[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Bummer: Asus and Acer Ultrabooks to Cost Over $1000 here

[Gnostradamus]

Wait, is it going to be like tablets where Apple's cheaper than the major alternatives? Am I going to end up with a Mac Air because I want a cheaper ultraportable?

[karthiq]

Blame the cost of SSDs mainly!!

[waldojim]

The premium ultrabooks hold more appeal to me. There are many of us who have gotten tired of buying junk. Who really wants to buy a new machine every year because the last one up and died? Sorry guys, but if they manage 'ultrabooks' with the kind of power that Sony managed with the SB, I would say that is quite impressive, and my consider getting one. But it they are still plastic junk, then screw them. I got tired of that crap a long time ago.

[nonseq]

Quality is NOT free or even cheap. While many don't seem to require any more than a spec sheet and some sort of case, others want more out of an Ultrabook. It's good to see these high end machines on the market that for far too long has been saturated with cheap construction and marginal execution. The Asus and Acer premium offerings will perhaps raise the bar and breathe new life into a lagging market segment.

[waldojim]

nonseq, on 27 July 2011 - 07:18 AM, said:

Quality is NOT free or even cheap. While many don't seem to require any more than a spec sheet and some sort of case, others want more out of an Ultrabook. It's good to see these high end machines on the market that for far too long has been saturated with cheap construction and marginal execution. The Asus and Acer premium offerings will perhaps raise the bar and breathe new life into a lagging market segment.

You know, it is funny in a way that we are talking about Acer and Asus in the premium market. Considering that historically, they have both proven that they couldn't distinguish premium from plastic junk. I have yet to see an Asus machine that didn't have a keyboard that flexed under the lightest pressure. And they have some of the heaviest machines on the market: even when considering the class of machines.

Time will tell though.

[CF8qk4]

nonseq, on 27 July 2011 - 07:18 AM, said:

Quality is NOT free or even cheap. While many don't seem to require any more than a spec sheet and some sort of case, others want more out of an Ultrabook. It's good to see these high end machines on the market that for far too long has been saturated with cheap construction and marginal execution. The Asus and Acer premium offerings will perhaps raise the bar and breathe new life into a lagging market segment.

Quality is great and everything, but there's the Mac Air problem. The Mac Air is considered decent quality and has stood the test of time for a couple of years. For Asus, for instance, to charge just as much (or more) and say: "Trust us, we're quality this time!" without the track record to prove it is just not a strategy that's going to work.

Much as I want a decent ultrabook running Win7, I don't really expect to pay more than the cost of the standard proven product in the segment. So unless you're offering considerably better performance or a better price, what reason is there for me to go with new kid on the block?

[waldojim]

CF8qk4, on 27 July 2011 - 10:46 AM, said:

Quality is great and everything, but there's the Mac Air problem. The Mac Air is considered decent quality and has stood the test of time for a couple of years. For Asus, for instance, to charge just as much (or more) and say: "Trust us, we're quality this time!" without the track record to prove it is just not a strategy that's going to work.

Much as I want a decent ultrabook running Win7, I don't really expect to pay more than the cost of the standard proven product in the segment. So unless you're offering considerably better performance or a better price, what reason is there for me to go with new kid on the block?

Sometimes the extras come in different forms. Such as a backlit keyboard, improved display, etc. There are many different reasons the Asus or Acer machines could be better. Though that doesn't mean they will be better.

[nonseq]

CF8qk4, on 27 July 2011 - 10:46 AM, said:

nonseq, on 27 July 2011 - 07:18 AM, said:

Quality is NOT free or even cheap. While many don't seem to require any more than a spec sheet and some sort of case, others want more out of an Ultrabook. It's good to see these high end machines on the market that for far too long has been saturated with cheap construction and marginal execution. The Asus and Acer premium offerings will perhaps raise the bar and breathe new life into a lagging market segment.

Quality is great and everything, but there's the Mac Air problem. The Mac Air is considered decent quality and has stood the test of time for a couple of years. For Asus, for instance, to charge just as much (or more) and say: "Trust us, we're quality this time!" without the track record to prove it is just not a strategy that's going to work.

Much as I want a decent ultrabook running Win7, I don't really expect to pay more than the cost of the standard proven product in the segment. So unless you're offering considerably better performance or a better price, what reason is there for me to go with new kid on the block?

I have made no bones about preferring OSX to other operating systems, there are those who really prefer Windows and a couple who prefer Linux. The new ultrabooks from Lenovo, Sony, Samsung, ASUS, Acer, and others provide that option (except some might not run Linux but then again they might).

I have found Apple's design and build quality to be superb over the years. These machines offer other choices in the same class.

[NoeAngeless85x]

i dont get it....
ASUS just last month talk about a new slim low budget netbook, with a ssd at $199.
now the same company tell me that the change from atom to core 5 cost $1000?

[MLStrand56]

When I need a Computer, I build one. When I need a Plastic Toy, I go to Toys-R-Us & Buy One!!!!

MLStrand56