Asus 1005HA - Sleakest, cheapest model yet!

[Zephik]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2034940772%2050001315&bop=And&ActiveSearchResult=True&CompareItemList=N82E16834220584%2CN82E16834220553% 2CN82E16834220551

As low as $300! Pretty nice. They don't come much cheaper than that and if they do, they aren't as nice or as sexy!

[Kayin]

No Linux model? Fail, hard. Don't wanna pay for another crappy Windoze license.

[OvRiDe]

No Linux model? Fail, hard. Don't wanna pay for another crappy Windoze license.

Agreed! I would be all over that if it were a linux model for say around 259 bucks! Still 299 is pretty decent for its specs.

[Zephik]

No Linux model? Fail, hard. Don't wanna pay for another crappy Windoze license.

Linux doesn't sell well, people want Windows. However, being as Linux is free, you could always just install it.

As for having to pay for Windows... these netbooks are already cheaper than most netbooks out there and you really aren't paying that much for the windows license. I think I read somewhere that its like $17 for Windows instead of Ubuntu. If someone can provide a link with correct information that'd be great.

These (http://www.amazon.com/8%252e9%2522-Netbook-Computer-Linux-White/dp/B001E1J1R2/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1251060686&sr=8-2) are pretty much the only Linux models out there as far as I know. So yea, its cheaper, but the specs aren't the same so its not even a fair comparison. So lets compare a Dell with Windows and the same Dell with Ubuntu to see what the real difference is.

Dell Mini 10 w/ Ubuntu = $349

Dell Mini 10 w/ Windows = $349

That's the same with any model you choose. The Asus 1005HA is a better deal compared to any of the Dell Mini's, so by going with Asus you're saving money anyways.

The point I'm trying to get at is that you're just being cheap. Do you remember when netbooks were costing consumers more around the $400 range? That wasn't that long ago. Now you can get a great Netbook for $300-$330 and they're much better than what they used to be. These things could be $200 and you'd still complain "because you don't want to pay for windoze".

A Linux Netbook will usually cost the same as a Windows Netbook. I'd imagine thats because even though a company like, say, Dell uses Ubuntu, that doesn't mean it doesn't cost them anything. Its free in that they don't have to pay for a license. But what about support? They do provide support for people who buy their Ubuntu systems and that costs. Probably why Ubuntu and Windows netbooks are the same price.

So here is an interesting question: You have a company with two netbooks that are identical except one has windows and the other has linux. Do they cost the same or is one cheaper than the other? I ask because I think the whole argument that linux costs less than windows isn't true. From what I've seen, they cost exactly the same. Its free for you to install and use it, however I don't think its free for them to offer and support it aside from license cost which is free because there aren't any license with ubuntu or most linux flavors.

Another good question would be how much are we actually paying for windows instead of linux?

Linux was cheaper back in 2007/2008, by about $50, but that was when it was first being introduced into the market. I think that they have since then realized that it does in fact cost them which is why they're the same priced these days.

[luciusad2004]

I wonder if these large corporations make any "donations" to open source projects when they decide to bundle them on their machines.

On one hand I think they should, but on the other hand then it wouldn't be cheaper than windows.

[Zephik]

I've heard that Dell helps out in Ubuntu support since they use it on their machines, but other than that I haven't heard of any other kind of "donation". But that's still a pretty good "donation" in any case.

[luciusad2004]

I've heard that Dell helps out in Ubuntu support since they use it on their machines, but other than that I haven't heard of any other kind of "donation". But that's still a pretty good "donation" in any case.

I think thats a great donation. Anything that helps users get the operating system working on their own machine is one of the best things they could give and seems very in the "spirit" of open source.

[x88x]

I had a change to play around with one of these this weekend at a friend's house. They're really a lot slicker and overall just feel better made than the previous generations.

[Kayin]

For me, it's less about being cheap and more about don't want to give MS money.

My main PC is basically a no holds barred monster. I have no issue with price if it gives me what I want. What I DO NOT want, though, is my money going to a company who has still not made the changes I see as necessary to win me back from Linux. That said, Win7 RTM is amazing, but there's lots of stuff I drop into Ubuntu for, and one is safe browsing, as well as downloading installers and such, as without fail my NICs function twice as fast in Linux as in Windows-because Linux doesn't call home. I burn my discs in it, I watch a fair bit of media in it, I even do some gaming in it (testing my RPG for wine compatibility.)

To me, I do not want to reward design decisions I regard as assheaded. Until I have a truly modular OS (and yes, I DID remove IE8 from Win7) from microsoft, I don't really wanna throw mass quantities (or any quantity, truth told) of money at them.

Is Microsoft the devil? Not in my eyes, even though there are some straight shady deals. It simply is not doing what I ask of it. When I want to game, I reboot into windows. I share partitions, so everything I have can be seen by both. I still use both, but I prefer Linux. And there is why I'd rather not have a Windows license with it-not to mention old-ass XP... Let it die, folks. If you think there's nothing better, you haven't sat down with 7 long enough.

[x88x]

Yeah, I agree partially. I don't really agree with all of MS' business practices, but I've kinda just accepted it as a necessary evil that if I buy a net/notebook, it'll probably have money going to MS. I might very well wipe the drive as soon as I get it, but there's not really a whole lot I can do about it that would be worth my time (there was one guy who sued Dell for the cost of a Windows license because he wouldn't accept the EULA or something, but really, the $20 or whatever that they paid for it really just isn't worth the time and effort imo).

The reason a bunch of stuff still has XP instead of 7 (well, besides the obvious, that 7 hasn't gone gold yet) is because XP is a 'known quantity'. People know what it is and they know how to use it. Unfortunately, it (or rather, MS' arbitrary requirements for an XP license now) is the reason why netbook hardware has been so stagnant the last year or so. You notice that almost every netbook has the same 1.6Ghz Atom proc and 2GB RAM limit? That's because of MS' performance/configuration requirements to get an XP license. That's why the Dell Mini12 had Vista; there's a <=10" screen requirement to get an XP license. I'm really hoping that 7 and Intel's new SoaC tech will breathe some new life into netbooks, but I suppose time will tell.

[Airbozo]

These things are neat and all, but I feel they are going in the opposite direction.

For the last decade or so, most laptops have been getting bigger and bigger screens. I hated my old 14" screen on my laptop and would now never buy anything smaller than 17". I was looking at all the netbook style systems and just could not fathom why anyone would pay for a screen that small.

When they come out with the device that beams the display right into your eyes, then I don't care how small the computer gets. So long as I can still fat thumb the keys, I will be ok.

[Zephik]

Solution: Stretchable screens. :p

[Airbozo]

Solution: Stretchable screens. :p

This would be a great idea.

Similar to this but color and bigger...
http://www.mobilecatcher.blogspot.com/2007/02/rollable-lcd-screen-from-polymer-vision.html



Just for my own curiosity, for those of you that own a netbook and those of your interested in one, why?

This is not a dis or anything. I realize my last post sounded a little harsh and I am curious why these would be useful over a laptop. Is the size of the screen an issue? How about the keyboard? Is it large enough for people with big hands to use?

I guess I am just a visual person and the more visual (and bigger) the better...

[Zephik]

Ultra-portability, great price's, great battery life. Size doesn't make much of a difference for me personally, as I'm used to using my iPod Touch to browse the web, take notes, play games, etc etc. If I need a bigger screen, I'll just connect the netbook up to a desktop screen. Computing performance isn't a concern for me as I have my desktop which has plenty of power for what I need.

But I won't lie. If I could afford this baby (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0028ACYKE/sr=8-1/qid=1251245944/ref=noref?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1251245944&sr=8-1), I'd never look back at netbooks again. Its not AS portable and the battery isn't AS great, but c'mon, 3 inches isn't THAT much more and 4 hours is still pretty good. For $100 more you can get one with 8 hours of battery life which doubles it and it also comes with a higher quality keyboard apparently. Still not as good as the 7-12 hour battery life that some netbooks offer though. But good enough and especially if you get the upgraded model with the larger battery. Its just not worth the price say compared to a netbook. But damn it does look cool. XD

(The 1005HA gets 8.5 hours of battery life @ $330)

[x88x]

@Airbozo:
Personally, I see a netbook as a small system that I could easily carry around and take out anywhere. It doesn't need to be powerful, that's what my desktop's for. I have bee rather disappointed in the screen resolutions offered in netbooks, but hey, it's a netbook, I'm not gonna be doing a lot of stuff on it that really needs much screen real estate. Honestly, if/when I get one, the things it will be used most for are random web-browsing, flash/silverlight, and as an SSH terminal.

As for keyboard sizes, it depends on the model. I know the Eee 1005 line has a keyboard 92% the size of a standard laptop, so I would imagine that it would be fine for people with larger hands. Personally, none of the keyboards seem really small to me, but that's because my Libretto 110ct was my primary laptop for a good long while:
http://i3.ebayimg.com/01/i/04/d2/dd/d8_1_sbl.JPG
Great little system for its time, but such a tiiiny keyboard :D It was really funny watching people trying to type on it.

[luciusad2004]

I think I was mostly attracted by the price. It's a fully capable web machine and I can take it anywhere. Granted, given the money I would probably choose a larger machine with more screen space and more power, but for what I payed this machine works fine. I don't really have a problem working with the small screen though I find that its Just a tad to small for some of the larger websites. 1024 x 700 doesn't really cut it anymore on the internet. However It has no problem pushing my 1680 x 1050 monitor if I absolutely need the screen real estate. For a lot of people they don't need monster laptops and a netbook suits them perfectly. In my opinion it all really comes down to whether or not you can deal with the screen and keyboard size.

I'm not sure how much longer this low resolution will be sufficient as with the growing popularity of HD resolutions I can see 1024 x 700 quickly becoming to small to view most content in the next couple years.