor. It was fast enough to be my enterprise developer platform for java and now for .Net development when booted into windows 7. (Yeah it makes me sad.)
With my bluetooth keyboard and a USB monitor it has replaced my smaller laptop. (But not my serious laptop for when I need a lot of cycles.) And it gets 2 bars more signal than my aircard. And it makes phone calls and fits in my pocket.
Sent from my ENIAC
The most expensive macbook air with 256GB drive and 8GB ram is $1599.
You could've had what you wanted, though I guess a copy of windows would add to the orice a bit.