those prices are for Z series MID cpus.

Intel has not published N series ( diamonville ) pricing.

It will be much less..

i meant…

1.6ghz = $95

1.86ghz = $160

way way way over priced for what you get. thats what happens when there is no competition in this market segment (AMD doesnt exist, Via has no pull)

“extra” weight was added… 1090g is with 6cell compared to HPs 1460g with 6 cel, both giving 5 hours.

you can add about an extra .5lbz to that weight to get an aftermarket EEE battery to equal the same battery life as the HP, not to mention the extra costs as well.

it’s funny how poorly peoples comparisons are sometime. laptop makers have been offering small batteries in return for pretty spec sheets (lighter weight) for years now. considering you guys are suppose to be a bunch of so-called mobile enthusiasts, i dont see alot of battery talk.

While the difference in screen resolution is notable, arguments could be made either way as to which resolution is better. I’ve become accustomed to an 8.9″ display with 1280×768 resolution, but I’d prefer a larger dot pitch. I’ve also heard from people who operate their 1280×768 LED displays at 1024×600 even though the clarity at this non-native resolution is horrible. Given the footprint, I believe the HP should have a 10″ display with a higher dot pitch.

The chief difference is weight…weight and size…size and weight…. The two differences are weight and size…and screen resolution…. The *three* differences are weight, size, and screen resolution…and price….The *four*…no… *Amongst* the differences…. Amongst the differing features…are such elements as weight, size, screen resolution and price….

No, the biggest difference is screen resolution. 1280×768 vs 1024×600. That is major.

hmm…

I think the the biggest difference of Eee and 2133 is the weight and size

Eee 900: 225mm x 170mm x 35mm, 990g / 1090g

HP 2133: 255mm x 165mm x 33/53 mm, 1299g / 1460g

Specially the weight difference is huge on this class