Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Portables Intel Hardware

Is Intel Killing 12-Inch Displays On Netbooks? 297

Posted by timothy
from the 12"-seems-a-bit-easier-on-the-eyes dept.
HangingChad writes "Dell has retired their 12-inch Intel Atom-powered netbooks, they said today. The official reason — 'It really boils down to this: for a lot of customers, 10-inch displays are the sweet spot for netbooksLarger notebooks require a little more horsepower to be really useful.' Or is the real reason that 12-inch displays on netbooks cut into Intel's more profitable dual-core market and Dell's profit margins on higher-end machines?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is Intel Killing 12-Inch Displays On Netbooks?

Comments Filter:
  • by bogotronix (1586717) on Sunday August 09, 2009 @03:14PM (#29004137)
    I think Atom purchasers have to declare the destination of the chip and intel charges more if the destination is a 12" display. The idea being every 12" sold is a desktop CPU sale lost. AMD, NVIDIA, VIA don't have the necessary market share to impose this kind of restriction on the manufacturers using their chips. Dell is probably surrendering now rather than continue with a platform that's had its profit margins hobbled from the start.
  • by jones_supa (887896) on Sunday August 09, 2009 @03:16PM (#29004143)
    Exactly. And, there is already the term subnotebook [wikipedia.org] for laptops of that size.
  • Re:Fail atom chipset (Score:4, Informative)

    by 0123456 (636235) on Sunday August 09, 2009 @03:17PM (#29004149)

    Most netbooks have the Intel chipset which sucks a lot more power than the NVidia one. That might be a reason to want smaller screens, seeing as that would save *some* power...

    I think you're confusing the desktop Intel Atom chipsets (which suck major ass) with the mobile Intel chipsets. I believe the Ion chipset takes less power than the desktop Intel chipset for the Atom, but more than the mobile Intel chipset for the Atom.

    If I remember correctly, it's something like 22W for the Intel desktop chipset vs 6W for the mobile, with the Ion somewhere in between (I've seen claimed idle consumption around 20-25W for Ion-based desktop systems).

  • Re:Yes (Score:5, Informative)

    by RedK (112790) on Sunday August 09, 2009 @04:27PM (#29004563)

    The case is Microsoft holds 90% of the entire PC market. Apple holds 10%. Hence why Microsoft is a Monopoly, and Apple isn't on the OS side. Apple also competes in the hardware business with Dell, HP and other OEMs. They don't have even near a controlling interest.

    As for your other comment, the MacOS market, MacOS isn't a market, it's a product. PCs are the market and Apple doesn't even come close to having a monopoly on it. You'd have to be retarded to think otherwise.

  • Re:Alternate Sources (Score:5, Informative)

    by c_forq (924234) <forquerc+slash@gmail.com> on Sunday August 09, 2009 @04:38PM (#29004675)
    Sorry, I assumed Slashdot was using the same sources at the TechCrunch article I read earlier. You can read it at their site. [techcrunch.com]
  • by PRMan (959735) on Sunday August 09, 2009 @05:53PM (#29005133)

    Yes, with average use and Auto Power mode, my Asus EEEPC 901 HA goes for a day and a half easily. It really does get over 6 hours as claimed, which for a netbook is almost 2 days of use in my experience.

    And I play my daughter's 720p gymnastics videos all the time with no stuttering, but I have to put it in "High Power" mode to do that. Of course, I need to install the KLite Codec Pack first, but it works. YouTube is no problem at all, even HD clips.

  • by dfghjk (711126) on Sunday August 09, 2009 @06:36PM (#29005451)

    "... all of Apple's MacBook Pros ... get 7 or 8 hours (verified as accurate by various third party reviews, so not the standard industry "under imaginary conditions" you see with most notebooks). Most netbooks would be hard-pressed to get half that."

    Wow, that is massively not true. Under real use the new MBP barely get half that as well. My 17 gets 5.5 hours when doing essentially nothing.

  • by node 3 (115640) on Sunday August 09, 2009 @06:47PM (#29005507)

    Yes, with average use and Auto Power mode, my Asus EEEPC 901 HA goes for a day and a half easily. It really does get over 6 hours as claimed, which for a netbook is almost 2 days of use in my experience.

    This is the exact sort of hyperbolic nonsense I'm talking about. 6 hours != 2 days. 6 hours is 6 hours.

    And I play my daughter's 720p gymnastics videos all the time with no stuttering, but I have to put it in "High Power" mode to do that. Of course, I need to install the KLite Codec Pack first, but it works. YouTube is no problem at all, even HD clips.

    Sorry, but I don't believe you. The fact that you mislead about battery life makes it hard for me to even give you the benefit of the doubt here.

    The Atom processor and GMA945 chipset combination used in most netbooks just simply can't play 720p video, except perhaps some low-quality implementations. I've tried both a 720p mkv and 720p h.264 video on an Atom netbook, and neither could play without dropped frames.

    Second test, youtube, the Internet Explorer S.H.Y.N.E.S.S commercial. regular quality, stutters if you don't let it load completely before playing. After letting it load, it plays without stuttering, but with what appears to be a reduced frame rate. The HD video cannot play clearly no matter what. For the question of, "can it play video", flash might seem like an unfair test, but for the question of "can it play video people want to play", it's crucial.

    Are your gymnastic videos AVCHD from an actual traditional style video camera? Or a video from a still digicam or a Flip Video (or similar style) camera? I can believe there are some 720p videos that can play, but I cannot believe for an instant that standard 720p videos you'll find on iTunes or bittorrent can play without issue.

  • by Ned Scott (1551823) on Sunday August 09, 2009 @07:13PM (#29005681)
    I've been using my new 15 inch 2.8 MBP, and I normally get around 7 hours unless I'm pushing the processor with more than casual web browsing and IRCing.
  • by koiransuklaa (1502579) on Monday August 10, 2009 @02:54AM (#29008269)

    I don't know of any machines today that offer the modern equivalent of performance and portability (even on the PC side of the fence, which I'd happily consider).

    As someone pointed out: Thinkpad X series has delivered that consistently for quite a long time. Be prepared to pay through the nose though.

  • by hab136 (30884) on Monday August 10, 2009 @04:37AM (#29008689) Journal

    If they ask for advice, you can advise on which computer you think will serve them *best*, but *best* should never ever mean "good enough".

    Best computer for the person != best computing experience for the person

    Some people really do want to just email, write documents, IM, and use Facebook. If the video stutters during Youtube, that's annoying but acceptable. What's best for them may be to spend as little as possible to get something workable, and to use that extra money in other aspects of their lives.

    Spending $300 on a netbook and $200 elsewhere (new tires for their car, new music/movies, new clothes) may be better for the person than spending $500 on the computer and nothing on the other things. So yes, the netbook is not the best computing experience for the person, but it may be the best computer purchase.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 10, 2009 @11:50AM (#29011535)

    Yes, with average use and Auto Power mode, my Asus EEEPC 901 HA goes for a day and a half easily. It really does get over 6 hours as claimed, which for a netbook is almost 2 days of use in my experience.

    This is the exact sort of hyperbolic nonsense I'm talking about. 6 hours != 2 days. 6 hours is 6 hours.

    And I play my daughter's 720p gymnastics videos all the time with no stuttering, but I have to put it in "High Power" mode to do that. Of course, I need to install the KLite Codec Pack first, but it works. YouTube is no problem at all, even HD clips.

    Sorry, but I don't believe you. The fact that you mislead about battery life makes it hard for me to even give you the benefit of the doubt here.

    Man, you are full of shit. The guy EXPLICITLY states that 6 hours of battery life is two days worth of usage FOR HIM. He says it plainly, he's not hiding anything, and he's certainly not misleading anyone who has a even a basic grasp of the English language.

  • by caladine (1290184) on Monday August 10, 2009 @12:46PM (#29012411)
    I really don't think the OP meant they use it for two straight days non-stop. A more logical look would be that they are able to go two days between charges because they only use it around six hours during that time frame.
  • by popo (107611) on Monday August 10, 2009 @01:21PM (#29013031) Homepage

    A 12" netbook is definitely a netbook. Samsung makes some awesome 1280x800 display netbooks with Nano processors that are imho, the best netbooks on the market.

    Dell's decision is a little hilarious, in that all they will accomplish is helping their competition.

    I'm sure Samsung will welcome all those disappointed Dell shoppers with open arms...

It's time to boot, do your boot ROMs know where your disk controllers are?

Working...