Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Centrino Laptops Reviewed

Posted by Hemos on Wed Mar 12, 2003 10:30 AM
from the wireless-machine-run dept.
Jeff Mancuso writes "CNET seems to be the first out with full reviews of the new Centrino Pentium M laptops. The performance looks solid, the features are great, designs are thin and battery life runs up to 4-7 hours on these machines." Yeah, I had hoped that we would make it on the review list, but alas, no such luck. Nice looking machines, though.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Logo (Score:1)

    by NorthWoodsman (606357) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:34AM (#5493952)
    (http://kitanokikori.tripod.com/)
    The Centrino logo is awful though... God.
  • Damn it (Score:5, Funny)

    by Toasty16 (586358) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:35AM (#5493967)
    (http://home.mchsi.com/~toasty/)
    The Centrinos are out and I had to buy a Dell Inspiron 8200 with a P4-M 1.80Ghz last Friday. I hate technology ;-)
  • Battery Life and Heat (Score:1, Troll)

    by NitroPye (594566) <coleman@@@nitroy...com> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:35AM (#5493977)
    Probably had to sacrifice power for battery life. This is why I choose an apple portable. I have a powerful chip that is energy efficient so I get fine battery life with no crippled processor. I wonder how hot these things get though.
  • I wonder (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:36AM (#5493981)
    ... why there's no direct link to the article. I mean tomorrow the cnet.com frontpage could have changed completely, couldn't it?

    Anyway here's the 'overview' as they call it:

    http://www.cnet.com/hardware/0-1027-8-20926222-1 .h tml?tag=ld
  • comercial? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by IAR80 (598046) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:36AM (#5493989)
    Is this a comercial? If so please post the link to the article because I'm to lazzy to browse through CNET.
    • Re:comercial? by Bonker (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:50AM
  • link? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:36AM (#5493993)
    Thanks slashdot for providing a link to this fantastic full review!
    • Re:link? by MatthewRothenberg (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:44PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:37AM (#5493995)
    For when this article gets moved off Cnet's front page, here's a direct link [cnet.com].

    And just so you won't mod me up, here's a link to goatse.cx [goatse.cx]
  • Article Link (Score:5, Informative)

    by HaloZero (610207) <protodeka@gmail.com> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:40AM (#5494026)
    (http://192.168.2.1/)
    For you lazy bastards.

    http://computers.cnet.com/hardware/0-1027-8-209262 22-1.html?tag=ld [cnet.com]

    Enjoy. Oh, and, to be honest, I'm happy with my new 12" PowerBook G4 [apple.com] - It does everything I want, and then some. :-D
  • http://computers.cnet.com/hardware/0-1027-8-209262 22-1.html?tag=ld [cnet.com] Take it an run, people! :-) -/- Mikey-San
  • Pentium M? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Undaar (210056) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:41AM (#5494044)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    What the hell happened to Pentiums V through CMXCIX?
    • Re:Pentium M? by cperciva (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:59AM
      • Re:Pentium M? by ersgameboy (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:35PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Battery life (Score:5, Informative)

    by tmark (230091) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:44AM (#5494069)
    Why hasn't it advanced much compared to just about every other technology in a laptop ? To me, low battery life and low weight are THE most important characteristics of any laptop, I might use, but we had laptops running for 2-3 hours 5-7 years ago, which is still where most laptops are at. Here it seems the Centrino ekes out its long life through advances in the CPU, not through better batteries.

    A recent Sony Vaio notebook I just got, while a lovely machine, lasts *maybe* 1 1/2 hours when all the consumption-related options are turned way down. Plug in the wifi card and it's borderline useless.

    So why hasn't battery life advanced significantly ? Are we already at a theoretical limit of battery performance ? Or is battery performance improving, but just managing to keep pace with ever-increasing power-consumption ?

    • Re:Battery life (Score:5, Interesting)

      It's not so much battery technology as power consumption (and waste) of the battery. That huge 16" on some laptops sucks up watts left and right. That new P4-1.X Ghz pulls away power too. Oh, and don't forget about the GPU and the spindles for the drives.

      Out of that list, the three that you could most obviously increase the power efficiency of are the ones where the masses want the latest and greatest. You could make a machine that runs for hours and hours, but it'd have a crappy little i810 graphics chip, and a p3, and a smaller display, which, honestly, is last century's technology, and not as appealing as the new gigahertz monsters.

      My VAIO (6 month old GRX), when running at the "slow" speed of 1.1 Ghz with full backlight and 3Com WiFi X-jack card, runs for 2.5 -> 3 hours, depending on how many packets I fling out to the base station, and how much I pound on the hard drive.

      If you want to know where your battery's going, it's the new "space warmer" feature that comes standard with most laptops.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Battery life (Score:5, Informative)

      There are two reasons that battery life isn't getting better. One is that there's an inherent competetion between improved battery life and improved features. Whenever somebody comes up with an improvement in energy storage, it can be used either to give you more time or to feed more cool stuff, like more powerful processors, extra storage devices, or a nicer screen. The competetion from cool stuff has a tendency to keep the life from improving as much as you might like.

      Equally important, there are serious physical limits to the amount of energy that a battery can hold. For a given mass of battery, the total energy storage is limited by the chemical properties of the materials you can use in the battery. Since those properties are reasonably well known, and people have been making batteries for a couple hundred years now, most of the possible advances have already been made. There just isn't much space for improvement once you've switched to the highest energy materials available. The only way to get radically higher energy density than is currently available is by switching to something other than batteries, like fuel cells.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Battery life (Score:5, Informative)

      by larien (5608) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:58AM (#5494231)
      (http://riddoch.org/ | Last Journal: Saturday March 01 2003, @10:55AM)
      Batteries have been around for decades and we probably have eked out most of the performance from them. However, I did read something in the last few days about some advances in lithium batteries [arstechnica.com] which may help out.

      In essence, batteries use well known chemistry/physics which we know a lot more about than making CPUs. Added to this, there are certain hard limits in this based on the chemistry/physics involved. We're probably already fairly near them using current battery techniques. The advances above may help out, but until they've delivered, we're stuck at current battery technology.

      To be honest, another approach should be to make CPUs equivalent to 500MHz PIIs; it's enough for most things (word processing, email) and should be able to be designed at a very low power consumption.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Battery life by lavalyn (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:10AM
      • Re:Battery life (Score:5, Insightful)

        When people realize this, laptop speeds will go down to usable levels (1GHz will play DivX movies fine, and that's probably the most intensive thing you could possibly do well on a laptop). Until then, expect those laptops to continue tacking on more battery burning "features."

        Well, what about people who do realize this. They realize that is what PDAs are for and such, and for a laptop they do want a powerhouse. I want a laptop that can run my entire development environment, quick compiles, while listening to mp3s and when I'm finished, reboot into windows and play some warcraft 3.

        Remember, not everybody feels the same way as you. This is why their is market diversity.
        [ Parent ]
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • I've not part of the over clocking scene, nor the laptop scene, so I wouldn't know one way or the other, but would it be possible to take an already good laptop (battery life wise) such as one of these models with the centrino, and underclock it? I'd love a laptop, but I really only want one to access email and putz around with excel files on the move.
      Is it even possible to jimjam with the bios settings, and lower the performance of the CPU? Would that even have an effect on battery life?
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Underclocking? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by addaon (41825) <addaon+slashdot@gmail.com> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:43AM (#5494615)
        You can do it in software on the Centrinos, I'm sure. On the other hand, with a reasonably well-designed laptop (centrino, g3, transmeta) you'll hit diminishing returns quickly. Most of these processors use between 3W and 7W of power (don't know centrino's power draw off the top of my head). Even if you manage to cut that to 1W, a 6W difference makes little difference when your monitor draws 8W-12W, your harddrive draws 2W, and even your ram and chpset draw a couple of watts between them. The difference doesn't hurt, but the performance difference probably begins to outweigh the battery life difference. A 100% performance decrease (conceptually, if we were to use a multiplier of zero on the processor) would probably correspond to a 20% battery life increase at most.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Underclocking? by StillAnonymous (Score:1) Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:52AM
      • Re:Underclocking? by Realistic_Dragon (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @04:57PM
    • Re:Battery life (Score:4, Insightful)

      by timeOday (582209) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:53AM (#5494709)
      Why don't you take a look at the links? The IBM machine tested at 7 hours!

      As for battery technology, slashdot has had several articles on fuel cells. (Whether these can strictly be called "batteries" we'll leave to the pedants.) Those are supposed to hit the market within a year.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Battery life by danlyke (Score:1) Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:49PM
    • Re:Battery life by jhines0042 (Score:3) Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:22PM
    • Re:Battery life by genka (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @03:35PM
    • Re:Battery life by Tailhook (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @04:48PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by xintegerx (557455) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:45AM (#5494084)
    (http://578.291.762.662/)
    These only support the weaker kind of WiFi -- 802.11b.

    They will have 802.11g which is both a+b (a is faster speeds) in June according to stuff I've read before.

    So if you're interested, remember that.
  • Target market dissonance? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by lavalyn (649886) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:47AM (#5494098)
    (http://127.0.0.1/ | Last Journal: Wednesday March 31 2004, @01:41PM)
    It appears the Centrino is a processor that actually could be practical, conserving battery power at the expense of computing power. As such, the market is of people that want more battery time, and are going to sacrifice computing power to do so.

    Why do these laptops then contain such battery burning parts as large screens, CDRW/DVD drives, and weigh as much as 7lb?

    When I saw the Sony Picturebook with Transmeta Crusoe processor, I was drooling. Not because it was a Crusoe processor, but because it was a computer that could do what mobile people need it to do, and do it for a long time, and be unobtrusive enough to put in my jacket pocket.

    If you're going to get a portable computer but you're always going to be plugged in when using it, get a cheap ECS Desknote that doesn't come with a battery. If you worry a bit about battery time, get a normal mobile Pentium IV or Mobile Athlon. If you're insane about battery life, get a Crusoe. I don't see the middle ground between the last two.
  • Nice reviews (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Alcimedes (398213) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:49AM (#5494122)
    After actually READING the reviews, i just wanted to post a few comments.

    first, (as i type this on a G4 PB) it looks like Intel has done a great job with these chips. those battery life stats were just marketing fluff, looks like they're real. (although the 7 hour IBM had a "special" order battery with it that stuck out an inch from the back).

    it's good to see the Windows world get some laptops that are actually focusing on what makes a laptop worthwhile, weight and battery life. the alienware machines are OK i guess, but suck as a true laptop IMO.

    in any case, these chips look like a real improvement to both performance and to the Intel mindset. i'm happy to see them start working towards real world benefits in their chips over marketing hype and lame numbers games.

  • Hey, stupid! (Score:5, Funny)

    by barspin (585641) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:50AM (#5494146)
    Yeah, I had hoped that we would make it on the review list, but alas, no such luck. Nice looking machines, though.

    This will not get you a review unit any sooner. Review units are sent to news sites that actually test machines; not to a "news" site that would use the machine and then post a three-sentence blurb on, which would be followed by 400 comments about goatse.cx and SOVIET RUSSIA, and one on-topic post complaining about the price of the product reviewed.

    Call this flamebait, troll, whatever, but it's reality: slashdot isn't classified in the realm of a legitimate news site. It's a BBS, plain and simple.

    In summary: go buy your own fucking laptop, Hemos.

  • by egghat (73643) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:50AM (#5494148)
    (http://egghat.blogspot.com/)
    12 new Athlon Mobile models, which will go down to 1 volt core voltage and use not more than 1 watt (!).

    Check here [amd.com]

    The 1 watt number is from a Heise article [heise.de].

    Bye egghat.
  • weight? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Schwamm (513960) <laurie_riley&yahoo,com> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:52AM (#5494156)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    why is it in reviews that the reviewers can't seem to bother to mention the weights of the laptops? i don't want to be toting around a seven pound beast.
    • Re:weight? by thegrommit (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:27PM
    • Re:weight? by User 956 (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:39PM
    • Re:weight? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Schwamm (513960) <laurie_riley&yahoo,com> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:20AM (#5494420)
      (http://slashdot.org/)
      Pussy. If a woman can do it, so can you.

      *cough*

      i am a woman.

      and yet i fail to see what bearing that has on my desire for a 3 pound laptop.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:weight? by Whatever Fits (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @04:09PM
        • Re:weight? by henele (Score:1) Wednesday March 12 2003, @05:23PM
          • Re:weight? by Whatever Fits (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @08:04PM
            • Re:weight? by henele (Score:1) Thursday March 13 2003, @09:56AM
              • Re:weight? by henele (Score:1) Thursday March 13 2003, @09:58AM
              • Re:weight? by Whatever Fits (Score:2) Thursday March 13 2003, @10:48AM
      • Re:weight? by xombo (Score:1) Wednesday March 12 2003, @06:08PM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Centrino looks great (Score:4, Interesting)

    by stratjakt (596332) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:54AM (#5494186)
    (Last Journal: Sunday November 11, @09:31AM)
    Seems Intel found a way to dramatically lower power consumption and heat without sacrificing too much CPU power.

    I cant wait until we can get flex-atx or something like miniitx boards designed for these centrinos.

    I want to put together little console-ish media players and gaming machines to plug into the TV, and VIA Edens offerings so far are just a little to gutless, and Shuttles spacewalker boards are great, but screaming CPU and case fans wont cut it.

    I wonder how these things would cluster (yeah, imagine a beow...). Possibilities for my own personal little server farm without having to run another 150 amps of service to my PC room, and wont deafen me (a beowulf cluster of fans I dont need).
  • anandtech review (Score:5, Informative)

    by adpowers (153922) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:13AM (#5494350)
    Anandtech also has their review [anandtech.com] up.
  • Little known fact (Score:2)

    by haggar (72771) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:14AM (#5494362)
    (http://slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Monday December 30 2002, @12:57AM)
    The centrino have been entirely developed in Israel [israel21c.org] under strict secrecy.
  • by e4liberty (537089) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:17AM (#5494389)

    The performance of these machines varies quite a bit. The top performers are described and benchmark results are here [cnet.com].

    What accounts for this range of performance. All four machines have the same processor, clock, memory speed, bridge chip, GPU, disk speed, etc.:

    Windows XP Professional; 1.6GHz Intel Pentium M; 512MB DDR SDRAM 266MHz; ATI Mobility Radeon 9000 32MB; [many]GB 5,400rpm [drive]

    Is it all in the firmware settings?

  • BusinessWeek on the new Centrino (Score:5, Insightful)

    by andy1307 (656570) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:17AM (#5494395)
    This is from the BusinessWeek subscription site.

    Laptop Makers Don't Want This Intel Inside The new Centrino comes with a disappointing wireless chip

    Too bad PC makers don't agree. Dell Computer Corp. (DELL ), Hewlett-Packard Co. (HPQ ), and other top manufacturers are eager to harness the extra power and efficiency of the new Pentium, but they are underwhelmed by Intel's wireless technology, which they say transmits data more slowly than those of rivals such as Broadcom (BRCM ).

    What's more, notebook manufacturers perceive an ulterior motive behind Intel's Centrino launch. While Otellini says Intel is combining features in one package "so everything works [well] together," some PC makers fear Intel could boost prices if it were to become the sole supplier for most of a notebook's innards. And even if Intel didn't raise prices, PC makers say they'd prefer to continue buying components from numerous suppliers so they can better set themselves apart from competitors.

  • ibook vs these new guys (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ilsie (227381) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:42AM (#5494608)
    I have to say, being a lifelong Windows user (I had a stint with Macs briefly, 10 years ago in high school yearbook class, pagemaker and what not) I was getting quite fed up with my 9 pound, 1 hour, Sony Vaio AMD laptop. So last week I sold it and went out and bought a sleek little 12" ibook. Best purchase I've ever made. After the initial learning curve with OS X (why the heck isnt Ctrl+C working? Wait, what's this weird little symbol key?) I am really digging the ibook. It's so beautiful, has great battery life, and does everything I'd ever need in a laptop. I love that I can ssh into my colo box without having to download putty. Little stuff like that.

    Anyways, long story short, if I had to do it again now with all these T&L windows laptops out, I would still go with the ibook.
  • by furrygeek (657108) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:49AM (#5494672)
    (http://timarmstrong.com.au/)
    Has anyone considered whether methanol or hydrogen powered laptops would be allowed in the cabin of a commercial aircraft?

    Unless I'm mistaken, the ICAO [icao.org] (International Civil Aviation Association) specifically forbids the transport of methanol in the cabin. I don't know if they have an issue with hydrogen or other hydrocarbons.

    There isn't any reason to worry, but there are regulations to deal with...

  • Astro (Score:2)

    by darthBear (516970) <`hactar' `at' `hactar.org'> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:18PM (#5494898)
    Does anyone know when Transmeta will have more info about the Astro? It made a splash and seems to have just gone away. I can't even find mention of it on their website.

    Seems like it could compete with the Pentium-M if/when it comes out.

  • Heat is GOOD! (Score:1)

    by neildiamond (610251) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:57PM (#5495256)
    (http://www.stingydave.org/)
    You know if someone got really smart, they'd use that excess heat from the PC to generate more electricity in the same way a Hybrid vehicle works. If laptops are hot enough to cook someone's privates [wired.com], maybe we can put that to some good use.
  • Astro (Score:1)

    by glenrm (640773) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:07PM (#5495340)
    (http://www.zenfar.com/ | Last Journal: Friday February 25 2005, @05:16PM)
    I am waiting on Astro [yahoo.com] it will be a great day when you can grab update video and CPU drivers for your cube, slate, rig, or serv.
  • by samfreed (572658) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:10PM (#5495368)
    (http://freed.net/)
    Look at the new Toshiba Protege R100 [toshiba.com] Only 2.3lbs (that's near enough 1kg), 900 Mhz CPU, 12" screen.... This is the one I buy.
  • by ottffssent (18387) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:27PM (#5495534)
    I bought a 15000RPM hard drive 18 months ago and it was the fastest disk made for almost a year.

    I just bought a laptop. It isn't even here yet. It's already obsolete. *cry*

    I got a ultra-low-voltage P3/933 because battery life is paramount. Now they're making laptops ~2x as fast with half again as much battery life. Huzzah for technology.
  • installing Linux on these systems (Score:2, Interesting)

    by unsung (10704) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:37PM (#5495626)
    (Last Journal: Monday July 08 2002, @06:10PM)

    Interesting stuff. This seems like a pretty nice step up from my current system. Question, would we be able to install linux onto these systems? (Will the generic pentium drivers, ... work) or do all of the drivers still need to be written?

  • Laptop comment metareview (Score:4, Funny)

    by foxtrot (14140) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @02:11PM (#5495919)
    Seems there are two sorts of common comments that show up when Slashdot mentions a laptop:

    • They're too heavy! Make them lighter!
    • Battery life sucks! Make the batteries bigger!


    Well, hard disks aren't getting any lighter, CD-ROMs aren't getting much lighter, keyboards're probably at the ragged edge of weight/reliability, TFT screens only get so light, and so, what's left?

    Batteries.

    Why's laptop battery life suck? Because as batteries get better they use less of them to make the laptop lighter. Why are laptops so heavy? Because if the batteries were any lighter, they'd have even less power...

    I want a nice thick ten or fifteen pound laptop that's got enough battery life to last all day and enough reinforcement under the hood that I can thump users upside the head with it. Lightweight's overrated.
  • by frostfreek (647009) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @02:35PM (#5496181)
    an astounding 77 million transistors

    Well it might have been astounding, except that ATI stuffed 107 million [tomshardware.com] into the mighty Radeon 9500 chip, and NVidia crammed 125 million [tomshardware.com] into the phenomenal GeForceFX!

  • It's a gimmick (Score:2, Informative)

    by ThresherGDI (650604) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @04:39PM (#5497830)
    Centrino is a marketing gimmick and a gimmick only. I'm sure the parts are just fine, but the whole setup is a marketing ploy.

    Each of the seperate parts of Centrino are very good. The new processor should do wonders for battery life. The new wireless solution should be halfway decent, but it's a commodity part. The motherboard should be solid, as usual for intel. Individually, these parts are worth more than their sum.

    In order to have the Centrino label, the OEM must use the specified Intel mobo, the intel WiFi part, and the Pentium M. If you have a large, paranoid company like mine, you do NOT want the WiFi part. Thankfully, this part is optional, but the computer can no longer be marketed as a Centrino and the OEM loses a certain amount of co-marketing dollars. This is bad for the OEM, okay for the end user (they get what they want), and bad for intel since they don't get to capitalize on all the marketing dollars they spent huckstering the Centrino name.

    For a personal user, say that I want 802.11g or a different video subsystem. If I change out the WiFi portion, the product is no longer Centrino. From my understanding, intel is also taking this stance on using anything other than the included intel graphics subsystem, so if I need a more powerful graphics solution (for games, CAD, 3D rendering, etc) I lose the Centrino label. It is also not clear that you can even USE non-intel graphics. The Register mentioned that ATi was denied a license. Once again, this is bad for the OEM, good for the customer, bad for intel.

    The only time this pays off for intel or the OEM is if the end user buys a stock Centrino unit. That may be a considerable number of people. But my bet is that there are plenty more individuals or corporate customers that only want a part of the package. Additionally, there will be many individuals that will be confused by the new label and not understand that there are other choices available that will give them either more power, or less if that's what they need.

    So, what was the point of putting this package together in the first place? It limits choice, it doesn't pay off in many situations, and it will confuse the customer.

    I guess intel figures if they can establish a brand that encompasses the guts of a laptop, they can control the laptop market. People will ask for a Centrino the way that they ask for Pentiums, regardless of their true merits.

    Why doesn't intel just slap a chassis and LCD on them and be done with it? They seem intent on making laptops. There will be little or no product variation between OEMS.

  • Advertisement! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tekunokurato (531385) <jackphelps@gmail.com> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @05:10PM (#5498234)
    (http://www.jackphelps.net/)
    Christ, this is not a product review, it's a bloody advertisement. Where's the criticism? Where's the testing? The only person we hear from is the salesperson!
  • Just like MSN, they have a media blitz going on. I chatted with a presenter at the NY Hilton, and he said that that Centrino is a new wireless technology that is based on 802.11.

    "Do they have a PCMCIA card yet?"
    "No, but they expect to soon."

    Then I read this. You can also try out free 802.11 at 10 [mcdwireless.com] different McDonald's locations in NYC with the purchase of a Big Mac or McNuggets.
  • I'm still waiting for cheap and reliable PII class 300 MHZ laptops. These things should be like $100 now, brand new. Why the heck do these manufacturers keep shooting for desktop replacements when the need is for mobile *CHEAP* and *DURABLE* alternatives. The software 90% of the people need when moble barely touches the computing capabilities of modern laptops.


    Skrew you guys, I'm going back to my 386. :)

  • by wungo (458243) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @06:07PM (#5498828)
    I just saw Sony's new Centrino notebook, the VAIO Z1 Series, while wandering around at BestBuy today. I was little disappointed that this wasn't one of the machines in the CNET reviews--I would've been interested in finding out what they thought of the Z1. The Sony Z1 is definitely one of the cooler-looking machines I've seen in a while. (Maybe even cooler-looking than my Ti PowerBook!)

    The specs that mattered to me: 14.1" screen, 4.7 lbs, CD-RW/DVD-ROM, 2 x USB 2.0, decent keyboard w/ no obvious layout design flaws.

    I'd post a link to the relevant page on the Sony site but the URL had lots of session gobbledygook in the query string.
  • 2 years? (Score:1)

    by darkitecture (627408) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @09:21PM (#5499927)
    It took Gateway two years to come up with a Powerbook ripoff?

    link. [cnet.com]

    Apple just called, they want their design back.
  • by silvakow (91320) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:48AM (#5494115)
    Wow, these are the first PC laptops to come close (surpass?) to Apple's PB's in a while

    I agree. I'm an iBook user instead of a Powerbook user for financial reasons, but this will certainly give me second thoughts next time I purchase a laptop. The only thing that came close to the Mac laptops in battery life and leetness factor was the Sony Vaio, which at the time I purchased the iBook was not enough to grab my sale. This might move Apple from their currently large chunk of the laptop market.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:Fule Cells (Score:2)

    by gilesjuk (604902) <giles DOT jones AT zen DOT co DOT uk> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @10:51AM (#5494149)
    Fuel cells?

    They sound like a good idea, but they also have the potential to explode and inflict damage on the user. Even current batteries can do that as one female owner of a dell laptop found out first hand.

    Fuel cells contain hydrogen and I would be pretty scared to carry around a laptop with that much energy potential in it. Suppose you leave it in the sun? what if it leaks.
    [ Parent ]
    • Re:Fule Cells (Score:5, Interesting)

      by BeBoxer (14448) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:10AM (#5494333)
      Fuel cells contain hydrogen and I would be pretty scared to carry around a laptop with that much energy potential in it.

      I dunno if I would worry about it too much. First, fuel cells don't have to use hydrogen. A lot of different hydrocarbon fuels can be used, depending on the design of the cell. I believe that the new laptop fuel cells that have been announced will be using methanol (rubbing alchohol) for fuel. Second, you have to keep it in perspective. How many people carry around butane lighters? There is a significant amount of energy in one of those, yet they seem to be remarkably safe. I've never heard of a catastrophic lighter accident, although I'm sure it happens. No reason to assume that a fuel cell "tank" wouldn't be at least as safe.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Fule Cells by X43B (Score:1) Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:13AM
    • Re:And yet... by gilesjuk (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:21PM
      • Re:And yet... by EvilBudMan (Score:1) Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:42PM
        • Re:And yet... by gilesjuk (Score:1) Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:51PM
      • Re:And yet... by agallagh42 (Score:1) Wednesday March 12 2003, @03:16PM
    • Re:Fule Cells by Pxtl (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:43PM
      • Hydrogen pop by Glonoinha (Score:2) Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:43PM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:Great news for Linux (Score:2, Interesting)

    I know I just posted a little blurb about this above, but I want to tell you that the fifteen local computers makers here have started putting branded linux as standard on all their machines (other OS are extra). I'm not talking about a wallpaper here, I mean all new icons with the company logo for the menu bar, hand picked apps with modifications, etc... My recent jaunt to the local hypermarket found all six of the desktops and all three of the laptops sporting some kind of branded KDE with Mozilla, Evolution and Gnome-meeting as defaults on the KDE desktop, with the whole system available in Thai. In fact, Thailand's Ministry of ICT is preparing to announce a Linux distro and an OpenOffice fork as the national OS and Office suite, respectively.
    I want to put an article together on all this, and am trying to schedule interviews and translate the necessary articles into English this week.
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:Fule Cells (Score:1)

    by Big Swede (303191) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:11AM (#5494338)
    I think he meant fool cells
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:Powerbook G4, irony (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:25AM (#5494464)
    Apple vs. Mac aside, you've got valid point on the marketing issue. I'm waiting for the day when Computers become marketed like cars, where the raw specs aren't important. The way I see this, we're still in the muscle-car era of computing. Once we get past the point where everyone realizes that having 350 Hp engine isn't required do drive to work, we'll have ultra-cheap and pervasive computers.
    [ Parent ]
  • by Remlik (654872) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @11:47AM (#5494660)
    (http://www.quantumflux.org/)
    Why did this get modded to +5 interesting?

    I don't find it interesting to read someone's obviously biased opinion without supporting facts.

    It thought /. people were more critical than that...or maybe they were just impressed that he can use HTML formatting and bullets?
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:Powerbook G4, irony (Score:4, Funny)

    by notaspy (457709) <[imnotaspy] [at] [yahoo.com]> on Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:07PM (#5494811)
    "You Mac gayboys really ought to do your research. [snip] I don't sit at my computer all day using Photoshop filters. Look at games on Macs. They're pathetic."

    That's a hoot, AC. You sit at your computer all day playing games and have the hubris to call Mac proponents "gayboys" (can you spell loser? Probably not, you'd probably spell it looser).

    My guess is that most laptop purchasers buy laptops primarily to do useful work, not to play games. The story is about laptops, isn't it?

    Once again, that's "loser" not "looser" or "loozer." It's a word you definitely should get used to hearing!
    [ Parent ]
  • by timeOday (582209) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:09PM (#5494826)
    Why are you benchmarking the best apple has got against a 900 mhz P3, which is 2 year old technology?

    The Pentium-M 1.6 beat the P4 2.6 [anandtech.com], so it's at least equal to the G4 per clock cycle, and yet is clocked twice as fast as the G4 0.8. Oh, and it gets 5-7 hours of battery life. In other words, the G4 is thoroughly obsolete.

    [ Parent ]
  • by fhammond (126717) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @12:10PM (#5494838)
    "5 hour advertised batter[y] life"

    And what is it really? I have a TiPB and it sure as hell doesn't get five hours.
    [ Parent ]
  • by mediahacker (566995) on Wednesday March 12 2003, @01:08PM (#5495349)
    (http://www.synthstuff.com/mt/)
    re MAC v/s Win for photo applications. Check out:
    http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp? cid=7-4869-4882
    Rob Galbraith runs an excellent site for digital photographers. In January 2002, he ran some real-life photo benchmarks with two high-end systems and two older systems. In most cases the Wintel system smoked the MAC. Excellent reading...
    [ Parent ]
  • 32 replies beneath your current threshold.