Acer TimelineU M5-481TG-6814 14" Ultrabook (GT640M) - $649.99+tax w/FS (DEAD)

Quote from slystache : In laptops smaller than 15.6", I have heard some say that the lower resolution is, if nothing else, a blessing for one's eyesight; perhaps they were just trying to make themselves feel better for not having a higher-resolution display. In a 14" display, my feeling is that it's probably more of a luxury than a necessity -- one of those boxes that would be nice to tick on the feature list. That perfect laptop/ultrabook that ticks every box, however, still eludes me. My old laptop is 13.3" @ 1366x768 and I personally don't feel that the resolution is a problem at all.

Personally, I think that 1600x900 or 1440x900 (like we have on MacBook Pro and Wintel laptops from 5 years ago) is the sweet spot for 13"-14" screens. Getting 1920x1080 would be nice, and I wouldn't consider a 15.6" laptop that didn't have it, but then I've never had screen resolution issues. I can't understand why Asus went away from those resolutons on the newer Zenbooks, other than being able to brag about specs.

I'm in the same boat in that I haven't been able to find exactly what I want. A 13.3" Zenbook with a 640M and 1600x900 would be ideal. Instead I either get stuck with a 620M and 1080P or a 620M and a crippled resolution. The one other notebook that stands out as an interesting option is the 15.6" Samsung Series 7. It's got a GT640M, 1600x900, and is only 1/10th of an inch thicker than this Acer. It's around $999 at the moment, which makes it the cheapest of the three units I'm looking at (UX32VD, Series 7, or UX51). I think the UX51 is probably just about perfect, if only it didn't start at near $1900.

this is a great price for some great specs

Quote from bestco : 4.3 lbs is a little bit on the heavy side for an ultrabook. 3 cell battery lasts up to 8 hours? that sounds weird.

Quote from slystache : The new Ivy bridge processors, like the Core i5 in this one, are very power efficient. Combined with Intel/NVidia Optimus technology to switch between integrated and dedicated graphics depending on the task being performed, I don't think it is at all unreasonable to expect "up to" 8 hours of battery life. Most consumer feedback and other third-party reviews seem to confirm this, citing battery life as a strong pro for this particular model (on par with or better than many other less powerful ultrabooks/thin and lights); my perception is that a solid 6.5 hours of battery life during moderate use is typical for this laptop, though I doubt those estimations extend to graphically-intensive gaming.

Quote from bestco : I thought it was weird because I usually see a 6-7 hour battery life on laptops equipped with a 6 cell or 8 cell battery. And this one is only a 3-cell. how's the display quality? is the 1366 x 768 a concern for this 14" screen? the price sure is very tempting.

FYI number of cells is not necessarily indicative of actual battery capacity. 3-cell just means the batteries consist of 3-cells in a series, without regard to actual capacity of each cell. This 3-cell's 4850mah is close to the capacity of many 6-cell batteries (many are 4400mah).

And then of course the actual hardware's power draw and the tendency for given battery life numbers to be inaccurate, and you'll find the only accurate battery life measures tend to be from reviewers' benchmarks.

Sony E Vaio- i5 dedicated graphics 6gb ram. 750gb 7200 any color 4pounds all optical drives 900p for $799 free shipping
Ram and resolution are worth the extra 170$

This is average price for screen resolution and other specs not a good deal even

Also ACER...brand quality issues

Quote from RealD3Al : Sony E Vaio- i5 dedicated graphics 6gb ram. 750gb 7200 any color 4pounds all optical drives 900p for $799 free shipping Ram and resolution are worth the extra 170$ This is average price for screen resolution and other specs not a good deal even Also ACER...brand quality issues

Their Timeline series tends to get good reviews, and it's their high end line. Yes, they sell a lot of low-end stuff that tends to have reliability problems (although I've had Acers outlast name brand laptops).
There was a survey on failure rates I read a while back that seemed to indicate that reliability and brand were not as related as high-end vs low-end laptops. Low-end laptops, as expected, tend to have higher failure rates, while high-end laptops regardless of brand had less failure rates.

Found one of the surveys:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/1...-hp-fails/
This seems to support what you say, Acer seems to have a high failure rate. But you'll note that they mention how "you get what you pay for".
I'll post the other one if I find it.

Quote from slystache : In laptops smaller than 15.6", I have heard some say that the lower resolution is, if nothing else, a blessing for one's eyesight; perhaps they were just trying to make themselves feel better for not having a higher-resolution display. In a 14" display, my feeling is that it's probably more of a luxury than a necessity -- one of those boxes that would be nice to tick on the feature list. That perfect laptop/ultrabook that ticks every box, however, still eludes me. My old laptop is 13.3" @ 1366x768 and I personally don't feel that the resolution is a problem at all.

something along the lines of a 13 inch sony s series probably is the best balance of power and portability

Full performace mobile processor check( no ulv there)
high res display check
optical drive check
Switchable graphics check
Thin and Comparatively light Check
Backlit keyboard Check
Solid build quality check

i dont know what else would you want/need in a portable machine

Quote from RealD3Al : Sony E Vaio- i5 dedicated graphics 6gb ram. 750gb 7200 any color 4pounds all optical drives 900p for $799 free shipping Ram and resolution are worth the extra 170$ This is average price for screen resolution and other specs not a good deal even Also ACER...brand quality issues

I have not seen a Vaio that has the specifications you are referencing, has graphics comparable to this Acer, and is at that price point. Most seem to have simply integrated graphics, or else they have low-end AMD chipsets.

The faster / larger hard drive, higher resolution, and additional RAM that you mention are certainly nice, but I'm not certain they would make up for the loss in graphics power for someone like me who is interested in using their laptop for gaming. Of course I may be wrong, so do you have a link to the laptop you are referencing at the given specs and given price?

Quote from hitman007 : something along the lines of a 13 inch sony s series probably is the best balance of power and portability Full performace mobile processor check( no ulv there) high res display check optical drive check Switchable graphics check Thin and Comparatively light Check Backlit keyboard Check Solid build quality check i dont know what else would you want/need in a portable machine

You make a compelling case, but given that this is Slickdeals, it seems silly to leave out one of the the most important "checks" -- price. The cheapest S-Series I can find with those specifications is well over $1000.

Is this really a slickdeal? I thought the Toshiba from a few days ago had a better spec and was cheaper. Too bad that sold out too quickly.

Quote from ourwish11 : this is a great price for some great specs

Are you sure about that? I thought the Toshiba from a few days ago had a better spec - more memory, SSD, and $150 cheaper... too bad it got sold out too quickly.

Quote from ishtay76 : can someone please tell how it is comparing the vizio CT15-A5 (not for gaming purpose yes for all others)?

The vizio's form factor is much better than the acer, it has a nicer screen at a higher res, and all-ssd storage so its going to be FAST. The Acer has a better GPU and an optical drive.

The reasons to buy this laptop is the GPU. There aren't any other laptops this small and this cheap with as powerful a GPU. If other things are higher priorities for you there are better deals to be had.

I had wanted one of these several years ago, before there was even such a thing as ultrabooks. But Acer didn't sell the TimelineX's with discrete graphics in the US. I ended up spending a ton more money for a Viao Z. These days there are a few more options for small, portable, laptops with good graphics (Vaio S, Zenbook) but not many, and all more expensive.

Bought one of this from Newegg on the Friday before Christmas (It was $649.99 since that day). Unfortunately UPS lost the package or it was stolen so I had to wait a long long time before I get a replacement unit.

I am going to put in a 8GB 1.35V Patriot RAM and a Samsung 840 250GB. Waiting for the Crucial m4 mSATA 256GB to go down 160 before I will get one. If anyone wants to know if the 8GB RAM will work, you could PM me.

Would this be an decent upgrade form my timelinex 4820tg?