Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 25th Apr 2008 21:12 UTC
When Asus released its Eee PC, praise was almost universal. People loved the device's size, low price, and the fact it came with Linux appealed to many geeks. Consequently, the device sold rather well, and was a hit for Asus. However, the device had two major shortcomings: its small screen (7" 800x480), and its relatively short battery life. Asus took the critcism to heart, and came up with the Asus Eee PC 900, which has a 9" 1024x600 screen. So, what's the verdict?
Permalink for comment 311585
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:
2005-07-06
For the forseeable future, you'd probably be best off to pick up a refurb. x31 or x40.
Most of the big laptop makers are stubbornly refusing to sell any laptops below a certain price point (and, by extension, profit margin). It seems to be the Apple business model, where products aren't discontinued when they become technically-obsolete - instead, products are discontinued once the profit margin falls to a certain level.
It seems to be largely a holding-action, to try to prevent laptop computers from becoming as "commoditized" as desktop PCs. I suspect it's going to be ultimately futile - there's obviously demand for low-cost laptops. And with companies like Asus stepping up to fill that demand, that's going to eventually/hopefully to force Dell, Acer, HP, Lenovo, et al.
It was starting to feel as the big-name laptop makers were engaging in round-about/accidental price fixing - by way of an unwillingness to compete on price when it comes to laptops (out of fear of jeopardizing the price premium that laptops typically command).
IMO, that's the best thing about the Eee PC: its existence will (hopefully) shake off some of the stagnation that has become the status-quo with laptops.