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

[pelov]

No doubt that Ultrabooks aren't where they should be yet.

I know I want the following at least, in any future Ultrabook, and until it is available, then there is no point in buying one.

1. Full sized HDMI out
2. Ethernet Connection
3. Genuine 7+ hours battery life
4. 1.3kg or less total weight on 13.3" model

Well, you can already get all of that and more in an ultraportable like the Toshiba 935 or ThinkPad X220/X230.

That's the dilemma, I think. Even if they add the above features, why would you buy the 17W TDP Ultrabook at the higher price than the X230 or Toshiba 935?

That's what I mean by Intel has to offer something different. If they offer the same stuff you're already getting in non-Ultrabook platforms, what's the point? Where's the sale? I understand Intel wants to sell their stuff at Apple-like margins and reel in the profits, but the fact of the matter is that the person looking for a sexy looking laptop will buy an Apple product no matter what the other OEMs offer, Microsoft included. Unless they're willing to differentiate themselves with actual features and not "Look! Me too!" they're going be in for a rough ride, Intel included. Just because Apple is using Intel CPUs now doesn't mean they'll be using them in the future. If Apple looks to consolidate all of their products into a single OS and ISA and core design, that likely means they'll be going ARM rather than x86. As soon as Intel got whiff of their new in-house ARM core, I'm sure they were pooping their pants.

Thus I think Intel has a lot riding on Ultrabooks because it's essentially their device to combat the approach of tablets and ARM. If they keep screwing it up they're going to be stuck in an unenviable position regardless of what they can offer on x86. It's Intel's version of the tablet with the exception that it flat out sucks...

 

[IntelEnthusiast]

Based on sales of Macbook Air it is clear that there is a market for a thin light weight laptop with extended battery life; that is what the specs for the Ultrabook™ are.
For me, I am not a Mac person so I was looking for a laptop that would fit my usage model. I travel and have gone back to college on top of work; so I was looking for a laptop that gave me great battery life along with light weight and offered the power when I would need it. I ended up buying an Asus UX31 Ultrabook and love it for what it does for me. I have cut 3 lbs. from my carry bag and never had to worry about finding plug for my classes. Not everyone has the same needs in their computer but for me and a lot of other people I know Ultrabooks is the answer.

 

[Phynaz]

300% lower than expectations is a disaster no matter how you hard you dream otherwise.

You didn't answer the question. How well is Lano selling?

 

[SPBHM]

if I wanted anything like an "ultrabook", I would just go with the original one, the macbook air.

 

[NTMBK]

For me, I am not a Mac person so I was looking for a laptop that would fit my usage model.

Why not just buy a Macbook Air and install Windows 7 on it?

 

[pelov]

Based on sales of Macbook Air it is clear that there is a market for a thin light weight laptop with extended battery life; that is what the specs for the Ultrabook™ are.
For me, I am not a Mac person so I was looking for a laptop that would fit my usage model. I travel and have gone back to college on top of work; so I was looking for a laptop that gave me great battery life along with light weight and offered the power when I would need it. I ended up buying an Asus UX31 Ultrabook and love it for what it does for me. I have cut 3 lbs. from my carry bag and never had to worry about finding plug for my classes. Not everyone has the same needs in their computer but for me and a lot of other people I know Ultrabooks is the answer.

Chris, let's cut the marketing jargon and remember this is Anandtech.

How does that Asus Zenbook differ at all from my X220 as far as Ultrabook standards go? Half a lb in weight and half the TDP at twice the price? And that's only for the Zenbook, which has the redeemable quality of an amazing display. You can stick on an amazing IPS display on an ultraportable as well. There is no requirement for IPS displays on Ultrabooks which is why most of them are stuck with horrendous 1366x768 TN panels with piss-poor contrast, brightness and black levels.

For those people that buy Apple because it's sexy and stylish, they'll continue to buy Apple Airs over Ultrabooks. And why shouldn't they? Ultrabooks are just looking to mimic them while on Windows and offer nothing else.

if I wanted anything like an "ultrabook", I would just go with the original one, the macbook air.

That's exactly what's happening. Ultrabooks were Intel's way of changing that, but instead of realizing that the Intel trademark doesn't sell as well as an Apple logo, they ignored it and are trumping on without offering any other standout features.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Well, you can already get all of that and more in an ultraportable like the Toshiba 935 or ThinkPad X220/X230.

That's the dilemma, I think. Even if they add the above features, why would you buy the 17W TDP Ultrabook at the higher price than the X230 or Toshiba 935?

Wow, that Toshiba 935 is almost perfect, whilst those ThinkPad's lacked HDMI and were too heavy.

What I also want is to be able to rest it on my chest when I'm in bed and not worry about blocking air vents.

That is why I hope a future fanless Haswell based Ultrabook will meet my needs.

I also want a 1080p screen.

 

[pelov]

Wow, that Toshiba 935 is almost perfect.

What I also want is to be able to rest it on my chest when I'm in bed and not worry about blocking air vents.

That is why I hope a future fanless Haswell based Ultrabook will meet my needs.

I also want a 1080p screen.

Yea, it was a toss up between the X220 and the Toshiba for me, but the 9-cell battery and IPS screen won me over. I'm really glad too, as it's just an incredible machine in an unbelievably small and light package. Hell, if I opted to buy the i7 model I could have set up an external GPU with an expresscard and dumped my desktop altogether (hint hint, Chris. As laptops outsell desktops by nearly 4-to-1, things like external GPU setups will be a pretty great feature to have)

With the issues windows has with DPI scaling and blurry text and images, I don't see the point of using a high res display at 12.5" diagonal. The text is just big enough to see and if it were any smaller I'd be struggling. If you're increasing DPI you're not gaining any real estate anyway, other than a more fine-grained and detailed image but that comes at the cost of potential software issues and browsing headaches. Frankly, I'd avoid the high-res displays on a screen this small until Microsoft gets their ship in order. Don't look to Win8 to fix that either, as the recent Techreport article using Chris' Zenbook showed that the same scaling problems still persist on the RTM version of win8. Way to go, Microsoft. They couldn't even get their own browser to work properly

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Based on sales of Macbook Air it is clear that there is a market for a thin light weight laptop with extended battery life; that is what the specs for the Ultrabook™ are.
For me, I am not a Mac person so I was looking for a laptop that would fit my usage model. I travel and have gone back to college on top of work; so I was looking for a laptop that gave me great battery life along with light weight and offered the power when I would need it. I ended up buying an Asus UX31 Ultrabook and love it for what it does for me. I have cut 3 lbs. from my carry bag and never had to worry about finding plug for my classes. Not everyone has the same needs in their computer but for me and a lot of other people I know Ultrabooks is the answer.

Yeah, but the ''extended'' battery life really isn't that ''extended''. A decent Sandy/Ivy Bridge laptop can get 5 hours with WiFi browsing, and an Ultrabook gives you two hours over that. Not too bad, but you guys could do better. How about 10-12 hours instead of 7? The only way you'd get that is by lowering idle power consumption.

 

[kelco]

This is troll bait, I cant tell from all the bait.

 

[pelov]

Yeah, but the ''extended'' battery life really isn't that ''extended''. A decent Sandy/Ivy Bridge laptop can get 5 hours with WiFi browsing, and an Ultrabook gives you two hours over that. Not too bad, but you guys could do better. How about 10 hours instead of 7? The only way you'd get that is by lowering idle power consumption.

Actually, the standard 6-cells available in ultraportables are generally at 62Whr, meaning they're actually much larger than an Ultrabook battery (which is actually a Lithium-ion Polymer battery that costs more as well and requires more care as to how you use them). A regular 35W laptop will get better battery life because the battery is generally larger, but given an equivalent battery the difference would be negligible because most of the power consumption has little to do with the CPU's TDP but rather all the other parts of a standard laptop, the screen being the biggest culprit.

If you want an actual portable laptop that offers more at a great price then buy this
http://www.mobiletechreview.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Number=43454
Unlike an Ultrabook, it offers roughly the same weight (and even lighter than most Ultrabooks), a better display (minus 2-3 Ultrabooks), way better keyboard, better battery life, all the ports you need AND more processing power.

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

I hate SemiAccurate too, so here's an Xbit article regarding the same issue
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile...books_Set_to_Be_Shipped_in_2012_Analysts.html

“So far, the PC industry has failed to create the kind of buzz and excitement among consumers that is required to propel ultrabooks into the mainstream. This is especially a problem amid all the hype surrounding media tablets and smartphones. When combined with other factors, including prohibitively high pricing, this means that ultrabook sales will not meet expectations in 2012,” said Craig Stice, senior principal analyst for compute platforms at IHS.

Even so, challenges stemming from the nebulous marketing and unappealing price surrounding the ultrabook can be overcome, IHS predicts, paving the way for shipments to rise by more than 300% in 2013. Growth is also expected to continue for the foreseeable future, with shipments expanding to 95 million units by 2016. This will drive long-term growth for devices used in ultrabooks, including motion sensors.

Unfortunately, I believe those estimates are far too high. Adding motion sensors isn't going to bring in anyone buying an Apple Air nor will it sway those who own tablets which have already had the feature since they've been introduced. If the prices go up, which looks likely, that's going to impact sales even further and not in a good way.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Actually, the standard 6-cells available in ultraportables are generally at 62Whr, meaning they're actually much larger than an Ultrabook battery (which is actually a Lithium-ion Polymer battery that costs more as well and requires more care as to how you use them). A regular 35W laptop will get better battery life because the battery is generally larger, but given an equivalent battery the difference would be negligible because most of the power consumption has little to do with the CPU's TDP but rather all the other parts of a standard laptop, the screen being the biggest culprit.

If you want an actual portable laptop that offers more at a great price then buy this
http://www.mobiletechreview.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Number=43454
Unlike an Ultrabook, it offers roughly the same weight (and even lighter than most Ultrabooks), a better display (minus 2-3 Ultrabooks), way better keyboard, better battery life, all the ports you need AND more processing power.

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

Yeah, the ThinkPad X200 series has always been great. I'm still doing pretty good with the $290 deal I got on my Dell. At least the CPU lets me multi-task without slowdowns unlike my mom's X120e with an AMD E-350 and after a $100 upgrade for a 128GB SSD and an additional 2GB of RAM it flies.

The display is another culprit when it comes to battery life, true, but you also have to take into account many Ultrabooks use IPS panel displays, which do require more power than a TN. I think the difference in normal use between ULV ans Standard is only around 1-2W, because comparing my two laptops the difference was that the Dell consumes 11W and the Lenovo 12W when web browsing/email.

 

[Ferzerp]

This is troll bait, I cant tell from all the bait.

And from seeing quite a few troll baits in your time?

 

[pelov]

The display is another culprit when it comes to battery life, true, but you also have to take into account many Ultrabooks use IPS panel displays, which do require more power than a TN.

While you're right about everything else, most Ultrabooks are using crappy standard 1366x768 TN panels with LED backlights. There's only a select few Ultrabooks which use an IPS display, the high end Zenbooks being the most notable. Samsung uses a different panel technology that they developed called PLS but only for their 9-series models. Every other Ultrabook uses the standard TN panel.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

See, I just don't get it.

When "normal" laptops are in the 4-5 pound range, is paying a premium and taking a performance hit to get a 3 pound ultrabook really that important?

I mean, what are you people's bones made out of, styrofoam?

And a 14 hour battery life? I mean, okay, I wish my battery lasted a little longer. (2 hours is lame) but there's diminishing returns and practical limits to need. The last time I was outdoors for more than two hours, I was camping, and indoors we have these things called power outlets. (If you're using a computer for extended periods, the ergonomic benefits of a proper desk and work area, avoiding RSI, etc., are important.)

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

While you're right about everything else, most Ultrabooks are using crappy standard 1366x768 TN panels with LED backlights. There's only a select few Ultrabooks which use an IPS display, the high end Zenbooks being the most notable. Samsung uses a different panel technology that they developed called PLS but only for their 9-series models. Every other Ultrabook uses the standard TN panel.

Really? :|

For $1000 I'd expect a lot better. For $600-650 a display of that type is justifiable. The platform is just too pricy for what it is.

Performance, build quality and size are good, but battery life is okay, displays are (mostly) crap, and connectivity is crap. The only one that seems to get everything right is the X220/X230, with the IPS panel option of course. It even costs less.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

See, I just don't get it.

When "normal" laptops are in the 4-5 pound range, is paying a premium and taking a performance hit to get a 3 pound ultrabook really that important?

I mean, what are you people's bones made out of, styrofoam?

And a 14 hour battery life? I mean, okay, I wish my battery lasted a little longer. (2 hours is lame) but there's diminishing returns and practical limits to need. The last time I was outdoors for more than two hours, I was camping, and indoors we have these things called power outlets. (If you're using a computer for extended periods, the ergonomic benefits of a proper desk and work area, avoiding RSI, etc., are important.)

Say that when you need to carry other things with you.

And battery life is important so you don't need to carry the power adapter with you on the first place.

 

[Rio Rebel]

I doubt most Ultrabooks will be adding ethernet connections. Most people are satisfied with wireless, and for those who aren't they can always get an ethernet to USB pretty cheap.

 

[pelov]

Personally speaking, I use my laptop away from the socket about 8 hours a workday, plus if I'm doing a little bit of work on the side. Having 10+ hours is an essential requirement for me. I had a Toshiba laptop that weighed 5.4lbs +1lb for the charger that I had to carry, and I can tell you there's a noticeable difference when carrying my X220 without the charger (because now I don't need it with the awesome battery life). 3lbs might not seem like a big difference, but it's considerably lighter and easier on my back over the course of a 10+ hour, of which 2 hours is dedicated to commute in public transportation. If the difference were only a lb or so it would be negligible, but it's not.

Considering there's a huge selection of laptops that weigh the same as Ultrabooks of the same size, the Ultrabooks don't offer anything with respect to weight savings other than the Air, Zenbook or Portege 935/835 which have only a fraction of a lb of savings compared to this X220. So while Chris may try to weave his way around that with marketing BS, the fact is Ultrabooks aren't any lighter than their 35W cousins. So yes, Dave, unless the weight savings are significant it makes no difference. But because they're so close to already-light alternatives, there is no significant weight saving if any weight saving at all.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

As far as I'm concerned, the whole "Ultrabook" fad only serves as an illustration of why the whole "Apple philosophy" should not be allowed to become the dominant model of thinking in the computer industry.

The computer as we know it has permeated our lives precisely because it was infinitely upgradeable and was based - as much as possible - on interchangeable formats, standards etc.

An Ultrabook is an evolutionary dead-end. Most of these don't even accept a RAM upgrade. Aside from the pretty face and razor-thin edges, they have nothing to offer than any regular machine won't be able to do better.

Death to Ultrabooks!

 

[kelco]

Love the ultrabook, best thing ever to happen in the industry.

AMD should copy them, as Intel copied Apple, and the circle of copying shall be complete.

 

[CHADBOGA]

See, I just don't get it.

When "normal" laptops are in the 4-5 pound range, is paying a premium and taking a performance hit to get a 3 pound ultrabook really that important?

If you want it rest on your chest in bed, then yes.

Otherwise it wouldn't matter so much to me.

 

[podspi]

Hmmm, interesting. Intel going to bring out a Core i9? Maybe a Core i11, so they have a Bigger Number than AMD's A10? (We all know that's the reason AMD went with A4,6,8 in the first place- bigger numbers = more sales. Sigh.)

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'.

Well, certain drawbacks were always there. For example, price was always too high for what it offered. Furthermore, the battery life, too, wasn't that great. 7 hours? I get double that with only half a pound in added weight with a 35W CPU Then there's the poor keyboards due to lack of feedback, the constant whirling of the fan due to the thin intake/exhausts, the idiotic choice of using aluminum on the bottom panel, transferring heat to your crotch and killing sperm like only a MacBook Pro can.

Had Intel came out with the Ultrabook and offered the wireless charging they planning to implement in the next generation or two then that would have raised an eyebrow. As they stand, it's just thinner and that's the only benefit. I'm not at all surprised the sales figures are poor.

I think from Intel's prospective the Ultrabook makes sense. They're essentially trying to build an OEM-agnostic platform brand name for themselves. For consumers, I don't think the Ultrabook initiative adds anything that wasn't already available before, either in the form of the Macbook Air, or other models (The Thinkpad X220 and HP DM1z are the two that come to my mind, but I am sure there are others).

As others have said in this thread, the main issue I see for ultrabooks are the non-upgradability, proprietary parts, and non-removable batteries. These pretty much make Ultrabooks a non-starter for me over more traditional models which are only slightly larger. As an aside, I feel many Ultrabooks are too think to type on for any extended period of time anyway, so being slightly thicker isn't too big a deal.


If you are going to give up the ability to open the machine up to fix it, and give up the ability to swap batteries, why not go for something like the Microsoft Surface, or better yet an x86 dockable tablet?

 

[SPBHM]

As far as I'm concerned, the whole "Ultrabook" fad only serves as an illustration of why the whole "Apple philosophy" should not be allowed to become the dominant model of thinking in the computer industry.

The computer as we know it has permeated our lives precisely because it was infinitely upgradeable and was based - as much as possible - on interchangeable formats, standards etc.

An Ultrabook is an evolutionary dead-end. Most of these don't even accept a RAM upgrade. Aside from the pretty face and razor-thin edges, they have nothing to offer than any regular machine won't be able to do better.

Death to Ultrabooks!

I'm OK with Apple, as long as we have worthy alternatives, which is not the case with the Ultrabooks,
they need to offer more in some way, be it a MUCH lower price (it's normally how clones are sold)... or something else, but at the moment I'm not seeing any of that...

but to be honest, I would probably never buy an Ultrabook or macbook air, BUT if I wanted anything like that, as I said, I would go with the macbook air...

 

[CHADBOGA]

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'.

Whilst the Atom processors to date have been underwhelming(something that will be fixed with the new architecture being designed for 22nm), it is by far my favourite processor range name from Intel, as it accurately designates that this is a very small CPU.

I see the Pentium as the odd man out, as it was once a Premium range name, so what's the point of it hanging around?

I also see all of Intel's sub i3 processors as being Celerons(Atom excluded) anyway, so yeah, axe Pentium.

As others have said in this thread, the main issue I see for ultrabooks are the non-upgradability, proprietary parts, and non-removable batteries. These pretty much make Ultrabooks a non-starter for me over more traditional models which are only slightly larger.

Obviously I would prefer upgradeability, especially if the battery is going to need replacing, but I see my desktop as being the primary computing device that I need to worry about upgradeability on.

If you are going to give up the ability to open the machine up to fix it, and give up the ability to swap batteries, why not go for something like the Microsoft Surface, or better yet an x86 dockable tablet?

With all the innovation currently going on in portable, maybe that is what a lot of people(myself included) will eventually do at some point.