2005 ASUS Notebooks

As mentioned in the other thread by Underpantman, ASUS will be releasing the new W3 14.1" series. In addition, the following models will also be on offer, including an updated version of the elegant W1 series.

1. W1Nb notebook: first Notebook with digital TV tuner

The W1Nb comes with the first digital TV-tuner and ergonomic, high-resolution wide-screen WSXGA+ LCD display, wireless access 54MB/s, subwoofer speaker, ultra-slim credit card-size remote control for convenient operation, and innovative ID designs that are aesthetically and ergonomically superior.

2. W5 notebook: 12.1" wide-screen notebook

The W5 comes equipped with a 12.1 inch wide screen, built-in 1.3Mega Pixels High-Quantity CMOS Camera and built-in Blue-tooth. The elegant design also treated to be a collection of luxury.

 

tv tuner in a notebook??? this sounds interesting!
i dont need one, but for some people this may be a realy huge plus.

personaly i dont find wide screen usefull but again this is very important for some people.

i have a desktop computer for both watching tv and dvd. what i want from a notebook is just beeing light and small

 

Yes, the W1Na already had an analog tv tuner. The W1Nb is purely an update for those countries with digital TV. The W5 seems interesting though.

 

widescreens aren't all that necessary
but its like a 'fad' in notebooks.
well, maybe not a fad, but more for the pimp factor..

i must admit tho, it does look cooler wider.

-nathan

 

I think that they are as much a fad as widescreen tv's. I don't have a lot of room and I can't afford the space to have a tv and computer, thus a wide-screen notebook serves as both. Its great for watching DVDs etc. Also I do alot of typing and photoshop, web design, with widescreen I have room for all the tool bars etc which makes working so much easier. So personally I think widescreen is the way of the future, and after having widescreen I doubt I will ever go back.
a


ASUS M6Ne 15.4" WSXGA 1.7 PM ATI9700 80Gb HDD 1Gb RAM

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by Underpantman

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by fernandomartins

 

Thanks Flaxx, you said what I ment to say it but I did a crap job of it.
Great post, clearly show that widescreens have a place in the notebook world. In fact I think in a year or two the majority of notebooks will be widescreen in shape, it just make more sense to me.
My WSXGA screen is great for the 2 window side by side, some thing I couldn't do on a standard 15" SXGA screen as easily, and there IS more room for tool bars dispite what fernandomartins may think...a whole 280 pixels to be exact. And don't get me started on DVDs its a no brainer that widescreen is better for those.
a


ASUS M6Ne 15.4" WSXGA 1.7 PM ATI9700 80Gb HDD 1Gb RAM

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by flaxx

You're comparing apples and oranges here buddy. If you want to compare stricly width in pixels or height in pixels then get a widescreen with the same value. If you liked 1280x1024 (SXGA), then your 1440x900 (WXGA+) screen would fit just as many buttons. You don't have to have your toolbars all ontop of one another (then u end up with these huge gaps on the right side) but rather put them next to each other ;-).

[...]
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

I really can't see the reason why one shouldn't or couldn't compare 4:3 screens with 16:9 screens.

First, what I meant is that long before widescreen, we had enough pixels (talking width) to put toolbars or two pages side by side, because we had 1400x1050 (I won't go into 1600x1200 because in 15" screens that's just way too much).

Of course 1280x800 (or it's 16:9 cousin, 1280x768) is better than 1024x768, you just have to count the pixels... it's a no brainer. what I meant to say to Underpantman is that is not the widescreen (either 16:10 or 16:9 ratio) that's giving him more space for toolbars, but the fact that he has 1280 pixels (256 pixels more) instead of the 1024 he - probably - was used to. and that is a completely different thing.

And you know why I insist on this? because more width is great, but, for work on a computer, and not movies, height is, AT LEAST, just as important, and in 1280x800 (the most popular 16:10 resolution in notebooks nowadays), you only get more 32 pixels in height when compared to the previous most popular resolution, 1024x768. Give me any day of the week 1280x1024 over any 1280x800 screen, for I need HEIGHT as well as width for all kind of work: spreadsheets, text, programming, digital imaging, internet - you name it!

And now you tell me "simple, then choose 1680x1050" - it's not simple, or a good choice, because things just get too bloody tiny at that resolution in a 15" screen, it's like 1400x1050 on a 14" - things do get way too small - AND, if I could bear things so tiny as those, I'd rather have 1600x1200!!! without ANY doubt whatsoever!! because it would give me also more height.

As I said, wide is only better for movies. that's why my living room TV is wide. but I don't deal with spreadsheets, internet or digital imaging in my living room...

Just for you to know a bit more about me, I'm a hardware specialist for 12 years, and I design high-performance workstations and advise notebooks for digital content creation professionals.

cheers,

Fernando Martins

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>
Great post, clearly show that widescreens have a place in the notebook world. In fact I think in a year or two the majority of notebooks will be widescreen in shape, it just make more sense to me.
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

In fact, probably, in a year, almost every notebook will come with a widescreen, but it's not because it's better, it's due to the fact people THINK it's better (because they think it's "cooler"); manufacturers will just get along. No manufacturer intents to teach people or give people what's it's better for them, they will manufacture and sell whatever people want, whatever sells the best.

it's like 16:9 TVs: in southern Europe (where I'm from), you almost can't find 4:3 TVs for sale, it's everything 16:9, and for quite some time now, but we don't have ANY 16:9 broadcasts (except for satellite, of course, bur here everyone gets broadcasts by cable). we only really enjoy our 16:9 TVs when watching DVDs (which I do a lot, that's why I bought a wide TV). But 95% people just watch TV 99,9% of the time, and what do they do? they simply stretch the image to fill the screen, it's the most absurd thing I've ever seen, but EVERYONE does it. and they it's cool that Nicole Kidman looks like an ugly midget. go figure...


<blockquote id='quote'>quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>
My WSXGA screen is great for the 2 window side by side, some thing I couldn't do on a standard 15" SXGA screen as easily, and there IS more room for tool bars dispite what fernandomartins may think...a whole 280 pixels to be exact. And don't get me started on DVDs its a no brainer that widescreen is better for those.
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

You misread what I wrote. I said we indeed have more room for stuff, but that doesn't come for the fact that you have widescreen, comes for the fact you have more pixels width, which you could get also without a widescreen, like in a SXGA+ 4:3 screen.

Of course you can do things you couldn't previously, because you were used to SXGA (1024x768), but the "miracle" here isn't widescreen, it's the additional 256 pixels (and not 280) you have.

please, try to understand this: the fact that a screen is wide doesn't mean it's got more resolution or space to put stuff on than a 4:3 screen, it just means that it's width/height ratio is different from a 4:3 (almost square) screen. which is great, like you said, and me too, for movies. but, that's it, believe me. you would better off with a screen with the same pixels you have in your screen, width wise, but more pixels height wise also (on a 4:3 ratio), unless you watch DVDs in your notebook 30-40% of the time you use it, which is highly unlikely...

cheers,

Fernando Martins

 

It is quite obvious that there is no correct answer to this debate, I personally like to work sideways, for eg having me photoshop toolbars on my left & right edges, and I find the WSXGA resolution just perfect for reading text...some will find this too small, some will prefer standard 4:3 shapes.
My main point was to say that widescreens aren't a "fad" or a waste of time, and there are many that love and will continue to purchase them over 4:3 screens, while others will prefer not to switch.
No one is wrong or right.
a


ASUS M6Ne 15.4" WSXGA 1.7 PM ATI9700 80Gb HDD 1Gb RAM

 

Well like I said I don't think were gonna agree, personally I think Nicole Kidman is to thin and tall thus looks alot nicer streched sideways...lol .But in a few years tv stations will put alot more content in widescreen format, it just takes time for things to switch.
Also with my wide screen there is physically more space than a standard 15" and there is also alot more pixels.
1680X1040=1764000 pixels
1400X1050=1470000 pixels

So I'm a bit confused by your argument that 15" SXGA = WSXGA screen.
I do understand that the physical dimensions of a screen don't dictate how much you fit on a screen, I've been working with computers for 10yr+ and do enough web and graphic work to understand pixels. I used to have a dual monitor setup for my desktop. I got a standard 4:3 laptop, M2N, which was good but I missed the horizontal space of the dual screens. So I got a high res widescreen, its not as good a spanned desktop across dual screens but its better for me than a standard 4:3...but thats because I like to work sideways.
a




ASUS M6Ne 15.4" WSXGA 1.7 PM ATI9700 80Gb HDD 1Gb RAM

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>
Also with my wide screen there is physically more space than a standard 15" and there is also alot more pixels.
1680X1040=1764000 pixels
1400X1050=1470000 pixels
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

Jesus! I never said a wide screen *1280x800* didn't have more pixels than a SXGA!!! I said I'd rather take a 1280x1024!! which has more pixels, as everyone would certainly agree.

oh well, honestly, either my english is really very bad or you just didn't take the time to read my posts, for I didn't said or meant what you're implying back there or in this quote:

<blockquote id='quote'>quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>
So I'm a bit confused by your argument that 15" SXGA = WSXGA screen.
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

... because I just never said that... what i said, once again, is that a 1280x800 screen (WSXGA) is just about the height of a standard SXGA (1024x768), which isn't nothing to like about, because everybody does need height as well as width. for work, 1280 means nothing to me if I don't have 1024 pixels height.


just another $2.

Fernando Martins

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by fernandomartins

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by flaxx
Widescreens is the solution for us just as 5:4 is the solution for you.
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

it isn't, it's just an illusion. much like AGFA's APS photo system's wide framing was a fraud, but very few people actually understood it and why...

<blockquote id='quote'>quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>
[...] and you aren't gonna get anywhere trying to convince people of that (that widescreen is a fad)
<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'></font id='quote'></blockquote id='quote'>

yes, so I've noticed. I give up.

cheers,

Fernando Martins

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by orangeguy

 

A digital tuner will not broadcast analog tv. Why would you want analog anyway when you can have digital? My guess is that the W1nb will only be released in countries were digital tv is available as it will be pointless in a country without digital. That is, unless this notebook comes with a dual tv tuner where it can take analog and digital signals.

 

You can see more pictures of the Asus 2005 Asus lineup at pchome.net. I'm not sure what language the page is written in:
http://article.pchome.net/2005/01/21/34785.htm
http://article.pchome.net/2005/01/21/34785_2.htm
http://article.pchome.net/2005/01/21/34785_3.htm
http://article.pchome.net/2005/01/21/34785_4.htm
http://article.pchome.net/2005/01/21/34785_5.htm

They have pictures of the W5 series, W3 series, and the M6 series. I'm not so sure about the V6 series. IF there is a V6 series in the photos, then it looks very similar to the M6. I can't distinguish.

Also, it appears that the W3N (black) comes with a glare-type LCD while the W3A (silver/white) comes with a traditional LCD. Interesting. Maybe it's just the camera angle.

 

The more I see the W3 series... the more I want one..[8)]
THat W5 looks okay too... except that the closed case looks weird due to the camera. THat's why the W3 looks so sweet... I love plain, professional looking notebooks.

ASUS M6800Ne, P-M 1.5 Dothan, 512MB Ram, Tohiba Combo drive, Samsung Spinpoint M 40G HDD with 8M cache, Mobility Radeon 9700

 

can't wait for w3 to come.

 

Just as a note, the W1Nb will not come to the states, I'm not even sure that was the offical name or not. It's going to be passed up because in April the W1G will come out.

The W1G is the same notebook, with the digital tv tuner, but also the 915 chipset. Asus doesn't want to bring in anymore 855 chipset models now that the new chipset has been released.

This is also why the W3 and W5 are not going to be coming here until the end of February, even though they have been released in Asia. The Asian market can still support new 855 chipset notebooks, where as the US (as seen in the forums here) would spit on a new notebook with current specs when a new platform has already been released.

J

Thanks,
Justin
PROPortable
www.proportable.com
[email protected]

 

Hmmmm, That W3 does look good. Hopefully will be somewhat affordable.

 

<blockquote id='quote'> quote:<hr height='1' noshade id='quote'>Originally posted by one918

 

Hey Justin, I'm curious if you have any other info on the W1G north american release.. you mentioned it is slated for April and will have a 915 chipset.

Do you know if they will change the chassis to match the Asian W1Nb? (carbon fibre lid)

Images here:
http://www.computerdiy.com.tw/modules/news/article.php?storyid=936

And do you have any idea what video card they will include? I found a spanish site listing a 9700 - 64meg for a W1G

Listing here:
http://www.dsd0.com/modulos/areasnegocio/index.php?area=tienda&categ=profesional&grupo=Ordenadores%20Portatiles


Any additional info would be good too..

 

Right now, none of this information is even available to Asus' US PM. They just don't know what they are going to be able to order yet. They should have a better idea in about a month. So at that time I could get back to you. The video card will certainly change, it has to.

As far as that carbon fiber lid, Asus has tried that before on early production units like the M6, but it never seems to make it to final production. The story on the CF is, it's still part of the M6 chassis, but it's always been in an grey abs plactic and then painted. You have the strength and lightness of the CF, but you have a durable surface and one that can be custom ... silver, charcoal.. what have you. The clear resin and CF, as you'd see on a car or something, doesn't hold up well to everyday use. In and out of a computer bag scuffs that up pretty good and it starts to get dull. You'd have to buff it out. I'm pretty sure thats why it was scraped on the M6.

Now, as I was mentioning before, Asus is going to make complete and custom units this year that are more alike. The comparison is going to be like a Lexus and a Toyota.... For the W1, the highend would have the brushed aluminum and the low end may have plastic or carbon fiber. So, although I don't think that is the exact look of that custom W1, it sure is hot. These custom W3, W1, etc are supposed to have a look similiar to that of the current M6.... so, we don't know yet. I'm going to see if I can order some of those lids (even if it's just for my own W1 )

I'll update you.

J

Thanks,
Justin
PROPortable
www.proportable.com
[email protected]

 

Not a problem. Thanks for the link. With enough new stuff already coming to the US, I don't hunt those out like I used to.

As far as the model with the tv tuner in it, if the tv tuner does come to the states, anyone with a current W1 will be able to get the tv tuner card for their unit. We'll see about that too.

J

Thanks,
Justin
PROPortable
www.proportable.com
[email protected]

 

Thanks for all the info, Justin. It's all very much appreciated.

ASUS M6800Ne, P-M 1.5 Dothan, 512MB Ram, Tohiba Combo drive, Samsung Spinpoint M 40G HDD with 8M cache, Mobility Radeon 9700