Finally we have a differently-styled small laptop to compare to MBA,
but it is again far too different to compare directly.
Buyers re****t horrible performance, major tweaks necessary, short
charge life, too-glossy display, and lots of bad trade-offs. All users
seem to have had to revert to earlier software versions to get mediocre
performance. None have thought it compared well to peers.
HP:
2GB RAM, 120 GB 5400 HD
1280x768 display (8.9 inch), too reflective
2.86 pounds, est. 85 cu in volume
Ethernet, Expresscard, SD slots
bigger battery option, but adds half pound
loud fan, small trackpad, BT optional
re****tedly poor CPU, poor GPU -- horrible reviews
$750
MBA:
2 GB RAM, 80 GB 4200 HD
1280x800 display (13.3 inch)
3 pounds, ~69 cu in volume
backlit kb, multitouch trackpad, quiet,
re****tedly great CPU, great GPU -- great reviews
$1800
On a related topic, I've lately been jaded by really bad, seemingly
uninformed battery-use re****tage. Too many hardware reviewers seem to
do nothing but test the time it takes to run out at default settings,
ignoring that serious ****table users know many tricks and have many
tweaks available.
So I was glad to see someone had gone to extra effort regarding at
least the MBA -- which is shown at
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=3220
I don't really want to see complex graphs about settings and use
against battery life for all models, but every once in a while someone
needs to point out that battery criticism (and what the builder
re****ts) are often _both_ different from what a user will get.
|
