[Arm-netbook] Good netbook based on Cortex-A9

[Gordan Bobic]

On 07/30/2012 01:34 PM, lkcl luke wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Gordan Bobic<gordan at bobich.net>  wrote:
>
>>> are 1366x768 ~12" harder to find or notably more expensive?
>>
>> 12" is a pretty dud size.
>
>    it's a size at a critical a point where the power for the backlight
> is still reasonable.
>
>> Very few panels available. 10" goes to
>> 1920x1200 now (Asus Transformer Prime HD). The only higher res options
>> from there are 15" (2048x1536, 4:3) and 15.4" (2880x1800, 16:10).
>
>   do you have any idea of costings here?  part numbers>

Don't know about the 2880x1800 one. 2048x1536 panels are listed for $400 
on aliexpress, but I'm sure I remember paying less than that when I got 
mine - the prices seem to vary with time. The only snag is that it's a 
CCFL backlit panel, so it'll draw a fair bit more power than LED backlit 
ones.

>> 10" and 15" sizes also have many different panels available in different
>> resolutions. Everything inbetween is poorly supplied and comes with a
>> very limited choice of resolutions, and because it's not popular, it
>> costs more, too. So why bother? Just because some "large company" wants
>> to proceed with their fixation on 14" laptops doesn't mean that those of
>> us that are better informed should follow them like lemmings.
>
>   huh.  this is good advice.  actually, the only reason it was 14in is
> because that's what they went with almost 2 years ago.

As I said, just because somebody else made a bad call doesn't mean we 
have to lemming after them.

>   ... ah, damnit.  of course.  the significance of what you're saying
> is beginning to sink in to my tiny brain.
>
>   fricking tablets are f*****g up the supply channels and disrupting
> everything.  wow.  no wonder laptop manufacturers are having a hard
> time.

How do you figure that? Not sure I'm seeing the connection. Tablets are 
<= 10". Or are you saying that this is why > 10" panels are fewer and 
more expensive?

>   ok.  so.  forgetting them: what size and resolution would people
> really want, on here?  (a little bit of research to find part numbers,
> a supplier and a part number would be good, here, but can come later)

If it were up to me, I'd want 3840x2400/22", but that may be a bit too 
big for a laptop for most people (although Acer did make a 20" laptop 
before). :-) The killer there is the 130W power draw (CCFL panel, not 
LED backlit).

The 2880x1800 15.4" panel out of the new Macbook Pro is pretty awesome, 
but it's bound to be pretty expensive. It is LED backlit so should be 
passable on power drain. Still, it's quite big which is the biggest 
drawback.

But really for what we are seriously looking at (light, portable, long 
battery life), 10" seems to be the ideal size, both for battery life and 
availability of panels. 1920x1200/10" is probably the best overall 
compromise, at least until PixelQi catches up on resolution.

Gordan