meh i think the voodoo envy 133 is better than the other 2 (Alamo, Mack book.) However, no matter how good it looks, id never buy a laptop without discrete graphics card, id settle for the 3470, or 9400. I know mack book has the 9400, but i think its the uglyist (my opinion.)
[citation][nom]Tindytim[/nom]This is just one more reason that thin laptops are completely retarded.To think, for a few more fractions of an inch, you could get a better graphics solution, a swappable batteries and all of a much cheaper price.[/citation]
The same sort of thinking applies to many goods, but perhaps best to cars. For just a few more seconds to go from 0 to 60 and back to 0 again, you could get a lot more trunk space, more seats, and a much, much cheaper price.
The people who buy an Adamo or Envy or Air know exactly what they're getting. Well, I would hope.
[citation][nom]Marcus Yam[/nom]The same sort of thinking applies to many goods, but perhaps best to cars. For just a few more seconds to go from 0 to 60 and back to 0 again, you could get a lot more trunk space, more seats, and a much, much cheaper price.[/citation]
You can't compare that to this. That's tangible performance, this is a gimmick. What tangible benefit does having a laptop a few fractions of an inch thinner bring? I suppose you could stuff a small stack of notebook paper in a bag, but I don't see that being a huge benefit.
[citation][nom]Marcus Yam[/nom]The people who buy an Adamo or Envy or Air know exactly what they're getting. Well, I would hope.[/citation]
I doubt all of them do. That's the benefit of a gimmick for a company. They can gloss over the details with marketing hype.
[citation][nom]Marcus Yam[/nom]The same sort of thinking applies to many goods, but perhaps best to cars. For just a few more seconds to go from 0 to 60 and back to 0 again, you could get a lot more trunk space, more seats, and a much, much cheaper price.The people who buy an Adamo or Envy or Air know exactly what they're getting. Well, I would hope.[/citation]
That's a bad analogy because seconds to go from 0 to 60 is a number based on performance. How thin a laptop is has nothing to do with performance, only looks. A better analogy would be a person constructing a car out of solid gold. Sure, the exterior would look neat but it would be so heavy the gas mileage would be murder.
I know what you're saying and I agree that people who buy these things know what they're getting into, but there's a difference between paying out the ass for that tiny extra bit of performance and paying out the ass for a prettier design while sacrificing performance.
Ugly looking thing in my opinion. I don't see what the big deal is about thinness , but weight is everything for some people.
I think the car analogy is pretty fair though - people pay thousands, even tens of thousands extra for cars that essentially do things marginally better than cheaper alternatives. I bought a 6 cylinder model over the four cylinder - you can argue that there was some sort of numerical "performance" advantage, but that would only be true if I was racing - just like the performance of a laptop, 99% of the time it's unused while you type, read email, browse the internet, watch video a celeron and integrated graphics could handle. How many gamers buy hardware partly for image?
Maybe a better analogy is buying a new car over a used - thousands wasted on image or feel. I've bought new cars - it felt great, smelled great, I loved it. Huge waste of money in retrospect.
A final thought, now that advances in computing power for most users are increasingly unnecessary, style is creeping back in as a marketing tool. "Ugh, is that last fall's laptop you're wearing?" And when are flexible displays and fuel cell batteries coming??!!
Personally I think these slim laptops are a waste of time. They aren't really any more portable than normal laptops, which are already pretty thin compared to laptops from several years ago. The size of the machine is determined by screen size, not thickness. If I was going to spend that much money on a laptop, I'd rather spend it to get a fast CPU, decent graphics and lots of RAM. The Adamo isn't the only $2000 laptop around, it's just that for $2000 you get a system that was mid-range several years ago. I think the "car made from solid gold" analogy is the best so far - and a pretty crappy car at that.
I don't think it's a bad compromise in an ultralight system, as long as it IS possible for the customer to change the battery with a little work (sending the whole unit back to the manufacturer for a battery replacement = LAME).
Making a battery removable adds a lot of volume and mass (the packs have to be very durable and the mounting has to be reliable and strong).
I suspect we'll see "external batteries" for these units... for those who HAVE to have a backup power supply.
I like the laptop, and I do not care if the battery is swappable or not. As long as the battery lasts long enough (say 3-4 hrs with regular usage) I'm ok.
For me laptops are just commodities to read school lectures/papers, browse the web, watch some videos during a trip, etc. I leave playing games for my home rig.
Now, no internal CD/DVD drive? That I don't like. I hate external hardware (too many cables), and I would hate it even more in a laptop.
Then there is the price. $2000+ for any mid-range laptop is too much.
Swappable batteries also go against the "slim" idea. Not only it increases the laptop itself, but you will have to be carrying that extra bulky battery almost everywhere you go. And if you don't swap, why would you need it to be swappable?
Also, with internal batteries, companies might actually invest more on longer charge life for the batteries.
Well... let's see. A basic Adamo versus a fully loaded XPS M1330...
The XPS does it all and more for much less bucks, doesn't require me to add an optical drive via USB, has discrete graphics, still looks hot, and if need be, I can swap my battery out so that I don't need to scrap my laptop when my battery refuses to charge anymore.
Remember guys that not every laptop needs to have every feature. I'm not saying that these ultralights are a good deal (they're not), but for some folks they're a good choice. If you're a road warrior who doesn't need to update his machine while on the road and puts a big premium on "lightweight and sexy" then this is an option. If you were thinking the Macbook Air would fit your needs then this one may too.
Personally... I like the idea of these machines but they would never work for me, I tend to need the heavyweight laptop because of the work I do (I've got a loaded Dell Precision M6400). However... my wife has a small light Gateway notebook and there are some times when I'm mounting up the 20+ lb Dell backpack that I wish I could take hers (which fits in a little bookbag the size of a 3 ring binder and weighs a quarter what my Dell weighs).
[citation][nom]Dave K[/nom]However... my wife has a small light Gateway notebook and there are some times when I'm mounting up the 20+ lb Dell backpack that I wish I could take hers (which fits in a little bookbag the size of a 3 ring binder and weighs a quarter what my Dell weighs).[/citation]
I can understand small, thin? Thin just means "We're going to put crappier parts in your system because we know some idiot will buy it as a gimmick, and we'll make a huge markup". If you want something small, get a 15" laptop.
Thin is definitely a style thing... but there's no doubt that style sells.
The whole fashion industry is based on the idea of intelligent people spending absurd amounts of money on clothes because they're 'new' and 'in'... knowing full well that not long after they buy them they'll be 'old' and 'out' and while perfectly serviceable will need to be gotten rid of.