It would have been nice to include a shot of what the desktop looks like on that screen. I've never seen Windows in 21:9. Looks like an interesting design, but I like my vertical space.
that aspect ratio is distusting. i feel like i'm trying to fit in yoda's house just looking at the thing while it's OFF. for the love of god, can we please just go back to 16:10 permanently?
This is hardly new and unique. When was the last time you saw 15:9 referred to as 5:3, or to use the most common example, how often do you see 16:10 given as 8:5?
4:3 is the exception rather than the rule, honestly.
This seems like the perfect compact machine to have a dedicated number pad, which would have been a major plus in my books. Just look at all the extra space beside the keyboard - why not make use of it?
I know, amazingly the only real flaw with this thing is the typical Toshiba keyboard layout. Other than that, $700 for this type of machine is reasonable if you can adjust to the location of the keys (I can't, if it isn't a Thinkpad editing block I can't do it)
I've always wanted a super wide screen laptop with a tn panel at a stupid low resolution. I also hate it when my videos fill up the whole screen because black bars are awesome. It would be perfect for movies released in 2.37, i'll just pop in a blura-- oh.
Since the display is neither 1920 pixels in width, nor 720 pixels in height, you will always be using non-native resolutions. The advantage with the wider aspect ratio, is that you can crop some of the 1080 vertical pixels (i.e. those in the letter box) and scale the result to 1792 pixels of width (or just crop the borders, if you prefer using the native resolution, and don't mind losing 64 pixels left and right (and about 30 top and bottom)
I hope that we get decently sized wide desktop screens soon.
Some 3840x1600 32" displays would be awesome. I'd be willing to plop down about $2.5-3k for such a display, if it can do localized contrast and brightness control, 10/12 bit color and decent grays, as well as be well calibrated. S-PVA or S-IPS with multiple high-frequency PWM ccfl backlights, or Adobe-RGB color LEDs.
And bloody USB (or displayport, thunderbolt) remote control! It's been done ten years ago, the cost is negligible, but not having to reach across the desk to use some god forsaken OSD to manage the screen is so worth it. Especially if the screen were to support advanced features.
* No TN panel. IPS, anything IPS, even E-IPS or even VA would be better.
* Double the 768 vertical resolution as it is painful regardless of how wide a panel is.
* Decent Graphics (Refuse to use Intel graphics after the last several decades of poor IGP's with even worse drivers which are still crap today.) or went with AMD's trinity.
* Better network connectivity.
As for peoples qualms about the wider aspect, to me it's fantastic but I also game in eyefinity so I'm used to having extra wide screens.
Unfortunately, companies like Toshiba would never bother reading the comments here at Anandtech to see what people want, instead we get the same let-downs from all manufacturers. :(
I'm sure Toshiba does care about your comments. Considering 0.01% of their customers read Anandtech, and 1% of those feel the same way you do. It's definitely folks like you who who want a $3500 dollar laptop who drive their billion dollar worldwide mobile computing roadmap.
Am I missing something here? I really don't see much of a reason for this odd-ball shaped screen, already 16:9 (standard) screens SUCK! 16:10 is better.
A more usable resolution in 1920x1080, easily possible on todays 13~14" displays.
You can STILL work on documents side by side WHILE having some height to work with and not get that tunnel vision feeling.
Widescreen laptops just doesn’t make sense. When we spend most of our time working with spreadsheets, text documents, and web browsers, we want a higher resolution with a longer page. Widescreen laptops are actually lower resolution and cheaper to manufacture, so largest companies were convincing that 16:10, then 16:9 is the best format for your eyes. Lot of business people and heavy users still prefer 4:3 screen. Join our community to show your demand for bringing back 4:3 screens to people - https://www.facebook.com/pages/Bring-Back-43-Lapto...
But if you make it WIDE-screen ENOUGH, then all of a sudden you can fit two windows side by side as you work or you can have one big window and still enough screen real estate on the side to have your IM window open, or some video going on the side, or CPU monitor stuff, etc.
It may not be the most common use scenario, but for some people they might really get a lot out of it. It sounds pretty interesting and kind of attractive to me (I just tried using two windows side by side on my 16:9 HDTV I use as my main monitor and it works pretty well. I'm typing this comment on the right while a Starcraft 2 live video stream with chat box is going on on the left).
The real killer use-case for this would be when you need to write or edit a document while doing research on the Internet, or working with some crazy-wide Excel spreadsheet, etc. Those kinds of people would be REALLY interested in this kind of ultrabook.
I think that there is one big difference between your scenerio and this netbook. You have HDTV monitor, and this notebook has low resolution monitor, which in fact makes many other things difficult. For example web browsing. Websites aren't wide, they are long in terms of height and imagine how much scrolling it's gonna to be on 768 pixels high monitor.
Andrew Cunningham reviewed the U845W for Ars Technica last month. The problem is that most websites (and applications) really want to be at least 1024 wide so it didn't work out that well. H was interested in trying the same thing at 2100x900; which would be wide enough to make side by side generally workable and have a halfway decent vertical resolution as well.
Come on, now you can have all your icons pined to taskbar. They also removed a need for horizontal scrollbar. Maybe 45:9 would be even better (or 5:1 if you like).
Kidding aside I agree this is horrible idea. Get us back 19:10 or 4:3 laptops!!
Kind of reminds me a joke about bus that was 30ft wide and only couple of feet long because everybody wanted to sit next to driver.
There's one thing I am missing in this review, and that is a look at how the form factor affects portability.
Ultrabooks are meant to be just that: ultraportable. They are meant to weigh little, fit in every pocket (figuratively), and easy to hold and handle, with one hand if necessary.
How does this form factor rest on the lap? Does it feel heavier, or more unwieldly in size, when compared to the regular 16:9 model? Does it fit into bags and backpacks just the same? What's the general feel of it in a day to day usage and carrying scenario?
I suppose it's a nice thing that this model has so much space to dedicate to cooling, but really: that space doesn't come out of nowhere. This thing is very large for an ultrabook, so the handling should be examined.
The FW11E I'm using as a HTPC is 16" with a 16:9 aspect screen is roughly 1 cm wider than the U845W and it's very clumsy to bring along the few times I for one reason or another have to have it with me. And so I have to assume the U845W will be fairly clumsy as well even if it's both much thinner and lighter.
The development we have had for the last few years saddens me. I guess 16:10 is workable, but from a portability and ergonomic point of view the old 4:3 format makes much more sense with one exception and that's among 12" laptops since they are small enough as is.
Obviously depending on what you do but I find a vertical resolution of 1600 (as in 30" at 2560x1600 or 20" at 1200x1600) to be the sweet spot even if 1050 is workable on a laptop. But 768 is a far cry from 1050 and even more so from 1600.
I had a toshiba libretto L1 (http://tinyurl.com/ck4f9yo) that got me through a lot of uni and a few coding jobs. 1200 x 600 wasn't ideal, but you could swap height for width with little effort. Tool bars on the side or floating, work full screen, autohide etc.
The wide res really worked for coding - you could get long lines of code all on the screen, and the PPI of 1200 on a 10" screen was stunning. System was reasonably powerful for its day too (played quake!), just wish I'd been able to get a later version with onboard NIC.
Superwide can work, you just need to be willing to change your work habits a little. What worries me is the size of this - I don't think I would put up with such an odd screen res without some other compelling feature tho - at the time the L1 was a ~1kg laptop that appeared to sacrafice very little for its size, the screen was a resulting oddity that you learned to live with and like to some extent. At 2kg there are probably other alternatives that I'd want to try in person first.
...is because someone typed the wrong horizontal resolution number into a screen order and they ended up with 30000 non standard screens.
As mentioned, though you get a machine with a odd feature as its main USP and the review doesn't even showcase it so we can see what the fuss is about.
You know some of us do care about other factors than pretty pointless benchmark graphs.
What next? Anandtech get a laptop in that has the ability to be used underwater yet it never leaves the testbench?
I wish you were right. With Follywierd producing ever more content at 2.37:1; this is probably a trial balloon for the next step in degrading computer screen usability for anything except consuming their garbage.
Oh and it has ONLY USB 3.0, which means that most probably you cannot install Windows from a USB stick... It happened to me a few times when I accidentally plug the stick into a USB 3 port on various notebooks.
Uhh, That shouldn't affect your installation. USB 3.0 is backwards compatible. I've installed Windows 7 on three notebooks using 3.0 ports and it went fine.
It happend with several HP ProBook 6560b or EliteBook of the same generation (Sandy Bridge). When the USB needs a driver that's not in Windows, it boots from it but you cannot install afterwards...
16:9 is bad enough, how dumb is it to release something even worse? How about somebody pay 5% more and use a 4:3 panel? Now THAT would be listening to your customers
They used to make 4:3 laptop monitors. My co-worker had a 1400 x 1050 laptop on a 15" display on an older Dell laptop. It was very nice, even back when displays for laptops weren't as advanced as they are now. You had a lot of vertical space, without the pixels being too small.
I assume half of customers would return this thing. Who needs a device capable only displaying embrasure view of the world, and fortified warfare is hopelessly obsolescent. With amazon generous return policy who wold carry the cost of returns, them or manufacturer?
I like the idea of this form factor for notebooks because it should allow for bigger keyboard on a smaller device. Unfortunately, it seems that's not what they did with it here.
I fly a lot, so get free economy plus seating on United, where I can open up my 17" 1080p laptop without any problems. I had a 17" 1920 x 1200 laptop before that. I tend to do more work at the gate or in a hotel room, versus when I;m on plane.
I haven't read all the above comments, apologies if I'm repeating someone.
I would SO prefer a 7x4 screen!! That is: 1792 x 1024. Better yet, I'd like a pivoting 7x4 screen. Yes, with 2 eyes our field of vision is wider than it is tall, so wide is good for scenic photos and film / video. I can also appreciate having a very wide screen for work that is naturally wide, spreadsheets being the major example of that. However, with so many of our documents formatted at 17 x 22 (8.5x11 letter size ) or 17 x 28 (8.5x14 legal size) doesn't anyone else want to see a full page at once?! Substitute A4 and B4 sizes for letter and legal sizes if you use them instead. I refused to buy a personal computer until the screen width was 80 columns of characters - the number of characters that fit easily on letter or legal width paper. I am still waiting for displays that show a full size page in both width and height - not even my 1920 x 1200 lcd does that quite properly. Hmm, anyone for an 8x7 (2048x1792) display with me? That would allow for two legal pages side by side with menus and special "bars" above and below. Sheesh! I gotta stop drooling for a screen that will never be. Maybe a strong projector wouldl allow that... One can hope so anyway. 8-)
I know this isn't a perfect IPS panel with 1920x1080 or 1200 or even going 21:9 with 1080 or 1200 in the vertical, but I think it's a HUGE step up from anything with a 1366x768 panel. If you think about the average joe six pack user/laptop in this market segment (500-1000) VERY few come with anything bigger than 1366x768 when 15.6" and below, this laptop has decent enough hardware (yeah optimus would be nice, but if you're not gaming it works) with the extended horizontal workspace. Wide screen is the way of future, with 2 windows open at once you have a much larger work area and the more this goes into the general public the more people will want the higher resolution.
I give toshiba props for trying this radical concept...it's not perfect but it's a step in the right direction IMO. I'd be interested in buying one (granted I'd rip out the 32gb mSATA and throw in a 128 drive) for graduate school...only thing holding me back is i'll probably just splurge on a zenbook (but thats 400+ more).
If they are going to do anything "radical", I'd like to see a 16:10 display instead. It would be radical, since they don't seem to make 16:10 laptops any more (much less 4:3 laptops).
The all new Toshiba Bunker View Mega Scroll Ultra Book, featuring a screen no bigger than the firing slot in a WW1 bunker, amuse yourself with the endless delight of scrolling constantly to see any real web content as you enjoy the vast empty fields of space on each side. 21:9=fail
I am looking forward to buy a ultrabook sometime this year end. Hence I am eagerly watching out for ultrabook reviews, needless to say the reviews here are informative, reliable and extensive. I love reading it.
We know that in the coming months we will have a many new varieties of ultrabooks, it seems as though the race for the best ultrabook between popular brands has just begun. While it is good that consumers are spoilt for choices and now with the entry of Windows 8 some of them are also looking to multi-task as tablets. Though I'm not too keen on this type ultrabooks, if they can keep up the important features of a good ultrabook then they're most welcome. Basically I think what consumers want (or at least what I want) from a ultrabook are :
1. Above average Performance 2. Good Display, resolution and battery life. 3. Good design with sufficient number of ports (like inclusion of Ethernet) 4. Lastly a "worth it" price point.
Hoping to find a ultrabook that satisfies above needs the best.
"The lower half of the U845W's interior continues the same tasteful aesthetic of the lid."
Apart from the 5 annoying badges on the left and the (hopefully easy to peel) large sticker on the right. I get that Intel requires this for the Ultrabook subsidy, but some manufacturers put them on the bottom or at least make the colors blend into the color of the palmrest.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
Back to Article
Subyman - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
It would have been nice to include a shot of what the desktop looks like on that screen. I've never seen Windows in 21:9. Looks like an interesting design, but I like my vertical space.prime2515103 - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I agree. Or at least something on the screen. It's as though they never turned it on.inperfectdarkness - Saturday, October 27, 2012 - link
that aspect ratio is distusting. i feel like i'm trying to fit in yoda's house just looking at the thing while it's OFF. for the love of god, can we please just go back to 16:10 permanently?brvoigt - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Looks more like 7:3 to me.KineticHummus - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
they use 21:9 because its easier to relate to the industry standard 16:9. Yes 7:3 is technically more correct, but 21:9 is easier to compare.ExarKun333 - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
What's next? 4:3 is now 12:9? Good grief...lowlymarine - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
This is hardly new and unique. When was the last time you saw 15:9 referred to as 5:3, or to use the most common example, how often do you see 16:10 given as 8:5?4:3 is the exception rather than the rule, honestly.
iMacmatician - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
Okay, this is the first time I've heard of 15:9….bwhalen - Thursday, October 18, 2012 - link
Math class moment approaching here. If you divide 21:9 by 3 you get 7:3.To echo others comments, a screen grab while power was being applied would be good.
PhoenixEnigma - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
This seems like the perfect compact machine to have a dedicated number pad, which would have been a major plus in my books. Just look at all the extra space beside the keyboard - why not make use of it?Dorin Nicolaescu-Musteață - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I'd rather have a proper „editing block” (i.e. Home, End, PgUp, PhDn etc.)DanNeely - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
same here.Samus - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
I know, amazingly the only real flaw with this thing is the typical Toshiba keyboard layout. Other than that, $700 for this type of machine is reasonable if you can adjust to the location of the keys (I can't, if it isn't a Thinkpad editing block I can't do it)noblemo - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I had the same thought initially. According to PCMag the space is used for "sweet sounding" Harman/Kardon speakers.Poopship - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I've always wanted a super wide screen laptop with a tn panel at a stupid low resolution. I also hate it when my videos fill up the whole screen because black bars are awesome. It would be perfect for movies released in 2.37, i'll just pop in a blura-- oh.MobiusStrip - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Wouldn't matter. Blu-Ray doesn't support 7:3. You'd still wind up with 16:9 material with black borders, or you'd have to zoom in and lose resolution.Rick83 - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Since the display is neither 1920 pixels in width, nor 720 pixels in height, you will always be using non-native resolutions.The advantage with the wider aspect ratio, is that you can crop some of the 1080 vertical pixels (i.e. those in the letter box) and scale the result to 1792 pixels of width (or just crop the borders, if you prefer using the native resolution, and don't mind losing 64 pixels left and right (and about 30 top and bottom)
I hope that we get decently sized wide desktop screens soon.
Some 3840x1600 32" displays would be awesome. I'd be willing to plop down about $2.5-3k for such a display, if it can do localized contrast and brightness control, 10/12 bit color and decent grays, as well as be well calibrated. S-PVA or S-IPS with multiple high-frequency PWM ccfl backlights, or Adobe-RGB color LEDs.
And bloody USB (or displayport, thunderbolt) remote control! It's been done ten years ago, the cost is negligible, but not having to reach across the desk to use some god forsaken OSD to manage the screen is so worth it. Especially if the screen were to support advanced features.
rarson - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
Aspect ratio and resolution are two different things. You all are confused.kmieciu - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
perfect for some retro side-scrolling platform gamesStuka87 - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
Dude, I was thinking the same thing! You could see like half the level!kevith - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
No thanks.Belard - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
This is SOOOO Amiga 2000/4000 and Commodore 64.Exodite - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
To be fair though, the Amiga at least ran much better aspect ratios.StevoLincolnite - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Would have had me on board if:* No TN panel. IPS, anything IPS, even E-IPS or even VA would be better.
* Double the 768 vertical resolution as it is painful regardless of how wide a panel is.
* Decent Graphics (Refuse to use Intel graphics after the last several decades of poor IGP's with even worse drivers which are still crap today.) or went with AMD's trinity.
* Better network connectivity.
As for peoples qualms about the wider aspect, to me it's fantastic but I also game in eyefinity so I'm used to having extra wide screens.
Unfortunately, companies like Toshiba would never bother reading the comments here at Anandtech to see what people want, instead we get the same let-downs from all manufacturers. :(
AssBall - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I'm sure Toshiba does care about your comments. Considering 0.01% of their customers read Anandtech, and 1% of those feel the same way you do. It's definitely folks like you who who want a $3500 dollar laptop who drive their billion dollar worldwide mobile computing roadmap.Belard - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Am I missing something here? I really don't see much of a reason for this odd-ball shaped screen, already 16:9 (standard) screens SUCK! 16:10 is better.A more usable resolution in 1920x1080, easily possible on todays 13~14" displays.
You can STILL work on documents side by side WHILE having some height to work with and not get that tunnel vision feeling.
tomeklutel - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Widescreen laptops just doesn’t make sense. When we spend most of our time working with spreadsheets, text documents, and web browsers, we want a higher resolution with a longer page. Widescreen laptops are actually lower resolution and cheaper to manufacture, so largest companies were convincing that 16:10, then 16:9 is the best format for your eyes. Lot of business people and heavy users still prefer 4:3 screen. Join our community to show your demand for bringing back 4:3 screens to people - https://www.facebook.com/pages/Bring-Back-43-Lapto...Paulman - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
But if you make it WIDE-screen ENOUGH, then all of a sudden you can fit two windows side by side as you work or you can have one big window and still enough screen real estate on the side to have your IM window open, or some video going on the side, or CPU monitor stuff, etc.It may not be the most common use scenario, but for some people they might really get a lot out of it. It sounds pretty interesting and kind of attractive to me (I just tried using two windows side by side on my 16:9 HDTV I use as my main monitor and it works pretty well. I'm typing this comment on the right while a Starcraft 2 live video stream with chat box is going on on the left).
The real killer use-case for this would be when you need to write or edit a document while doing research on the Internet, or working with some crazy-wide Excel spreadsheet, etc. Those kinds of people would be REALLY interested in this kind of ultrabook.
knedle - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I think that there is one big difference between your scenerio and this netbook.You have HDTV monitor, and this notebook has low resolution monitor, which in fact makes many other things difficult. For example web browsing. Websites aren't wide, they are long in terms of height and imagine how much scrolling it's gonna to be on 768 pixels high monitor.
DanNeely - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Andrew Cunningham reviewed the U845W for Ars Technica last month. The problem is that most websites (and applications) really want to be at least 1024 wide so it didn't work out that well. H was interested in trying the same thing at 2100x900; which would be wide enough to make side by side generally workable and have a halfway decent vertical resolution as well.http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/09/putting-the...
processinfo - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Come on, now you can have all your icons pined to taskbar. They also removed a need for horizontal scrollbar. Maybe 45:9 would be even better (or 5:1 if you like).Kidding aside I agree this is horrible idea. Get us back 19:10 or 4:3 laptops!!
Kind of reminds me a joke about bus that was 30ft wide and only couple of feet long because everybody wanted to sit next to driver.
MobiusStrip - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
It's time to move out of the '90s. Thunderbolt should be a standard item at this point.Streetwind - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
There's one thing I am missing in this review, and that is a look at how the form factor affects portability.Ultrabooks are meant to be just that: ultraportable. They are meant to weigh little, fit in every pocket (figuratively), and easy to hold and handle, with one hand if necessary.
How does this form factor rest on the lap? Does it feel heavier, or more unwieldly in size, when compared to the regular 16:9 model? Does it fit into bags and backpacks just the same? What's the general feel of it in a day to day usage and carrying scenario?
I suppose it's a nice thing that this model has so much space to dedicate to cooling, but really: that space doesn't come out of nowhere. This thing is very large for an ultrabook, so the handling should be examined.
Calista - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
The FW11E I'm using as a HTPC is 16" with a 16:9 aspect screen is roughly 1 cm wider than the U845W and it's very clumsy to bring along the few times I for one reason or another have to have it with me. And so I have to assume the U845W will be fairly clumsy as well even if it's both much thinner and lighter.The development we have had for the last few years saddens me. I guess 16:10 is workable, but from a portability and ergonomic point of view the old 4:3 format makes much more sense with one exception and that's among 12" laptops since they are small enough as is.
Obviously depending on what you do but I find a vertical resolution of 1600 (as in 30" at 2560x1600 or 20" at 1200x1600) to be the sweet spot even if 1050 is workable on a laptop. But 768 is a far cry from 1050 and even more so from 1600.
Avendit - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I had a toshiba libretto L1 (http://tinyurl.com/ck4f9yo) that got me through a lot of uni and a few coding jobs. 1200 x 600 wasn't ideal, but you could swap height for width with little effort. Tool bars on the side or floating, work full screen, autohide etc.The wide res really worked for coding - you could get long lines of code all on the screen, and the PPI of 1200 on a 10" screen was stunning. System was reasonably powerful for its day too (played quake!), just wish I'd been able to get a later version with onboard NIC.
Superwide can work, you just need to be willing to change your work habits a little. What worries me is the size of this - I don't think I would put up with such an odd screen res without some other compelling feature tho - at the time the L1 was a ~1kg laptop that appeared to sacrafice very little for its size, the screen was a resulting oddity that you learned to live with and like to some extent. At 2kg there are probably other alternatives that I'd want to try in person first.
Avendit
jabber - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
...is because someone typed the wrong horizontal resolution number into a screen order and they ended up with 30000 non standard screens.As mentioned, though you get a machine with a odd feature as its main USP and the review doesn't even showcase it so we can see what the fuss is about.
You know some of us do care about other factors than pretty pointless benchmark graphs.
What next? Anandtech get a laptop in that has the ability to be used underwater yet it never leaves the testbench?
DanNeely - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I wish you were right. With Follywierd producing ever more content at 2.37:1; this is probably a trial balloon for the next step in degrading computer screen usability for anything except consuming their garbage.Mugur - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Maybe they should call it "Portable 2.35:1 Movie Player"... :-)Mugur - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Oh and it has ONLY USB 3.0, which means that most probably you cannot install Windows from a USB stick... It happened to me a few times when I accidentally plug the stick into a USB 3 port on various notebooks.xTRICKYxx - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Uhh, That shouldn't affect your installation. USB 3.0 is backwards compatible. I've installed Windows 7 on three notebooks using 3.0 ports and it went fine.Mugur - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
It happend with several HP ProBook 6560b or EliteBook of the same generation (Sandy Bridge). When the USB needs a driver that's not in Windows, it boots from it but you cannot install afterwards...processinfo - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
sigh...robmuld - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
16:9 is bad enough, how dumb is it to release something even worse? How about somebody pay 5% more and use a 4:3 panel? Now THAT would be listening to your customerskmmatney - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
They used to make 4:3 laptop monitors. My co-worker had a 1400 x 1050 laptop on a 15" display on an older Dell laptop. It was very nice, even back when displays for laptops weren't as advanced as they are now. You had a lot of vertical space, without the pixels being too small.TegiriNenashi - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I assume half of customers would return this thing. Who needs a device capable only displaying embrasure view of the world, and fortified warfare is hopelessly obsolescent. With amazon generous return policy who wold carry the cost of returns, them or manufacturer?twtech - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I like the idea of this form factor for notebooks because it should allow for bigger keyboard on a smaller device. Unfortunately, it seems that's not what they did with it here.dcuccia - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
Would see HUGE benefits for this on the plane. I can't even open a 13" 16:9 laptop in a standard economy seat these days.kmmatney - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
I fly a lot, so get free economy plus seating on United, where I can open up my 17" 1080p laptop without any problems. I had a 17" 1920 x 1200 laptop before that. I tend to do more work at the gate or in a hotel room, versus when I;m on plane.jihe - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
One of the more stupid 'innovation' I've seen in PC history.VTArbyP - Tuesday, October 16, 2012 - link
I haven't read all the above comments, apologies if I'm repeating someone.I would SO prefer a 7x4 screen!! That is: 1792 x 1024. Better yet, I'd like a pivoting 7x4 screen.
Yes, with 2 eyes our field of vision is wider than it is tall, so wide is good for scenic photos and film / video. I can also appreciate having a very wide screen for work that is naturally wide, spreadsheets being the major example of that.
However, with so many of our documents formatted at 17 x 22 (8.5x11 letter size ) or 17 x 28 (8.5x14 legal size) doesn't anyone else want to see a full page at once?! Substitute A4 and B4 sizes for letter and legal sizes if you use them instead. I refused to buy a personal computer until the screen width was 80 columns of characters - the number of characters that fit easily on letter or legal width paper. I am still waiting for displays that show a full size page in both width and height - not even my 1920 x 1200 lcd does that quite properly. Hmm, anyone for an 8x7 (2048x1792) display with me? That would allow for two legal pages side by side with menus and special "bars" above and below. Sheesh! I gotta stop drooling for a screen that will never be. Maybe a strong projector wouldl allow that... One can hope so anyway. 8-)
Alexo - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
What about people that want to WORK on the road, not just watch movies. Bring back the vertical space!I would be ready to pay a premium for a system similar to the old T61 but with more modern components (Ivy Bridge) and better battery life.
The X230 could have been a great solution for me if it could be had with a higher resolution 4:3 (hell, I'll even agree to 16:10) screen.
ATC9001 - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
I know this isn't a perfect IPS panel with 1920x1080 or 1200 or even going 21:9 with 1080 or 1200 in the vertical, but I think it's a HUGE step up from anything with a 1366x768 panel. If you think about the average joe six pack user/laptop in this market segment (500-1000) VERY few come with anything bigger than 1366x768 when 15.6" and below, this laptop has decent enough hardware (yeah optimus would be nice, but if you're not gaming it works) with the extended horizontal workspace. Wide screen is the way of future, with 2 windows open at once you have a much larger work area and the more this goes into the general public the more people will want the higher resolution.I give toshiba props for trying this radical concept...it's not perfect but it's a step in the right direction IMO. I'd be interested in buying one (granted I'd rip out the 32gb mSATA and throw in a 128 drive) for graduate school...only thing holding me back is i'll probably just splurge on a zenbook (but thats 400+ more).
kmmatney - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
If they are going to do anything "radical", I'd like to see a 16:10 display instead. It would be radical, since they don't seem to make 16:10 laptops any more (much less 4:3 laptops).rickon66 - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
The all new Toshiba Bunker View Mega Scroll Ultra Book, featuring a screen no bigger than the firing slot in a WW1 bunker, amuse yourself with the endless delight of scrolling constantly to see any real web content as you enjoy the vast empty fields of space on each side. 21:9=faildeamon0 - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - link
I am looking forward to buy a ultrabook sometime this year end. Hence I am eagerly watching out for ultrabook reviews, needless to say the reviews here are informative, reliable and extensive. I love reading it.We know that in the coming months we will have a many new varieties of ultrabooks, it seems as though the race for the best ultrabook between popular brands has just begun. While it is good that consumers are spoilt for choices and now with the entry of Windows 8 some of them are also looking to multi-task as tablets. Though I'm not too keen on this type ultrabooks, if they can keep up the important features of a good ultrabook then they're most welcome.
Basically I think what consumers want (or at least what I want) from a ultrabook are :
1. Above average Performance
2. Good Display, resolution and battery life.
3. Good design with sufficient number of ports (like inclusion of Ethernet)
4. Lastly a "worth it" price point.
Hoping to find a ultrabook that satisfies above needs the best.
KPOM - Thursday, October 18, 2012 - link
"The lower half of the U845W's interior continues the same tasteful aesthetic of the lid."Apart from the 5 annoying badges on the left and the (hopefully easy to peel) large sticker on the right. I get that Intel requires this for the Ultrabook subsidy, but some manufacturers put them on the bottom or at least make the colors blend into the color of the palmrest.
Iketh - Friday, October 19, 2012 - link
I got excited at the headline, then I stopped reading at the specs...Why bother with this design if you're gonna provide less than 1920 pixels wide?
And then why bother if you're not going to make use of the extra keyboard space...
Use this form factor if you're providing 2520 pixels wide and a full sized keyboard... then i'll be all over this