←back to thread

Dell releases powerful, well-supported Linux Ultrabook

(arstechnica.com)
520 points iProject | 2 comments | 29 Nov 12 14:09 UTC | HN request time: 0.418s | source
Show context
grannyg00se ◴[30 Nov 12 00:13 UTC] No.4851131[source]▶
I'm missing the point of these laptops that focus on extreme weight reduction. Can someone chime in on the relative benefit of these more expensive yet compromised machines? They seem to compromise on cost and features for the sake of lower mass. But most of the time your laptop is sitting on a surface while you are working. You aren't working while holding it in your hands like you might be with a tablet. So why deal with a 12" or 13" screen when you can have a 15" or more and still carry it under your arm from your home to the coffee shop?
replies(2): >>4851164 #>>4851971 #
1. oconnore ◴[30 Nov 12 00:21 UTC] No.4851164[source]▶
> You aren't working while holding it in your hands like you might be with a tablet.

Why not? I do this all the time. I also bike with it in my backpack, pick it up with one hand, toss it on my bed, hold it sideways to read a paper while laying down. And it's also dual core with 4GB of ram and a long battery life, where is the compromise?

I don't understand why you would put up with an unwieldy machine for such insignificant benefits in processing power and screen size.

replies(1): >>4851421 #
2. grannyg00se ◴[30 Nov 12 01:36 UTC] No.4851421[source]▶
A regular laptop is fine in a backpack, holding with one hand, and tossing onto a bed. You could probably prop it up sideways and read a paper on it as well, although I'd probably use a tablet for that instead. I think your last sentence answers my question though.