Asus S56CA-WH31 Ultrabook $450 Shipped

Since when do ultra books have screens this big?

Quote from Mako1215 : Why would you need more then 8 in this one?

I tend to use my laptops as desktops with an external monitor in the office and then I can grab and go when I'm on the road for work. Synchronizing between desktop and laptop became a pain, easier to just keep current backups and use one machine.

Each time a new version of your web browser, office suite, anti-virus, etc is released it tends to gobble up more memory than the last version. So being able to add lots of memory is a nice way to future proof your investment since memory gets cheaper and cheaper as time goes by. Asus products tend to last longer, or at least they have fewer warranty claims than other brands according to info from warranty vendor square trade.

As for me personally I run a LOT of extensions in my web browser and like to keep a LOT of tabs open at the same time. Combine that with my desktop gadgets and custom GUI add-ons and I use up 8GB easily.

Quote from dougpaw57 : Why can't we complain about the resolution? 1366x768 on a 14" display is criminal, on a 15.6" display it's an atrocity.

Higher resolutions cost more to make. If you want higher resolution you will have to pay more. LCD prices fluctuate and it's on the up so with time higher resolution will cost even more..

Quote from geniv : IF they call that an "ultrabook" then I'll call myself slim and fit..I TD this this deal just on the princple that Asus is a retard for using "ultrabook" for this.

Holy s*** are you dense... even after the point was made that "Ultrabook" is a set of specifications (and with a link to the specs, no less) that makes no mention of screen resolution or weight, you STILL are complaining, and even TD'ing the thread because it doesn't meet YOUR definition? Wow. I couldn't care less about Asus, and now I feel compelled to give the thread a TU just to counteract an uninformed TD. A DELIBERATELY uninformed TD, at that. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

You and your bitchy friends, who also can't bother to find out what the specs are, apparently, could stand to do a little research. For instance, this IS "slim". It's .8" thick (21mm), which IS one of the specs it has to meet. Even one millimeter thicker (in this screen size) and it wouldn't be an Ultrabook. But it IS one. Asus isn't "a retard", but people who can't read specs they've been directed to and figure out if a product meets them may be. Get over it.

Quote from sreeves3 : Since when do ultra books have screens this big?

While not common on the market, there is nothing in the Ultrabook specs that prohibits a 15" screen. Another one off the top of my head is the 15" Acer M5 TimelineU, which is fractionally thinner than this and fractionally heavier, but has an i5, more RAM and a dedicated video card. It does not improve on the screen resolution and is also much more expensive.... but even at nearly 5lbs, it, too, is an Ultrabook.

Damn, I almost bought this a few days ago when it was $500. Whew.

Intel would like to remind everyone that nothing in the Ultrabook specification excludes gooey lumps hurled by zoo'd primates, something recent product releases suggest could be right around their "innovation corner".

why cant people just appreciate someone was kind enough to share the deal. This is SD not a tech forum!

Basically, it is either you will buy it or not. These are the two only answers you need here.

bad res

Quote from ca51580520 : why cant people just appreciate someone was kind enough to share the deal. This is SD not a tech forum! Basically, it is either you will buy it or not. These are the two only answers you need here.

This is "Slick"Deals, not "Every"Deals.

If it's a bad product for a bad price, people should know. If it isn't clear and there is room for discussion, it should be discussed. If there is relevant information, it should be posted for all to see. If it can be identified, elaborated, or categorized better, someone should provide the information to make it more useful.
This is what a forum is for. This is what the internet is good for: communication.

We need more answers than just whether a person is buying it or not. In fact, that is probably one of the most useless pieces of information you could post. If a person buys 2lbs of dog feces for $500,with the possibility of pieces of 24k gold and pure diamonds embedded inside, it doesn't help me to know that he bought a piece of feces for $500. It will help to know that the dog the feces was sourced from, liked to eat people's expensive jewelry and so had a high chance of having them in it. It also helps to know if that jewelry eaten was worth $10, or $1000.

But, if it makes you feel any better, I'll apologize for everything on the internet not being puppies and love for every piece of vomit regurgitated onto the internet.

Now someone post an obnoxiously useless remark about how this isn't a Macbook, so we can come full circle.

Quote from Maschil : 4cell battery.. hm

I require a minimum of 4.25 cells.. tisk tisk.

Quote from drdiaboloco : Holy s*** are you dense... even after the point was made that "Ultrabook" is a set of specifications (and with a link to the specs, no less) that makes no mention of screen resolution or weight, you STILL are complaining, and even TD'ing the thread because it doesn't meet YOUR definition? Wow. I couldn't care less about Asus, and now I feel compelled to give the thread a TU just to counteract an uninformed TD. A DELIBERATELY uninformed TD, at that. There are none so blind as those who will not see. You and your bitchy friends, who also can't bother to find out what the specs are, apparently, could stand to do a little research. For instance, this IS "slim". It's .8" thick (21mm), which IS one of the specs it has to meet. Even one millimeter thicker (in this screen size) and it wouldn't be an Ultrabook. But it IS one. Asus isn't "a retard", but people who can't read specs they've been directed to and figure out if a product meets them may be. Get over it.

Quote from drdiaboloco : Holy s*** are you dense... even after the point was made that "Ultrabook" is a set of specifications (and with a link to the specs, no less) that makes no mention of screen resolution or weight, you STILL are complaining, and even TD'ing the thread because it doesn't meet YOUR definition? Wow. I couldn't care less about Asus, and now I feel compelled to give the thread a TU just to counteract an uninformed TD. A DELIBERATELY uninformed TD, at that. There are none so blind as those who will not see. You and your bitchy friends, who also can't bother to find out what the specs are, apparently, could stand to do a little research. For instance, this IS "slim". It's .8" thick (21mm), which IS one of the specs it has to meet. Even one millimeter thicker (in this screen size) and it wouldn't be an Ultrabook. But it IS one. Asus isn't "a retard", but people who can't read specs they've been directed to and figure out if a product meets them may be. Get over it.

Relax. No need to be so uncouth, especially when it does nothing to help get your point across.

Regardless of whose fault it is, I'm sure we can all agree that the term "Ultrabook" has been grossly abused.
"Ultrabook" was marketed and understood by many as laptops that were both portable and powerful. Many people, myself included, have always associated "Ultrabook" with the term "ultraportable" that came before it. So it is frustrating to look for Ultrabooks and find such heavy laptops.
4.5lbs is very heavy. Heavier than many 17" laptops. It's also not very portable.
So I might go a little further and say what an "Ultrabook" (if the term was used usefully and properly), should be. It should match all the specifications given and a few more. It should be something special that is both "ultraportable" and has the power of a good laptop.

And besides, a lot of these people aren't really saying that this is a bad deal just because it doesn't match their definition of "Ultrabook". They're basically saying that this product is not a good product for the price, and are bewildered that it is being marketed as an "Ultrabook". Now it might have skewed their perception a bit, because they expected an "Ultrabook", but it doesn't change their opinion's validity.

Quote from grueber : After looking at Intel's definition the term "Utrabook" is a complete joke.

Yep, it's not really Asus' fault if Intel's definition of "Ultrabook" is rather lax. The current main requirements are just that a notebook be moderately thin and get 5 hours of battery life, with an Intel chipset.

I can see how people might expect more from an "Ultrabook" though, seeing as Intel originally debuted the category as products that would compete with other thin and light models like the Macbook Air. They didn't provide very strict requirements though, so you end up with notebooks like this carrying that name, despite not being near the same category in terms of portability or features. This system does look reasonably thin compared to most other notebooks in this price range though.

screw i3, my i7 asus U36S ultrabook is 380$, pass, next deal please