Because the most expensive part of the laptop is really the screen,
That's the first reasonable logic I've heard yet for such a small pc. However, the fact remains that you're still going to have to shell out the cash for a Micro PC and a monitor. And personally, I think if it's not portable it had better be expandable. So if you're not going to get an LCD monitor, I still say there's no point to the Micro. I haven't found a price yet for the Micro, but I'm pretty sure that makes a laptop cheaper.
Whatever happened to form follows function? Macs look more attractive (to me) then a Micro PC, so if I'm not buying it (the Micro PC) for the superior functionality, I'm not buying it.
While the single most useful course of action for you and me would be to make radical changes to U, this is not the job of the software developers. Rather, their job is to try to make those radical changes unnecessary. (in order to be able to use their software)
Also, while I'm all for systems allowing more than one G to be implemented with a given I, the bottom line is and always will be I. The reason that people (not average people, but the type of people who will be reading this) choose one software product over another is functionality.
Slashdot Mirror
Because the most expensive part of the laptop is really the screen,
That's the first reasonable logic I've heard yet for such a small pc. However, the fact remains that you're still going to have to shell out the cash for a Micro PC and a monitor. And personally, I think if it's not portable it had better be expandable. So if you're not going to get an LCD monitor, I still say there's no point to the Micro. I haven't found a price yet for the Micro, but I'm pretty sure that makes a laptop cheaper.
Whatever happened to form follows function? Macs look more attractive (to me) then a Micro PC, so if I'm not buying it (the Micro PC) for the superior functionality, I'm not buying it.
While the single most useful course of action for you and me would be to make radical changes to U, this is not the job of the software developers. Rather, their job is to try to make those radical changes unnecessary. (in order to be able to use their software)
Also, while I'm all for systems allowing more than one G to be implemented with a given I, the bottom line is and always will be I. The reason that people (not average people, but the type of people who will be reading this) choose one software product over another is functionality.