Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'CPUs and Overclocking' started by piesquared, Jul 16, 2012.
They just aren't worth the added cost. I've used an Acer Ultrabook and the Macbook Air and while they're nice, there is no way I'd spend that much more just to have a small form factor. The battery life argument is moot since a lot of laptops get good battery life now and cost a lot less than an Ultrabook.
Hear that Anandtech readers? I'm getting rich on your backs!
Buying Intel makes you more attractive to women.
Buying Intel will get you a better job.
There's nothing subliminal about it.
I've read about that also.
It will be interesting to see what direction Intel goes with their Form factor reference spec for Haswell?
Well, the same as they are now probably. Don't force a resolution ;P
Though with higher DPI the images look cleaner, there's the obvious issue of software and OS playing along. This isn't an Ultrabook problem but rather a Windows one. If you just use native resolution then you alleviate any potential image/font clarity screwups but if you've got a small form factor with a high DPI then it becomes incredibly difficult to use due to the small sizes of what's being displayed.
Hands off is the best approach, imo. People can buy whatever they'd like as far as resolution-to-screen-size goes. I'm just hoping that the laptop manufacturers will finally get the hint that paying the extra $15 bucks for a 1080p TN panel on a 15.4" resolution might actually pay off with more units sold. Or if you're at a smaller diagonal size, an IPS panel with lower res if you want to avoid scaling issues.
Uh...how do you think I buy all of my shiny Intel products?
Phynaz, c'mon, don't tell people that Intel wants to make money! It's evil to want to make money, except for when you're an individual going to work to make money. Then it's cool.
Ya its really bad only 500k on ultra books a new line. Intel should close its doors Who knows it likely those cheap books were likely sales intel took from AMD . earnings report this week
Ya I bought 1 for my eldest grandson . Its ok but I with you on this . But my grandson loves his. It plays all the games he loves perfectly
Tablet as the base configuration? (Apparently the Windows 8 touch interface is already geared towards high DPI).
Of course, that still doesn't fix these high DPI issues (you've mentioned and I have read about elsewhere) in legacy OS mode if a high enough res screen is used.
So maybe Intel Core series CPU Tablet + options (various types of Tablet docks, Tablet to Laptop docks, various types of vendor cooling system for cTDP) that allow differentiation from Apple?
P.S. Anand wrote a great Article on the Intel Ivy Bridge Tablet here.
Considering the current flock of IvyBridge ultrabooks don't even seem to be available in Europe, if they are having sales issues, it's not necessarily due to demand.
There's no remedy here, really. Unless you go full blown Metro you won't have proper scaling in your typical desktop interface due to the variety of applications and the sheer volume of apps as well. Even within Metro, though, you'd probably still find some problems.
First off, I absolutely despise win8 and Metro. I think it's atrocious and just doesn't work at all with the desktop. This is rather obvious if you've used it extensively or even for a few minutes (I've used win8 for 2 months or so). It just doesn't work on the desktop and it's quite clearly geared toward tablets with your average desktop as an afterthought.
That said, it should work really well on tablets. The issue MS will have, though, is that keeping x86 legacy costs money. The ULV chips aren't cheap and not easy to integrate into a tablet form (take a look at my issues with Ultrabooks earlier in this thread to see what I mean). Pricing will be too close, and probably more expensive than Apple due to the hardware involved. The margins will be more slim and the surrounding hardware will probably be unimpressive (display resolution, for example, is 1080p on the Surface tablet).
The other problem I see is that it's trying to bully itself into a space that doesn't exist. It's a "hybrid device" that's supposed to be a tablet and a laptop. Unlike regular tablets which fill a void between a smartphone and a laptop and serve a practical purpose (though you can argue about the practicality aspect here as well considering Ultrabooks and their size), a "hybrid device" tries to be a tablet and a laptop and fill a space in the market that I don't see really existing.
If I were to buy a tablet, I'd buy a cheap one that serves its purpose: watch movies, play a stupid game or two and just waste time. Personally, I'm not sure why I'd pay upwards of $1000 for a tablet that's too close in size to a proper laptop.
One of the biggest problems MS has with it's Surface Tablet, is that it is crippled with intel chips and notoriously disastrous 'graphics hardware'. MS got stung hard with Vista and intel's blurry slideshow producing wares, it seems they are destined for the same outcome this time around.
Dunno what this has to do with Intel. If you don't like MS's format, which I agree with you on, it's got hardly anything to do with Intel. If anything Intel is actually pushing to bridge the gap between tablets and laptops by decreasing the overall size of a laptop (see Ultrabooks). The latter approach is the more sensible one, imo.
It's too bad AMD doesn't have a CPU that was good enough for Microsoft to use. Looking at AMD's sales, it looks like they don't have a CPU good enough for nearly anybody to use.
Hopefully at some point, maybe in a few years, the functionality of all these devices will come together in a great form factor at a reasonable price. Maybe something like a laptop with a keyboard but with a display that folds all the way over to make it into a tablet without docking and undocking. I think these may exist now, but are not well developed and expensive.
I have to say though, after having a tablet for a few months, the more I use it, the more frustrated with it I become. Maybe I just cheaped out too much (Acer 7" A100), but it has so many nice features, but none of them really work well. Surf the net, sure, but terrible wi-fi connectivity and the browser hangs up all the time. Lousy battery life. Has GPS, but cant find the satellite half the time, and had to buy Co-pilot live to download maps, because it doesnt have 3G connectivity. Maybe it is good for Skype, I havent tried it, but with as slow as it is for everything else, I cannot imagine it would not lag like crazy.
Anyway, end of rant, but I am not sure if a tablet is a good compromise between a laptop and a smartphone, or a terrible compromise that does nothing as well as the other two in combination would do.
I want one to replace my ION netbook but the GPUs have held me back.
we have to face the facts, the portale gadgets are taking over the market. ipads, ipods, kindles, smart phones etc.
The hate is really strong in this one.
So is the truth, but lets ignore that part hey shintai? lol
Intel's graphics aren't a problem unless you're looking to do gaming or some serious video/graphics work in which case, the Surface doesn't make sense to begin with.
intel's graphics suck in all areas from drivers to software to performance and image quality. Last in all categories, to me that's a serious problem, just like it was for every other generation in 30 years. And what if an unsuspecting consumer picks up one of these and hooks it up to their 1080p TV expecting some decent gaming. I know there are some here who would say, 'who cares about the consumers as long as intel is making a nice profit'.
Maybe someday AMD will have something that sucks as bad as Quicksync.
Yet you did buy a load of their (sucking) stock...