- May 14, 2012
- 6,762
- 1
- 0
Okay, I just don't get the appeal of the ultraportable, be it the MacBook Air or Intel's relentless marketing campaign for "ultrabooks".
I understand wanting a smaller computer. I understand wanting a lighter computer. And I certainly get wanting both of those without compromising performance or battery life.
What I cannot wrap my head around is all of this focus on the thinness of the machine. Leaving aside the secondary effect that a thinner machine is lighter than a thicker one, why does it matter if my notebook is 0.9" thick rather than 1.2"? I can't come up with even one use scenario where it matters: it has no real impact on how the machine is used, and barely any impact on how mobile it is. Yet all I see is manufacturers fighting over whose machine is the thinnest by half a millimeter.
What am I not seeing here? Or is it just yet another technology fad, spurred on by an irrational obsession over aesthetics and commercial one-upsmanship?
I understand wanting a smaller computer. I understand wanting a lighter computer. And I certainly get wanting both of those without compromising performance or battery life.
What I cannot wrap my head around is all of this focus on the thinness of the machine. Leaving aside the secondary effect that a thinner machine is lighter than a thicker one, why does it matter if my notebook is 0.9" thick rather than 1.2"? I can't come up with even one use scenario where it matters: it has no real impact on how the machine is used, and barely any impact on how mobile it is. Yet all I see is manufacturers fighting over whose machine is the thinnest by half a millimeter.
What am I not seeing here? Or is it just yet another technology fad, spurred on by an irrational obsession over aesthetics and commercial one-upsmanship?