Too.. Ex.. Pensive..
Seriously, anything with an atom processor in it over $500 has completely lost any sort of value considering entry level laptops start at that price with far better specs.

as far as i see anything over 10" is too big to be called a netbook. i'm typing on my 1000he and i don't see why anyone would spend over $500 on what amounts to a castrated ultra portable.

I think with an Atom and under 12" would qualify, but also the price needs to be $400 or less at the retail level. Otherwise just buy a 13" full blown laptop with dual core processor for $500.

Will the 11.6" screen sneak in under MS's limit for the cheap version of W7? Maybe that is its reason for being.

A Z520 running at 1.33GHz? So its even slower than the old 1000e? How does that make sense? Won't the bigger display mean certain tasks (games, etc...) might require a little more CPU power?

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the Z series of atoms carry a weaker graphics chip? A weaker graphics chip on a larger screen? You kidding me?

i thought Intel was strict on what to use the atom with - 10'' max, no PCIe vga, 1 ram slot etc?????

Netbook size:
I would call it a "netbook" if the size of the keyboard is below what the average person can use to type normally (with two hands).

This will change once screens become OLED as they will go right to the edge hence allowing for large screens. I'd say anything 10" below right now is a "netbook."

I think the term "netbook" is misleading anyway. The difference between "netbooks" and regular laptops is disappearing (aside from size). Even the DVD drive won't matter as many laptops will drop them (as they should).

Why not just call them all laptops?

Just bought a T3400 Pentium Dual Core 15.4" laptop for $379 shipped from Newegg.
Then, I bought a refurb 900 series EeePC for $169 shipped from a different store.

That's $548... Yes, I spent $7 less and got TWO computers. One is more powerful,
one is more portable. Hmmm....

These netbook prices are getting totally out of control.

A nice price would be sub $300 for an atom 9" netbook, and sub $350 for a 10".Swivel screen doesn't cost more than 25,so should be less than 375!
What else is there this laptop has that an Atom does not have?

On the other hand, if you can spare the few mili seconds of lag, the Atom Z processor should run XP or Linux just fine,and give you good battery life.
Though I'd probably prefer a Celeron M processor over this if performance is concerned.

Anything over 9" has no right to be called a netbook.

WHY any serious reviewer, as TH, discuss about the correct Width x Height pixel count for screen.
I think width with 1366 pixels for that small 11" wide screen is excessive, with very small letters, horrible to read ! It should be 1152 or even less ! As netbooks are used to access internet, height is more important than width.
I use a 1280x1024 19" (4x3), and I believe it is a good balance for comfortable reading and space for applications.

I think the classification of netbook is derived from the idea that its sole purpose is to do tasks like access the interNET. Hence, NETbook. If you could fit a Core i7 and Geforce 260 into a 8" laptop that weighted only 4 pounds, it wouldn't be considered a netbook. Nor would a 20", 8 pound laptop with an Atom in it.

A netbook needs to be VERY mobile, 3-4 pounds, and have excellent battery life, 6+ hours. But more importantly it should really only have very basic capabilities. The screen size seems to be more based on preference. I think a 13" is very mobile and a 15" isn't all that bad. The reason we normally don't consider larger screens to be more mobile is because usually the larger the screen is, the more the laptop weights.

"Netbook" is Asus's way of branding slow notebooks, not small notebooks. It's a way of telling consumers, this thing is slow and don't come complaining when you cannot run all the softwares that you want. It also serves a defense against consumer lawsuits. "We never told you that you are buying a notebook." Ultimately, we might see a 17" netbook by Asus. :-) I can see a market among older folks who cannot see well on small screens and only use computers to send emails to grand children. Good development or not, the market will decide.

I think the battery life and portability (ie weight) are the key factors in defining what a netbook is. This (for now) corresponds to an Atom processor and small screen size, but those are more consequences of the first criteria than criterion in themselves.

I personally don't see the need for an 11" netbook right now. I have pretty large hands but am typing comfortably from my 10" EEEPC right now. The extra inch wouldn't matter very much for keyboard spacing and because of the lack of power, you don't really need the larger resolution (though a full 1024*768 would be nice rather than 1024*600).

And as has been said already, I just can't figure how you could justify spending $500+ on a netbook. You can get much more powerful laptops for that amount of money. If you want to get maximum performance out of a netbook (by buying higher-end models), then I figure your thinking is more in line with a normal laptop anyways. The point of the netbook is to get a nice portable work computer for dirt cheap

My netbook problem is not with the keyboard but with my eyes. I need more then 9" screen space to be able to use a PC of any kind in 1024x600 mode. 11.6" to 13" at 1366x768 or 1280x800 is the sweet spot for me - I need the screen real estate, and I am willing to pay for the low weight. Right now for this weight and screen real estate the competition costs more (NC20, Sony).

NetBook for me is (1) low weight, less then 3Lb if possible and no more then 4Lb with battery and charger; (2) reasonable price, (3) enough pixels to make it usable (1024x600 is the absolute minimum, with 1280x800 or more strongly preferred), (4) big enough screen so I do not need a magnifier glass to read it (1366x786 on a 9" screen is useless for me), and (5) usable performance for web surfing, movie / flash playback, and light use of normal office applications (tried out an Asus PC900 with 16GB SSD and was too slow for any use - shipped it back due to unacceptable performance; SSD light continuously on was likely the main culprit, unacceptable slow writes to SSD killed its performance even for looking at my.yahoo). Battery life is not a big issue for me - I have an outlet where ever I am likely to spend more then a couple of hours at a time - but I will take what I can get, given the other restrictions from above. Dual core / hyprethreading is kind of required so the system keeps on responding while one thread is locked in by an errant program.

A third mouse / tablet button (like I have on my Compaq 8510W laptop) comes in really handy for opening new tabs in Firefox / new IE; as it does not take a lot of $$$ to put it in, and it is quite useful, I am amazed so few models have it (pressing both buttons at once simply does not work properly, tried it out in more laptops and netbooks then I can mention here).

Other deal killer for me are the shiny surfaces, specially shiny screen which are common in new laptops - I will not buy at any price a laptop or notebook with a mirror instead of a normal, old style, glare-free LCD. I need to be able to read it with no reflections - no "Crystal Clear" screens I have seen so far come with a lifetime free supply of Windex for the mirror-like surfaces. I would really appreciate if reviewers mention which notebooks / netbooks have such screens, or worse, shiny fingerprint magnet keyboards and cases so I can avoid them....

The sizes, prices, and capacities of electronic devices exist on a coninuum. Although there may be a definitional problem here, whether there's room for an 11-inch device depends on the market and the needs and wants of consumers. At the present price, I wouldn't be in the market for the eee 11-inch model, but I might later on if it comes down in price, especially if a slightly more robust as well as cheaper model comes along. I like my 10-inch 1000he and I'm glad Asus didn't stop with its groundbreaking 7-inch Linux netbook for the sake of satisfying the purists.

So basically, I can pay just slightly under what I paid for my 3 year old 12" 4.4lb 512MB RAM 80GB HD Turion T28 Averatec 2150 laptop for a computer that's probably not much faster (if at all--how do these 2 CPU's compare) and that, ok, has double the RAM and storage (but we're talking 3 years later), but is still basically the same laptop? (And which I've since upgraded with an extended battery, 1.25GB RAM and a 310GB HD, and which still works find (well, with some minor surgery to repair frayed wires, and a power jack that I just can't seem to fix).

Uhuh.

What I really want is a slate tablet that does pretty much what a netbook does, for a similar price and with similar features, but without the keyboard (with the ability to add one if needed). When they figure out how to make those for under $300 and 2lbs, with WiFi, Bluetooth and cellular (although there's always Bluetooth tethering), they'll sell like crazy and make netbooks disappear, as they'll be perfect eReaders, web browsers and TV viewers for commuting, travel and such.

hi i want to buy new netbook & i am confused with the ASUS Eee PC Seashell 1005HA & ASUS Eee PC 1101HA wich one is better because the 1101ha have z520 atom cpu with 11.6-inch HD screen & the 1005ha have N280 atom cpu that is faster than the z520 with 10-inch normal screen so how the HD screen netbook have slower cpu the the 10-inch one so help me with one is faster the N280 or the Z520 plz