I have a book from my dealership; they don't fill it out unless I ask them to, even though it's in the glovebox.
You your mechanic is a lazy customer-unfriendly slob? I'm so surprised....
So thorough he's replacing things that don't need replacing
If that means my car breaks down, less or not at all.... Then it's a good thing. You're using double standards: one point you don't want old cars because they break down "a lot" (meaning in the 8 years of ownership of my TT, exactly once and it was a sensor that gave a wrong signal.... false positive thus), but you aren't willing to replace pieces that a mechanic might rate "suspicious". He's the expert, remember.... But we already know you have a lazy mechanic....
color me impressed.
As a matter of fact, I know that if the engine supports it (most modern ones do), a computer is attached an everything recorded gets evaluated. But, hey, I already know that the US customer services sucks, and the AAA is probably no exception.
Funny, how you rule out reliability for German cars... I also heard that in the US they lack competent mechanics for those kind of cars. Hey, but your mileage may vary.
Ya, how many people keep those up to date? That's what I thought.
Done by the dealership. It's only a problem for those that change the oil themselves.
Thanks for the good laugh though.
I'm actually laughing at the sad state of the cars on your roads.
Of course, they may not be as through as you think either. You may want to talk to a mechanic.
You should ask a German what kind of fear the German TUV instills to Heinz-Auto-Owner. They *are* thorough. As for asking a mechanic: before I go to said inspection, I go to my mechanic to weed out any small problems that may eventually cause my car to fail. If your car fails, you're legally allowed to drive to four places: a mechanic (garage), the junkyard, your home and the inspection station. Oh, and that only for 30 days. After that you're in even worse trouble.
AAA eqiovolent [sic] is going to take the engine apart, your inspection is rather meaningless and feel-good. I'd be curious to know, how long does said inspection take?
According to their website, a full check has 152 tests (including a actual power reading. RPM/power output) Out of these 28 are for the enigine, the rest for the other mechanical aspects.
As I said in my other post, our regulates here going from non-existence to very quick look over.
Look, I knew that, but I simply didn't want to come over as bashing the US. I cannot help it that your government does allow rusty wrecks on the streets.
My employer would think my being three hours late is a big deal, especially if it becomes fairly frequent.
Oh, my employer won't be ecstatic either. However, you call them, you say what your problem is and I expect them to understand that. As I said in the previous post: if you car starts to break down very regularly, then it's time to get another one.
Why not buy a new car for $2,000 to $7,000 more then?
So you get new cars from 6000$ to 11000$? Not here, just forget that. I'll elaborate later on that.
car troubles far outnumbered my sick days my entire life.
Strong health, or you go to work sick which isn't a good idea either.... or of course very bad luck with cars.
Why do you assume all older cars are 30,000 miles or less?
And where exactly do I assume that? I have mentioned my Audi 80 in the thread, it has 183000km, I also mentioned my current car, an Audi TT with 145000km. That's 115000miles respectively 90000miles...
So, it is true that when you *buy* a used car, you'd better go for the 3 to 5 year old models where the first owner paid the "new" premium. I have said everywhere in the thread "a younger second hand car".
My wifes car is only 30,000 miles, only worth $9,000. But for $4,000 more I can get a brand new 2008 Honda civic
So a brand new Honda Civic costs 13000$? Even assuming 1$=1€, I just looked it up: a second hand Honda Civic from 09/2006 with 34000km cost 16000€ (Closest match I could find). That's a 1.8l gas engine, so nothing really special. A brand new Honda Civic, base model (being 1.4l gas), costs -according to my national website- 15990€. Fun isn't it? Now let's look what I get for that price second hand at the nicer brands (after all, it's just a Honda). Of course, this counts for my local market. The US will obviously vary, but I am speaking out of my perspective.
BMW 320d: 15500€ - 2005 model - 60000km (37500miles). Has air conditioning, on-board-computer, leather seats,.... the works.
Mercedes C 200CDi: 15.700€ - 2004 model - 81000km (50000miles). Also had "the works".
Audi A4 Quattro 2.5TDi: 15.900€ - 2003 model - 76500km (48000miles). Again, "the works" as options.
Any of these cars, new, would cost at least 30k€ *new* and are completely outclass the Honda Civic. Are you honestly telling me you prefer a Honda Civic above any of these nice cars?
Oh, I did that too. I resigned, I still have my own mailserver, but it simply sends everything through my ISPs smtp server. Even then, I sometimes get flagged as spam. This is, alas, a battle we have lost ages ago:-(
Considering that slashdot declares that the pages are iso-8859-1, there is no surprise that it doesn't support full unicode. However, the euro-sign can be displayed considering you're supposed to use HTML-Entities in the first place. So: € = €. Not, hard, is it?
What's the cost if your car is so unreliable that you are late for an important meeting?
I don't have important meetings. I'm not a businessman, if you are, you'd better have a company-provided car. At that point is isn't important how much you pay for your car, since you don't pay for it. All other meetings, you can call and tell them your problem. Old cars don't break down every two weeks, they break down once every two years or so, at worst... If you have a car that breaks down every two weeks, you really should consider replacing it.
Or you break down in the middle of nowhere?
I call the equivalent of the AAA in my country. No big deal.
Or a part breaks and now you're in the hospital because that caused a loss of control?
Oh, come on... Parts breaking causing loss of control are as such part of the safety infrastructure of your car. As I told you elsewhere, the yearly safety inspection will weed out risky cars. You're NOT getting through if your brake lines are rusted or if the suspension is dead or dying. Heck, you fail if your tires are at 2mm profile, even though the legal limit is 1.6mm. Rust on parts needed for structural integrity = FAIL, etc, etc, etc...
How much do you invest into a car that's only worth $4000?
What about my original statement was not clear? The answer is: you pay up to 4000$.
The reason cars lose value is because they tend to break down more as they get older. The part you don't know is WHEN that break down will occur, or what impact the break down will have, so you're taking a fairly significant risk.
No, you're painting the situation in much a worse light than it actually is. A well maintained older car (you do maintain your cars, right?) is very reliable. The associated riks are pretty much: "I could be late for work one day", but the odds that you have to call in sick much much higher. (Your own human body isn't as reliable as your old car.... Just had a week long flu, my car on the other hand purred on)
The risk is there, but it really is very low... *if* you maintain your car. An old rusty-haven't-changed-oil-in-50000km-car is indeed going to be a risk. Except such a car, won't even be allowed on the street where I live.
There is something called "maintenance booklet" (at least in my part of the world) which details the maintenance history. On top of that every car on the streets here needs to get past the technical inspection (mandated by government). If it isn't fit for the road, you don't get a permit. A heavily damaged car, skimpily repaired won't get through. They are very very stringent.
Finally, I'm member of the equivalent of the AAA in my country. I can take any car I want for a thorough inspection there for a very fair price. It's a third party independent review: If a seller doesn't want you to do that, it's fishy. When buying a second hand car, you have to protect yourself.
My point is that there is more to social interaction than exchanging strings of text
However, intelligence has nothing to do with social interaction.
You are completely misunderstanding the concept of a Turing Test, which is what the original poster indirectly referred to. The Turing Test is not about social interaction, it's about intelligence. The point of a Turing Test is essentially: "if it acts intelligently, then it is intelligent, regardless if it is programmed to be so (simulated) or not". You are asking for a bodily incarnation, which has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence. For all you know, everyone in your environment could be a simulated entity in a world created only for you. Descartes: cogito ergo sum. You simply cannot know that we are real. It if it weren't the case, would it really change anything to you? In exactly the same way, the Turing Test works: you can converse intelligently with a machine without knowing it's a machine, make it "for all intents and purporses" intelligent.
You ask for verbal/bodily interaction (which Mr.Jean-Dominique Bauby, linked to above pretty much lacks 100%) to required for intelligence. Consider it this way: if the Turing Test is solved, then that part of the problem is done. You now only need to put that AI in a sufficiently convincing robot and you have created an artificial being that covers your condition. However, the "intelligence" part was covered by the Turing Test, and that' it.
As for the "I can write a chatbot that simulates an illiterate". Yeah, me too.... It just has to return random chars, and even then you could probably analyse the output: if it's too random, then it's a computer. Simply typing gibberish on the keyboard isn't random. You are also simply ignoring that the Turing Test uses the text-only conversation to remove bias. Of course, if you can see the face and hear the voice of your interlocutor, you're going to see it's not human. But again, this has nothing to do with intelligence.
Well, you didn't specify what exactly the "final exam" would be. For now, I'll take the Turing Test to be the final exam. It pretty much covers the following: if it looks intelligent, acts intelligent, then for all intents and purposes it is intelligent.
As you might have read, I drive a 8 year old Audi TT (I bought it new, just FYI). You'll really have to explain to me what's not nice about that car? It's not underpowered, it's not loud (well, it really has a nice sound) and it's pretty damned comfortable. Sure, it doesn't have an iPod connector, or built-in GPS.
I've often mentioned my 14 year old Audi 80, I had before my Audi TT. Now guess what: it wasn't underpowered at all. Mountains were not a problem, it was very comfortable (better than the TT, IMNSHO) and the loudness? The engine ran like a purring kitten. Why did I change it? Because of an accident.
Just face it: buy a nice car in the first place and it'll last you long. Nobody told you to buy a piece of crap and run it in the ground. ("Rusted out Geo Metro"? WTF?) I talked explicitly younger second hand cars. Like a 3 year old BMW. They are affordable when buying and they'll last you for ages.
Yeah, you say it yourself... "GeForce 8600GT". Integrated Graphics doesn't only mean they are integrated on the motherboard, it usually implies that it uses system RAM for the graphics card, and frankly: good luck with that. Your graphics card is not "integrated", it is a module on your motherboard that contains it's own VRAM. (Hey, in desktop PC's we call that indeed a "Graphics card", wow!) Yeah, on some laptops the graphics card is actually replaceable.
2000 Audi TT... A bit above 90k miles. It's 8 years old and I have no intention to replace it I'm sure I'll still have a few years to go before the really expensive repairs start, and even then, I'll have to see...
The only reason I see to replace it, would be because we'd finally get some offspring, but for now...
I've known older people who think I'm insane for buying a new car and driving it till it's got 150K miles, and then dumping it.
I'm only 30, and I think that's an insane thing to do. You replace your car when the repair costs exceed the value of the car.... and even *then* you have to make a decision on how much more time you think to get out of your car by actually doing the repair, versus buying a new car (or a young second-hand car)
Assuming 10k miles/year, that car is 15 years old. One of my first cars 14 years old and in prime condition... when I had an accident (and thus had to be replaced) I'm sure, it would have done another 5 years easily.
If you want to save a maximum on a car, you buy a younger second-hand car, and drive it down. That's the financially most sane option.
you should be aware of the state of technology and what your options are, even if you're "not good with computers"
I disagree. Let's go for the bad analogy: A "not good with computers" person uses Dial-Up @ 28.8kbps. That person, is happy with it because it allows her to do her email and that's all she does. Does this person really need to inform herself about "better options" like Cable, DSL, FiOS? Frankly? It suits that persons needs, and as such there is no need to change. It also makes no sense to this person to know about the better (Better in your world, not in that persons world) alternatives.
Don't fix it if it ain't broken.. Ever heard of that? (You could argue that Netscape was "broken", but not in his eyes!)
Knowing "what are better options in technology" are by default only important to people like you and me, which entirely excludes "not good with computers" people. However, even I am inclined to stick to what I have. I pay quite a lot for my DSL. There are cheaper options around, but asking the salespeople if they have a dedicated SMTP server (I absolutely need that), drew only blank stares. So, sure, I pay more, but at least I know that I'm not going to lose out on what I have.
You take his statement out of context: "It worked for me, so I stuck with it." From this statement one could deduce that neither of his wifes "worked for him". Which is usually why a divorce is done, in the first place.
You can have a sloppy, niphomanic, epensive wife and still it could "work for you". Doesn't mean there aren't better possible wives out there....
The T1 will have to kill you if I tell you.;-) I do have the parallel port interface, which was used to transfer files between a "real PC" and the Portfolio. Whatever you think of it, the Portfolio rocked and I'd love to be able to repair it....
I have a similar laptop (Fujitsu-Siemens Pa1510: Turion X2/2Gig RAM/120GB HD). Let me guess: ATI X1100 chipset? No way to play any games on it. It sucks donkeys balls. It now runs Ubuntu, but compiz etc, won't work either.
Yeah, that's indeed smaller than what most people refer to as desktop replacement. Let's just say that I interpreted your comment and you pretty much described the concept of desktop replacement. I couldn't know you have different standards;-)
That said, I used to have a 12" iBook G3 600MHz and I wouldn't call it an ultraportable either. Really not something I'd like to lug around everywhere. It was my "desktop replacement" though... but only conceptually. As a "laptop" it was quite nice.
I understand what you mean. I used to have (still have, but the flatcable to the screen is dead) an Atari Portfolio. Not as powerful as your HP, but damn, did I do a lot on it!
Utraportables are *companions* to desktops or desktop-replacements (that's what you describe). Utraportables are "just enough to do something on the move", but that's it. I mean this from a usability perspective, not from power since you can get powerful (but expensive) ultraportables.
You mention gaming, this means that the Dell is out of the question too by the way. (Integrated Graphics: forget it)
You are simply not the target demographic for an ultraportable. Cheap or not. I am, but I'm not shelling out 2000€ for an Ultraportable as they have been costing the last few years.
The Asus EEE is for me: small, usable for browsing, small text editing, etc, while I commute to work with the train. No way in hell, I'd lug around my 15.4" desktop replacement.
I used to have a Highscreen Bluenote in 1994. That was what a full-size laptop was back then! I used to do use it on my 2h ride on the train to go to University each week.
It was pretty compact, probably still a bit larger than the EEE, and the screen was a 8" colour LCD at 800x600. You could work quite well on it (OS/2 ran on it wonderfully) One of the RAM modules went back, and back in those days laptop RAM was proprietary.
It sure was heavy and thick though.
So, why this post: to tell you, yes, I am toroughly convinced that the EEE PC is just right for train-travelling people wanting to type in an assignment or read some webpages/PDFs. Back in the time we all did (at least those that could afford it *grin*)
Slashdot Mirror
...and I frankly didn't know anyone could insert *that*! Uh, /ME needs brainbleach.
You your mechanic is a lazy customer-unfriendly slob? I'm so surprised....
If that means my car breaks down, less or not at all.... Then it's a good thing. You're using double standards: one point you don't want old cars because they break down "a lot" (meaning in the 8 years of ownership of my TT, exactly once and it was a sensor that gave a wrong signal.... false positive thus), but you aren't willing to replace pieces that a mechanic might rate "suspicious". He's the expert, remember.... But we already know you have a lazy mechanic....
As a matter of fact, I know that if the engine supports it (most modern ones do), a computer is attached an everything recorded gets evaluated. But, hey, I already know that the US customer services sucks, and the AAA is probably no exception.
I'm not disagreeing, however, what can I do as a residential DSL user? I can't remove my IP that is blocked since I'm on "residential".
Funny, how you rule out reliability for German cars... I also heard that in the US they lack competent mechanics for those kind of cars. Hey, but your mileage may vary.
Done by the dealership. It's only a problem for those that change the oil themselves.
I'm actually laughing at the sad state of the cars on your roads.
You should ask a German what kind of fear the German TUV instills to Heinz-Auto-Owner. They *are* thorough. As for asking a mechanic: before I go to said inspection, I go to my mechanic to weed out any small problems that may eventually cause my car to fail. If your car fails, you're legally allowed to drive to four places: a mechanic (garage), the junkyard, your home and the inspection station. Oh, and that only for 30 days. After that you're in even worse trouble.
According to their website, a full check has 152 tests (including a actual power reading. RPM/power output) Out of these 28 are for the enigine, the rest for the other mechanical aspects.
Look, I knew that, but I simply didn't want to come over as bashing the US. I cannot help it that your government does allow rusty wrecks on the streets.
Oh, my employer won't be ecstatic either. However, you call them, you say what your problem is and I expect them to understand that. As I said in the previous post: if you car starts to break down very regularly, then it's time to get another one.
So you get new cars from 6000$ to 11000$? Not here, just forget that. I'll elaborate later on that.
Strong health, or you go to work sick which isn't a good idea either.... or of course very bad luck with cars.
And where exactly do I assume that? I have mentioned my Audi 80 in the thread, it has 183000km, I also mentioned my current car, an Audi TT with 145000km. That's 115000miles respectively 90000miles...
So, it is true that when you *buy* a used car, you'd better go for the 3 to 5 year old models where the first owner paid the "new" premium. I have said everywhere in the thread "a younger second hand car".
So a brand new Honda Civic costs 13000$? Even assuming 1$=1€, I just looked it up: a second hand Honda Civic from 09/2006 with 34000km cost 16000€ (Closest match I could find). That's a 1.8l gas engine, so nothing really special. A brand new Honda Civic, base model (being 1.4l gas), costs -according to my national website- 15990€. Fun isn't it? Now let's look what I get for that price second hand at the nicer brands (after all, it's just a Honda). Of course, this counts for my local market. The US will obviously vary, but I am speaking out of my perspective.
Any of these cars, new, would cost at least 30k€ *new* and are completely outclass the Honda Civic. Are you honestly telling me you prefer a Honda Civic above any of these nice cars?
Oh, I did that too. I resigned, I still have my own mailserver, but it simply sends everything through my ISPs smtp server. Even then, I sometimes get flagged as spam. This is, alas, a battle we have lost ages ago :-(
Considering that slashdot declares that the pages are iso-8859-1, there is no surprise that it doesn't support full unicode. However, the euro-sign can be displayed considering you're supposed to use HTML-Entities in the first place. So: € = €. Not, hard, is it?
I don't have important meetings. I'm not a businessman, if you are, you'd better have a company-provided car. At that point is isn't important how much you pay for your car, since you don't pay for it. All other meetings, you can call and tell them your problem. Old cars don't break down every two weeks, they break down once every two years or so, at worst... If you have a car that breaks down every two weeks, you really should consider replacing it.
I call the equivalent of the AAA in my country. No big deal.
Oh, come on... Parts breaking causing loss of control are as such part of the safety infrastructure of your car. As I told you elsewhere, the yearly safety inspection will weed out risky cars. You're NOT getting through if your brake lines are rusted or if the suspension is dead or dying. Heck, you fail if your tires are at 2mm profile, even though the legal limit is 1.6mm. Rust on parts needed for structural integrity = FAIL, etc, etc, etc...
What about my original statement was not clear? The answer is: you pay up to 4000$.
No, you're painting the situation in much a worse light than it actually is. A well maintained older car (you do maintain your cars, right?) is very reliable. The associated riks are pretty much: "I could be late for work one day", but the odds that you have to call in sick much much higher. (Your own human body isn't as reliable as your old car.... Just had a week long flu, my car on the other hand purred on)
The risk is there, but it really is very low... *if* you maintain your car. An old rusty-haven't-changed-oil-in-50000km-car is indeed going to be a risk. Except such a car, won't even be allowed on the street where I live.
There is something called "maintenance booklet" (at least in my part of the world) which details the maintenance history. On top of that every car on the streets here needs to get past the technical inspection (mandated by government). If it isn't fit for the road, you don't get a permit. A heavily damaged car, skimpily repaired won't get through. They are very very stringent.
Finally, I'm member of the equivalent of the AAA in my country. I can take any car I want for a thorough inspection there for a very fair price. It's a third party independent review: If a seller doesn't want you to do that, it's fishy. When buying a second hand car, you have to protect yourself.
However, intelligence has nothing to do with social interaction.
You are completely misunderstanding the concept of a Turing Test, which is what the original poster indirectly referred to. The Turing Test is not about social interaction, it's about intelligence. The point of a Turing Test is essentially: "if it acts intelligently, then it is intelligent, regardless if it is programmed to be so (simulated) or not". You are asking for a bodily incarnation, which has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence. For all you know, everyone in your environment could be a simulated entity in a world created only for you. Descartes: cogito ergo sum. You simply cannot know that we are real. It if it weren't the case, would it really change anything to you? In exactly the same way, the Turing Test works: you can converse intelligently with a machine without knowing it's a machine, make it "for all intents and purporses" intelligent.
You ask for verbal/bodily interaction (which Mr.Jean-Dominique Bauby, linked to above pretty much lacks 100%) to required for intelligence. Consider it this way: if the Turing Test is solved, then that part of the problem is done. You now only need to put that AI in a sufficiently convincing robot and you have created an artificial being that covers your condition. However, the "intelligence" part was covered by the Turing Test, and that' it.
As for the "I can write a chatbot that simulates an illiterate". Yeah, me too.... It just has to return random chars, and even then you could probably analyse the output: if it's too random, then it's a computer. Simply typing gibberish on the keyboard isn't random. You are also simply ignoring that the Turing Test uses the text-only conversation to remove bias. Of course, if you can see the face and hear the voice of your interlocutor, you're going to see it's not human. But again, this has nothing to do with intelligence.
Well, you didn't specify what exactly the "final exam" would be. For now, I'll take the Turing Test to be the final exam. It pretty much covers the following: if it looks intelligent, acts intelligent, then for all intents and purposes it is intelligent.
As you might have read, I drive a 8 year old Audi TT (I bought it new, just FYI). You'll really have to explain to me what's not nice about that car? It's not underpowered, it's not loud (well, it really has a nice sound) and it's pretty damned comfortable. Sure, it doesn't have an iPod connector, or built-in GPS.
I've often mentioned my 14 year old Audi 80, I had before my Audi TT. Now guess what: it wasn't underpowered at all. Mountains were not a problem, it was very comfortable (better than the TT, IMNSHO) and the loudness? The engine ran like a purring kitten. Why did I change it? Because of an accident.
Just face it: buy a nice car in the first place and it'll last you long. Nobody told you to buy a piece of crap and run it in the ground. ("Rusted out Geo Metro"? WTF?) I talked explicitly younger second hand cars. Like a 3 year old BMW. They are affordable when buying and they'll last you for ages.
Yeah, you say it yourself... "GeForce 8600GT". Integrated Graphics doesn't only mean they are integrated on the motherboard, it usually implies that it uses system RAM for the graphics card, and frankly: good luck with that. Your graphics card is not "integrated", it is a module on your motherboard that contains it's own VRAM. (Hey, in desktop PC's we call that indeed a "Graphics card", wow!) Yeah, on some laptops the graphics card is actually replaceable.
You do not have to believe me: wikipedia article
2000 Audi TT... A bit above 90k miles. It's 8 years old and I have no intention to replace it I'm sure I'll still have a few years to go before the really expensive repairs start, and even then, I'll have to see...
The only reason I see to replace it, would be because we'd finally get some offspring, but for now...
I'm only 30, and I think that's an insane thing to do. You replace your car when the repair costs exceed the value of the car.... and even *then* you have to make a decision on how much more time you think to get out of your car by actually doing the repair, versus buying a new car (or a young second-hand car)
Assuming 10k miles/year, that car is 15 years old. One of my first cars 14 years old and in prime condition... when I had an accident (and thus had to be replaced) I'm sure, it would have done another 5 years easily.
If you want to save a maximum on a car, you buy a younger second-hand car, and drive it down. That's the financially most sane option.
I disagree. Let's go for the bad analogy: A "not good with computers" person uses Dial-Up @ 28.8kbps. That person, is happy with it because it allows her to do her email and that's all she does. Does this person really need to inform herself about "better options" like Cable, DSL, FiOS? Frankly? It suits that persons needs, and as such there is no need to change. It also makes no sense to this person to know about the better (Better in your world, not in that persons world) alternatives.
Don't fix it if it ain't broken.. Ever heard of that? (You could argue that Netscape was "broken", but not in his eyes!)
Knowing "what are better options in technology" are by default only important to people like you and me, which entirely excludes "not good with computers" people. However, even I am inclined to stick to what I have. I pay quite a lot for my DSL. There are cheaper options around, but asking the salespeople if they have a dedicated SMTP server (I absolutely need that), drew only blank stares. So, sure, I pay more, but at least I know that I'm not going to lose out on what I have.
You take his statement out of context: "It worked for me, so I stuck with it." From this statement one could deduce that neither of his wifes "worked for him". Which is usually why a divorce is done, in the first place.
You can have a sloppy, niphomanic, epensive wife and still it could "work for you". Doesn't mean there aren't better possible wives out there....
The T1 will have to kill you if I tell you. ;-) I do have the parallel port interface, which was used to transfer files between a "real PC" and the Portfolio. Whatever you think of it, the Portfolio rocked and I'd love to be able to repair it....
I have a similar laptop (Fujitsu-Siemens Pa1510: Turion X2/2Gig RAM/120GB HD). Let me guess: ATI X1100 chipset? No way to play any games on it. It sucks donkeys balls. It now runs Ubuntu, but compiz etc, won't work either.
Yeah, that's indeed smaller than what most people refer to as desktop replacement. Let's just say that I interpreted your comment and you pretty much described the concept of desktop replacement. I couldn't know you have different standards ;-)
That said, I used to have a 12" iBook G3 600MHz and I wouldn't call it an ultraportable either. Really not something I'd like to lug around everywhere. It was my "desktop replacement" though... but only conceptually. As a "laptop" it was quite nice.
I understand what you mean. I used to have (still have, but the flatcable to the screen is dead) an Atari Portfolio. Not as powerful as your HP, but damn, did I do a lot on it!
That's exactly why you usually don't call them "laptop" or "notebook", but "desktop replacement".
Utraportables are *companions* to desktops or desktop-replacements (that's what you describe). Utraportables are "just enough to do something on the move", but that's it. I mean this from a usability perspective, not from power since you can get powerful (but expensive) ultraportables.
You mention gaming, this means that the Dell is out of the question too by the way. (Integrated Graphics: forget it)
You are simply not the target demographic for an ultraportable. Cheap or not. I am, but I'm not shelling out 2000€ for an Ultraportable as they have been costing the last few years.
The Asus EEE is for me: small, usable for browsing, small text editing, etc, while I commute to work with the train. No way in hell, I'd lug around my 15.4" desktop replacement.
I used to have a Highscreen Bluenote in 1994. That was what a full-size laptop was back then! I used to do use it on my 2h ride on the train to go to University each week.
It was pretty compact, probably still a bit larger than the EEE, and the screen was a 8" colour LCD at 800x600. You could work quite well on it (OS/2 ran on it wonderfully) One of the RAM modules went back, and back in those days laptop RAM was proprietary.
It sure was heavy and thick though.
So, why this post: to tell you, yes, I am toroughly convinced that the EEE PC is just right for train-travelling people wanting to type in an assignment or read some webpages/PDFs. Back in the time we all did (at least those that could afford it *grin*)