While most manufacturers seem happy to hurl out new netbook models at the rate of knots, HP is positively lumbering along. Back in May 2008, it released its first model, the Mini-Note 2133, and it's only just got around to releasing an updated version, the Mini 2140. HP Mini 2140 HP's Mini 2140: familiar, decent design HP may …
I have a Mininote 2133, and it's by far and away the best of the early crop of netbooks, awesome build quality, fantastic keyboard and screen.
However the 2133 is such good value for £180, I can't really warrant paying double for a 2140 for something that's basically a 2133 with more powerful Intel Atom rather than the Via C7.
The C7 in the 2133 may run hot and be a little on the weedy side, but it's actually perfectly usable (far more usable than the Aspire One and eeepc900 that I tried beforehand).
If the price drops £100, then I'm interested...
Far too Expensive
Even the base model is over £100 too much for what you get!
Pretty near the top? Are you honestly suggesting that the HP is nearly twice as good as the Acer Aspire One? Because that's what it would have to be - given that it's damn near double the price - for it to rank near the top.
I don't understand how you can even carry out a meaningful review when the laptop they sent you was the wrong one.
Pretty poor show all around.
Don't worry about the buttons.
If you're in the market for one of these, don't worry about the track pad buttons. I have a 2133 and they're not a problem - I actually prefer the placement as you can hit the left button easily with your thumb (although I usually tap). I'd also recommend holding out for the higher res screen, the 2133's 1280x768 really is magic, but then i am a bit of resolution junky.
HP Mini 700?
What about the HP Mini 700?
Similar specs, just a "consumer" device... and yet far cheaper than the 2140.
Also, with a 16x10 screen at 1024x600.
In before "I'd buy one if it came with linux"
1024 x 576 ????
The huge screen res was the biggest selling point of the 2133, and they've chucked it away. And let's not start on the price. Fools!
The 2133 (which you can get from ebuyer for £180) is a million times better than the Acer Aspire One (and the EEEPC900/901)
I had both of them before I got a 2133, and they were horrible, in build quality, performance and usability.
I almost bought a 2133 when it was released, but my eeeee701 still had new smell, so i couldnt justify the thing... this is VERY tempting, cost aside as its a moot point, (skodas and audis are worlds apart in price but share many components, with the audi always scoring higher) the letdown here is the resolution, the original crammed a 1300x700ish screen in - tiny fonts, but excellent useability, 1024x560!! eh gads! whats that about? hsnt anyone from hp ever seen a dialog box??!
anyhoo, im sticking with my Sony UX1XN - the worlds best minature computer!
HP asleep at the wheel?
It's a real shame that HP, after creating the best netbook keyboard out there, somehow managed to drop the ball. Just as the other manufacturers are releasing a new generation of netbooks, HP gives us one with last year's CPU and chipset, and tries to charge us double the price of a netbook for it.
It's a real shame about the lack of 3G too. This should at least be an option on any new netbook worth its salt - these machines are supposed to be for browsing the web after all. My only complaint with my Acer Aspire One is that the 3G dongle sticking out of the side makes it bloody unwieldy.
There is a Linux version
...even though you cannot put it straight into your basket,
Personally, I'm still waiting for the high-resolution version. I think the chassis is nice.
ditto - screen
Best netbook HP2133 because of keyboard , screen and build quality - coupled with linux version £180.
Take the best feature (screen) and double the price. WTF are they thinking?
why no linux in the UK
I dont get HP UK's anti-linux stance in retain products. As an HP employee, I happily strip off vista and stick ubuntu on my work boxes, but for home use I don't want to pay the premium for an OS that won't ever get used. When will they accept that linux is ideal for a mini-note, and give us it on systems with 3G built in?
So why is this better than my 2133
OK so the CPU is quicker, but for casual web browsing, reading emails and most other stuff I'm quite happy with the performance of the 2133. It's a great little bundle, the keyboard is better than any of the other laptops or desk tops I use regularly. I like the touch pad. I dumped the version of SLED it was installed with and went with Ubuntu.
But the 2133 has a 1280x768 display with is brilliant, this new jobby has replaced it a screen an out of the ark. Even the tele has more than 560 lines.
Throwing away their USP
I'm another 2133 owner who bought it solely for the screen. Without it, this is just another machine in a sea of similar devices - no matter how pretty an how nice the keyboard. (I've been happy on a Libretto for years - the 2133's is wasted on me.) In fact, it's *less* than most of them, since it's got even fewer pixels. Who listened to all the "1024x600 doesn't give you enough room" complaints and decided that cutting off pixels was the solution? What's the point of 16:9 if you don't have the resolution for HD anyway?
Having had to reinstall Linux on my 2133 anyway (loose hard disk when shipped to me, trashed the boot sector before I re-seated it), throwing out the Microsoft OS doesn't bother me too much, other than moral objections to Microsoft tax. Given that HP never supported the Linux version anyway (my 2133 came with a note saying that if I had the Linux version, don't bother calling tech support) I'm surprised they can't be bothered to offer it.
Glad to see they've kept the multicoloured nipple illuminators, though. There's nothing like a bright LED shining straight in your eyes to make the screen easier to read in the dark. (The trick is never to take your hands off the keyboard, even if you dare to stop for a drink...)
About the screen res...
MS only allows XP on low-powered chipsets, like Intel's Atom. It doesn't want to lose sales of it's pricier Vista.
Intel only allows certain hardware specs on laptops that use it's Atom, with 1024x600 being the max allowed. It doesn't want to lose sales of it's more expensive portable chips in tradtional laptops, when the reality is that an Atom could, for the most part, do the job just as well and use less power.
Note that the old HP 2133 didn't use Atom, the new one does and that's why the screen has been gimped.
So XP = Atom = Crap hardware, and you're stuck with it until either:
1. AMD gets their finger out.
2. Windows 7 gets released and turns out okay.
Right now is not a good time to buy a netbook, unless you can get a nice early 2007 model on ebay cheaply. I spent £83 on a used eee701, very happy with it.
Windows 7 on Mininiote 2133
I have WIn 7 build 7068 running sweet as pie on my Mininote 2133 (upgraded to 2GB of RAM), why on earth would I pay double to get a 2140 with a gimped screen?
Even Paris can see this is overpriced...
Waiting for HD screen upgrade (3G woud be nice too)
Then its this baby and a Hackintosh OS X install to give me the Netbook that apple wont make......
As its vanilla netbook innards should should run the Dell Mini 9/Wind OS X install happily.
One step forward two steps back
2133 had a lovely screen, good resolution. 1024x600 is just usable, 1024x576 is just a silly idea.
- Review Apple takes blade to 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display
- Munich considers dumping Linux for ... GULP ... Windows!
- Game Theory The agony and ecstasy of SteamOS: WHERE ARE MY GAMES?
- Intel's Raspberry Pi rival Galileo can now run Windows
- Microsoft and HTC are M8s again: New One mobe sports WinPhone