A year on, Ultrabooks are a worse disaster than most expected

[pelov]

I think from Intel's prospective the Ultrabook makes sense. They're essentially trying to build an OEM-agnostic platform brand name for themselves.

But they have far too lenient guidelines and are still wholly dependent on the OEMs to make and sell the entire package. Ultrabooks come in all shapes and sizes, most of them incredibly crappy with only the Zenbook as the saving grace, yet that's entirely due to the display -- which, btw, isn't something that's among the Ultrabook guidelines. Intel is also ignoring what's already out there as far as alternatives go which these same OEMs are currently producing.

This whole approach where they're mimicking the MacBook Air is a pitiful attempt at selling these in any significant quantity. Instead of offering the same features as a tablet or MacBook Air, they should distance themselves from both and really redefine just what a laptop is capable of. Things like wireless charging, all-day battery life, high quality displays, non-proprietary hardware, upgradeable components, quick charging times. Hell, even an independent OS would be welcome. The current flock only offers "thinner" and nothing else. And I'm not exaggerating about the nothing else. It literally offers nothing else.

 

[IntelEnthusiast]

So, Chris, what exactly is the point of an Ultrabook?

Well Pelov I would have to say the reason for Ultrabooks™ is really to open the door into an area that we believe will be important in the future. I believe the requirements for Ultrabooks will be changed and refined overtime but start off they are there to start focusing the laptop manufactures products towards a goal with these units.

 

[pelov]

Well Pelov I would have to say the reason for Ultrabooks™ is really to open the door into an area that we believe will be important in the future. I believe the requirements for Ultrabooks will be changed and refined overtime but start off they are there to start focusing the laptop manufactures products towards a goal with these units.

I know I'm pressuring you, and I'm sorry for that, but I'm actually thankful you're even responding. So, honestly, thanks But admittedly, I'm also a bit frustrated because this is the same story you've given us before and I've read on other forums and news articles regarding the Ultrabook platform (not from you, but others).

I know that Intel is pushing a standardized Li-Polymer battery which should decrease prices by a small amount as well as the new mSATA standard form factors. This much you've said. Unfortunately, neither one of these is a new feature nor a significant determining factor in the overall cost of the platform. When OEMs are making these things at razor-thin margins, below 7%, there's certainly a reason to be skeptical that we'll see any sort of price decrease to such a level where the form factor in its current state would make a good buy.

If we aren't going to see a significant decrease in price, then what exactly are the new features coming with Haswell that will redefine Ultrabooks? Bear in mind, both motion sensors and touchscreens aren't anything new for those who have had a smartphone or tablet these past few years. I guess what I'm asking is, why would I want to buy an Ultrabook over an ultraportable or Microsoft Surface, iPad or a 10" Android tablet? What is it that an Ultrabook has that none of the others have?

 

[happysmiles]

semiaccurate is trolling again.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

if they drop any name it should be "atom". everything in that line has been so crappy that that is an extremely tarnished brand name. after using netbooks do you really think anyone is going to trust atom with windows 8?

 

[IlllI]

i love how within about the first 5 posts people are calling each other names and attacking each other. this is why i dont bother to read most topics anymore. you people ruin any semblance of an intellectual discussion.

 

[Jionix]

Well Pelov I would have to say the reason for Ultrabooks™ is really to open the door into an area that we believe will be important in the future. I believe the requirements for Ultrabooks will be changed and refined overtime but start off they are there to start focusing the laptop manufactures products towards a goal with these units.

....What?

 

[BenchPress]

I was actually surprised that Intel launched ultrabooks a year ago with Sandy Bridge and then Ivy Bridge processors. This form factor demands Haswell generation hardware (for its much longer standby time), and better yet Broadwell.

On the other hand it makes some sense to introduce the new form factor early on to work out the issues before targeting the mainstream market. In any case, I'm not the least bit surprised that ultrabooks haven't had much of an impact yet. But it would be stupid to conclude from this that it's a dud like S|A portrays it. Portable computers were once unwieldy and overpriced, but now they outsell desktops. Smart phones were once bricks that cost a fortune and were slow, but now they're light and nimble and everyone wants one.

There is no need for Intel to rush things. They don't have much if any competition. Haswell has all the traits to offer exceptional performance at very low power consumption, and things are only going to get better over time.

 

[OBLAMA2009]

ultrabooks are just an attempt by intel to reset higher prices of notebooks. good luck with that, as if were going to start paying $1000 again for notebooks now that weve been paying 400 for the last decade

 

[ninaholic37]

if they drop any name it should be "atom". everything in that line has been so crappy that that is an extremely tarnished brand name. after using netbooks do you really think anyone is going to trust atom with windows 8?

Yes. The dumb-downed Windows 8 and simple Atom will be a match made in heaven. :awe:

Apparently the Surface can cram an i5 (super ULV?) into 10" form factor. Maybe this will open the door to more options...

 

[Keysplayr]

It was trolls writing the articles.

BTW are you dyslexic?

I don't think he is dyslexic, else it would manifest in other words. And what I'm about to say is a little twisted. He may despise Intel so much that he doesn't even want to give them a search engine hit so he intentionally spells it wrong.
Hey just a guess since he isn't answering several people asking him if he is dyslexic. If he is than I apologize to him.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Nobody buys ultrabooks because most of them totally lack appeal against the MBA...And what chipmaker powers MBAs?

 

[Blitzvogel]

ultrabooks are just an attempt by intel to reset higher prices of notebooks. good luck with that, as if were going to start paying $1000 again for notebooks now that weve been paying 400 for the last decade

T'was my assumption from the beginning. What the PC industry needs is a new paradigm, but not a major increase in price because that automatically turns consumers off unless the product really is a whole new, desirable experience. In order for the Ultrabook idea to succeed, it needs to cover a wider range of configurations so all parts of the market can be catered to. Have a wider range allows buyers to not only choose but see why they might want the higher end and perhaps even higher end from there (dedicated graphics, SSD, etc).

AMD needs to take advantage of Intel's lack of foresight and encourage builders to adopt their APUs.

 

[IntelUser2000]

But they have far too lenient guidelines and are still wholly dependent on the OEMs to make and sell the entire package.

I do agree on the lenient part. It's funny though how from the IHS Suppli report how the manufacturers want even looser specs. But I agree with Chris on this, specs are going to change over time. They probably don't want to drive developers away by making a big change so soon.

Specs are being expanded, as shown here: http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/05/intel-ultrabook-ivy-bridge-requirements.jpg

With Haswell, the S0iX feature is only coming to Ultrabooks.

What NUSNA_Moebius said here is right too:

In order for the Ultrabook idea to succeed, it needs to cover a wider range of configurations so all parts of the market can be catered to.

It's like how Atom covers all the way from Smartphones to 10W using Nettops. Then we have 17W Core chips, going to 95W mainstream and 130W Extreme parts. Soon, we'll have 10W Core chips too. You do have a really thin and light Ultrabook, that goes way below boundaries standard thin and lights have, like the 12mm thick Acer Aspire S7 or the 875g NEC LaVie Z.

And you are wrong about the mSATA caching not affecting price. They are cheaper than SSD version from the same manufacturer. One interesting thing about the caching: It seems later in the Ultrabook revision(before they revealed the brand) that manufacturers wanted more flexibility than just using SSDs. So Intel gave them the choice of having caching with certain performance requirements(like with response times and PCMark Vantage HDD scores).

The main problem for Intel and the platform is the costs. I haven't seen any Ultrabooks being offered with a ULV Core i3,

What are you talking about? It's not common, but the Core i3 models exist.

Few examples:
http://store.vizio.com/ct14a0.html
Lenovo U310 and U410/Asus UX32A: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=core+i3+3217U

 

[IntelUser2000]

And what I'm about to say is a little twisted. He may despise Intel so much that he doesn't even want to give them a search engine hit so he intentionally spells it wrong.

There's a little background around that. Intel actually stands for "INTegrated ELectronics". So that's why you see him saying IntEL or the wrong keyboard stroke Inetl(he actually mentioned what the acronym stood for). Hmm, maybe he is in fact ill in some way as he can't even spell something he made up himself.

which, btw, isn't something that's among the Ultrabook guidelines.

It is in a subtle sense. The $300 million they want to spend isn't a mere marketing fund, but investing money to put into companies that make displays, sensors, batteries, etc. They have a presentation from IDF that says they want to push beyond 2560x1600 resolutions in Notebooks. Of course, that's largely up to manufacturers and the price point they want to reach.

 

[blastingcap]

Here's another analyst's take on ultrabook markets: http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/377281/why-ultrabooks-are-falling-well-short-of-intels-targets

 

[OBLAMA2009]

I do agree on the lenient part. It's funny though how from the IHS Suppli report how the manufacturers want even looser specs. But I agree with Chris on this, specs are going to change over time. They probably don't want to drive developers away by making a big change so soon.

Specs are being expanded, as shown here: http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/05/intel-ultrabook-ivy-bridge-requirements.jpg

With Haswell, the S0iX feature is only coming to Ultrabooks.

What NUSNA_Moebius said here is right too: It's like how Atom covers all the way from Smartphones to 10W using Nettops. Then we have 17W Core chips, going to 95W mainstream and 130W Extreme parts. Soon, we'll have 10W Core chips too. You do have a really thin and light Ultrabook, that goes way below boundaries standard thin and lights have, like the 12mm thick Acer Aspire S7 or the 875g NEC LaVie Z.

And you are wrong about the mSATA caching not affecting price. They are cheaper than SSD version from the same manufacturer. One interesting thing about the caching: It seems later in the Ultrabook revision(before they revealed the brand) that manufacturers wanted more flexibility than just using SSDs. So Intel gave them the choice of having caching with certain performance requirements(like with response times and PCMark Vantage HDD scores).

What are you talking about? It's not common, but the Core i3 models exist.

Few examples:
http://store.vizio.com/ct14a0.html
Lenovo U310 and U410/Asus UX32A: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=core+i3+3217U

ive actually noticed that sem-iultrabook (i3 with non-ssd) prices have fallen to the 599 range

 

[podspi]

For those who either own or have used one in a store, am I the only one who thinks they are a tad too thing for comfortable typing?

I know it sounds a little silly, but I don't like things to be too small. Kind of like how smartphone size is now rebounding from the ultra-small sizes they reached a few years ago. The most comfortable laptop I ever typed on was a 14" laptop with a fullsize keyboard and an oversized battery propping up the back. It got 12+ hours of battery life back in 2007, too (and a convertible tablet!). Only downside is that it weighs about a ton...

I think Ultrabooks (and ultraportables in general) will really explode when we get double-digit hours worth of light use, and 24+ hour 'connected standby'. More than anything else, I think that is what people value once the laptop hits a certain level of portability, and is one of the greatest things about tablets. I NEVER, EVER worry about my tablet's battery life, and it isn't an iPad so you know it isn't great...

 

[kelco]

Every time I see this thread I poke myself to make sure I'm not dreaming.

 

[Bill Brasky]

I just bought a laptop last year (14" i5-2410) so I won't be in the market for a while, but my next laptop will be an ultrabook.

 

[grkM3]

I love my ultrabook and everyone at work loves it also.

Its 3 lbs and made out of metal and looks sexy as hell.I made a thread about it the day I got it.

It does everything a bigger laptop does with better bat life and way lighter and smaller,its exactly what I wanted and this is where intel is headed.a lighter pc that you can easily take on the go.

I got the hp spectre xt with an i7 ivy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8M5ue1phcc

 

[NTMBK]

I doubt they would name it an 'i9' or 'i11', because it will likely be slower than most of their lineup. They'll probably add another brand name, something to fit above the Atom in power usage and performance.

Intel needs to clean up their product lines, Atom, Celeron, Pentium, i3, i5, i7, Xeon. I would personally say drop Pentium, and roll this 'new brand' into Atom, or trash Atom altogether and have some other brand name for ultralow power. They could probably get rid of the Celeron too, but I suppose technically the i3 is just the lowest 'premium range'.

I still wish that they'd just chuck out the "iWhatever" naming- arbitrary numbers mean nothing to the man on the street. Bring on the Pentium 8, that's what I say!

 

[Sephire]

Ultrabooks are great. Very fast performance from a very light machine. Unfortunately the price is what scare Cx away. These past few years Cx are just used to paying $500 for a laptop.

 

[Sephire]

I just bought a laptop last year (14" i5-2410) so I won't be in the market for a while, but my next laptop will be an ultrabook.

I have i7 Dell XPS and I think this will last me at least 3 years or more. I don't see anything in the near future (tech) that will make me upgrade sooner.

 

[pelov]

It is in a subtle sense. The $300 million they want to spend isn't a mere marketing fund, but investing money to put into companies that make displays, sensors, batteries, etc. They have a presentation from IDF that says they want to push beyond 2560x1600 resolutions in Notebooks. Of course, that's largely up to manufacturers and the price point they want to reach.

The point is that it isn't, and we're flooded with crappy displays on overpriced notebooks with no interesting features other than "thin." It's moving towards higher res displays anyway purely because Apple's doing it and if the OEMs want to increase their sales figures they'll have to. Having Intel push that as a standard would only mean following the same trend rather than setting itself apart by offering something different.

For example

I love my ultrabook and everyone at work loves it also.

Its 3 lbs and made out of metal and looks sexy as hell.I made a thread about it the day I got it.

It does everything a bigger laptop does with better bat life and way lighter and smaller,its exactly what I wanted and this is where intel is headed.a lighter pc that you can easily take on the go.

I got the hp spectre xt with an i7 ivy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8M5ue1phcc

For hundreds of dollars less I got an IPS screen, double the battery life, a faster processor, better build quality, equal weight and a better keyboard.

What does that Ultrabook have that my X220 doesn't? I was in the same position as far as buying a laptop went, and nearly picked up an Ultrabook -- I was looking at the Zenbook at the time. I decided against it because at that price I could pick up my current laptop, a 256GB SSD and a Google Nexus 7. What would I be losing? Well, on that awesome display, but that's it. There's no other redeeming feature in that Zenbook that other laptops don't have other than that display. Most Ultrabooks are using crappier TN panels, so it's an even easier choice. Expensive product that offers absolutely nothing special but has a higher price tag? Pass.

Those are chipset features not specific to Ultrabooks, meaning I'll get the same in a regular laptop. That's the entire problem here: Why choose an Ultrabook over a laptop at half the price? Why choose an Ultrabook at an equal price with a laptop if it can't even offer better battery life and lower weight?

-- Just to clarify, those are the current standards. Others that aren't on that slide include the suggested 13.3" size, ~3lbs in weight and the OEM-suggested metallic shell. Intel tried to push through a specially designed plastic that was just as durable but cost less but the OEMs weren't having it and the idea died before it even started.