Why do notebooks with small screens cost more?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by JohnO, May 8, 2013.

  1. JohnO

    JohnO Guest

    If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally cost around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6" screen, why?

    With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!
     
    JohnO, May 8, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. JohnO

    Enkidu Guest

    On 08/05/13 15:44, JohnO wrote:
    >
    > If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally cost
    > around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6"
    > screen, why?
    >
    > With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!
    >

    Could be a couple of reasons. The most obvious is that they sell less of
    them so there is less economy of scale. The next most obvious is that
    the price is held up so that the sucker, I mean customer, goes for the
    bigger margin larger items. Or it could be that the smaller components
    are more expensive. Or the smaller machines have to have more
    sophisticated component layout.

    Cheers,

    Cliff
     
    Enkidu, May 8, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. JohnO

    JohnO Guest

    On May 8, 5:01 pm, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net dot nz> wrote:
    > JohnO <> wrote:
    > >If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally cost around
    > >double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6" screen, why?

    >
    > >With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!

    >
    > Possibly because of heat dissipation. It isn't the screen that costs more.. The
    > smaller the enclosure the harder it is to cool. Also the components need to be
    > smaller due to smaller packaging.
    > People want fast and small at the same time, that is a technical challenge and
    > will remain so until affordable components are developed that don't generate
    > heat.
    > Just a guess however.
    > Tony


    Hmm, all the main components - hdd, cpu/chipset, ram are the same as
    any other laptop as far as I can see.
     
    JohnO, May 8, 2013
    #3
  4. JohnO

    JohnO Guest

    On May 8, 6:31 pm, "geoff" <> wrote:
    > "JohnO" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    >
    > > If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally cost
    > > around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6" screen,
    > > why?

    >
    > > With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!

    >
    > They didn't sell for ages, and are still at the older (more expensive) price
    > ?
    >
    > geoff


    Don't think so - they all become obsolete at the same time when newer
    CPUs come out. I'm comparing like to like, eg core i7 3630QM etc.
     
    JohnO, May 8, 2013
    #4
  5. JohnO

    Gib Bogle Guest

    On 8/05/2013 3:44 p.m., JohnO wrote:
    > If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally cost around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6" screen, why?
    >
    > With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!
    >


    If more people want the smaller device, they can charge more for it.
    There may be additional costs related to cramming components into a
    smaller volume and cooling them (as has been suggested), but this
    doesn't seem likely to result in the price difference you report.
     
    Gib Bogle, May 8, 2013
    #5
  6. JohnO

    Enkidu Guest

    On 08/05/13 20:59, JohnO wrote:
    > On May 8, 5:01 pm, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net dot nz> wrote:
    >> JohnO <> wrote:
    >>> If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally cost around
    >>> double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6" screen, why?

    >>
    >>> With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!

    >>
    >> Possibly because of heat dissipation. It isn't the screen that costs more. The
    >> smaller the enclosure the harder it is to cool. Also the components need to be
    >> smaller due to smaller packaging.
    >> People want fast and small at the same time, that is a technical challenge and
    >> will remain so until affordable components are developed that don't generate
    >> heat.
    >> Just a guess however.
    >> Tony

    >
    > Hmm, all the main components - hdd, cpu/chipset, ram are the same as
    > any other laptop as far as I can see.
    >

    Yeah, same size in a smaller space.

    Cheers,

    Cliff
     
    Enkidu, May 8, 2013
    #6
  7. JohnO

    Enkidu Guest

    On 08/05/13 21:29, Gib Bogle wrote:
    > On 8/05/2013 3:44 p.m., JohnO wrote:
    >> If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally cost
    >> around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6" screen,
    >> why?
    >>
    >> With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!
    >>

    >
    > If more people want the smaller device, they can charge more for it.
    >

    Not necessarily. The increased cost might well put people off. If the
    per unit supply cost stays the same, it's impossible to tell if the
    number of units sold would increase or decrease as retail price increases.
    >
    > There may be additional costs related to cramming components into a
    > smaller volume and cooling them (as has been suggested), but this
    > doesn't seem likely to result in the price difference you report.
    >

    It may be a number of factors.

    Cheers,

    Cliff
     
    Enkidu, May 8, 2013
    #7
  8. JohnO

    JohnO Guest

    On Wednesday, 8 May 2013 21:29:05 UTC+12, Gib Bogle wrote:
    > On 8/05/2013 3:44 p.m., JohnO wrote:
    >
    > > If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally cost around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6" screen, why?

    >
    > >

    >
    > > With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!

    >
    > >

    >
    >
    >
    > If more people want the smaller device, they can charge more for it.
    >
    > There may be additional costs related to cramming components into a
    >
    > smaller volume and cooling them (as has been suggested), but this
    >
    > doesn't seem likely to result in the price difference you report.


    I can't see the major cost add for cooling - it's not rocket science and heatsinks are made of Al and Cu not unobtanium?

    One way they avoid heat issues is simply by avoiding the higher speed processors. The ultra small notebooks are typically running less powerful cpus than the larger units and desktops. Still no cost add.

    I'm inclined to believe it's a marketing lead price break.
     
    JohnO, May 8, 2013
    #8
  9. JohnO

    Gib Bogle Guest

    On 8/05/2013 10:40 p.m., Enkidu wrote:
    > On 08/05/13 21:29, Gib Bogle wrote:
    >> On 8/05/2013 3:44 p.m., JohnO wrote:
    >>> If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally cost
    >>> around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6" screen,
    >>> why?
    >>>
    >>> With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!
    >>>

    >>
    >> If more people want the smaller device, they can charge more for it.
    > >

    > Not necessarily. The increased cost might well put people off. If the
    > per unit supply cost stays the same, it's impossible to tell if the
    > number of units sold would increase or decrease as retail price increases.


    There is a concept "Charging what the market will bear". If people
    prefer smaller devices, it makes sense that they'd be willing to pay
    more for them.
     
    Gib Bogle, May 9, 2013
    #9
  10. JohnO

    Enkidu Guest

    On 09/05/13 12:24, Gib Bogle wrote:
    > On 8/05/2013 10:40 p.m., Enkidu wrote:
    >> On 08/05/13 21:29, Gib Bogle wrote:
    >>> On 8/05/2013 3:44 p.m., JohnO wrote:
    >>>> If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally cost
    >>>> around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6" screen,
    >>>> why?
    >>>>
    >>>> With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> If more people want the smaller device, they can charge more for it.
    >> >

    >> Not necessarily. The increased cost might well put people off. If the
    >> per unit supply cost stays the same, it's impossible to tell if the
    >> number of units sold would increase or decrease as retail price
    >> increases.

    >
    > There is a concept "Charging what the market will bear". If people
    > prefer smaller devices, it makes sense that they'd be willing to pay
    > more for them.
    >

    *IF* they prefer them. I'm far from sure that that is true, and as I
    said the increased price will tend to put people off.

    Cheers,

    Cliff
     
    Enkidu, May 9, 2013
    #10
  11. JohnO

    Richard Guest

    On 9/05/2013 9:59 a.m., JohnO wrote:
    >>
    >> doesn't seem likely to result in the price difference you report.

    >
    > I can't see the major cost add for cooling - it's not rocket science and heatsinks are made of Al and Cu not unobtanium?
    >
    > One way they avoid heat issues is simply by avoiding the higher speed processors. The ultra small notebooks are typically running less powerful cpus than the larger units and desktops. Still no cost add.
    >
    > I'm inclined to believe it's a marketing lead price break.


    Of course it is, there is more prestige in having a smaller laptop so
    the market will pay more for it.
     
    Richard, May 9, 2013
    #11
  12. JohnO

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on teh intarwebs JohnO wrote:
    > On May 8, 5:01 pm, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net dot nz> wrote:
    >> JohnO <> wrote:
    >>> If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally
    >>> cost around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6"
    >>> screen, why?

    >>
    >>> With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!

    >>
    >> Possibly because of heat dissipation. It isn't the screen that costs
    >> more. The smaller the enclosure the harder it is to cool. Also the
    >> components need to be smaller due to smaller packaging.
    >> People want fast and small at the same time, that is a technical
    >> challenge and will remain so until affordable components are
    >> developed that don't generate heat.
    >> Just a guess however.
    >> Tony

    >
    > Hmm, all the main components - hdd, cpu/chipset, ram are the same as
    > any other laptop as far as I can see.


    Yes, that's as maybe. However the I very much doubt that the 11.6" notebook
    is anywhere near as think as the 15.6" version. That often means that the
    CPU is no longer in a socket, instead soldered to the planar. This
    introduces another potentail point of failure in the production-line - where
    things can go wrong. Meaning more are dumped and the 'good' ones have to
    cost more to cover that fact. Also, the screen may be ~50% of the size but
    it likely has the same pixel-count - and a much higher pixel-density. You're
    wrong in your original assessment - it's not so much the screen *size*
    that's where the cost is it's the number of pixels. If you cram them into a
    smaller area then they cost even more per pixel as it's more delicate =
    higher percantage of units get binned.

    Also consider cooling. If the thick book has a fan that can run at, say
    5Krpm to keep the CPU cool a fan that's half as think either needs to run at
    10K (very noisy) or the chassis neads to be bulky to act as a sink. However
    it can't be heavy... Consequently there is a lot more expensive material
    such as titanium and magnesium in the small machine - not only for 'sinking'
    but also to maintain rigidity in what is a wispy thing by comparison.

    Then there's the cachet of having a machine that is 1/3 the weight but the
    same power as the 15.6" beast - they are a premium product and cost
    accordingly.
    --
    /Shaun.

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
    cozy little classification in the DSM."
    David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
     
    ~misfit~, May 9, 2013
    #12
  13. JohnO

    ~misfit~ Guest

    Somewhere on teh intarwebs JohnO wrote:
    > On Wednesday, 8 May 2013 21:29:05 UTC+12, Gib Bogle wrote:
    >> On 8/05/2013 3:44 p.m., JohnO wrote:
    >>
    >>> If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally
    >>> cost around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6"
    >>> screen, why?

    >>
    >>>

    >>
    >>> With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!

    >>
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> If more people want the smaller device, they can charge more for it.
    >>
    >> There may be additional costs related to cramming components into a
    >>
    >> smaller volume and cooling them (as has been suggested), but this
    >>
    >> doesn't seem likely to result in the price difference you report.

    >
    > I can't see the major cost add for cooling - it's not rocket science
    > and heatsinks are made of Al and Cu not unobtanium?


    As I said above; In the smaller machine the fan is likely much thinner -
    which means it has to be of much better design and construction, better,
    quieter bearings with the ability to handle the higher speeds needed to move
    enough air...

    > One way they avoid heat issues is simply by avoiding the higher speed
    > processors. The ultra small notebooks are typically running less
    > powerful cpus than the larger units and desktops. Still no cost add.


    The OP was comparing like-for-like, the same components in different
    packages.

    > I'm inclined to believe it's a marketing lead price break.


    Oh, for sure that's a part of it but it's not the whole story.
    --
    /Shaun.

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long, way when religious belief has a
    cozy little classification in the DSM."
    David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
     
    ~misfit~, May 9, 2013
    #13
  14. JohnO

    JohnO Guest

    On Thursday, 9 May 2013 23:04:18 UTC+12, ~misfit~ wrote:
    > Somewhere on teh intarwebs JohnO wrote:

    <snip>
    >
    >
    > As I said above; In the smaller machine the fan is likely much thinner -
    > which means it has to be of much better design and construction, better,
    > quieter bearings with the ability to handle the higher speeds needed to move
    > enough air...
    >
    > > One way they avoid heat issues is simply by avoiding the higher speed
    > > processors. The ultra small notebooks are typically running less
    > > powerful cpus than the larger units and desktops. Still no cost add.

    >
    > The OP was comparing like-for-like, the same components in different
    > packages.
    >
    > > I'm inclined to believe it's a marketing lead price break.

    >
    > Oh, for sure that's a part of it but it's not the whole story.
    >


    I still can't see any of those components adding a thousand dollars to the price - even for the display.

    Note the Acer ChromeBook 11.6" is only $450 but it's a Celeron 1.1Ghz cpu.
     
    JohnO, May 9, 2013
    #14
  15. JohnO

    Me Guest

    On 10/05/2013 8:50 a.m., JohnO wrote:
    > On Thursday, 9 May 2013 23:04:18 UTC+12, ~misfit~ wrote:
    >> Somewhere on teh intarwebs JohnO wrote:

    > <snip>
    >>
    >>
    >> As I said above; In the smaller machine the fan is likely much thinner -
    >> which means it has to be of much better design and construction, better,
    >> quieter bearings with the ability to handle the higher speeds needed to move
    >> enough air...
    >>
    >>> One way they avoid heat issues is simply by avoiding the higher speed
    >>> processors. The ultra small notebooks are typically running less
    >>> powerful cpus than the larger units and desktops. Still no cost add.

    >>
    >> The OP was comparing like-for-like, the same components in different
    >> packages.
    >>
    >>> I'm inclined to believe it's a marketing lead price break.

    >>
    >> Oh, for sure that's a part of it but it's not the whole story.
    >>

    >
    > I still can't see any of those components adding a thousand dollars to the price - even for the display.
    >
    > Note the Acer ChromeBook 11.6" is only $450 but it's a Celeron 1.1Ghz cpu.
    >

    It's also made by Acer...
    The last Acer notebook we had in this household was bought at the same
    time as a basic Toshiba notebook with similar specs. The Acer literally
    fell to pieces a year ago, the Toshiba is still going strong.
    Faults with the Acer were with plastic used in the chassis and lid
    fracturing, dumb design power socket which sheared (not from tripping
    over the cable), the PSU was under-powered, so that if the battery was
    flat, you had to leave it charging for at least 15 minutes because it
    wouldn't have enough oomph to spin up the HD and boot and charge the
    battery at the same time. (If you were in a hurry to boot it, you needed
    to remove the battery). Various other biots fell off or cracked. I
    kept it going for a while with araldite, soldering iron, and kiwi
    ingenuity (ham-fisted though I may be) but gave up in the end and sold
    it for $10 for parts on TM.
    Someone might comment that Acer have improved and/or you get what you
    pay for.
    My suggestion is to run as fast as you can - to any other brand.
     
    Me, May 10, 2013
    #15
  16. JohnO

    Donchano Guest

    On Fri, 10 May 2013 18:41:11 +1200, Me <> shouted
    from the highest rooftop:

    >On 10/05/2013 8:50 a.m., JohnO wrote:
    >> On Thursday, 9 May 2013 23:04:18 UTC+12, ~misfit~ wrote:
    >>> Somewhere on teh intarwebs JohnO wrote:

    >> <snip>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> As I said above; In the smaller machine the fan is likely much thinner -
    >>> which means it has to be of much better design and construction, better,
    >>> quieter bearings with the ability to handle the higher speeds needed to move
    >>> enough air...
    >>>
    >>>> One way they avoid heat issues is simply by avoiding the higher speed
    >>>> processors. The ultra small notebooks are typically running less
    >>>> powerful cpus than the larger units and desktops. Still no cost add.
    >>>
    >>> The OP was comparing like-for-like, the same components in different
    >>> packages.
    >>>
    >>>> I'm inclined to believe it's a marketing lead price break.
    >>>
    >>> Oh, for sure that's a part of it but it's not the whole story.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I still can't see any of those components adding a thousand dollars to the price - even for the display.
    >>
    >> Note the Acer ChromeBook 11.6" is only $450 but it's a Celeron 1.1Ghz cpu.
    >>

    >It's also made by Acer...
    >The last Acer notebook we had in this household was bought at the same
    >time as a basic Toshiba notebook with similar specs. The Acer literally
    >fell to pieces a year ago, the Toshiba is still going strong.
    >Faults with the Acer were with plastic used in the chassis and lid
    >fracturing, dumb design power socket which sheared (not from tripping
    >over the cable), the PSU was under-powered, so that if the battery was
    >flat, you had to leave it charging for at least 15 minutes because it
    >wouldn't have enough oomph to spin up the HD and boot and charge the
    >battery at the same time. (If you were in a hurry to boot it, you needed
    >to remove the battery). Various other biots fell off or cracked. I
    >kept it going for a while with araldite, soldering iron, and kiwi
    >ingenuity (ham-fisted though I may be) but gave up in the end and sold
    >it for $10 for parts on TM.
    >Someone might comment that Acer have improved and/or you get what you
    >pay for.
    >My suggestion is to run as fast as you can - to any other brand.


    Couldn't agree more. I've not only had endless problems with the two
    Acers I've owned, but their service in NZ is total crap. I've heard
    the same from other people who've had Acer products. Wouldn't touch
    them with a barge pole.
     
    Donchano, May 10, 2013
    #16
  17. JohnO

    JohnO Guest

    On May 10, 6:50 pm, Donchano <> wrote:
    > On Fri, 10 May 2013 18:41:11 +1200, Me <> shouted
    > from the highest rooftop:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > >On 10/05/2013 8:50 a.m., JohnO wrote:
    > >> On Thursday, 9 May 2013 23:04:18 UTC+12, ~misfit~  wrote:
    > >>> Somewhere on teh intarwebs JohnO wrote:
    > >> <snip>

    >
    > >>> As I said above; In the smaller machine the fan is likely much thinner -
    > >>> which means it has to be of much better design and construction, better,
    > >>> quieter bearings with the ability to handle the higher speeds needed to move
    > >>> enough air...

    >
    > >>>> One way they avoid heat issues is simply by avoiding the higher speed
    > >>>> processors. The ultra small notebooks are typically running less
    > >>>> powerful cpus than the larger units and desktops. Still no cost add.

    >
    > >>> The OP was comparing like-for-like, the same components in different
    > >>> packages.

    >
    > >>>> I'm inclined to believe it's a marketing lead price break.

    >
    > >>> Oh, for sure that's a part of it but it's not the whole story.

    >
    > >> I still can't see any of those components adding a thousand dollars tothe price - even for the display.

    >
    > >> Note the Acer ChromeBook 11.6" is only $450 but it's a Celeron 1.1Ghz cpu.

    >
    > >It's also made by Acer...
    > >The last Acer notebook we had in this household was bought at the same
    > >time as a basic Toshiba notebook with similar specs.  The Acer literally
    > >fell to pieces a year ago, the Toshiba is still going strong.
    > >Faults with the Acer were with plastic used in the chassis and lid
    > >fracturing, dumb design power socket which sheared (not from tripping
    > >over the cable), the PSU was under-powered, so that if the battery was
    > >flat, you had to leave it charging for at least 15 minutes because it
    > >wouldn't have enough oomph to spin up the HD and boot and charge the
    > >battery at the same time. (If you were in a hurry to boot it, you needed
    > >to remove the battery).  Various other biots fell off or cracked.  I
    > >kept it going for a while with araldite, soldering iron, and kiwi
    > >ingenuity (ham-fisted though I may be) but gave up in the end and sold
    > >it for $10 for parts on TM.
    > >Someone might comment that Acer have improved and/or you get what you
    > >pay for.
    > >My suggestion is to run as fast as you can - to any other brand.

    >
    > Couldn't agree more. I've not only had endless problems with the two
    > Acers I've owned, but their service in NZ is total crap. I've heard
    > the same from other people who've had Acer products. Wouldn't touch
    > them with a barge pole.


    Thanks for the heads-up on Acer, guys.

    My preference so far is for the Toshiba too - Z930 model.
     
    JohnO, May 10, 2013
    #17
  18. JohnO

    JohnO Guest

    On May 11, 10:31 am, JohnO <> wrote:
    > On May 10, 6:50 pm, Donchano <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Fri, 10 May 2013 18:41:11 +1200, Me <> shouted
    > > from the highest rooftop:

    >
    > > >On 10/05/2013 8:50 a.m., JohnO wrote:
    > > >> On Thursday, 9 May 2013 23:04:18 UTC+12, ~misfit~  wrote:
    > > >>> Somewhere on teh intarwebs JohnO wrote:
    > > >> <snip>

    >
    > > >>> As I said above; In the smaller machine the fan is likely much thinner -
    > > >>> which means it has to be of much better design and construction, better,
    > > >>> quieter bearings with the ability to handle the higher speeds needed to move
    > > >>> enough air...

    >
    > > >>>> One way they avoid heat issues is simply by avoiding the higher speed
    > > >>>> processors. The ultra small notebooks are typically running less
    > > >>>> powerful cpus than the larger units and desktops. Still no cost add.

    >
    > > >>> The OP was comparing like-for-like, the same components in different
    > > >>> packages.

    >
    > > >>>> I'm inclined to believe it's a marketing lead price break.

    >
    > > >>> Oh, for sure that's a part of it but it's not the whole story.

    >
    > > >> I still can't see any of those components adding a thousand dollars to the price - even for the display.

    >
    > > >> Note the Acer ChromeBook 11.6" is only $450 but it's a Celeron 1.1Ghz cpu.

    >
    > > >It's also made by Acer...
    > > >The last Acer notebook we had in this household was bought at the same
    > > >time as a basic Toshiba notebook with similar specs.  The Acer literally
    > > >fell to pieces a year ago, the Toshiba is still going strong.
    > > >Faults with the Acer were with plastic used in the chassis and lid
    > > >fracturing, dumb design power socket which sheared (not from tripping
    > > >over the cable), the PSU was under-powered, so that if the battery was
    > > >flat, you had to leave it charging for at least 15 minutes because it
    > > >wouldn't have enough oomph to spin up the HD and boot and charge the
    > > >battery at the same time. (If you were in a hurry to boot it, you needed
    > > >to remove the battery).  Various other biots fell off or cracked.  I
    > > >kept it going for a while with araldite, soldering iron, and kiwi
    > > >ingenuity (ham-fisted though I may be) but gave up in the end and sold
    > > >it for $10 for parts on TM.
    > > >Someone might comment that Acer have improved and/or you get what you
    > > >pay for.
    > > >My suggestion is to run as fast as you can - to any other brand.

    >
    > > Couldn't agree more. I've not only had endless problems with the two
    > > Acers I've owned, but their service in NZ is total crap. I've heard
    > > the same from other people who've had Acer products. Wouldn't touch
    > > them with a barge pole.

    >
    > Thanks for the heads-up on Acer, guys.
    >
    > My preference so far is for the Toshiba too - Z930 model.


    .... the Lenovo X230 range also looks good and are quite a bit less
    costly than the Tosh.
     
    JohnO, May 10, 2013
    #18
  19. JohnO

    Gib Bogle Guest

    On 9/05/2013 10:59 p.m., ~misfit~ wrote:
    > Somewhere on teh intarwebs JohnO wrote:
    >> On May 8, 5:01 pm, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net dot nz> wrote:
    >>> JohnO <> wrote:
    >>>> If you look at notebooks with say, 11.6" screens, they generally
    >>>> cost around double the price of a similar spec machine with a 15.6"
    >>>> screen, why?
    >>>
    >>>> With TVs, the smaller the screen the cheaper the price!
    >>>
    >>> Possibly because of heat dissipation. It isn't the screen that costs
    >>> more. The smaller the enclosure the harder it is to cool. Also the
    >>> components need to be smaller due to smaller packaging.
    >>> People want fast and small at the same time, that is a technical
    >>> challenge and will remain so until affordable components are
    >>> developed that don't generate heat.
    >>> Just a guess however.
    >>> Tony

    >>
    >> Hmm, all the main components - hdd, cpu/chipset, ram are the same as
    >> any other laptop as far as I can see.

    >
    > Yes, that's as maybe. However the I very much doubt that the 11.6" notebook
    > is anywhere near as think as the 15.6" version. That often means that the
    > CPU is no longer in a socket, instead soldered to the planar. This
    > introduces another potentail point of failure in the production-line - where
    > things can go wrong. Meaning more are dumped and the 'good' ones have to
    > cost more to cover that fact. Also, the screen may be ~50% of the size but
    > it likely has the same pixel-count - and a much higher pixel-density. You're
    > wrong in your original assessment - it's not so much the screen *size*
    > that's where the cost is it's the number of pixels. If you cram them into a
    > smaller area then they cost even more per pixel as it's more delicate =
    > higher percantage of units get binned.
    >
    > Also consider cooling. If the thick book has a fan that can run at, say
    > 5Krpm to keep the CPU cool a fan that's half as think either needs to run at
    > 10K (very noisy) or the chassis neads to be bulky to act as a sink. However
    > it can't be heavy... Consequently there is a lot more expensive material
    > such as titanium and magnesium in the small machine - not only for 'sinking'
    > but also to maintain rigidity in what is a wispy thing by comparison.
    >
    > Then there's the cachet of having a machine that is 1/3 the weight but the
    > same power as the 15.6" beast - they are a premium product and cost
    > accordingly.
    >


    I agree with your points. In particular you make a very good point
    about the smaller screen having the same number of pixels - definitely a
    more expensive item.
     
    Gib Bogle, May 11, 2013
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?QXJhZ29ybjczMjY=?=

    Weird Problem on connecting wirelessly two notebooks

    =?Utf-8?B?QXJhZ29ybjczMjY=?=, Jan 12, 2005, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    652
    =?Utf-8?B?TWFkTWF4NzMyNg==?=
    Jan 14, 2005
  2. zZz
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,051
    SgtMinor
    Jan 12, 2005
  3. Mr.Happy

    why do film SLRs cost more than DSLRs?

    Mr.Happy, Aug 10, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    717
    Mr.Happy
    Aug 12, 2005
  4. Little Green Eyed Dragon

    TV screens big versus Small LCD versus Plasma.

    Little Green Eyed Dragon, Mar 2, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    418
    Little Green Eyed Dragon
    Mar 2, 2007
  5. news.xtra.co.nz

    NZ Cost vs US Cost...

    news.xtra.co.nz, Dec 29, 2005, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    930
    MarkH
    Jan 5, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page