Simple question: Is this a netbook or not?

Me and my friend had a discussion about the Acer 1810tz.

It's an 11.6" with Intel Dual Core CPU SU4100 and comes with Windows 7 Home Premium. It costs about $500 in the US.

Now of course it all depends on how you define a netbook but what do you say, is this a netbook or not?

Edit: Please also state why it is or why it is not.

 

No its not, mainly due to the processor and from that most definitions of a netbook I just read say is is supposed to be cheap as well as light weight and good for checking email and web browsing.

 

I'd call it a netbook based on the CULV CPU.

 

I would say netbook or nettop = Atom processor. This one, in my opinion, would be classified as an 'ultraportable' laptop.

*Thinks of some classifications: UMPC, Netbook, Ultraportable, Tablet PC, Thin-and-light, 'Mainstream', Desktop Replacement..

In our FAQ, we have netbooks as 10" or less and ultraportable as 11-12".

 

No Atom, not a netbook to me.

 

We could use some more votes.

 

It's an ultraportable. It doesn't use an Atom, and is a tad larger than the majority of netbooks are. It's kind of in a gray area, but personally I'd say it's an ultrportable.

 

I'd call it a netbook. Dell has released larger models (the Mini 12 for instance) that were still netbooks.

 

just because it's 11" doesn't make it a netbook. those sizes where available long before netbooks even existed. my tablet is 12" and nowhere near.

they are the first low end cheap ultra portable notebooks, new for the price category, but not new in any other form.

 

Not having a built-in optical drive = net-book to me, simple.

cheers ...

 

It's a great...netbook.

 

Bad argument, look at the HP Envy 15 - doesn't have a built in optical drive either - and it has an i7 etc. etc...

Also quite a few ultraportable business laptops didn't use to have a built in drive.

 

yep, mine for example.

the actual solution to this topic is simple: does it fit the netbook requirements of windows, or not? it does not, else it would have win7 starter on it (or basic, or how ever that's called). => no netbook.

 

Well, i consider anything with a screen resolution of 1024x600 and Windows XP, Vista Basic or 7 Starter as "Netbook".
So the Acer Timeline series is not classified as Netbooks.
But the price on it is nice.

 

we'll i would say its a CULV notebook as it has a CULV processor and not an atom... we tend to associate netbooks as having atom processors... but i doubt that there is a clear definition of netbooks or notebooks..

 

Less than 12" screen, low res monitor (1366x768), no OD, great battery life, less than 1.5 Kg's and less than $500 say 'netbook' to me.

Add Win 7 (not starter), 3GB RAM, an HDMI port, Gigabyte Lan, Core 2 Duo CULV processor, Dolby Sound enhancements and an LED backlit screen and we move into the 'great netbook' category.

To me:
Netbook = some compromise (in this case screen/no OD), but still great battery life at a great price.

Nothing else defines a netbook - unless you're writing a dictionary definition with at most, a two week 'lifespan'.

 

For me a netbook has Atom(like) performance.

Acer 1810tz with SU4100 is clearly not a netbook, to me.

 

For me, Atom(like) performance is not an option. I lived through that in the PII/PIII era, thanks.

The Acer 1810tz is the only netbook I'll consider for my own use - in 2009/2010.

 

Technically i would say it was not a netbook. It is a budget ultraportable. Although, many people that own one might perceive it to be a netbook and might use it as one.
Some people might own a second more powerful computer and use this on the go, browsing on the sofa or in bed for very non intensive tasks etc. For some this will be the minimum performance that will accept just for their whole web browsing experience.

I own a TT and really i'm using that like a netbook these days. I don't really do anything demanding with it and use my SZ as my desktop if i want to do anything more demanding.

 

if you use your 1810/1410 mainly for surfing the then your is a netbook

 

No atom, no netbook, simple as that. 1810 is also an 11.6", which is a big difference from 10" or 9"

Did I mention the CULV? It may be 3-4 times faster than atom

 

Netbook. No matter what Acer says. The SU series seem to me like upper-class Atoms but they are certainly no match with typical Notebook processors. Ditto for the onboard graphics solution.

I bought the 1810 because my 13" 2Kg Dell was too big to carry everywhere...

In the defence of the Notebook proponets, I do have to admit that it is as large as a Netbook is allowed to be (i.e., it's a very large Netbook, per say...).

 

I agree with this assessment. Netbooks are secondary laptops that are portable and used for web surfing and light productivity. The 10" and 11.6" laptops that use Atom and CULV respectively, are two levels of netbooks, lower-end and higher-end.

In my opinion, ultraportables (with regular ULV or LV chips) are 12-13.3" and are intended to be primary laptops.

 

What about a Sony TT with Core 2 Duo SU9600 1.6Ghz... netbook by your definition? It's 11.1" and a CULV CPU.

To me a netbook must have downgraded performance, which makes it suited for browsing the NET and checking mail and not really suited to do heavier applications on it. Anything with Dual Core CULV is too powerful to be a netbook, in my opinion.

 

I guess that kind of falls in a grey area. I was thinking when I wrote my post that a lot of people in Japan have been lugging around laptops with tiny screens before netbooks showed up.

I suppose if pressed I would call the TT an ultraportable since it uses a regular ULV chip. SU9300-9600 were released before the "CULV" marketing and used to only be found in pricey business class ultraportables like the Dell E4200, Toshiba R500, lenovo x301, etc. These laptops were meant to be primary laptops so I would call them ultraportables. It seems the TT is also intended for that purpose.

Obviously, as tech progresses, CULV powered laptops will move into a position where it is powerful enough to be a primary laptop. Currently, though, I would say that CULV is not enough (for me anyway, and I don't play games or do much heavy duty stuff) to power a primary laptop. Even SU9300-9600 is borderline in my opinion. Therefore I would include CULV powered sub 12" laptops to be netbooks at the moment (as per my statement that netbooks are laptops that are meant for web-browsing and light productivity).

 

Phil, I really do not understand the part of your definition that includes, or 'must have' downgraded performance?

Like I originally posted (see quote below), battery life, weight (which almost automatically means no OD) and low price define a netbook. When all three are present in the right balance, then it approaches a 'good' netbook status.

As technology is always moving forward, our gaming notebooks of today may become tomorrows netbook 'minimum' (performance-wise, not size-wise). If they can shrink the 'package' enough and effectively control the heat output, offer it for $500 and 5+ hrs battery life, I'll call it a netbook in a blink of an eye!

Why would you want manufacturers to keep producing the same 'netbook' in the same form factor and purposely keep performance subpar?

Weight (keeps the screen small and mostly no OD), Cost, Battery life. Everything else that manufacturers can offer us within those parameters is icing on the cake - and, I love icing!

 

Something with SU2300-SU9600 I don't call netbook, something with N270/N450 I do call netbook.

It's that simple. I'm 100% agreeing with Intel's definition:

http://www.intel.com/consumer/learn/netbook.htm

 

Not a netbook because of the processor.

 

Well to play the devil's advocate...

That line from Intel implies one thing i.e. an Atom CPU = netbook. It doesn't imply the reverse however i.e. that netbooks necessarily use Atoms; it only states that if there's an Atom, it's a netbook.

 

I'm never in agreement with marketing definitions! lol...

Intel makes statements to ensure you'll be constantly buying/upgrading - even every few months is too long for them to wait for your next purchase.

My 'definition', although not 'official', is what I would vote with my wallet with. For me and for my clients.


Client: Okay, I have $500 to spend for a netbook, what do you recommend? I need battery life, light weight and within budget.

Do I say:
Me: Well, if you want a netbook - get anything with an N270/N450 Atom CPU in it - the cost is within your budget and battery life could be up to 5-6 hrs or so. Forget about trying to do XX, YY and ZZ with it though, okay? Good luck and hope you're happy with your purchase.


or, do I say:
Me: Forget Atom CPU's, forget the 'netbook' category (...forget BS marketing strategies, even Intel's). I don't know what software you will be using in a few months time, so I recommend to get the best CPU you can, while also ensuring an extended battery life, so a CULV based system is a great choice. Currently, I recommend the Timeline 1810tz - within your budget, great/best battery life and a platform (CPU, RAM and O/S) you can grow with. This will not be a toy - this will be a productive tool that you'll use for many years to come. Now, go and enjoy your purchase!


I don't know, but to me, the ( right) answer is obvious.

 

That's just plain ignorant to assume anything without an atom CPU is not a netbook. AMD has its own "netbook class" CPU's (Neo, Neo X2), So to you they aren't netbooks because it doesn't contain an atom CPU?

What happens when atom is phased out?

 

DV2 and Acer Ferrari One, examples of notebooks with AMD Neo, are not netbooks to me.

 

AMD Neo performs just above the Atom class, so no netbooks to me either.

Atom, Via Nano are the netbook class.

 

I thought the AMD Neo(the single core one) was supposed to be of the same category as the Atom no(i.e. meant for ultraportable netbooks)? I mean, I've seen machines very similar to netbooks with the only difference being the Neo instead of the Atom so I don't see how a slightly better CPU would change the whole category of the machine.

And since we're on the topic of "listening to the industry", lots of Neo based machines fall under the category of "netbook" for most retailers here(ex: the MSI Wind).

 

Well yeah Neo is a grey area.

I personally wouldn't call the DV2 a netbook though.

 

Maybe not the dv2, but the MSI Wind comes in a variant with the Neo and so do a few Gateway "netbooks". Both of these machines are listed in the "netbook" category of the retailers I found them at.

I mean, I personally don't think an Atom CPU alone should determine the "netbook" category as I'm sure you all know that certain desktop machines(or some all-in-ones) have Atom CPUs in them.

Personally, to ma a netbook is defined by a combination of 3 things:

- a weak set of specs: notably a weak CPU of the Atom or Neo class(I've also seen Sempron based netbooks), normally 1Gb of RAM and either XP or Windows 7 starter

- a small form factor: I think we all agree that the EEE-top and other such machines(small box PCs) aren't netbooks so the smaller and compact form factor of the machine itself will determine if it's a netbook. Something smaller than 11.6" is pretty standard size for netbooks.

- a smaller price tag: While I am full aware there are more expensive machines like the Sony Vaio P and such, but as a general rule of thumb(in case somebody wants to show me an expensive netbook just to be nitpicky ) netbooks are characterized by their smaller price tag in the mobile computing world.

Normally, these 3 things blended together characterize most machines that are labeled "netbooks".

 

An Atom desktop is called a nettop.

Price tag... try the Sony X Series... I think they start at 1300 Pounds in the UK... and its a netbook... (or was, have they changed it yet?)

 

A net top isn't a net book last I checked so I fail to see your point

And if you read my post I did specifically mention that there exist netbooks which have high price tags, but in general, a netbook isn't supposed to be expensive. If you tabulate netbooks over 1000$ and those under 1000$, I bet a large percentage of those sold and even produced fall under the 1000$ mark if not under the 500$ mark.

I don't mean to sound offensive, but you're just being nitpicky on specific parts of my post without addressing the whole of it.

 

You specifically address a desktop machine with an Atom CPU... yes?
The I say its a nettop and you come along and say its not a netbook...

Of course its not unless an atom based desktop is suddenly a netbook... but then its not a desktop...

The price, yes I am picky... ...and the X series shows the flaw of the whole concept...

 

But it's still not a netbook... My point was that an Atom CPU alone cannot define a netbook because there exist other machines(which we now agree are called "nettops") with Atom CPus which aren't called netbooks. So in the end idk what we're discussing if not simply semantics.

Noentheless, thank you for informing me that Atom based desk machines are called nettops

Which is why I said "as a general rule of thumb" I did not say "all netbooks are cheap"; I even acknowledged that there exist more expensive netbooks so idk why you insist on noting the Sony X series if not simply to say "oh look, you forgot another expensive netbook" . I even stated myself that my "model" does not represent all netbooks, but is simply a general set of guidelines I personally use to define them.

 

A SU9600/4500HD combo is powerful enough for most people. It can handle everything but the most intensive of tasks.
A SU9600 is no slouch, it has a 800mhz bus and 3MB of cache. That in conjuction with up to 8gb of 800mhz memory and the integrated HD graphics card puts the performance at an very acceptable level. Here benchmarks would be useful. My TT gets just under 1,400 in passmark using W7 64bit for my CPU and just under 600 for overall performance.

It seems that some of the demands are changing such as flash for a example. The CPU will be used less so the performance of these netbooks/notebooks should improve. Whether this can live up to its claims or is hyperbole the jury is still out on that one for me anyway.

Power users and those that demand more speed need to look elsewhere or buy this as a second laptop.

 

I agree, an Atom CPU does not constitute a netbook. Eventually the Atom will be phased out and then what? Intel releases a successor to the atom in an 8 inch small form factor and its now a note book?

Pure Ignorance.

 

SU4100 dual-core not Atom-based processor, Windows 7 Home Premium....also it's not in Acer's "Aspire/Ferrari One" series...... its an ultraportable/subnotebook.

 

Your thinking of now and not tomorrow. Eventually everything gets phased out. I am quite certain Intel is quite capable of developing a successor to the Atom CPU and Iam sure it will be placed in an 8-11 inch form factor laptop.


On the contrary "Intel Does not own the rights to the generic term Netbook"

 

The U210 and L2100, both 12" come with Neo. Only the U210 is branded "Wind". I count neither as netbooks.

 

Its a generic term and Intel does not own the rights to that term.

 

I would like you to prove to me that Intel owns the patent to "netbook" and the AFO is 11.6 inches and is classified as a "netbook" by many reputable sources.

http://www.trustedreviews.com/laptops/review/2009/10/02/Acer-Ferrari-One---11-6in-Netbook/p1

 

Well care to elaborate why? Except for the presence of a Neo rather than an Atom as well as a 12" form factor, I see no difference in specs between the U210 and a generic netbook so it has to be one of those 2 things.

It's also classified as a netbook by 2 retailers here so it's got netbook like properties at the least.

 

Intel's "classification"

http://www.intel.com/consumer/learn/netbook.htm

The Broadcom BCM70015 Crystal HD solution

http://www.techpowerup.com/111089/N...gs_HD_to_the_Intel_Atom_Netbook_Platform.html

Well according to "Intel" a netbooks cant play HD movies however why are the new netbooks with the Atom CPU getting broadcom HD chips? That contradicts what a netbook is doesn't it? The AFO can be considered a netbook because of form factor of 11.6 inches.

 

Whether to call a CULV-based portable a "netbook" or not really seems to be a matter of debating semantics. "What word shall we attach as a name to this computer with this unusual configuration?" Admittedly it has characteristics of both an ultra-portable and a netbook, but its pointless to argue either way.