Intel launched its latest generation of netbook-centric Atom processors right at the end of 2009. While the following weeks saw plenty of announcements heralding new machines based on the chips, those PCs have only now started to arrive on shop shelves. Asus is, of course, the genuine pioneer of the netbook arena, launching the …
I still have my 1000H... 4 hours battery life on average, so the 5.25 to 10.5h life is definitely an improvement on the earlier models.
I hope ASUS gets the new Pine Trail chipset right next time. The sooner they get it right, the sooner I replace my 1000H. :)
No SSD? No Linux?
Eee PC, but..
yea what gives?
Where is she?
What does it look like...
So, most importantly, what does it look like when being used on the beach by a nubile girl?
Come on Reg, where is the picture?
The pinetrail ATOM processor is about saving money for intel, not boosting performance; the chipset is to all intents and purposes the same as the old one, it's just moved from two chips to one. There is an article about it on anandtech: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3728
Just read that
w7 kills batteries and the latest updates make the in more unstable
Can I get this anywhere with Linux on to save even more money and win all round?
Why so expensive?
What happed to the 'cheap' part of SCC? Is this some sort of con orchestrated by MS in order to make Win7 'seem' affordable. I note the lack Linux for the latest crop of netbooks - that would show the true cost of win7.
A netbook needs to be <£300 (preferably <£250) otherwise it's just a small, underpowered laptop...
@ The Serpent and Cornholio
She's upset there's no high res screen option ftw.
Thanks to Ballmer ramping up netbook prices using Windoze, these things are just too damn expensive. A full laptop is around the same price - not as small, but way more powerful. This should be £200.
And where's the Linux version? Presumably a casualty of the deal between netbook makers and the aforementioned overweight bane of the IT industry.
Evil Bill, 'cause there's no Evil Ballmer.
Netbooks are still shit.
Still looks promising
I've got a Eee 1000, one of the last models to still have Linux pre-installed before Asus drank the Windows koolaid. I have long-since replaced the Xandros-based install with Ubuntu Netbook Remix, and just recently upgraded the flash hdd to 64GB. I love the speed of the SSD, and the system performance is tolerable. It's not speed demon, but it does well what it's advertised to be: a light and portable, ultra-low-powered, Internet browsing machine. My only real complaint after a year of use is I find the small keyboard too cramped to do extensive typing.
I can't imagine what the SATA HDD and Windows 7 do to battery life, but it's got to hurt it bad. I'd love to see another review with a user-installed copy of linux (any flavor) on it, and see how the performance numbers compare. Netbooks were born for SSD and light-weight OS. Seems to my that trying to squeeze Windows on one defeats (at least half) the purpose.
Yes, you could say I was somewhat of a Linux-fanboi. Not militant, mind you. I just like to have choices.
er, what's the screen res?
..just bring one out with a wider right shift key PLEASE!!!
Yet another one, boring.
Another yawn inducing netbook.
Eh, you forgot this (apart from the pix of the bird)
For a nerd e-rag, you should know a good proportion of your readers like to customize their kit.
How easy is it to get this thing open? Upgrade the ram? Throw away the winchester?
Netbooks vs cheap laptops
Why does everyone always bring this up?
If you want a machine to use around the house, so you don't care about size / weight / battery life, then buy a cheap laptop.
If you want a light machine you can just stick in a bag to be used anywhere, buy a netbook.
Typing this post on one
Picked one of these up in the US just after release date as I travel a lot and wanted a netbook with good battery life. This it has, but I wished I'd read some more reviews before purchase. It's a nice light machine and does standard web-browsing fine but it struggles with flash-heavy sites and stutters like crazy when trying to play 480p or upward YouTube videos. I haven't tried any HD mkv/h.264 videos yet but I've heard it refuses to play 1080p and only works with 720p with CoreAVC codec on the most stripped-down options. Spending a couple of weeks stuck in a hotel room in the middle of nowhere and no car or option of escaping, I wish I'd paid the $50 more and got an Ion-based 'book with dvi/hdmi so I could have connected it to the in-room HDTV and watched some films through it.
And so the Netbooks spiral into insignificance
These latest netbooks seem pointless, they're not significantly smaller or lighter than full laptops, and they're not significantly cheaper either.
Where are the netbooks that exist somewhere between a highly powered mobile phone ( Nokia N900 ) and a full laptop ?
I'd love to buy something like the original Asus Eee PC 701 ( but with less bezel around the screen and thus a larger LCD , but not larger overall form factor. )
I'd love there to be a netbook that weighs around 800 - 900 grams
And it would be running Linux on an SSD of around 12 - 20 GB.
Most of all it would cost less than 200 quid.
The netbook idea as implemented by Asus, Samsung, Acer , Toshiba and the rest seems now to be approaching bloated middle age ( a bit like me), and that's never an enticing place to be.
Netbooks need to be lean - mean and cheap. Something that's better than browsing/emailing on a crackberry/other-mobile-phone. They do NOT need to be full PC replacements, capable of HD Video.
Please someone tell the manufacturers this.
asus aspire one 9"
Still the best imho. small, cheap, does the job.
mine triple boots osx, win 7 and xp.
plays 720p no bother. I use it on holidays to edit movies in imovie, etc no bother - even using it to edit gopro HD footage... I mean it ain't quick.. but its better than not being able to do it.
Where is the...