There might be a lot of companies stating that netbooks are just a fad, and that the whole thing will pass (Sony, Apple), but that isn't stopping several chip companies from putting serious effort into improving the performance of these small netbooks. NVIDIA, AMD, and VIA are all hard at work at improving several aspects of netbook computing.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-01
Better graphics capabilities will be nice I'm sure but that's perhaps not so important in this format. Laptop gaming has always been the poorer cousin of PC gaming, which is in turn the poorer cousin of console gaming and netbooks are at the weak end of laptops.
OK, maybe some people will want to drive a 1080p display with one of these. Certainly video playback is the key function people will want from a netbook video card.
The sort of advances that I think will make more of a difference in the sector this year are the arrival of dual core processors and bigger, faster SSDs.
Member since:2005-07-06
I think we get bigger bank for the buck with faster SSDs rather than more powerful CPUs.
I thought these devices were IO bound already, speeding up the CPUs gives little benefits in that case.
What I really want to see is lower power for the support chips and battery life reaching near triple digits in hours.
Of-course, I say this as a person who want to take one on one week canoe trips.
Any chance we see one with solar cells built-in for recharging?
Member since:2005-07-22
Member since:2006-09-30
Member since:2005-07-22
Member since:2006-03-23
Member since:
2006-09-30
Member since:2005-07-06
That is a good point. I never really played around with the BeOS kernel setting for number of CPUs running. I know the CPU runs cooler when it is in HALT STATE, but I don't know how much power is saved.
As it is, I already wish I could lower the clock rate on my laptop further (it gives the options of 733MHz or 1.0 GHz).
Tunable number or CPUs and/or clock rates would be useful too.
Member since:
2006-03-23
I just don't get why Intel has taken such a hard line stance against allowing the dual-core atoms to be used in OEM netbooks. If power is such a concern, figure out a way to hot-plug a core (maybe based on AC power) to extend battery life. But the extra computing power of a dual core will lead to smoother response and better performance, particularly under high demand tasks (such as encrypting/compressing/transferring files around). Why is it acceptable to waste 6W so my netbook, with a screen resolution well under 1920x1080, can decode 1080p videos? So I can watch a bluray on a 9" screen? What would the bluray drive cost compared to the netbook itself? Why the hell would you even hook a $250 netbook to a $1000+ 30" monitor? All these things boggle my mind, as they are simply IMPRACTICAL.
Netbooks are great - we keep a bunch of them around as mobile SSH terminals to our machines - but they're great because of their battery life, simplicity, and mobility. They weren't meant to be high performance machines and nVidia/Intel/VIA should respect that and FOCUS on LOWERING power while raising or maintaining existing performance. This generation of netbooks = smart engineering. The next generation = smart marketing. Sometimes better does not mean faster...if I want the performance of a laptop I'll buy a bloody laptop!
Edited 2008-12-20 07:21 UTC
Member since:
2005-11-10
Member since:2006-07-30
Member since:
2008-11-16
Member since:2006-02-06
Not Fedora 10, but I just bought an Acer Aspire one which runs Linpus Linux... basically this is a customized version of Fedora 8. And it works really well.
Most distro's have their own seperate wiki-pages for netbooks, for example:
- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EeePc
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Acer_Aspire_One
- http://en.opensuse.org/OpenSUSE_on_the_EeePC
- http://en.opensuse.org/OpenSUSE_on_the_Aspire_One
- http://wiki.eeeuser.com/mandriva_2008.1_eeepc_installation_howto
Edited 2008-12-21 14:07 UTC
Member since:2008-11-16
Member since:
2007-12-19
Member since:
2005-07-06
Having used my netbook for a bit now, I can see some room for improvement.
However, based on the comments above, people are underestimating the best feature of netbooks: the battery life. I get 6 hours of use consistently with my 901 when WiFi is on, or 2 days of suspend, and that opens up so many new opportunities for using a computer. When you combine that with the 2.5 pound weight and the easy suspend, I don't ever have to leave my computer behind or even turn it off. I can take it with me in less than 10 seconds, and I just plug it in when I get home. It feels like I got out of jail.
The coming improvements sound good, particularly the graphics. If you keep the battery life up this would make a great mobile media player - I already use it as such, but it can barely handle 720p output. 1080p output would make hooking it to people's TVs more rewarding.
A faster SSD would be really helpful - I get IO freezes.
A faster or dual CPU would be irrelevant, and could be really bad if it reduced the battery life. My only CPU-bound situation is JavaScript in IE; switching to Chrome solved that better than any CPU upgrade could. You would get more bang for your buck by improving the graphics.
The amount of RAM you have matters a lot since you don't get virtual memory with a SSD. You start to notice how much memory programs use again, and pick programs based on how efficient they are (bye bye, Firefox). More RAM would help, but only if the battery life doesn't suffer.
My netbook was cheap enough that it is replaceable, so next year I will likely get a new one and sell my current one to a friend. As long as I can get the same or better battery life and the same form factor, with some improvements, I'm on the upgrade cycle again.
Member since:
2005-07-06
Ignoring Microsoft's ludicrous "limits" on what max specs a NetBook can have to run XP, why can't a NetBook have a 64-bit dual core mobile-class CPU like virtually all normal laptops do? And why not 2-4GB RAM too, since RAM is dirt cheap? Am I the only person who'd like CPU/RAM specs in a NetBook to be the same as a laptop, albeit in a smaller package?
CPU, RAM and SSD improvements in NetBooks in 2009 would be most welcome, plus some way to get a higher resolution (especially vertically) on 9"/10" screens - 1024x600 that seems to be the norm is a bit painful. Until these things happen, I see little point in getting a NetBook yet.
Member since:2005-07-06
You might want to take a look at refurbished "ultraportables" like the Thinkpad x-series. Right now, the gulf between current netbooks and ultraportables is pretty large - compare the cost/specs of any netbook with a Thinkpad x300 or the MacBook Air.
But ultraportables from one or two generations back seem to fill that gap nicely. E.g., judging from eBay, one can pick up a refurb Thinkpad x60 for $600-700 USD these days.
Member since:2005-07-01
Nice suggestion but those x60s weigh the same as two netbooks and the x300 and Air are basically luxury netbooks, with a luxury price tag - twice as fast for four times the money. OK It's probably closer to four times as fast for four times the money but still not a bargain.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2005-07-08
Member since:
2005-11-10
Member since:2005-07-01
Member since:
2007-07-03
Hopefully with this new graphic capability we would be able to run games on the netbook
Those that want to run business apps on the netbook but found them underpowered might want to use a terminal server to stream the apps
http://www.aikotech.com/thinserver.htm
Member since:
2007-04-23
Like other posters, I can't see graphics power being essential. Sure, playing games once in a while will be nice, but netbooks don't have the right form factor for serious gaming anyway.
What I see more need for is longer battery life and higher screen resolution. 1024x640 is just too little, and I would like a netbook to work for most of a day without recharging. But as long as it can scroll through a PDF document without too much lag, I'll be fine. Web-browsing is i/o limited anyway, so here CPU/graphics card power doesn't matter much.
Member since:
2006-01-03
