Why does SR cost more than the FW?

My computer ignorance is likely evident with this question, but that is why I'll be grateful for everyone's help. I'm interested in the SR (looking for a 13/14 inch for portability, also considering the Macbook), but couldn't help notice that the FW costs less even though it has a bigger screen and Blu-ray. Was just hoping someone could explain this to me so that if I actually talk myself into splurging for the SR, I won't feel so gypped. Thanks!

 

LED Screen on the SR (usually 100-200 dollar upgrade on other sites)

Smaller in size and lighter in weight (smaller/lighter= more expensive)

Better battery life on the SR by hours.

That's about all I can think of. To be honest with you, I feel that Sony is charging too much for what the SR DOESN'T offer. No blu-ray (infact i JUST yesterday realized how fast blu ray will become standard. i read some film companies ala Lion's Gate, ect.. are blu ray only now?) and no HDMI seems like the price should be 1,200 instead of 1,400 base price.

Basically... If you want a smaller, easier to carry and better screen with better battery life, get the SR. If you are going to sit at home all day and maybe take your laptop out ONCE in a while, get the FW and load it.

that's my opinion. I only opted for the SR since I'm a student. Otherwise, I would have gotten the FW loaded, no doubt.

 

It's easier to manufacture something with a larger form factor than a smaller form factor.

 

if u have a bigger space to do things then u can be less concentrated on heat control and such.

 

The SR costs more because you always pay more for miniaturization and weight reduction, unless you make a lot of compromises. The SR is much lighter than the FW, has much better battery life, seems to keep a lot cooler, and at the same time it doesn't compromise performance (same CPU, RAM, video card, etc. as the FW). This is why you pay more.

Now, if the FW weighed something like 5 pounds, I'd expect it to cost a lot more, but it doesn't. IMO all of Sony's laptops above 13.3" are mediocre at best - not so great battery life, not so great performance (compared to other laptops of it's size / weight), not to lightweight, etc.

 

i find that to be true as well. seems like when it comes to 14.1 + Sony doesn't have it down with battery life. But you have to give it to them that they still look better than the competition, IMO.

 

if sony decides to add a blu-ray to the SR, my guess is that the HDMI port will be added as well.

 

There's gotta be a reason for the HDMI cut-out on the side of the SR.

 

And that's when I buy one.

 

That would be the Z.

 

not really, 2 different types of laptops.

Perhaps sony is waiting with the blu-ray on the SR? It comes with the 3470 and has an area for an HDMI port so it makes only logical sense to have blu-ray in the near future added to it. perhaps a special model?

 

They might make a "premium" SR or something and include HDMI and Blu-Ray. However, i guess it might take away the appeal of the 600 dollar more (you need the 1600x900 screen Z to get blu-ray) expensive Z. So they might not.

It is wierd that they have a space reserved for HDMI though...

 

I agree totally. When it comes to portables Sony has it down, but above that, meh.

 

If the FW weighed 5 lbs, I'd be VERY happy.

 

Well, the FW is already like a miracle for its size. Most 15 inch laptops are as heavy as the FW.

 

The MacBook Pro is 5.5 pounds and 1.0" thick. I know the FW is a little bigger, but they could have at least tried to make it ~6 pounds, rather than ~7. Personally, if I was going to get a larger, non ultra-portable laptop, I'd get the MacBook Pro. It has a GeForce 8600 too.

 

Exactly. To be honest, I would have MUCH preferred if Sony came out with a trimmed down, 5 pound, 15.4" laptop with 1440x900 resolution. That would be ideal for me. If Dell's updated m1530 comes close, I'll probably bite.

I thought very seriously about that. But I just can't get used to the idea of switching to a Mac. Simply too many little differences -- and I hate the Mac way of rendering text (too blurry, in my opinion). And buying a MBP just to use Windows on it would be silly.

 

The Dell E 14" might also be interesting. I'm guessing it's light but I'm not sure.

 

Hmmmm.... true.

 

Not to be confused with a 14" Deli sandwich.

 

Ooh, the 15.4" Dell 'E' is only 5 lbs, and is LED backlit, and has 1440x900 resolution. And it's a Dell Latitude.

I like it!

 

The 13.3" Dell E is supposed to be have a "3.0 pounds target weight", but that doesn't mean they'll actually achieve that (they're just stating what they "want" it to weigh). If they do achieve it, and at the same integrate a good cooling system, build it reasonably well (so that it doesn't fall apart like the m1330, for example), and with good battery life, then I'll be impressed (as I am with the Sony Z).