Discuss (23) -
Posted at 8:40 AM on Monday 01/12/09 by
Ben
Hotness UNHOT
NewEgg.com has the new Lenovo IdeaPad S10 10.2" Notebook with Intel ATOM Processor N270 Single Core ( 1.60GHz 533MHz 512KB ) for $350 + $0 shipping = $350 shipped.

  • 2.76 lbs and about one inch thin, 1.60GHz ATOM, 1GB RAM, 160GB HDD
  • Intel High Definition Audio, Integrated web cam and microphone
  • LED Backlight, GMA 950 Video, 512 MB PC2-5300 DDR2, Windows XP Home
    • 1
      refractionsofthedawn - Posted 8:44 am PST 01/12/09 (16 Posts)  Report Spam

      Sorry, I'm confused. Is is 1gb ram or 512mb ram? If it weren't for the comma before the number 512, I would think that was for the video processor. Clarification anyone?

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 2
      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 3
      dhho1 - Posted 9:16 am PST 01/12/09 (2173 Posts)  Report Spam

      is this powerful enough to do normal Office duty?

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 4
      koticphreak - Posted 9:20 am PST 01/12/09 (81 Posts)  Report Spam

      yes, this is more than enough to do everyday surfing/office duty

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 5
      sagirl17 - Posted 9:39 am PST 01/12/09 (34 Posts)  Report Spam

      the description says 1GB RAM

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 6
      fxp - Posted 9:55 am PST 01/12/09 (983 Posts)  Report Spam

      The battery life is the
      Knock Knock.
      Who's there?
      Bacon.
      Bacon who?
      . I had a small Toshiba and was always running low on battery power. You have to be near a plug all the time.

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 7
      the lawyer - Posted 10:16 am PST 01/12/09 (4118 Posts)  Report Spam

      with xp, the atom processors do not run vista well.

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 8
      koticphreak - Posted 11:03 am PST 01/12/09 (81 Posts)  Report Spam

      no processor runs vista well Razz

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 9
      boxingfan - Posted 11:31 am PST 01/12/09 (458 Posts)  Report Spam

      Not sure what you are talking about #8. At this point, Vista is a much better operating system than XP. It just needs more ram.

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 10
      digh - Posted 11:53 am PST 01/12/09 (467 Posts)  Report Spam

      I've been using PCs since IBM DOS w no hard drives, and Vista SUCKS!!! No matter how much ram you feed it. Long Live xp.

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 11
      koticphreak - Posted 11:55 am PST 01/12/09 (81 Posts)  Report Spam

      #9, other than it being pretty, more fool proof, and having a few useful 'gadgets', what makes vista a much better operating system?

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 12
      boxingfan - Posted 12:04 pm PST 01/12/09 (458 Posts)  Report Spam

      #11, Vista is more stable than XP. It just doesn't crash. It also doesn't suffer from Windows rot like XP. After a while, things just stop working in XP.

      I've built over 200 machines. Several returning customers. The ones who have the most problems, you know, the ones who really shouldn't actually own a computer, have had a difficult time with XP. It would always seem to crash on them.

      I've converted them over to Vista, and I never hear from them about problems. Their computers just work. No crashes.

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 13
      baltimoron - Posted 12:14 pm PST 01/12/09 (514 Posts)  Report Spam

      I have Vista Business running on a Dell D420 (100g HD, 2g Ram, Centrino Duo) and it has run well. But I also killed all of the desktop garbage and games that came with Vista and stripped off all of Dell's pre-loaded BS software. I don't have anything on the machine but Office 2007, IE, and Photoshop and it has performed pretty well for a business computer. Granted most users want more out of their computer that photoshop and Office.

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 14
      david714 - Posted 1:05 pm PST 01/12/09 (478 Posts)  Report Spam

      If you're having problems with vista it's because you're a retard...

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 15
      koticphreak - Posted 1:45 pm PST 01/12/09 (81 Posts)  Report Spam

      #12, all you basically said is that vista is more fool proof and yes, I agree. I keep my XP machines on for 2-3 months at a time without a restart with daily use on one of them and 2-3 times/week on the other. I can count the XP crashes i've had in the last 8 years on my 2 hands.

      Vista has NO benefits whatsoever that are worth the switch for someone who knows how to use a computer.

      If you think Vista is great, you may as well switch to Apple, it's more stable and prettier.

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 16
      boxingfan - Posted 1:59 pm PST 01/12/09 (458 Posts)  Report Spam

      #15, Is that really all you got from my post? You should probably read it again. Maybe several times. The simple fact is it works better than XP. I have the customer base to prove it. Plus, it is more functional. Try getting QAM support from XP.

      It's simple really. Vista isn't a huge leap ahead of Xp. XP wasn't a huge leap over 2000, or 98. But Vist is far superior than 98. Technology takes small steps most of the time. I wonder how many people were holding onto their horses when the auto came around.

      You can keep xp for the next ten years. You will find yourself far behind if you do though.

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 17
      koticphreak - Posted 2:27 pm PST 01/12/09 (81 Posts)  Report Spam

      XP was not much superior to 2000, but 2000 was much more superior to 98, particularly, NTFS which is much faster and more stable.

      Vista is less of a leap ahead as much as a leap sideways.

      I read your post again, you said people who don't know how to use a computer crashed their computer more using XP than vista. As for "things stop working". what things? everything works for me.

      And as I thought I made it clear before, I said people who know how to use a computer should keep XP, so they don't need QAM support.

      I'm not against change. I installed vista for 2 days when it came out. found it to be slower and less efficient all around so I reverted. I'll probably switch to Windows 8 when it comes out in ~2012

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 18
      truebeliever71 - Posted 3:49 pm PST 01/12/09 (12 Posts)  Report Spam

      Vista sucks on any Atom processor. Want a good deal check out a Dell Mini9

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 19
      lawnsprinkler - Posted 3:54 pm PST 01/12/09 (1876 Posts)  Report Spam

      My customer base says #16 is a retard.

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0
    • 20
      jlayman920 - Posted 5:08 pm PST 01/12/09 (362 Posts)  Report Spam

      #16 I don't care what your customer base says because I rely on my own personal experience with both operating systems and IMO, XP is better. My wife has a 6 month old laptop running Vista and I have a 4 year old laptop with a crappy Celeron processor running XP. We've had to reboot her comp more in 6 months than I have rebooted mine in 4 years. To me, XP is better.

      Was this useful?
      Voting ...
      0 0

    Already a member? Sign in below.

    Forgot Password?

    Registration takes seconds! Once registered you’ll have members only access to:

    • Favorites bookmark list
    • Fully customizable User Profile
    • Discussions on all products
    • Forums & more
    or