Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Portables Hardware

11.6" Netbooks Face Off 238

Posted by kdawson
from the category-benders dept.
Dr. Damage writes "Netbooks have grown from tiny curiosities with 7" screens into surprisingly well-rounded little computers. The latest step is 11.6" displays with 1366x768 resolution and near-full-sized keyboards. Two such systems are available now for under $400 at US retailers: the Aspire One at Walmart and the Gateway LT3103 at Best Buy. The Gateway packs an Athlon 64 processor and Radeon graphics. The Tech Report bought them both and has compared them head to head in some depth, choosing a clear winner between the two." Like most such in-depth reviews, this one is spread across 10 pages.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

11.6" Netbooks Face Off

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:09PM (#28945775)

    soon we'll be marvelling at the 15" netbooks with core 2 duos!!!

    I can't wait!

    then we'll see the introduction of some amazingly tiny 7" microbook!!

    I can't wait!

    • by 140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:26PM (#28946039) Journal
      Then the microbook will grow to be 17" screen full keyboard QuadCore 64 bit CPU with Nvidia graphics card and all the users will abandon this and flock to Nanobook that has a 7" screen and all the marketing gurus of these hardware vendors will sign and start it all over agin.
    • by Capt.DrumkenBum (1173011) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:29PM (#28946081)
      I am with you. 11.6" is just too big.
      Lets get back to the 7" and 8" models please.
      • Surprised no one called you an insensitive clod.
      • Lets get back to the 7" and 8" models please.
        The EEE 700 series was pretty much as big as the 900 series despite the smaller screen. Can't say i've seen many 7 or 8 inch ones from other brands.

        Personally I want a 10 inch with 1366x768 resolution. HP made one (the mini 2140) with a very thin border such that it was about the same physical size as and EEE 900 but refused to release it in this country and having had a bad experiance with one grey import attempt (I got my money back eventually) i'm not in the m

        • oooooooooooooosh!
        • by Mr. DOS (1276020)

          In fact, the predecessor to the 2140, the 2133, packed a 1280x768 resolution into an 8.9" screen. It was awesome, although somewhat eyestrain inducing. It probably would've been better with a slightly larger screen (9.3", perhaps?). IMHO, even 10" is getting too large for it to be considered a netbook.

          Interestingly enough, the 2133 also had the best keyboard I've yet tried in a netbook, and the speakers were fairly crisp (although lacking bottom-end). Unfortunately, it suffered from ergonomic issues (the sc

          • In fact, the predecessor to the 2140, the 2133, packed a 1280x768 resolution into an 8.9" screen. It was awesome, although somewhat eyestrain inducing. It probably would've been better with a slightly larger screen (9.3", perhaps?). IMHO, even 10" is getting too large for it to be considered a netbook.
            That's the amazing thing, the 2140 was exactly the same size as the 2133 (which is approximately the same size as an EEE 900) despite the bigger screen. Unfortunately unless I want to pay an intermediary to im

      • I owned a Fujitsu notebook PC with a 10.4" screen around ten years ago; most active matrix screens were that size at the time. So we're just reverting to an older format with these new netbooks. I'd have to agree with the thread originator; we need both bigger, more powerful and more gorgeous notebooks, and smaller, more portable netbooks. The in-between size is a trade-off that benefits very few.

      • It's subjective. It depends on what you want to do with a device. Some want a small device for coffee shops, while having a full blown desktop for home.

        11.6" fills a niche of lightweight desktop replacement. For me a 15" is too big but I want a decent keyboard. I downgraded to a 12.1" and couldn't be happier. Plug in an external display at home or desk but 1366x768 is fine for everything else. Equip it as a tablet (they're coming!) and it's perfect for reading PDFs on public transport.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        I am with you. 11.6" is just too big.
        Lets get back to the 7" and 8" models please.

        Today, we call those "Phones"

        • by vlm (69642)

          I am with you. 11.6" is just too big.
          Lets get back to the 7" and 8" models please.

          Today, we call those "Phones"

          Not really. A phone with a 8 inch screen would be the size of my shoe... My current cellphone has an almost exactly 1 inch screen.

    • It's about the value - if we really do see 15" netbooks with Core 2s and 5 hour battery life at under $400, it'll knock my socks off. But it does lose the portability. I like being able to carry my 9" aspire one in my backpack.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I believe the point of a netbook is to be low powered and small, they're not meant to replace notebooks. The manufacturers are falling into the old game of bigger is better (or bigger numbers are better), only in the case of a netbook all consumers really want is the long battery life and portability. Keep the size, up the specs as much as you want but not at the cost of battery life.

        • by Sj0 (472011)

          Cost is important too.

          One of the reasons I love my netbook is I can replace it without any huge amount of financial planning. "Oh, guess I lost my Aspire One. Guess I'll buy another one."

      • by Sj0 (472011)

        Gotta second you on the portability thing. My Aspire One is about the perfect size. You can't type on the eee, and anything bigger is creeping into desktop replacement territory, which isn't great for kicking back and surfing.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by lazyforker (957705)
      Fuck that. I'm waiting for the 17" HD netbooks with built-in FW800, DVD burner GigE, 802.11n etc. I think Apple makes a pretty good one.
    • by Locutus (9039) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @05:19PM (#28947741)
      Microsoft wants the netbook segment gone so there's been pressure to move the spec up from where the segment started, in the $200-$300 range. It helped that Windows required more hardware than the original Linux installs did and now with Windows 7 on the way, there's a new push to boost the specs and the price.

      We've already seen the manufacturers state that they were afraid of Microsoft so it'll be interesting to see who will, or can, produce the ARM based netbooks this fall. IIRC, ASUS had to spin off their ARM department of their manufacturing facility and they were also the ones to say they were sorry for showing and ARM netbook at a computer show. So far, the press is doing Micrsoft's bidding and confusing the segment by calling small notebooks netbooks.

      LoB
      • I know you probably won't believe me, becuase until I tried it myself I wouldn't have believed it, but windows 7 doesn't really use a significantly larger amount of system resources than windows XP. I'm sure you've seen articles that have some comparitive benchmarks between the two OSes. Ignore them. Grab a copy of the beta of the Windows 7 beta for yourself and try it. It will surprise you.

        I recently installed windows 7 on a somewhat old 1.40 Ghz Celeron Pentium M laptop with only 756 Mb of Ram and it
  • Slashvertisement (Score:3, Insightful)

    by WilyCoder (736280) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:10PM (#28945795)

    Nice slashvertisement.

    Not.

  • by Chees0rz (1194661) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:12PM (#28945817)
    I have a 7 inch netbook in my pants...
    (rounded up to compensate for low self-esteem)
  • by Tynin (634655) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:15PM (#28945877)

    Like most such in-depth reviews, this one is spread across 10 pages.

    I highly suggest checking out the Firefox Autopager [mozilla.org] add on. It nicely formats this into a single page for easy reading. Although I do suggest turning off the "Show AutoPager Refinements" as it will give you suggestions on search pages that try to redirect you to some other search engine. Otherwise it is EXCELLENT and fixed a lot of my hatred of viewing this 10 page articles that should be on one page.

  • a netbook? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by seringen (670743) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:15PM (#28945881)
    11.6" and only five hours of battery life for the "clear" winner?

    i guess it's the cheapskate route for people who really want a 13 inch macbook, but don't need bluetooth or wireless n.

    i personally think it shouldn't be called a netbook if you really can't use it all day without carrying around a charger.

    • Re:a netbook? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by clang_jangle (975789) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:25PM (#28946017) Journal
      Yeah, I think the term "netbook" has come to mean "smallish low-end laptop with no optical drive". No doubt better for profit margins, but not much of a win for the consumer.
      • Re:a netbook? (Score:4, Interesting)

        by petermgreen (876956) <plugwashNO@SPAMp10link.net> on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @04:19PM (#28946841) Homepage

        not much of a win for the consumer.
        I disagree, it used to be that most cheap laptops were big, usually 15 inch, occasionaly 13 inch. The large screen size combined with poor build quality meant that theese machines were pretty damn fragile. If you wanted an ultraportable you went to sony and payed through the nose or bought a secondhand toshiba with really crappy specs.

        Then came the OLPC XO, it was cheap but this was tempered by the fact it was only availible though a G1G1 program (pushing up the effective price), it couldn't easilly run windows or normal linux and it had a weird screen and keyboard.

        Then came the EEE 700 series which were really pretty crappy machines. They had a case big enough for a 9 inch screen but only fitted with a 7 inch, hardly any storage and a crappy old processor that they then underclocked. Still we jumped on them because they were way cheaper than previous ultraportables while still being pretty conventional machines.

        Since then the gap between the first "netbooks" (I hate that term, it implies the machines are far more crippled than they really are) and regular laptops has been gradually filling and I regard this as a good thing, users can now pick there preffered tradeoff between size and functionality.

        Personally I want a 10 inch with a vertical resoloution of at least 768 pixels. There was the HP mini 2140 but the "HD" option for it was never released in the UK and my attempt to grey import one failed. Both HP and sony now have 10 inch 1366x768 models about to be released and i'll probablly end up buying one of those unless something better comes out in the meantime.

        The power issue doesn't bother me too much, most long distance trains here now have power outlets anyway. I can see for some people it could be annoying though.

        • Since then the gap between the first "netbooks" (I hate that term, it implies the machines are far more crippled than they really are) and regular laptops has been gradually filling and I regard this as a good thing, users can now pick there preffered tradeoff between size and functionality.

          See, the term "netbook" seems wrong to you because you don't want a netbook, you want a reasonably priced ultraportable, which is where the netbook market is currently heading. This is not a win for consumers who don't need a 10"+ screen or a "good" processor, or rather, doubling the price doesn't represent a good value in the form of a netbook, either in regards to price or diminished battery longevity.

          • I see plenty of 9 inch models still availible for those who want that. They just aren't the hot new thing at the moment. Heck you can still find the eee 700 series pretty easilly (like off the shelf in high street stores) if you really want one.

            Heck over here the mobile phone companies are giving away the lower end netbooks if you take out a mobile broadband contract to go with them.

        • I disagree, it used to be that most cheap laptops were big, usually 15 inch, occasionaly 13 inch. The large screen size combined with poor build quality meant that theese machines were pretty damn fragile. If you wanted an ultraportable you went to sony and payed through the nose or bought a secondhand toshiba with really crappy specs.

          Yes, but there was a time when the same thing was true of calculators and cell phones. Electronics naturally get smaller, and economies of scale make them get cheaper. But IM

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by petermgreen (876956)

            so we don't get a blister-packed $99 netbook.
            Mobile phones are still pretty expensive if you pay full price for them (here in the UK even payg phones are subsidised to some extent by the carriers). Looks like it's about $70 for a basic phone and goes up dramatically for the ones with larger screens (even the basic phones seem to support downloadable apps theese days).

            It seems crazy to me to expect a netbook to be similar in price or cheaper than a smartphone with a much smaller lower resoloution screen any

    • by prockcore (543967)

      Actually, why would a mac user need bluetooth? It's not like he could use it with his iphone...

  • The 11.6" are an odd variety... of what I have seen so far. In the spring, they upgraded the 10" ones I was looking at from the N270 Atoms to the N280, which could handle HD video but the screens were usually at 1024x600. Just barely big enough for comfortable browsing. Now the Acer Aspire and a few others that I have seen have that 11.6" wide screen that have a really nice ~1300x768 resolution, but the chip is now a Z520, which reportedly stutters when handling HD video.

    Now that Always Innovating's arm-

    • I was really looking forward to the ION platform (nVidia Chipset + Atom CPU), which would have been a compelling reason to upgrade for me, but without that, I'll stick to what I am running now. My only irritation has been the keyboard (Eee 1000H), but not enough to shell out another $400+ on. I got it because my old 17" laptop was too small to do actual work on, and too big, with too poor a battery life to comfortably take around with me. The 10" netbook is great for email/chat, which is most of what I u

  • netbooks, eh? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Trepidity (597) <delirium-slashdot AT hackish DOT org> on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:18PM (#28945927)

    Is my 12" Powerbook with 5-hour battery life now retroactively a netbook?

    • by Tetsujin (103070)

      Is my 12" Powerbook with 5-hour battery life now retroactively a netbook?

      You really get 5 hours with that thing? I'm lucky to get three with mine...

      My EEE 901, on the other hand, claims six or seven hours and I get about five. And it runs Linux. I am so happy with that machine. :)

      • by Trepidity (597)

        Yeah, though admittedly on a newish battery, not using the WiFi, and without the screen at full brightness (i.e. basically "airplane mode").

      • My 12" PowerBook with its original battery (491 cycles as of this morning,) lasts about 4 hours with WiFi off. When it was new, I could get 6 hours.

        Personally, I'm annoyed at my 15" MacBook Pro. It can get 5 hours on a new battery, but I'm now on my 6th battery in three years; the others all dropped to less than 2 hours run-life before they had even has 100 discharge cycles.

        I like the IDEA of the built-in batteries on their newer products; and the battery life per charge is fine; I'm just worried about th

    • by elashish14 (1302231) <profcalc4@gmail.3.1415926com minus pi> on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:38PM (#28946233)

      If you ask me, it depends on how much you paid for it.

      • by Trepidity (597)

        Yeah, I was being somewhat facetious, but I suppose I could actually see an argument for the 12" Powerbook being in the netbook category if it were re-introduced today, at an appropriately low price.

  • ...is that some sites like Yahoo Mail still "delay" one's surfing experience with a warning of how your display settings might not work well with the site. Folks at Yahoo in particular, do not realize that netbooks with lower resolutions are in existence. By the way, if you choose to ignore the warning, the site displays normally.

    I think they (Yahoo), are just lacking the normal expected degree of ability. What do you think?

    • by RAMMS+EIN (578166)

      Sadly, many websites have displayed a similar level of ineptitude over the years, and many continue to do so. Back when I was a webmaster, I was annoyed by this. I figured they should hire me so I could do a better job. That offer is still open, but, in the meantime, I've stopped caring quite so much - it isn't going to change anytime soon, so there's no point in letting it get at me so much.

    • ...is that some sites like Yahoo Mail still "delay" one's surfing experience with a warning of how your display settings might not work well with the site.

      They should get some of those 256-colour animated icons from 10 or 11 years ago that said "best viewed at 1024 x 768 with Internet Explorer 4" or somesuch shit. (Yeah, because I'm really going to change my sodding browser and/or screen resolution just to view your badly-designed site. Twonks...).

      And then they could put the left-hand vertical menu in a frame for that added 90s feel. Then host the whole damn thing on a Geocities site- they own(ed) that, after all.

  • Acer Aspire One (Score:4, Interesting)

    by TheMeuge (645043) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:21PM (#28945963)

    For all it's worth, I own one, and I find it fantastic. The resolution is finally high enough to actually use it (I couldn't stomach a 1024x600 screen), and it's VERY thin and light. What did it for me, is the ease with which this netbook can be upgraded. Both the hard drive and memory are easily user-serviceable. Actually, I purchased a 2gb memory kit along with the notebook, and I don't even think I booted it with the 1GB it comes with. I got the WinXP version sans bluetooth from newegg for $380... a little over $400 w. the memory upgrade. The computer also has an internal minPCI slot and a SIM-card reader, which makes it theoretically possible to install an internal 3G card for ultimate portability of communications. The battery lasts about 6.5-7 hours with Wifi usage and brightness set to about 75%. Overally, some of the best $400 I've spent in the digital world.

    The glossy shell does attract fingerprints, but I don't really care too much (I lost that compulsion a little while after I got my iPhone). When it really bothers me, I take a damp microfiber cloth to it and the fingerprints come off... really same idea as my car.

    As an aside, to be honest I am not a big fan of WinXP these days. I've become spoiled with WinVista64SP1 on my gaming desktop, and Ubuntu on my work laptop.

    • by Sj0 (472011)

      I was with you right up 'till the vista64. Anything but XP 32-bit for gaming means leaving too much of the world in the dust.

  • by Animats (122034) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:31PM (#28946105) Homepage

    I'd still like to get a somewhat bigger Linux netbook. I have some EeePC 2G Surf units, and like them, but the original version with the tiny screen just isn't quite enough. Has Microsoft totally crushed the Linux netbook market, or is something cheap still available with no Windows?

  • by Drummergeek0 (1513771) <tony@ 3 b d d .com> on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:35PM (#28946181)
    What I would like to know is which netbook is John Travolta and which is Nicholas Cage.
    • Travolta wears a blue suit, Cage wears a black one, therefore Travolta is the Acer, Cage is the Gateway.

  • by luvirini (753157) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:38PM (#28946217)

    I have an original eee 701 and I am very happy with it. It is about right size, has large enough keyboard to type short notes and so on. The only complaint really is that it is a bit on the thick side and the use time is slightly too short. I really like the use of a solid state disk and lack of windows too, not to mention the 199 euros I paid for it as new.

    I am hoping that once the current crazyness of calling ever larger things netbooks is finally over someone will make something revolutionary.. whatever they call it then... something the size of eee PC, though hopefully by then they can make it thinner. I will likely personally need such in about 4-5 years or so.. hope they have again such on the market at that point instead of the current "netbooks"

    • I am hoping that once the current crazyness of calling ever larger things netbooks is finally over someone will make something revolutionary.

      Netbooks are revolutionary in one major respect: price. it used to be that light and compact notebooks were called ultraportables, and they costed twice that of a regular notebook. They usually costed $2000 and up when a regular notebook could be had for $1000. Now, if you want small, you don't have to pay a lot more for it, a little less than a regular notebook. It's not for everyone, but the netbook craze really opened up more markets.

      Netbooks also don't have optical drives, typical ultraportables hav

  • Summary (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:40PM (#28946257)

    The Tech Report bought them both and has compared them head to head in some depth, choosing a clear winner between the two."

    One time a scientist friend of mine talked about a pet peeve of his regarding some academic papers: when the Abstract section reads like an advertisement for the paper, rather than a summary.

    I wish kdawson had the same sensibilities.

  • But it has a "mainframe" price :-(
    The Air is light, very readable screen, fast graphics, etc.
    • Older Macbook Air systems can be bought as refurb from Apple for around $1k. That's just three of these "netbooks" and I'll bet it would last three times longer...

  • Executive Summary (Score:5, Informative)

    by steveha (103154) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @03:52PM (#28946475) Homepage

    I read the whole article; I thought it was worth my time. But I'll summarize the most important points for you.

    He liked the Gateway better. The Athlon64 uses more power and radiates more heat compared to the Atom in the Acer; but it delivers more performance, and the author thinks it's worth it. If you want maximum run time and don't care so much about performance, the Acer would be better for you. (The Atom does hyperthreading, and some video codecs are tuned to take advantage of that, so the Acer did slightly better than expected on some video playback; but even so, he felt the Athlon64 was better overall for video playback.)

    Both netbooks come pre-loaded with Vista and piles of bloatware. He scrubbed off the bloatware and updated Vista to the latest service pack, and the machines were a bit faster. He then installed Windows 7 and they were a bit faster again, but not amazingly so. He didn't say anything about Linux, but I'll wager that if he put Ubuntu 9.04 on the netbooks, they would fly.

    By the way, I'm running Ubuntu on a six-month-old 10.6" Acer Aspire One, with an Atom chip, and the performance is great. My biggest complaint is that there are dialog boxes that are just too big for the vertical resolution (600 pixels); the reviewed netbooks both have 1366x768 resolution, so the dialog boxes that annoy me would not be a problem. (I'm talking about the setup dialogs for Evolution. To set up Evolution, I had to judiciously use the Tab key to move the highlight to the "Okay" button, which was not visible because the dialogs were too tall; it worked but it was a huge pain, and not everyone would know you can even do that.) I've been meaning to try the special Netbook Remix version of Ubuntu... but with these new 11" netbooks, there would be no reason to bother; just run Ubuntu 9.04.

    steveha

    • Re:Executive Summary (Score:5, Informative)

      by PacoSuarez (530275) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @04:03PM (#28946605)

      To set up Evolution, I had to judiciously use the Tab key to move the highlight to the "Okay" button, which was not visible because the dialogs were too tall; it worked but it was a huge pain, and not everyone would know you can even do that.

      Most window managers will let you move a window around if you press Alt and then click anywhere in the window. That's really handy for these situations.

      • Most window managers will let you move a window around if you press Alt and then click anywhere in the window.

        Sure, I tried that. And the window hit the top of the Ubuntu desktop, and would not go up any further, so it did not help. If the top of the window could have gone out of the visible area, allowing me to see the "Okay" button, that would have been nice. Also nice would be if a scroll bar appeared to one side of the dialog and just let me scroll the dialog until the "Okay" button was visible.

        I tho

      • by TeknoHog (164938)

        Most window managers will let you move a window around if you press Alt and then click anywhere in the window.

        This is how it should work according to the desktop metaphor: you have these documents on your desk, and you can move them around by grabbing them at any point. Of course, if your desk is made in Redmond, you can only grab a paper by the top edge.

  • by emag (4640) <slashdot&gurski,org> on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @04:05PM (#28946623) Homepage

    This past weekend, the wife picked up an Acer Aspire One (AO751h) @ Costco for about $330. Came w/ 1GB RAM, 160GB HDD, 11.6" screen, WinXP Home w/ SP3, Atheros 802.11b/g. My impression of it, up until last night when we finally booted it w/ a USB-stick live linux distro was, in a nutshell, "worthless piece of crap that can't stay running more than a few hours".

    I mean, quite literally, every few minutes, to every few hours, this new from box thing would just randomly lock hard, no keyboard, touchpad, or even power button response. Unpingable. Needed a battery pull to recover. This is with the from-factory supplied OS (WinXP Home 32-bit, w/ SP3, remember). Even sitting idle, it would do this. With or without any USB devices plugged in. Connected or disconnected from the network. With or without AV software running. With the original or updated BIOS or drivers (newest from Acer's site).

    As of last night, booting off a USB-based Debian Lenny, trying to exercise as much of the machine as possible, from memtest86+ to md5summing the entire 160G drive, to just sitting idle all night long, it's _still_ running, as of about an hour ago with no lockups. Go figure. Alas, lenny's too old to have decent ath5k support (not sure that'll even really work), so I wasn't able to connect to our WPA2-protected wireless network, to see if that caused issues.

    The only other caveat I've found so far, is that it uses the Intel GMA 500 graphics chipset which...isn't very well supported at all (the only Intel GMA one that isn't). Vesa resolutions are OK, but not 1366x768 native (IIRC, it's coming up 1024x768). A little too blurry/not crisp for me, but the wife seems happy enough, coming from a Thinkpad T30 that looks downright dull in comparison.

    I'm not sure I'd get one for myself.

    • by speedlaw (878924)
      Sorry to hear that. I just got the same unit for $299 and after updating XP and one trip through the startup folder to remove extra stuff, this unit is fast and seems solid. It replaced a huge Toshiba laptop that died a natural death. The tosh had 30 gb, 512 mb and a 800 mhz pentium. Cost about 1200 new. This thing IS moore's law. Return it and get another.
    • by HungWeiLo (250320)

      I got the exact same laptop from Costco for the wife. She requires Windows for her work, so I wiped the hard drive and put on a clean install of XP SP3. Works just fine with no crashes and has recovered from every lid-closing-induced sleep. I ordered a 2GB SODIMM stick to replace the 1GB because the graphics seemed to be a bit on the slow side (shared memory - I've heard that it will see the extra RAM and use more of it for graphics)

      It's very well suited for everything other than graphics/video apps and har

  • Taskbar... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Bert64 (520050) <bert@noSPam.slashdot.firenzee.com> on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @04:12PM (#28946731) Homepage

    Is it just me, or is the windows 7 taskbar much taller (ie consumes more vertical space) than previous versions?
    That, combined with thicker titlebars, doesn't make for very efficient use of vertical space on widescreen displays and especially on small netbook displays...
    The Ubuntu netbook interface seems far more suited to such devices, it has no bar at the bottom, and the menu bar at the top combines with the titlebar of any open window to use very little of the very limited vertical space on the screen.

    • Disable the aero interface... seriously, you get a taskbar closer in size to the original 9x/2k style bar, but with the extra win7 goodness. I'm running in that config on my Eee. Though I tried having the bar auto-hide, and always on top, there were a couple apps that were quirky. Some websites I need to go into F11 mode to actually use though, and I have my address and toolbar all on one line in my browser.

  • hmmm (Score:4, Funny)

    by thatskinnyguy (1129515) on Tuesday August 04, 2009 @04:37PM (#28947101)
    Could we please stop using the phrases "Face Off" and "Shootout" to spark interest for a simple product comparison. It seems so "SUNDAY! SUNDAY!! SUNDAY!!!"
  • Sounds like a laptop to me.

  • If it's got an Athlon 64 processor in it, is it still a netbook? Doesn't seem to me like it would be anymore!
  • Okay, so what I've been able to gather, netbooks are either small machines that aren't very powerful, but make up for it with portability and runtime, or normal sized laptops that are super super cheap and have no other advantages over a regular laptop.

    If the latter is the case, why not just call them 'cheap laptops'?

    I don't have a netbook, but I understand why you'd want a 7" screen in a super-portable format. As a former sysadmin, that sort of tool would be invaluable. Once you start getting up to 11.6",

"But this one goes to eleven." -- Nigel Tufnel

Working...