The $45 Windows Laptop 299
YokimaSun writes "The search for a cheap laptop has brought us news from India of a $10 laptop (which later turned out to be a hundred dollars). Today PC Gaming News has details of a laptop which is selling for a measly 45 dollars, what do you get for that, you get a netbook running windows embedded compact 7, 128 megs of ram, a via8505 processor and a 7 inch screen capable of 800x480 pixels resolution." I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook.
"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook." (Score:5, Insightful)
"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook."
What is the point of this kind of trolling in article summaries, really?
Re:"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook." (Score:5, Funny)
"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook."
You'd have better luck waiting for Duke Nuke- ...er..wait.. guess we can't use that one anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
On Slashdot you can. I mean, we're still making BSOD jokes!
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing says 'I am part of the group' then demonstrating 'see, I hate the same things all the other cool kids hate! Lets go push some nerds in the mud!'
Re: (Score:3)
Really? I almost never see "PC-hate" coming from Mac users. I've seen the Mac vs. PC commercials, which skirt the line a bit, but I don't think I've ever seen a Mac user call a PC user an idiot for choosing PC over Mac.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My guess: There wasn't enough meat to the blurb otherwise, so the editor posting it had to come up with something to flesh it out, and it's tough work to come up with something clever on the spot. :)
Re: (Score:3)
A woosh to you, sir. I get $10 computers all the time, in fact people usually give them away as they're too underpowered to run a modern OS; I use them for spare parts. I just "fixed" an old ThinkPad that had been given to a Felbers bartender by removing the admin password, drank for free all day when I brought it back.
You're likely to get a far better used computer for $40 than a new $40 computer. I seriously doubt one of these $40 computers will run Win7 or Ubuntu 11. That was the joke you missed.
Re: (Score:2)
With the kind of specs they show for the $45 netbook, what would be the point of either one of them?
Re: (Score:2)
"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook."
What is the point of this kind of trolling in article summaries, really?
Really, you have a point. But the pedantic in me points out that $50 macbooks are a reality, free macbooks even. The disposable Apple culture, where significant numbers of people absolutely must have the next incremental improvement, coupled with common consumable parts that are not user replaceable, has created a brisk used market, for people willing to invest in the tools, scout out parts suppliers, and learn the procedures, that is actually quite affordable. It has kept me busy, replacing screens, aud
Re:"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook." (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook." (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm amazed how few people actually price shop before they claim the Apple laptops are overpriced. I find them to be +/- 10% of a roughly-equivalent Dell/HP/Lenovo.
It is correct to say that Apple's laptops are expensive - they don't offer anything at all on the low-end.
Re:"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook." (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm amazed how few people actually price shop before they claim the Apple laptops are overpriced.
I did just that when I bought my new laptop a couple of years ago. My Toshiba cost $1100 while the closest equivalent Mac -- AFAIR it had a sligfhtly faster CPU, less RAM and a smaller hard drive -- was about $2500.
So yes, overpriced it was.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I did just that when I bought my new laptop a couple of years ago. My Toshiba cost $1100 while the closest equivalent Mac -- AFAIR it had a sligfhtly faster CPU, less RAM and a smaller hard drive -- was about $2500.
Every time I've seen this sort of comparison, closer inspection has revealed that the Apple laptop in question has a number of other features that the cheaper one doesn't. Features that always drive the cost of any laptop up - and while these features may not matter to you as a purchaser, they clearly do matter to some people.
Typically these concern size, weight, construction materials and battery life.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Every time I've seen this sort of comparison, closer inspection has revealed that the Apple laptop in question has a number of other features that the cheaper one doesn't.
Yes, it had an Apple logo on the lid.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I price shop and I think apple laptops are overpriced..
Care to show some examples? Like the GP, I find them to be spot-on when comparing apples to apples. Build quality, OS, and support is well worth the $50-100 premium, if any.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
It's easy, just start selecting some extra options such as more RAM or an ssd drive. Admittedly the other manufactures also have a high markup on such upgrades but it's much easier to upgrade these parts yourself. Apple do their best to go against this with helpful features such as hard to open cases, oddly sized storage mounts and glued in memory.
If you choose the cheapest RAM / storage options on a "pc laptop" and buy upgrades elsewhere you not only save a few hundred bucks on manufacturers price but al
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that hasn't been true in a long time. You might be able to get a similarly spec'ed laptop if you didn't care about form-factor or style that much, but then it's not really the same product. The new Mac Book Pro has taken things even further by giving the best resolution available for the money. Doing a quick price comparison can show you they aren't overpriced at all. The Dell Ultrabook XPS 13 currently retails for $999, while the Mac Book Air 13" retails at $1199. Of course the Mac is more, but it has a 1400x900 screen as opposed to 720p resolution, 1.8GHz CPU as opposed to 1.6GHz CPU and a height of 0.68 inches vs. 0.71 inches. The rest of the main features seem to be about the same, and while some may say, what's the difference between .68 and .71 inches, well, it's still 5%, which takes quite a lot of engineering to get rid of when you are looking at laptops of this size. Mac laptops are quite competitively priced, the only problem is they've decided not to make $400 laptops. Which is fine, because there is no money to be made in that market anyway.
They're overpriced regarding "How much money do I need to spend to get the task done" not "What gives me the most features for my dollar." A $400 laptop can type Word documents, create Excel spreadsheets, browse the internet, send email, haul it around a job site looking at PDFs, watch movies, and play games just as well as the $1200 mac book pro. I don't need to do that in 720p resolution, I don't need a super drive sitting idle, I don't need 500 gb of hard drive storage, or the cutting edge RAM speed.
Re:"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook." (Score:4, Informative)
I think that hasn't been true in a long time.
I'm not so sure. A couple years ago I bought an HP Envy 15 for $999 after rebates with 1600x900 display, 160GB ssd, extra battery, 4 GB RAM... I don't remember what the exact specs were for an equivalent Macbook Pro, but I did significant price comparison and the Macbook was over $2000 for lesser hardware in every regard. Just priced out a brand new Envy 15 comapred to the brand new Macbook pro, and here's what we get:
.16" of height, OSX, and the Apple branding as far as I can tell.
Envy 15
Display: 15.6" 1920x1080
Processor: 3rd generation Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3610QM Processor (2.3 GHz, 6MB L3 Cache)
Graphics: 1GB Radeon(TM) HD 7750M GDDR5 Graphics
Storage: 750GB 7200 rpm Hard Drive
Memory: 6GB 1600DDR3 System Memory (2 Dimm)
Height: 1.11 inches
Weight: 5.79 lbs
Battery Life: 10 hours
Warranty: 2 years
Price: $1,350.00
Macbook Pro 15
Display: 15.4" 1440 x 900
Processor" 2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor (Turbo Boost up to 3.3GHz) with 6MB L3 cache
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M with 512MB of GDDR5
Storage: 500GB 5400-rpm hard drive
Memory: 4GB of 1600MHz DDR3
Height: 0.95 inch (2.41 cm)
Weight: 5.6 pounds
Battery Life: 7 Hours
Warranty: 1 year
Price: $1800
So from my perspective, for $450 less (and this isn't even without ninja rebate magic like I pulled on my last Envy) I'm getting better graphics, more storage, more memory, better display, bigger display, longer battery life, longer warranty, and I'm also getting a decent built laptop with premium features like aluminum casing, slot load DVD, and backlit keyboard, and basic features not available on the macbook pro like HDMI port, display port, 3 USB ports, higher maximum memory (16gb as opposed to 8gb for the macbook pro... how is this a "pro" model again?)
If the Macbook Pro was really a premium model with premium build and premium specs, then yes, I'd be willing to spend more on it. But it just looks like more money for less value all around. You're really paying a premium for
Re: (Score:2)
A 1.8 GHz CPU? My HP laptop has 2 2.2 GHZ CPUs and cost significantly less.
MacBook height savings: $6,600/inch (Score:2)
Although you correctly point out that the MacBook Air is 5% thinner, you left off that it is 20% more expensive. The cost per inch to save those 0.03 inches is more than $6,500.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if the time of year is a factor in this. Apple only does limited refreshes and they do not drop their price over time. I think that if you did this comparison six months from now Dell could come out ahead.
At least that would explain why this debate keeps going back and forth.
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I shopped notebooks, I included the macbook pro but it was significantly overpriced. By the way, the 1199 price you mentioned is that of the Pro and not the Air. I decided to price compare again, this time with only one competitor since I'm not actually buying new notebooks but just comparing out of curiosity. Here's what I found:
Apple MacBook Pro 13"
CPU: Core i5 2520M 3MB Cache Dual Core 2.5-3.2Ghz (Second Gen)
GPU: Integrated Intel HD 3000
Ram: 4GB
Mass Storage: 500
Re:"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook." (Score:4, Insightful)
There is no such thing as a good trackpad, they are all equally terrible. I will keep my trackpoint nub, thank you very much.
Re:"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook." (Score:4, Insightful)
I used to think the same thing until I used the newer Apple glass trackpads. There is no comparison, really. And the gestures are nice feature and work well.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I used to agree with you until I started scrolling the page with the trackpad. Now I use that way more than I ever used the nub.
Re:"I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook." (Score:4, Insightful)
The zoom functionality works well when the application supports smooth zooming. Otherwise, it's just as clunky trying to pick one of 3 locked percentages. This is a functionality support issue.
The scrolling drives me nuts. I HATE physics emulated scrolling. A simple friction slowdown is far more controllable and intuitive TO ME.
I realize Apple user's quite enjoy their trackpad. I simply wanted to point out that there are some of us who find it gets in our way. It's not universally better, it's suited to it's target audience: you.
Re: (Score:3)
The scrolling drives me nuts. I HATE physics emulated scrolling. A simple friction slowdown is far more controllable and intuitive TO ME.
Friction not being part of physics?
Re: (Score:2)
I would submit that the backlit keyboard and absolutely wonderful mac trackpad are worth the difference in price alone. Windows peeps have no concept of how nice a GOOD trackpad is.
I can't compare the trackpads but other (most?) ultra books come with back lit keyboards. It's not something exclusive to Apple and therefore shouldn't really be a selling point when comparing products.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
"They do sell millions to customers each quarter that fulfills their needs as some people want an Ultrabook"
Of course some people want them - the same way some people want a pair of Jimmy Choos when a $50 pair of shoes would do the same job. Its a fashion item for rich fashion victims. Most people who buy an ultrabook probably couldn't even spell ethernet port much less tell you what one is. But its sooo shiny and sleak and preeeetty .... *drool*
"I would venture to say that few of them judge you while you judge them."
Oh I feel so guilty judging people on a forum. Whatever next, subjective opinions?
I know a bunch of people that has these, all of which can deal with networks fairly well (including one who wrote one of the first major books on IPv6, almost a decade ago.)
They've got different priorities than you and me, but they clearly know what they are getting and do a conscious choice around it. My laptops are a MacBook Pro for work and a Lenovo for home use; I prefer the increased memory and screen size on the MacBook Pro compared to the easier-to-carry form factor of the ultralights. I'll probab
Re:$1200 is not a good price (Score:4, Insightful)
For what I need, I'm probably going to install Unix (FreeBSD or Linux) on it and be paying an extra $1000 or so primarily for a better trackpad and an easier to connect/disconnect power supply chord - and that is worth it to me.
I've just got to say, holy fuck!
I usually have a computer for 3 to 5 years; let's say four years on average. That's less than 70 cents a day. I use it for a fair bit of time every day, and I immediately appreciate a better trackpad (and regularly appreciate slot loading as opposed to tray loading DVD; forgot that annoyance point). I also am more likely to move to a better spot (more ergonomically wise) if there's no hassle with the power supply cord, and I'm less likely to get the machine damaged or trip from the power supply cord with the better connection.
All in all, it's worth 70 cents a day to me. If I was extremely money constrained in general, it might not be - but I have a comfortable income and having the computer I spend a lot of time on be comfortable to me is worth it.
Re:$1200 is not a good price (Score:4, Funny)
I don't frankly care if something is 2 inches or 2.5 inches thick. Nor wether it has 800 resolution which I won't be using anyway. What I do care about is a floppy disk drive, plenty of serial ports and an a dial-up modem so I don't have to rely on shit dongles when in an office or at home.
Oh , but it doesn't have that.
Laptops in general are nothing more than vanity machines for people with more money than sense.
Mod me down fanboys, I care not and I have karma to burn.
Re: (Score:2)
"You don't care about screen res but you do care about an optical drive?"
I do care about screen res , but not when it makes the pixels so tiny that they're almost invisible and can't be distinguised from a lower resolution but cost a hell of a lot more.
As for optical drives I fail to see the connection - I don't see why I should have to buy a separate drive just do I can install boxed software.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It's not really like that either. The resolution is still 2880x1800 by definition, and 240ppi. Graphics of apps can be scaled to any of those settings, making the workspace equivalent to 1440x900, which is different from having a 1440x900 resolution. Text is also rendered at full depth, unless the app developer decided to write their own font renderer instead of using the standard one, or decided to write nonstandard widgets or just write graphics on-screen with an 1:1 pixel assumption. The scaling can also
Lol... (Score:3)
Professionals can now work on the go ... a boost with the 128 MB RAM memory
Exactly what professional can work with such little RAM?
I don't even think you could connect to a VM properly with that...
Re: (Score:2)
if you'd like ssh terminals in every room of your house, this is a pretty affordable way to do it.
these things were 100 bucks a while ago minimum. I guess you could get something beefier with 100 bucks now.
Re:Lol... (Score:5, Interesting)
I think you're just trolling. Why would you need more than 128MB to connect to a VM, that'd be a simple dumb terminal... I'm pretty sure dumb terminals at that resolution can run just fine with those specs.
Re:Lol... (Score:5, Funny)
Why would you need more than 128MB to connect to a VM, that'd be a simple dumb terminal... I'm pretty sure dumb terminals at that resolution can run just fine with those specs.
Once Corporate IT gets ahold of it, it'll need 4GB and a couple of cores just to keep up with Symantec Endpoint Protection.
Re:Lol... (Score:5, Funny)
We need a moderation option for "+1 Sad Reality"
Re: (Score:2)
Funny is often used for that purpose.
Re: (Score:2)
RDP/VNC/X11 could all run fine on that, past that 128mb wont even load a modern web browser displaying a moderately complex web page.
Re: (Score:2)
Professionals can now work on the go ... a boost with the 128 MB RAM memory
Exactly what professional can work with such little RAM?
I don't even think you could connect to a VM properly with that...
I've run databases, web servers, mail servers all on a Linux machine with less RAM. With the right tuning it should be possible to get something usable on there.
Of course RAM is cheap so why not just add a little more?
Re: (Score:3)
I've run databases, web servers, mail servers all on a Linux machine with less RAM.
But did you run a GUI, or go headless? The latter isn't always possible on Windows.
Of course RAM is cheap so why not just add a little more?
RAM cards may be cheap, but how do you add RAM slots?
Terrible deal (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Not very useful, if your plan is to make a Beowulf cluster.
It will be a while before a sub-$50 computer is truly available. When I say available, I mean that I can order 300 of them now, and they'll be shipped today.
The closest is the Raspberry Pi computers off Ebay. They go for about $80 (even though they are frequently referred to as $25 or $35 computers). Unfortunately, $80 is more than $50, and there are not 300+ of them available on Ebay.
Re: (Score:2)
It will be a while before a sub-$50 computer is truly available.
Intel could probably do it with the Atom if they wanted to, but for some reason they continue positioning Atom-based platforms as if they were competitive with Bobcat, which they clearly aren't. Where they might be able to stand out is by making a single-board x86 PC that includes 1GB or so of soldered-in DDR SDRAM, and ~40GB of solid state storage also on-board.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
You can find lots of various computers on Craigslist. I will not argue that point. I will argue that they will not be identical, though, and building a beowulf cluster from such machines is all but impossible. Even the trouble of contacting hundreds of craigslist sellers and meeting them in person would push the cost well above $50 each (considering time as money).
But, I have to admit, I did not RTFA well enough. If you follow the trail of links, you finally arrive here [ebay.com] I've removed the part of the URL
Re: (Score:2)
Value of the Pi isn't in the processor, it's in the video decoder and HDMI driver.
Only point in a Raspberry cluster is if you have a "wall of monitors" app.
Re: (Score:2)
There's an oft repeated phrase that comes to mind: "It's only Free if you don't value your time". Spend a few hours learning one configuration and then deploying to 300 identical machines vs. spending a few dollars to obtain 300 junkers off of ebay/craigslist that now require refurbishing, formatting, checking to see what distro will support each hardware configuration, etc etc etc. I've been down this road and it sucks.
Squishy (Score:2)
Netbook...800x480 pixels resolution.
I feel like I haven't horizontal scrolled in ages.
This will be awful (Score:3, Informative)
The VIA8505 SoC is a AWFUL chip. I have a tablet based one of these running Android and it SUCKS.
Maybe the editors could actually read submissions? (Score:5, Informative)
This is an eBay sale of a discontinued netbook.
As somebody pointed out, if you wanted a $50 netbook, they can look on Craigslist or eBay themselves.
Nothing new or interesting here,
myke
Re: (Score:2)
Did you time travel from a point in the past where /. editors did read the submissions?
We all did. We traveled at 1 Day/Day. We haven't figured out how to go at any other speed, that's all.
VIA 8505 is a Pentium? (Score:3)
Correct me if I'm wrong... (Score:5, Informative)
... but isn't Windows 7 Embedded Compact the new name for what used to be called (much more appropriately) WinCE?
In other words, this is an almost-useless piece of junk that runs a nearly dead operating system that is being dropped by MS in its next version.
I bought something very similar in the UK for about £30 a couple of years ago. It was useless then, it'll be useless now.
Battery (Score:3)
Cheap mobile devices like these (including cheap portable DVD players) save money by skimping on batteries and going with NiMH instead of Lithium Ion. I would be surprised if this netbook could run for two hours off of its batteries.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Why cant they skimp more and make it a feature. use 6 AA batteries. LET the buyer go out and get his own batteries. That way it adds a significant amount of useful to the thing. Plus all the survivalist nuts would be all over it.
Re: (Score:3)
Why cant they skimp more and make it a feature. use 6 AA batteries. LET the buyer go out and get his own batteries. That way it adds a significant amount of useful to the thing. Plus all the survivalist nuts would be all over it.
Because if there's one thing you need to survive, it's a crappy laptop.
Re: (Score:3)
I've got one smaller! (Score:4, Insightful)
I've got a "laptop" that's about 2 1/2 x 4 inches or so, runs Android, and doubles as a phone... Wait... It *IS* a phone!
No Just No (Score:3)
WonderMedia WMwhatever processors are INCREDIBLY slow. I have a tablet powered by a WM8650, which is the improved version of he WM8505 the article talks about, and you're always waiting on the CPU to slowly do its thing - both on Android and Debian. It also has 256 megs of RAM, which is about a fourth of what you need for proper general computing nowadays. And this one has even less.
The WM8505 might be ok for embedded stuff, but as a CPU for general computing, especially with such little RAM and *especially* if it's running Windows, it's really worse than nothing - at least with nothing you go do something else, instead of twiddling your fingers while you wait for the damn thing to display a webpage or something.
Could be an intersting device. (Score:4, Interesting)
Interesting, and inbelievably cheap - not just becasue of the Windows license fee; no idea how much they pay for that. It's Windows CE so linking to the normal Win7 retail prices doesn't make sense.
OS: Windows CE. Never worked with that, no idea on the interface. Should include a browser, assume IE. But what version for WinCE?
Storage: not mentioned. Is this a "true" netbook as in can only do web browsing and web apps? Price could imply no local storage indeed, other than for the embedded OS. The ebay [ebay.com] listing has no details at all. They are selling, shipping US only.
Install other OS? Well if no external storage, good luck with that.
Install applications? No mention about this. No external storage could be an issue there.
Form factor looks like the EEEPC 701 series, that's not too bad. It has a higher screen resolution. I like the overall idea. I'm still regularly using that EEEPC, almost exclusively for web browsing. It's sitting on the dining table, quick to grab, small enough to not be in the way too much, light enough to move around with one hand.
Can't wait to see so-called "gamers" buy this (Score:5, Interesting)
Not only did they get the company wrong, it's not even x86 architecture. VIA 8505 is ARM-based. This isn't even including the fact that it runs Windows CE (aka Windows Embedded Compact), so standard Win32 programs wouldn't run on it, even if compiled for ARM.
Re:Can't wait to see so-called "gamers" buy this (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.amazon.com/SYNET7WID-7-Inch-Wireless-Mobile/dp/B003ZYUCDS [amazon.com]
Not "Windows" in any meaningful sense (Score:5, Informative)
I saw this same (or very similar) model on sale at the local CVS. One reason it's so cheap is that it doesn't run "Windows" in any meaningful sense. It runs an embedded-system OS that is called Windows, but isn't compatible with any existing Windows software. (Look for much more of this kind of confusion with the upcoming WinRT for ARM.) Furthermore, since this netbook doesn't have an x86 processor, it can't run the real version of Windows.
Re:Not "Windows" in any meaningful sense (Score:5, Informative)
I'm pretty sure this is the Sylvania netbook that appeared in 2010 for $99 at CVS [informationweek.com]. Reviewers were not kind about it, but the novelty of buying a $99 computer at a drug store was sort of fun. It's no surprise that 21 months later it's dropped under $50.
These little craptops have always intrigued me, and it's just a matter of time before someone puts out one in the under-$100 range that's not entirely terrible. There's this guy [ebay.com] that is available new from lots of ebay sites (I chose this one at random and am not endorsing it). It runs Android 2.2 and sports 256 mb of RAM. I haven't seen any kind words about it and from the specs it's likely still terrible, but you're starting to approach something respectable. It's not that far from being a 7" version of the Efika MX SmartBook [genesi-usa.com], which isn't a world beater by any stretch, but which is light and fanless and runs Linux and sort of harks back to what was fun about early netbook.
Re: (Score:3)
this netbook doesn't have an x86 processor, it can't run the real version of Windows
So try this: install Debian (if on Android or Maemo, possibly in a chroot), grab the new multiarchized versions of wine that just hit unstable, install qemu-user. Way too slow for modern bloatware, but you can run 95/98 era software adequately.
This is not new, they used to be $99 (Score:3, Informative)
Windows CE == crap, laptop too slow for video (Score:3)
a friend got a "netbook" with the same hardware, windows CE 6.0. a "Tec T-book". All software outdated, very few of it (wordpad, calculator and that's all), no apparent way to install software - you can browse web archives for old PDA software meant to run on resolutions below 320x240, but what to do with it?
then, the CPU is too slow for smooth playback of SD divx. you can probably play mp3, but on a lame version of windows media player, I prefer a winamp clone. Internet Explorer on it is like browsing with a 486 under windows 3.1. There's was a youtube app! but it was broken, hard-wired to how youtube was a few years ago, it couldn't load or display anything.
it's a total rip off and my friend had paid 79 euros for this. but interestingly, it has better connectivity that a macbook air : three USB, two audio jacks, SD and ethernet! purportedly you can install Android 1.x on it. too bad my buddy got it stolen, I would have tried to do it, and install busybox or something. it can be interesting for a machine only used to ssh in other machines.
now the best about it : it's incredibly light, solid state and fanless. its keyboard and LCD are standard quality - because they are no factories making terrible versions of them. so the display, helped by its small size looked excellent. So, it was both the worst computer ever and had something to it! I noticed a remotely similar computer : Efila MX smartbook, it's 189 euros but has 10", 800MHz ARM cortex, 3G modem, 512MB memory, 16GB flash, good keyboard. It looks awesome and thin, but you lose the ethernet port which is a tragedy.
Add linux or android... (Score:2)
Comparing Apples to Oranges (Score:2)
"...selling for a measly 45 dollars, what do you get for that, you get a netbook running windows embedded compact 7, 128 megs of ram, a via8505 processor and a 7 inch screen capable of 800x480 pixels resolution." I'm still waiting for my under $50 Macbook.
You're still waiting for a $50 Macbook? I'm still waiting for anyone to actually call that $45 mess a functional computer. 128 megs of RAM would hardly run the (very necessary) anti-virus software for Windows.
Re: (Score:3)
$50 tablets (Score:2)
This isn't a 'Laptop' (Score:3)
Nobody would consider this heap a laptop.
It looks like they took the guts of a 7" tablet, moved the touchscreen to a touchpad, added a crap keyboard and Win7 Embedded(lol), and sold it for as little as physically possible.
128MB ram is abysmal. You can't get anything done with that, and even my Firefox routinely goes above that by almost double when working with a lot of sites at once, or streaming video, or using any sort of complex web app.
Good luck with that, bros. I'm not getting one.
Re: (Score:2)
Laptop sales declined by the amount that netbook sales increased. Laptops are more profitable than netbooks. At least, that's my assumption.
Re: (Score:2)
If it was simply 'we stopped making them because laptops are more profitable and netbooks were doing too well' then whichever manufacturer continued to supply netbooks would have made a killing. Companies s
12" is a laptop (Score:3)
I bought one for $275 that has a 12 inch screen, full sized keyboard, and 1300x768 screen, and 64 bit CPU.
That's a laptop.
The only netbooks I see listed have tiny 1024x600 resolution, are 10 inch with reduced size keyboards
I thought one of the defining characteristics of a netbook was a smaller screen. But most of these newer 10" laptops appear to support 64-bit instructions.
Re: (Score:3)
"Smaller" compared to the high-end for laptops yes, but the high end for WinXP netbooks was 12.1" (due to Windows XP Home UItra-Low Cost PC licensing limitations from Microsoft); the defining features were generally those smaller screens, network or peripheral dependence for loading software (due to lack of a built-in optical drive), and network or peripheral dependence for large data storage (due to small onboard HDD or even sm
Re: (Score:2)
What happened? The iPad happened. Customers are shifting away from PCs of all types as the move to mobile computing accelerates.
I'll believe that when someone I know buys a tablet. I've seen a few people using them, but I've seen hundreds of times as many people using desktop PCs and laptops.
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh grasshopper. You must be new here.
I remember when it was 64K (sixty four thousand) for the OS. And we liked it.
Floppy disks.
300 baud modems.
80 x 25 character screens.
Patching Wordstar with a hex editor.
50 cent per gallon gasoline.
Bell bottoms.
Sex.
You kids don't realize how good things are.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm going to get out-grey-bearded for sure, but at least I can get my toe in.
MODEMs? We used to call them acoustic couplers and that was only because we'd seen them at a distance.
Our computers had 1KB of RAM (about a page of A4) to run programs in and the OS was in a chip. The Z80 CPU was always considered modern, every time a new microcomputer with it in came out.
I never asked what specs my wooden Atari games machine had
Re: (Score:3)
64K? We had 32K, and most of that was reserved for other things so we couldn't actually use it.
And as for floppy disks! We used to dream of floppy disks! We had to plug our dad's cassette player into the computer to load software!
Re: (Score:2)
64K? We had 32K, and most of that was reserved for other things so we couldn't actually use it.
32k? We had 1k and most of that was used by the OS and the video RAM.
Re: (Score:2)
64K? We had 32K, and most of that was reserved for other things so we couldn't actually use it.
32k? We had 1k and most of that was used by the OS and the video RAM.
1k? We just had an infinitely long roll of tape.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure exactly (and I wasn't around then, so take this with salt) but I think it probably had something to do with the populace being convinced that we needed stuff.
Why should love be free if you could turn a profit instead?
Re: (Score:2)
windows 95 comfortably fit in 16mb of ram a few years later.
Not comfortably really. I had Win95 with 16MB and, unless you ran anything else than just the OS itself, it swapped like an animal. Maybe my installation was a bit bloated too, but still.
Although what every time comes up in my mind is a Slashdot message from maybe 5 years ago, where someone run 95 on a modern CPU. The core components of the OS could fit in the processor cache (maybe 4 megs or so), and he had some method to pull out the RAM out from the live system, after which the system ran happily for a w
Re: (Score:2)
£10 a month gets me 250 minutes of free any network calls, unlimited SMS and "unlimited" data. Calls or texts to someone on the same network are completely free and don't take anything from the allowance. They're just setting up automatic topups so it's as good as a contract but you can just cancel it whenever you like.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not for such an outdated device. Lots of those are free to good homes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The date is incorrect. The ebay auction referenced in the article [ebay.com] was originally posted June 7, 2012.
Well-founded arguments need precise definitions (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)