The HP Chromebook 13: A High-Priced Hands-On

[kewlguy239]

HP recently invited us to New York City to announce its Chromebook 13, a thin and light Chrome OS-powered device with a QHD display and Intel Core-M processor options. The company was eager to put one in our hands, so we agreed to take a look.

The HP Chromebook 13: A High-Priced Hands-On : Read more

 

[mbmorris]

I personally don't understand the point of slapping such a high resolution screen on small, light, or "cheap" devices like this. They cost far more money, use more power, and require more graphics processing. With a 32 GB storage, its not like someone could store 4K video on the device anyway, and the same for many hi-res pictures. Even then, it's not like you could install any kind of high-end multimedia software on a Chromebook. Operating systems often scale the UI, so the "actual resolution" is significantly less than what the screen can do anyway.

 

[cknobman]

$1000 for a Chromebook???

Is that a joke?

 

[Axonn]

Indeed, the high resolution display is a complete waste on this. It forces the GPU to render more pixels and this reduces battery life. I'm getting about 14 hours of work out of my FHD Dell XPS 13 on light work load (writing). Why are they doing it? Simple, because there are unaware people who buy their unused panels & hardware that they bought because they're chums with other manufacturers. The amount of overpriced junk out there is scary.

 

[wifiburger]

who cares 1000$ and QHD screen sounds good to me, just need to wait for Google Play

 

[jayglaze379]

Eh. I got one of these day one. The build quality is beyond disappointing. The body flexes so badly the LED pannel fell out of the bezel on my first one. The second one flexed, but not as badly, but one day I clicked the track pad and it pushed right into the chassis. I'm currently waiting for #3 to be shipped, but do not have high hopes for this machine. A pixel competitor it is not.

 

[jasonelmore]

it is absolutely criminal what intel is charging for Core M Cpu's. The die is super small yet it cost more than a desktop Skylake i5 K Series Quad Core

 

[cnick6]

Hmm is Tom's H/W working for HP? I find it interesting that the reviewer failed to neglect that HP ships the G1 set to a resolution of 1600x900 on its 3200x1800 QHD screen. As others have pointed out, the QHD screen is nothing more than a marketing gimmick. That resolution is WAY too small on a 13.3" screen. It's was silly. Oh and ChromeOS doesn't support any UI scaling! The QHD is pretty nice but no user in their right mind is going to use it at the QHD resolution. Also, I agree with the other user that the G1's Trackpad was a joke. I've seen better Trackpad's on much cheaper laptops. Another issue with my G1 was the USB 3.1 port was physically installed at an angle so plugging a mouse was a chore. Also it felt too pinched. I had to baby the connectors just to get it mated correctly. The only thing about the G1 (at least my m3 version) was the performance. It is very fast but then again, it's nothing more than a browser OS. Google needs to bring the PLAY store to ChromeOS and very quickly. The ChromeOS apps are pretty bad and are somewhat dull. For the $567 I paid, it was nothing more than an expensive paperweight. I'm returning my G1 this week.

 

[cnick6]

[quotemsg=18420394,0,2278945]I personally don't understand the point of slapping such a high resolution screen on small, light, or "cheap" devices like this. They cost far more money, use more power, and require more graphics processing. With a 32 GB storage, its not like someone could store 4K video on the device anyway, and the same for many hi-res pictures.[/quotemsg]
While I agree that the QHD screen on this HP G1 Chromebook is nothing more than a marketing gimmick, your stated facts are not correct. This unit is far from cheap and the G1's battery is pretty good. The Intel m3 GPU isn't half bad either. Also, with my Samsung 128GB Pro+ MicroSXDC card it brings the total storage to over 200GB. That's plenty of storage for high resolution media. The poor design is using a MicroSD slot. They should have stuck with a standard SD slot to make it more useful for people needing to upload photographs from their digital cameras.

[quotemsg=18420394,0,2278945]Operating systems often scale the UI, so the "actual resolution" is significantly less than what the screen can do anyway.[/quotemsg]
ChromeOS doesn't support any kind of UI scaling. And I don't know what you mean by "actual resolution" is less... that's completely false. This goes for Linux, Windows and MacOS X.

 

[cnick6]

[quotemsg=18421202,0,2305768]Eh. I got one of these day one. The build quality is beyond disappointing. The body flexes so badly the LED pannel fell out of the bezel on my first one. The second one flexed, but not as badly, but one day I clicked the track pad and it pushed right into the chassis. I'm currently waiting for #3 to be shipped, but do not have high hopes for this machine. A pixel competitor it is not.[/quotemsg]
Didn't have any problems with my LED panel but my trackpad and USB port were very poor. With HP's reputation the quality should have been much better especially at the price they're charging.

 

[ferengitarian]

Reviewing a $1000 chromebook and you don't even hint at the possibility of wiping ChromeOS and putting on a standard OS? I did that with a $250 Dell Chromebook 11, and it was the best small laptop anywhere near its price and size

 

[Manish_75]

I got the $499 one. Actually I managed to get it down all the way to $429. Regardless, at that price, for this kind of build, there is nothing like it.
The 1600x900 is a perfect scale and the display is fantastic. I also get to use standard USB C cables and power banks to keep it going on the road. With Android apps on the way, this will be a VERY powerful machine at a very low cost that fully satisfies the 3 Big Items on a laptop - Screen, Keyboard and Mouse. Everything else is gravy on top considering this is a fasr Chrome OS system with an expandable micro SD slot as well.

 

[daglesj]

Why pay for a premium Chromebook? That question is pointless if like many you work and play totally in the ChromeOS environment. Why wouldn't you want a premium ChromeOS device? After all you look around a Starbucks and 99% of those using a $1000+ Macbook are only using the web and no one questions their choice. Think about it. In fact most Macbook users could do well to get a nice Chromebook instead.

Posting here because after all these years I still get pushed to the pointless empty UK news version.

 

[daglesj]

[quotemsg=18420394,0,2278945]And I don't know what you mean by "actual resolution" is less... that's completely false. This goes for Linux, Windows and MacOS X.

[/quotemsg]

Probably referring to the fact that whilst a Mac etc. may have a 2800x1800 screen whatever, it still scales giving you the same screen estate as though you were using a 1400x900 screen or whatever.

 

[Manish_B]

For those that quickly dismiss the "browser only" capabilities of a Chromebook and pooh pooh any that exude elegance and higher specs for a bit more money....
I use this Chromebook for personal use and also a full Windows work laptop hosted by my company in the cloud via the HVD environment using the VMWare app (available for all types of devices). So I have a personal laptop AND a work laptop in a great form factor with USB portable charging on the go. A $65 (from Office Depot) Samsung laser printer (allows Airprint/Google Print/NFC etc) is the printing workhorse for this one.
But wait, I am not done...
I also access my iMac that is on and running at home with the quick and easy Chrome app and bring up the iMessages app running on the side. The iMessages was one thing I missed about a Macbook OS. Now I have that running (along with all my Mac apps on the IMac)...on...a... Chromebook.

And soon...Android apps in all their glory via the Google Play store....

so...yeah...the Chromebook is plenty good for some of us.....?