Ask HN: Why doesn't anyone make a laptop like the Cr-48?
10 comments
Not sure if you can still get it but about a year ago I bought an Asus U56E. I think I paid about $700 for it at the time (probably pick it up cheaper now) and I think it matches what you're looking for.
Good design, high quality construction, higher-end construction materials (aluminum chassis), etc..
It's probably a little larger than what you're looking for if the Cr-48 is your preferred size.
Link: http://reviews.bestbuy.com/answers/3545/product/3411128/asus...
Good design, high quality construction, higher-end construction materials (aluminum chassis), etc..
It's probably a little larger than what you're looking for if the Cr-48 is your preferred size.
Link: http://reviews.bestbuy.com/answers/3545/product/3411128/asus...
I could deal with a 15.6" computer if it meant decent resolution, but more 1366x768? Really, Asus?
Aside from that, it looks promising. I'm seeing it for about $400 at a couple places.
Aside from that, it looks promising. I'm seeing it for about $400 at a couple places.
After my 13" MBP was stolen, I brought my CR-48 out of hibernation and have been using it as my primary machine for nearly 6 months.
It is indeed a great computer, but I can't help thinking a used Macbook, Thinkpad, or the plethora of netbooks on the market would better serve even the most avid of hackers.
May I ask what puts you off with it's current incarnation, the Chromebook? It 's only $200 (and up). The external branding can be resolved with a $5 can of 'Plasti-dip', a screwdriver, and a bit of time. You'll end up a with a black, rubberized finish similar to the CR-48.
It is indeed a great computer, but I can't help thinking a used Macbook, Thinkpad, or the plethora of netbooks on the market would better serve even the most avid of hackers.
May I ask what puts you off with it's current incarnation, the Chromebook? It 's only $200 (and up). The external branding can be resolved with a $5 can of 'Plasti-dip', a screwdriver, and a bit of time. You'll end up a with a black, rubberized finish similar to the CR-48.
I have been looking at Samsung's ARM chromebook. It looks like it might be the best of my options right now, but I would really like a higher-resolution screen, even if that meant a bigger screen size. (Every laptop is 1366x768 these days...)
If you aren't in a hurry, you may want to wait and see if Google's Pixel turns out to be real. I know that most people initially thought it was fake, but since then someone has found interesting stuff in Chrome's code.
It may very well be fake, but if it isn't, it's probably gonna be worth waiting for unless you need something right now.
It may very well be fake, but if it isn't, it's probably gonna be worth waiting for unless you need something right now.
The Verge says this about the Pixel: "Google’s greatest advantage is that it doesn’t need bleeding-edge specs to build a high-functioning computer."
That could be exactly what I'm talking about.
Ah, that's understandable.
To make better use of the smaller screen real estate, you may wish to look into using a tiling window manager (dwm, xmonad, etc) coupled with a 'full screen' browser like Conkeror which nets another 100px vertically by not having a tab/navbar.
To make better use of the smaller screen real estate, you may wish to look into using a tiling window manager (dwm, xmonad, etc) coupled with a 'full screen' browser like Conkeror which nets another 100px vertically by not having a tab/navbar.
I've been meaning to try a tiling window manager. Right now I'm working with Unity, Chrome, and either Vim or Geany depending on my mood.
Frustratingly, the Samsung Chromebook is $249 in US, but £229 in UK. ($249 is £158).
The Acer chromebook is $199 in US, but £199 in UK. ($199 is £126)
The UK prices do include our sales taxes (VAT at 20%), but still.
The Acer chromebook is $199 in US, but £199 in UK. ($199 is £126)
The UK prices do include our sales taxes (VAT at 20%), but still.
The perfect option for you is to buy a Thinkpad T430U and install Chrome OS on it. It's remarkably similar to the CR-48 with regards to hardware design, it's $600, and it's a Thinkpad.
Which means you can use it as a breakfast tray when you're at a business summit, as a bludgeon when intruders come into your home, as a bulletproof plate if you live in a ghetto, as a riot shield if you're a journalist in Syria, and also as a skateboard if your car is broken.
Or, if you really want, you could use it as a really good, durable computer.
Which means you can use it as a breakfast tray when you're at a business summit, as a bludgeon when intruders come into your home, as a bulletproof plate if you live in a ghetto, as a riot shield if you're a journalist in Syria, and also as a skateboard if your car is broken.
Or, if you really want, you could use it as a really good, durable computer.
Part of the problem with OEMs, especially when you look at the Windows ecosystem is that they are cutting costs by using the same design with swappable part (different memory, different HDs, etc.). Reaching the $400-500 price range requires low end specs, but also requires a single SKU that can be mass produced cheaply.
Since alot of the major OEMs (Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc.) have already made major investments in products (Thinkpad, Inspiron, etc.) for design that is focused on the head end and highly configurable, they don't spend resources producing the low end. Instead they all of the R&D cost have been spent creating one design that is very configurable, which results in design tradeoffs (swapable parts causes laptop to be bigger, etc.) in order for them.
Apple is successful partially because they have VERY few SKUs, a small number of models, which enables to them to easily reach scale and spend all their money on design. There is no equivalent because the margins at the $400-500 are very low and if OEMs have to spend large amount on design for something with low margin that can't be scaled up to high end, the ROI is not there.
Since alot of the major OEMs (Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc.) have already made major investments in products (Thinkpad, Inspiron, etc.) for design that is focused on the head end and highly configurable, they don't spend resources producing the low end. Instead they all of the R&D cost have been spent creating one design that is very configurable, which results in design tradeoffs (swapable parts causes laptop to be bigger, etc.) in order for them.
Apple is successful partially because they have VERY few SKUs, a small number of models, which enables to them to easily reach scale and spend all their money on design. There is no equivalent because the margins at the $400-500 are very low and if OEMs have to spend large amount on design for something with low margin that can't be scaled up to high end, the ROI is not there.
This is very irritating. I really don't want to buy a Mac, but the PC laptop market seems determined to suck!
Some Macbooks are a bit like that. I have the new 13" one and when looking at the screen, there is no branding nor anything that would distract me, unlike e.g. the "Macbook Air" label printed below the screen in MBA. I really like it.
But obviously, this is nowhere near the price point you are suggesting. I think the reason cheap laptops look cheap is that they are, well, cheap. Users do not really expect them to last and therefore manufactures do not focus on longevity or style.
Good design is a premium for which you simply need to pay extra.
But obviously, this is nowhere near the price point you are suggesting. I think the reason cheap laptops look cheap is that they are, well, cheap. Users do not really expect them to last and therefore manufactures do not focus on longevity or style.
Good design is a premium for which you simply need to pay extra.
It just seems to me that it should be possible to design a really good laptop that costs less than $1000, if specs are secondary. I think that would be the best way for a PC manufacturer to finally beat Apple. The problem, however, is that such a computer might not run Windows very well. (but Linux would run quite nicely!)
Right, but how big is the market for low spec laptop with good design? As you have pointed out, it may have trouble running Windows which excludes the vast majority of users right here and there. It might work well in conjunction with Ubuntu et al., but that would require some non-trivial marketing effort from Canonical to create some demand for "premium netbook" niche.
However, given the success of Chrome OS, it might not be that difficult, actually.
However, given the success of Chrome OS, it might not be that difficult, actually.
The ASUS eee pc 701 was dirt cheap; had limited hardware; had a few problems; but was robust.
It should be easy to replicate it with better hardware and avoiding some of the biggest problems (tiny SSD soldered to the motherboard; weird trackpad; tiny keyboard) especially if you're not trying to cram it into a teeny tiny package.
It should be easy to replicate it with better hardware and avoiding some of the biggest problems (tiny SSD soldered to the motherboard; weird trackpad; tiny keyboard) especially if you're not trying to cram it into a teeny tiny package.
That's the "original" netbook, isn't it? I can't believe I hadn't ever seen one of those before.
At a quick glance, I think the biggest problem with it would be the 800x480 screen! If screen resolution wasn't an issue, I think a netbook could meet my criteria.
At a quick glance, I think the biggest problem with it would be the 800x480 screen! If screen resolution wasn't an issue, I think a netbook could meet my criteria.
I had an EEE PC 901, which was one of the first 9" netbooks (and considered by many to be the best netbook Asus ever released.) The screen was bumped up to 1024 x 600. It was a nice little machine, but there's lots of stuff that doesn't display very well on something with that low of a resolution.
I seem to own computers for a long time(3-4yrs), so paying a little more for a solid machine is worthwhile to me. I spent the most I have ever to get a MBPr and it..is..the..damn..future. I've not owned a sub $700 laptop for more than a year. They just aren't built for that.
I've always found Clevo laptops to be durable, I've knocked my 15" off a desk by accident and the screen didn't even crack.
I think they have an 11" and 14" in their range which might fit the criteria and you can customise the specs to whatever you want really.
I think they have an 11" and 14" in their range which might fit the criteria and you can customise the specs to whatever you want really.
I looked at Clevo's site a while ago and was kinda put off by their obscure model numbering. Can you recommend a friendlier site to look at, and where I could potentially buy one?
Never mind, I found rjtech.com. The designs don't look spectacular, but that's just from the pictures. What does look great, though, is the "No OS" option.
I had a Cr-48. It didn't last long.
Why isn't there an equivalent now? All the laptops I see in that price range have very nice specs, but weak design. They don't seem at all durable, and they often have terrible battery life as a result of high-end processors.
Basically, what I want is a laptop designed like a Macbook for about $500, with the price difference coming from reduced specs. I don't want a superpowered laptop, I would rather have the battery life. Does this exist, and if not, why?