2 ms·
if it was more than a toy, 499 would be fine with me. the atom processor (if its the dual core) is okay. the hard drive space, memory, and overall os just are
by jasonlbaptiste 17y ago
if it was more than a toy, 499 would be fine with me. the atom processor (if its the dual core) is okay. the hard drive space, memory, and overall os just aren't appealing. at 499 I want a real computer, not a toy. that's my problem with things like chromeos- they're gravitating us towards a lower common denominator of computing. were conditioning people to go for cheap toys, that don't really do much. i'd rather go for things that don't cost a ton, but cost something and act like a real computer.
- stcredzero 17y agoThe thing would be vastly more powerful than an Apple II. The Apple II wasn't a "real computer?" Maybe we need to clarification on definitions? My point: what's most salient for how useful a processor or any piece of hardware, is to what purpose that hardware is going to be put. If the thing is just for browsing then it probably has enough. Whether just browsing fits a lot of people's use of the web is another matter. (If it's just an adjunct to another machine, why not have it map the user's Downloads directory?)
- bmj 17y agoI agree. For that price (or a bit more), I can get a netbook that actually acts like computer. If I have to carry something that isn't going to fit in my pocket, I'd rather it be more practical.