Impact of ultrabooks

M

McFry

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 25, 2011
Messages
1,715
I've long since complained about the mobile computing market's inability to grasp something we really need, and cut out all the crap we dont. CD-rom drives? PCMCIA slots? VGA ports? GTFO! Apple did a great job with their willingness to develop the Macbook air. Now that other manufacturers have grown a pair of balls and intend to produce these Air knockoff's otherwise known as "ultrabooks", I'm wondering what you forecast the immediate result will be?

Will all non-ultrabooks quickly become outdated and relegated to the junk bin?

Will most all ultrabooks initially be marketed towards high end users with deep pockets?

Do you see budget friendly ultrabooks in the sub $500 range coming out any time soon?

I cringe at the thought of buying my wife a $400 laptop that will be worth $200 come january once all these manufacturers start touting their ultrabook designs. Then again, if they keep selling them at $1000+, the oldschool laptop market may surive for quite some time.
 
I think they will mostly remain in their own segment, targeting mid to high range buyers who prioritize portability. There will always be higher end users who need more power or want a larger screen, thus defeating the purpose of an ultrabook, and there will always be more budget minded laptops for people who don't want to/can't spend as much for a laptop with features like an SSD.
 
VGA ports are quite useful on portable machines. Just about every projector in existence has a VGA input... that can't be said for HDMI.

I don't see anything wrong with optical drives either... the DVD won't be dead for a while. Sony put out several 11 inch notebooks with them... still quite compact.

I just bought a VAIO X myself... crazy thin with no DVD drive... but there's no reason a computer slightly larger shouldn't have one.

On the money issue, I've never been compelled to buy a laptop new. Most people are just buying facebook machines anyway. I bought my X because I lusted for it when it was released but couldn't afford it ($1,300 for a high end ATOM machine)... now they're going in the $500 range on ebay.
 
They will not replace "normal" type notebooks just like the MacBook Air has not replaced the MacBook Pro. The Ultrabook has it's place, but as has been said, the old school features are still used by some (myself included. /hug vga port).
 
lttletimmy said:
I think they will mostly remain in their own segment, targeting mid to high range buyers who prioritize portability. There will always be higher end users who need more power or want a larger screen, thus defeating the purpose of an ultrabook, and there will always be more budget minded laptops for people who don't want to/can't spend as much for a laptop with features like an SSD.
Click to expand...

Bingo. Too many people seem to believe in the zero sum game. There are so many factors when in comes to computers there's simply no one size fits all. Now granted thin and light is great and the Intel SB ULV designs are great, that's what my .5" thick 2 lbs. Samsumg Series 7 Slate uses and it there's enough computing power there for most. But ultrabooks sacrifice everything to be thin and light and come at a price premium. That simply isn't a formula for most people where cost is #1 factor. When ultrabooks come in at the $500 price range and lower I they'll become far more popular. But I x86 tablets will vie for the same market.

I see tablets and ultrabooks blurring, the ultimate ultrabook will have a folding keyboard dock with detachable screen. When you need maximum productivity put it in the dock, when you don't need or want the keyboard take it out of the dock. The best of all portable worlds. Like the Asus Transformer and like the old HP TC1100 that came out almost ten years ago.
 
given the size of a netbook and machines smaller than 14" getting a standard optical drive in one is not really practical as the drive consumes a LOT of space. Express card/PCMCIA slot also consume a fair amout of space. Removing those things helps make the machine thinner. Seen a macbook air and I gonna say that while it looks nice, it's not a practical solution for me as I want a laptop

1. with a larger keyboard
2. larger screen
3. MORE pixels on said larger screen
4. A means to quickly hook up machine to TV using cables that I already have (HDMI and VGA for example)
5. Removable battery as they only seem to last about 1-2 years before they go Tango Uniform.
6. Dedicated Graphics
7. BD-Rom drive
 
I hope we'll start seeing some inexpensive non-ultrabooks without optical drives. Just because it's large and cheap doesn't mean you absolutely have to stick a CD drive in there. I mean, it's nice to have choice. I would choose one without a CD drive. Then again, I'd probably choose an ultrabook or slate.
 
Dedicated graphics are going to go in to an even tinier niche market than they are now with the push by Intel and AMD to incorporate actually useful GPU cores in their CPUs; I can play League of Legends, Halflife 2, and other fairly undemanding games easily with high settings and solid framerates on the HD3000 in a mobile i5 at 1366x768. I'm planning to try more modern titles when I have time, just out of curiosity, but I didn't buy my ultrabook to be a gaming machine, that's what my desktop is for. Considering Ivy Bridge is supposed to be getting even stronger integrated GPUs, unless you want 1080P gaming at ultra settings on a laptop (in which case you better not give a damn about size or weight) you don't really need (or possibly even want, from a battery savings standpoint) a dedicated GPU in a laptop.

Some people still use optical drives, but really with a 32GB USB drive running about $30 these days I don't see why. That's what, 8 DVDs roughly? If you do use optical likely the only thing it is used for is installing software, so having a portable USB powered drive you only pull out very rarely for that purpose isn't out of the question. Don't have to take it with you everywhere. If you're in a specialty situation where you make regular use of optical discs, then sure get a drive. Otherwise, eh. Wasted bulk and weight.

Digital distribution is really kicking off, too. I haven't actually purchased anything on a disc but an OS (and I installed Windows 7 and Windows 8 Dev Preview from a USB stick) in years. Unless you can't get solid broadband where you live, there's no reason to anymore.
 
Last edited:
dalamchops said:
well, like the news article... ultrabooks will hopefully replace netboooks.
Click to expand...

Ultrabooks are $1000+ and netbooks are $300+. I see no reason why they couldn't coexist. Pricing on ULV CPU's and SSD's won't allow Ultrabook pricing to get significantly lower anytime soon.
 
Zinn said:
Ultrabooks are $1000+ and netbooks are $300+. I see no reason why they couldn't coexist. Pricing on ULV CPU's and SSD's won't allow Ultrabook pricing to get significantly lower anytime soon.
Click to expand...

ultrabooks are gonna be in the 700 range by end of next year... netbook's also has to share market with tablets
 
silent-circuit said:
Dedicated graphics are going to go in to an even tinier niche market than they are now with the push by and AMD to incorporate actually useful GPU cores in their CPUs; I can play League of Legends, Halflife 2, and other fairly undemanding games easily with high settings and solid framerates on the HD3000 in a mobile i5 at 1366x768. I'm planning to try more modern titles when I have time, just out of curiosity, but I didn't buy my ultrabook to be a gaming machine, that's what my desktop is for. Considering Ivy Bridge is supposed to be getting even stronger integrated GPUs, unless you want 1080P gaming at ultra settings on a laptop (in which case you better not give a damn about size or weight) you don't really need (or possibly even want, from a battery savings standpoint) a dedicated GPU in a laptop.

Some people still use optical drives, but really with a 32GB USB drive running about $30 these days I don't see why. That's what, 8 DVDs roughly? If you do use optical likely the only thing it is used for is installing software, so having a portable USB powered drive you only pull out very rarely for that purpose isn't out of the question. Don't have to take it with you everywhere. If you're in a specialty situation where you make regular use of optical discs, then sure get a drive. Otherwise, eh. Wasted bulk and weight.

Digital distribution is really kicking off, too. I haven't actually purchased anything on a disc but an OS (and I installed Windows 7 and Windows 8 Dev Preview from a USB stick) in years. Unless you can't get solid broadband where you live, there's no reason to anymore.
Click to expand...

compared to AMD, Intel's offerings are pretty lackluster, thus I had to remove Intel from the above statement.
 
To me, they're not really "ultra". They're just thin and light netbooks. I've always wanted "Ultrabooks", but in my definition I consider them more like the HP Envy, MacBook Pro, and Sony Z series . I wish more manufacturers would make these sorts of machines. Having a "premium" notebook made out of high quality materials (metal chassis etc...) with all the "little things" (magnetic power connector, thunderbolt, USB3, eSata6, multitouch trackpad, backlit keyboard etc..), built to the thinnest/smallest/lightest possible specs while making only minimal compromises in hardware power. I have no use for a $1000+ machine with Intel graphics and an ULV processor that does "netbook stuff" really well and is thinner/nicer looking; I can't justify this over the cost of an actual netbook. Ultimately I need something with the best mobile processors available and a mid-high range GPU, and if I can find that in a luxe, aesthetically pleasing package so much the better.
 
Xaeos said:
To me, they're not really "ultra". They're just thin and light netbooks.
Click to expand...

ULV Sandy Bridge machines are MUCH more capable than Atom based netbooks. Different kinds of mobile devices have their tradeoffs. Your version on an ultrabook would weigh a relative ton compared to what they really are. Some people want power, some people want thin and light and almost everyone wants affordable.
 
YeuEmMaiMai said:
compared to AMD, Intel's offerings are pretty lackluster, thus I had to remove Intel from the above statement.
Click to expand...

...and that was obnoxious. Compared to Intel, AMD's current top end processors are terrible and their mobile offerings are not nearly as powerful or power efficient. It goes both ways. I personally would never consider an AMD CPU / chipset at this point, but I wasn't bashing them, I've had several AMD systems in the past. Take your fanboy nonsense elsewhere.
 
silent-circuit said:
...and that was obnoxious. Compared to Intel, AMD's current top end processors are terrible and their mobile offerings are not nearly as powerful or power efficient. It goes both ways. I personally would never consider an AMD CPU / chipset at this point, but I wasn't bashing them, I've had several AMD systems in the past. Take your fanboy nonsense elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Lawl stating a fact and poking fun at intel is not obnoxious....might want to learn how to relax and enjoy the fun.. Btw compared AMD mobile to Intel mobile is not as cut and dry as Liano pretty much owns Atom.....
 
YeuEmMaiMai said:
Lawl stating a fact and poking fun at intel is not obnoxious....might want to learn how to relax and enjoy the fun.. Btw compared AMD mobile to Intel mobile is not as cut and dry as Liano pretty much owns Atom.....
Click to expand...

Neither Liano nor Atom are sufficient for even basic web browsing so far as I'm concerned; I even had occasional issues with a 1.2Ghz ULV Core2Duo, but that was mostly heavy Flash sites. Atom and Liano have no place in the consumer market, both product lines need to die. "Real" chips are getting sufficiently power-efficient and inexpensive where we don't need to bother with these half-assed stopgap "solutions" anymore.
 
silent-circuit said:
Neither Liano nor Atom are sufficient for even basic web browsing so far as I'm concerned; I even had occasional issues with a 1.2Ghz ULV Core2Duo, but that was mostly heavy Flash sites. Atom and Liano have no place in the consumer market, both product lines need to die. "Real" chips are getting sufficiently power-efficient and inexpensive where we don't need to bother with these half-assed stopgap "solutions" anymore.
Click to expand...

hopefully, you only mean the lower end Zacate :p llano is based off of the faster "K10.5" uarch, and has, in every configuration, a faster IGP than Zacate.
 
Ultrabooks are all over the place now, no need to conjecture what will be. You can get Ultrabooks now for $500 if you look, I got mine for far less. Netbooks will stay around as the $100-$150 cheapo computer, "ultrabooks" will occupy the $300+ areas, just like Laptops, and depending on what you want in them (metal build, i7, battery life, SSD size and BRAND) they'll go up in price from there.

What is odd to me is that these "ultrabooks" are getting larger and larger screen sizes, I'm sorry but 13.3 inches is no longer small nor is it portable enough for me.
 
Ultrabooks are just the next logical evolution.

1. Current tablets/pads are not powerful enough yet but people greatly love the small/sexy/thinness of it.

2. People have figured out (or quickly do) netbooks suck.

3. People want the power of a laptop but don't want to carry about 6lbs+

The ultrabook is a niche right now that will be popular for a couple of years. However, I think think that niche will not be a niche in 3-4 years. Either tablets will achieve the same power an ultrabook or an ultrabook will have the same power as a traditional laptop. Eitherway, I see netbooks going poof FAST (at least in the consumer arena) and not sure if ultrabooks are gonna swallow laptops (thus making laptops a niche) or tablets are gonna swallow ultrabooks.
 
milicz said:
Ultrabooks are all over the place now, no need to conjecture what will be. You can get Ultrabooks now for $500 if you look, I got mine for far less. Netbooks will stay around as the $100-$150 cheapo computer, "ultrabooks" will occupy the $300+ areas, just like Laptops, and depending on what you want in them (metal build, i7, battery life, SSD size and BRAND) they'll go up in price from there.

What is odd to me is that these "ultrabooks" are getting larger and larger screen sizes, I'm sorry but 13.3 inches is no longer small nor is it portable enough for me.
Click to expand...

13.3 inch isn't portable enough? Really? Why's that? Just curious really. I bought a 10" netbook a couple years ago and it was the best for portability, but when I bought a Dell Vostro V13 on sale for under $400, the netbook went on a shelf and I haven't picked it up since. It's barely heavier then the netbook, but has a larger screen, bigger keyboard and the ULV processor beats the hell out of the Atom in the netbook. I see the appeal of Ultrabooks as I love my V13. Of course, it's only for using on the couch or when I'm on a trip and don't need to game. I have a full sized desktop and a gaming laptop for needs the V13 doesn't fulfill.
 
13.3 is still portable, but to me it's a laptop. I had a Medion 13 incher like 7 years ago, it was simply a laptop, not a netbook and not an ultrabook. Netbooks started at 7 inches right? 8.9 was the standard, and then it kept creeping bigger, to where now the supposed "Netbook with full horsepower" replacement as an ultrabook is at over 13 inches. It's just a thin laptop at that point, isn't it?

Powerful, thin, and small 11-12.5 is my completely subjective view of an ideal "ultrabook" size.
 
silent-circuit said:
Neither Liano nor Atom are sufficient for even basic web browsing so far as I'm concerned; I even had occasional issues with a 1.2Ghz ULV Core2Duo, but that was mostly heavy Flash sites. Atom and Liano have no place in the consumer market, both product lines need to die. "Real" chips are getting sufficiently power-efficient and inexpensive where we don't need to bother with these half-assed stopgap "solutions" anymore.
Click to expand...

Can I have some of what you are smoking? 'Cause you gotta be on some crazy stuff to believe that you can't browse on a machine that is totally capable of heavy web browsing, 1080p HD playblack, and more than light gaming....
 
heatlesssun said:
On the GPU side this is true but AMD has nothing to compete with ULV Core CPUs on the higher end.
Click to expand...

considering that those machines come with intergrated graphics at that price pont,it's gonna be tradeoff city...faster graphics and better battery live vs better cpu
 
YeuEmMaiMai said:
considering that those machines come with intergrated graphics at that price pont,it's gonna be tradeoff city...faster graphics and better battery live vs better cpu
Click to expand...

Sure, but I've been using a SB ULV i5 machine with an HD 3000 for a couple of months. It really is a decent amount of GPU power, my Samsung Series 7 Slate can play Blu Rays from disk at 1080P smoothly, even runs games like Portal 2. No it's not a gaming machine, but for something that weight less than 2 lbs., is a .5" thick and gets 5 to 6 hours of battery life, not bad at all for most people.
 
Last edited:
heatlesssun said:
Sure, but I've been using a SB ULV i5 machine with an HD 3000 for a couple of months. It really is a decent amount of GPU power, my Samsung Series 7 Slate can play Blu Rays from disk at 1080P smoothly, even runs games like Portal 2. No it's not a gaming machine, but for something that weight less than 2 lbs., is a 5" thick and gets 5 to 6 hours of battery life, not bad at all for most people.
Click to expand...

I hope you meant .5"!:p
 
milicz said:
13.3 is still portable, but to me it's a laptop. I had a Medion 13 incher like 7 years ago, it was simply a laptop, not a netbook and not an ultrabook. Netbooks started at 7 inches right? 8.9 was the standard, and then it kept creeping bigger, to where now the supposed "Netbook with full horsepower" replacement as an ultrabook is at over 13 inches. It's just a thin laptop at that point, isn't it?

Powerful, thin, and small 11-12.5 is my completely subjective view of an ideal "ultrabook" size.
Click to expand...

I think going from a 10" netbook to something like the 11" MBA is a profound difference in portability, even if they weigh pretty much the same and the MBA is thinner. I still have an old 13" Vaio and as far as I'm concerned that is full-on laptop territory. An ultra-thin 10" would probably be my ideal ultra-netbook format, as long as it had a high resolution screen and enough horsepower.
 
Well, my V13 is almost as light as my netbook, thinner and far more useful. The processing power is much better, the screen is much better, the keyboard is much better and bigger as well. I just couldn't be very productive on the netbook, where I feel I could carry around my V13 and use it all day long. The only downside is the battery is only good for 4 hours, vs the 10 or so hours on my netbook.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top