Personally I like real newspapers, I even subscribe to one (not the NYT) that gets shoved through my door every 4am.
But would I read a newspaper on line? Would I heck. I even have access to the online version of my newspaper (beautifully rendered in Adobe AIR, natch) and I've looked at it. Once.
Get the message, guys. The "shall we do the internet thing?" was ten years ago. I'm as nostalgic as anyone for the days of rumbling printing presses and ink on your hands. But in evolutionary terms, the temperature's dropping, there are asteroids falling everywhere and you guys are the dinosaurs. The fact that we're talking about this in a comment section on an online blog which isn't the NYT (and there ain't no comment facility on the original page) just underlines the painful reality.
So long, NYT, I tried to read you whenever I was in New York, because (so I assumed) that's what New Yorkers do. I just don't read it online.
@thatsmrpotatohead2U: You're not the only one who still likes paper newspapers - thank God at least college drivel papers will still be printed on pulp for some time more to come it seems. And you know why? Limited production. Just because digital cameras absolutely destroyed film cameras in the consumer marketplace doesn't mean that there's no market for film; similarly, so long as there is pulp to print on there will be a market for paper newspapers.
I can understand subsidizing the Kindle, for instance, since that offers a more convenient way of reading NYT content in places where a laptop wouldn't make sense (subway, breakfast table, park) but a netbook just seems silly and invites obvious comparisons to just browsing the content on the web.
I'm lost as to what I'd be missing out on with the NYT. I can read all of Krugman's hack rants, Brooks's pontificating, and Maureen Dowd's drivel without paying a dime. Why else would I want to open the Times again?
You can get the Go for $350 from amazon and newegg right now. Plus, the small print in the add states it comes with a 4-cell battery. Through normal retailers the US Go comes with a 6-cell. Mistake? or cost cutting?
looks like it comes with vista (WTF?) but i'd just throw TinyXP on anyways.
bottom line: you can totally score a much better laptop with not too much more heft for not too much more money, and i'm sure you could pick up something with an AMD for even cheaper.
@nutbastard: It's true, you can configure one. But as I said in another thread, walk into, say, a Best Buy and these machines are basically non-existent.
@nutbastard: 14 inch and 720p display but what are the graphics capabilities? Crap I am sure.
Bottom line: It does not take much processor to run office, facebook and the other crap most people do. And instead of a huge notebook I can carry a much lighter and smaller unit with tremendous battery life.
And every week best buy and every other retailer has a deal for a $399 Notebook.
when my 5 year old inspiron with a palty 512mb of ram and a 1.6ghz pentium m can run fullscreen HD video at 1920 x 1280, i tend to believe that a dual core @ 2.1ghz can handle output at 720 just fine, even if it is with integrated graphics.
the other part is, my laptop is my primary computer - i dont own a desktop, so whatever i eventually upgrade to needs all teh bells and whistles.
i know optical media is kind of dying, but when your machine gets gorked and needs to be doctored up a bit, you can't always count on being able to boot over USB.
@Demonbird: Look, Steve Jobs says it is impossible to sell a computer for less than $500 that does not suck. So, buy a netbook for $500 if you want a computer that does not suck.
[www.dell.com]
They're there, but they're not stock. You can still get a C2Duo as a BTO option. But don't let the Pentium name scare you - they've got half the L2 cache, but they're Core2 parts and a wicked good value.
I HAVE an Atom/ION netbook, and I would GLADLY trade it for a Core2 Duo with the same size and battery life.
$400 was a good price point for netbooks, but I don't think they'll sell at $500, when you can a full-size laptop for the same price.
I understand that people like small and portable, but the Eee's promise was originally a $200 laptop. I was excited because of the price, not because it was small or portable. Whoever put a $500 price tag on this thing forgot that he's directly competing with Toshibas that have a 15" screen and twice the CPU for the same money... and if I had to make that choice, I'd go for the bigger, more capable machine.
11/27/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
But would I read a newspaper on line? Would I heck. I even have access to the online version of my newspaper (beautifully rendered in Adobe AIR, natch) and I've looked at it. Once.
Get the message, guys. The "shall we do the internet thing?" was ten years ago. I'm as nostalgic as anyone for the days of rumbling printing presses and ink on your hands. But in evolutionary terms, the temperature's dropping, there are asteroids falling everywhere and you guys are the dinosaurs. The fact that we're talking about this in a comment section on an online blog which isn't the NYT (and there ain't no comment facility on the original page) just underlines the painful reality.
So long, NYT, I tried to read you whenever I was in New York, because (so I assumed) that's what New Yorkers do. I just don't read it online.
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
11/25/09
In fact, i'm not going to even bother with the Samsung Go, and just use my current computer.
11/19/09
14" 720p display, 250GB, 2GB, intel wireless n, T4300 proc, 9 cell battery:
$534
looks like it comes with vista (WTF?) but i'd just throw TinyXP on anyways.
bottom line: you can totally score a much better laptop with not too much more heft for not too much more money, and i'm sure you could pick up something with an AMD for even cheaper.
11/19/09
11/19/09
Bottom line: It does not take much processor to run office, facebook and the other crap most people do. And instead of a huge notebook I can carry a much lighter and smaller unit with tremendous battery life.
And every week best buy and every other retailer has a deal for a $399 Notebook.
[www.bestbuy.com]
11/19/09
when my 5 year old inspiron with a palty 512mb of ram and a 1.6ghz pentium m can run fullscreen HD video at 1920 x 1280, i tend to believe that a dual core @ 2.1ghz can handle output at 720 just fine, even if it is with integrated graphics.
the other part is, my laptop is my primary computer - i dont own a desktop, so whatever i eventually upgrade to needs all teh bells and whistles.
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
11/19/09
lol
But... I bought a netbook for $380 that's a good netbook, it doesn't suck. It doesn't... Can Steve Jobs... be wrong?
Oh my lord...
#speakup
11/19/09
"I mean, I'm not arguing this is probably the most promising netbook of all time."
Kanye approves.
11/19/09
11/19/09
judging purely from the available pictures and a bit of googling: no.
11/19/09
They're there, but they're not stock. You can still get a C2Duo as a BTO option. But don't let the Pentium name scare you - they've got half the L2 cache, but they're Core2 parts and a wicked good value.
11/19/09
$400 was a good price point for netbooks, but I don't think they'll sell at $500, when you can a full-size laptop for the same price.
I understand that people like small and portable, but the Eee's promise was originally a $200 laptop. I was excited because of the price, not because it was small or portable. Whoever put a $500 price tag on this thing forgot that he's directly competing with Toshibas that have a 15" screen and twice the CPU for the same money... and if I had to make that choice, I'd go for the bigger, more capable machine.
11/19/09