Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Micro Four Thirds camera review

It's no surprise that the mirrorless interchangeable lens camera category is continuing to grow at a rapid pace. These compact, pro-featured ILCs undoubtedly have a strong future, with mass consumer appeal and a widening assortment of price points. We're particularly taken with the technology's compact footprint -- we're focusing our camera reviews on mirrorless models, and even outfitted our entire CES team with Sony's NEX-C3. But long before the likes of Sony and Fujifilm launched their first cameras, Olympus and Panasonic dominated the then-infant mirrorless category, developing the Micro Four Thirds sensor standard, that, for better or worse, has failed to catch on among other manufacturers. Surprisingly, Panasonic's pioneering days were far stronger than those of recent past, with the company's GF1 melting the hearts of compact-seeking professionals. But following that successful first model, Panasonic opted to take the GF series in a different direction, launching a dumbed-down GF2(and later GF3) in what was likely an attempt to appeal to the much larger amateur category. This left the GF1 faithful without a worthy successor -- until now.


The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 looks pretty standard on paper: there's a 16-megapixel Live MOS sensor, a choice of body colors, RAW shooting, HD video and a top sensitivity of ISO 12,800. Just as it did with the GF2 and GF3 body designs, Panasonic took a different direction with its new X-series lenses, swapping the traditional manual zoom for a motorized version, enabling a much more compact footprint. The difference when positioned alongside the NEX-C3's 18-55mm zoom is staggering, but Panasonic didn't arrive at this slick design without compromise, particularly noticeable when it comes time to swallow the $950 kit price. Still, one look at the hardened matte black metal body is all it takes to know that this is no GF4 -- this is it, the long-awaited successor to the GF1 has finally arrived. So, will the GX1 be our new top pick for the mirrorless category? Join us past the break to find out.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 review

Hardware

Canopied in varying shades of matte black paint, the GX1 has a sleek and elegant retro design. Panasonic didn't exactly take many risks when it came to the camera's physical appearance compared to the GF1, but if we have any complaints about that model, design doesn't come to mind. The GX1's metal construction makes it heavy enough to feel solidly built, but it's still light enough to be worn comfortably around your neck. This should of course come as no surprise to GF1 vets, but the GX1 is far too large to fit in your pocket. Still, the control layout and instrument placement is very efficient, albeit a bit cluttered, so there's very little wasted space.

While it's certainly an upgrade, Panasonic didn't intend the GX1 to replace the GF3 -- the company's more, shall we say, beginner-friendly model, from both a price and design standpoint. The GX1 marks the return of the full-size hot shoe, however, which made its way from the GF1 to the GF2, but was notably absent on the GF3. The hot shoe doubles as a base for the new 1.440k-dot LVF2 electronic viewfinder, which can be added to the kit for an additional $250. That accessory is powered by a proprietary connector, positioned directly below the hot shoe. And there's also a stereo mic on the opposite side of the shoe, with clearly defined left and right positions.

Still up top and to the right of the hot shoe, you'll find a dedicated mode dial, with positions for aperture- and shutter-priority, program mode, manual, two custom modes, a scene mode with access to 17 programmed shooting modes and a Creative Control mode with a handful of artistic settings that we'll expand on a bit further below. There's no auto mode on the main dial itself -- instead, you can launch Intelligent Auto by tapping a dedicated button to the right of the dial, with the button glowing blue when activated. There's a power lever to the right that, just like the mode dial, takes just enough force to turn that you need not worry about accidentally activating it while recording. There's also a dedicated still shutter release along with a video record button. Notably absent, however, is a zoom slider, which you'll instead find mounted to the left side of the lens.

Speaking of those lenses, the GX1 doesn't ship with one at that $700 sticker price. Instead, you can purchase either the new Lumix G X Vario PZ 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH Power OIS lens for $400, or a Lumix G 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 Mega OIS optic wish a $200 list price (or you can opt for a kit that includes the X lens for $950). Both lenses offer a 28-84mm 35mm equivalent focal length, but the former (and pricier) version includes electric-powered zoom functionality, enabling smoother zooming during video capture and an overall (much) more compact design. We tried out the GX1 paired with the new X-series lens, which performed very well during our week-long test period, offering excellent focus speeds and smooth zoom. Advanced photographers may not be so keen on the lack of manual zoom and focus ring control, but the size tradeoff is worthwhile for most.

Continuing the tour, the majority of the GX1's backside is occupied by a 460k-dot 3-inch LCD. Unlike the GF1, this successor's display includes touch functionality, though you certainly don't need to use it -- the touchscreen interface enables you to zoom, touch-to-focus and even fire the shutter without using physical controls, though dedicated buttons are available as well (with the notable exception of touch-to-focus). The display is acceptably sharp and responsive, and there's a nifty level gauge on screen to help ensure the correct horizontal and vertical position. There's also an on-screen histogram option, which you can position anywhere you'd like just by tapping and dragging it on the screen. The LCD occasionally displayed the image preview with incorrect color balance, though the captured image was typically accurate, even when it didn't match the preview.

To the right side of the display, you'll find a playback button, AF/AE lock, along with function, display, quick menu and AF/MF buttons. A five-position selector also brings direct access to ISO, white balance, shooting speed, focus area and menu controls. Finally, there's a flash release button just above the LCD -- pushing it activates the pop-up flash, which extends above either lens but can also be used in a variety of manually-controlled positions. On the right side of the camera, there's a remote connector, an HDMI port along with a proprietary PC/AV connector. The bottom includes a metal tripod connector and a battery cover that slides to reveal a SD card slot and a 1,010mAh rechargeable battery.

Performance and battery life

A far cry from the GF2 and GF3, the GX1 offers generally excellent performance from a shooting perspective, with an interface and control layout that will feel quite familiar to GF1 owners. The camera can power on and fire its first image in just 1.4 seconds, including the time required to focus. Once it's powered on, it can change focus from a far subject to one that's near and capture an image in less than a half second after pressing the shutter release -- if you're capturing another image after focusing, the delay is virtually unnoticeable, with the camera firing instantaneously.

Even low-light subjects come into focus in a small fraction of a second, resulting in a very pleasant shooting experience, regardless of condition. This incredibly fast focus time made shooting moving subjects not only possible, but even enjoyable -- we noticed a unicyclist riding down the sidewalk just a moment before he passed directly in front of the lens, yet the camera was able to capture him with sharp focus, as if we had time to prepare composition. This rarely tends to be an issue with full-size DSLRs, but mirrorless cameras (and especially point-and-shoots) rarely offer this level of performance.

We also had a positive experience shooting 720p video, thanks to the GX1's accurate focus and exposure. (The camera is also capable of 1080/60i capture.) We noticed a delay when rapidly switching between near and far subjects during video capture, as you can see in the clip below, but Panasonic may have opted for a more gradual adjustment to avoid dramatic shifts and unintended focus hunting, which is an issue on other cameras -- even the beloved Sony NEX-C3. Since you're very unlikely to jump back and forth between subjects near to the camera and those in the distance while capturing a single clip, this shouldn't be an issue for you.

The camera's 1,010mAh battery, while not particularly generous in size, was perfectly sufficient over our nearly week-long test period. We were able to capture 530 photos and 12 minutes of video in a variety of conditions, including low light and a few shots with flash. Speaking of the flash, there's a compact model built-in, but it didn't perform very well during our test, blowing out details even when shooting in Intelligent Auto mode. We spent a significant amount of time reviewing images and adjusting settings on the LCD, which contributes to power draw as well. The battery is incredibly lightweight, which matters less on a camera of this size than it does on a compact point and shoot, but we're happy to reduce weight wherever possible.

Image quality

The GX1's image quality is definitely an improvement over the GF3, which suffered from significant noise in low-light shooting and had an awfully difficult time white balancing during our brief indoor test period. As with any camera, the GX1 performed at its best when shooting outdoors in bright light, where focus, exposure and white balance were typically spot-on. Bright light shooting also allows for low image sensitivity, and noise was undetectable in any of these outdoor images, even at a 100 percent view. Details often didn't appear tack-sharp at a 1:1 pixel view and some scenes were occasionally flat, as you can see in the image below, but overall image quality was quite good for a Micro Four Thirds camera.

As you've probably noticed, the GX1 offers an image sensitivity of ISO 160 - 12,800, making it theoretically capable of competing with the big guys, at least when it comes to low-light shooting. But it's one thing to claim that a camera can capture usable images at high ISOs -- actually delivering on that promise has traditionally been a challenge. As expected, especially given the sensor size, images were very noisy at 12,800, even when scaled down to 600 pixels wide (the size we use on the web). There was a staggering improvement at ISO 6400, however, with the camera capturing usable photos at any size, though noise was clearly visible at a 100 percent view. Image quality was excellent once we dropped to ISO 3200 and below -- at that sensitivity noise was visible at 100-percent view, but we would be comfortable leaving the ISO fixed at that setting for everyday straight-to-web shooting. Noise became barely perceptible at ISO 1600, and was hardly noticeable at all at ISO 800 and below.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 sample images gallery

User interface

For the most part, the GX1's user interface is intuitive enough that you can just pick up the camera and start shooting without flipping through the manual. More advanced adjustments, like changing exposure compensation (push in the rear control wheel) and moving the histogram (click and drag it using your finder) probably require an hour or two with that little black and white book that advanced photographers tend to set aside, or never unwrap. Once you've got the hang of it, however, the user interface is incredibly easy to maneuver, with logical button and settings placement.

In addition to the buttons that we outlined along with the rest of the hardware above, there's also a slide-out touchscreen drawer with options to control zoom, activate screen-tap shutter release, enable/disable the on-screen position guide and activate/move the histogram. You'll probably be more comfortable using hardware controls for most of these functions, so it's convenient that the drawer can be tucked away out of view. The camera includes a fairly comprehensive display overlay, with readouts of all critical settings at the top and bottom of the frame. Unfortunately there's no battery percentage meter -- instead, you're left with a standard three-level indicator. The camera (almost) makes up for that with the inclusion of a precise focal length readout, along with a nifty countdown for long (one-second-and-up) exposures.

Often-used settings like metering mode, flash, picture and movie recording size and quality, histogram, guide lines and photo style are accessible by tapping the Q Menu button. Other adjustments may require a trip to the main system menu, which you can access using a dedicated menu button in the center of the five-position controller. Menu items are presented on five multi-page tabs, including Record, Motion Picture, Custom, Setup and Playback. Some of these sub-menus are many pages deep (seven for the Custom menu, for example), though intuitive placement makes it fairly easy to find the setting you're looking for.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 user interface

The competition

When push comes to shove, Sony's NEX-C3 still remains the one and only steal, at $550 including an 18-55mm lens.

Until now, we've spent little time focusing on price, since the GX1 is powerful enough to justify that $699 body-only sticker. But once you factor in the lens (even at the $950 kit price), you're getting dangerously close to mid-range DSLR territory. Still, this is really the first mirrorless camera we've come across that offers an overall package that rivals the NEX-C3, which has been our top pick in the category from a cost:benefit perspective. From a strict value standpoint, the Sony cam still offers the most bang for your buck, especially when you consider that you can get a body and lens for $150 less than the GX1 alone. If you're looking for a camera with similar focusing performance and a Micro Four Thirds sensor and mount, then Olympus's E-P3 is another excellent choice. It also offers a retractable lens, but with a manual twist-zoom function. And you can take home the kit (with 14-42mm zoom lens) for $900 -- 50 bucks less than the GX1. When push comes to shove, Sony's NEX-C3 still remains the one and only steal, at $550 including an 18-55mm lens, a larger APS-C sensor and a slightly smaller form factor, lenses not withstanding.

Wrap-up

All things considered, we're quite thrilled with the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1. Micro Four Thirds early adopters who fell for the GF1's sleek, retro design two years ago finally have a successor worth considering, and we may even go so far as to say that Panasonic has undone the wrong caused by the misdirected marketing strategy adopted by the GF2 and GF3. The GX1 is, in fact, a terrific shooter, exceeding our expectations and giving us the first viable alternative to the stellar Sony NEX-C3. If you have deep pockets and a desire to continue your love affair with the GF-series that never was, look no further than the GX1.

Read More

Motorola Droid RAZR review

By Terrence O'Brien

Review

The RAZR brand has a long and storied history, starting in the halcyon days of 2004. Back then it was a premium line -- set apart from the crowd by its extremely thin profile and aluminum construction. Shortly after launching as an expensive status symbol, Motorola chopped the price and turned the V3 into one of the best selling handsets ever. In the years that followed there were countless revisions, colors and would-be successors that ultimately turned the once-hyped product line into a euphemism for obsolete technology.

Motorola has certainly had success since, particularly with the iconic Droid and Droid X, but alas, the Droid stamp belongs to Verizon. To once again make the name Motorola synonymous with cutting-edge tech, the company has returned to the well and resurrected the RAZR name. Has Moto managed to reclaim the magic and mystique of the V3, which had many a gadget hound coughing up some serious dough upon its initial release? Or is the Droid RAZR a successor in title only, more akin to the ill-fated MOTORAZR maxx? Keep reading to find out.

Motorola Droid RAZR review

Hardware

To say the Droid RAZR is thin doesn't do it justice. At only 7.1mm thick it's almost unbelievably svelte. Heck, the Galaxy S II, which impressed us with its sleek physique just a few months ago, measures a comparatively beefy 8.49mm. The RAZR does bulge out at the top to about 10.6mm around the 8 megapixel camera, but that's hardly enough to make the handset cumbersome. Besides, the hump is the only place with enough room to house the headphone, HDMI and micro-USB jacks. Along the right side you'll find all of the physical buttons. The textured power key sits roughly an inch above the rather flimsy volume rocker, which has almost no travel. The bottom of the handset is unadorned, but the left edge conceals the Micro SIM and microSD slots under a door that's more than just a little tough to pry open. The RAZR ships with a 16GB card pre-installed, a nice complement to the 8GB of internal storage.

Handsets simply don't get much more premium-feeling than the Droid RAZR.

The shell of the phone is a stunning mix of aluminum, Kevlar and Gorilla Glass. Handsets simply don't get much more premium-feeling than the Droid RAZR. It may be extraordinarily light, but there's just enough heft to reassure you it won't shatter into a few dozen pieces on the first drop (though, we make no guarantees about the second or third). Good thing, too, since the synthetic fabric backplate is very slick, which makes it quite easy to get in and out of even your tightest jeans, but could make for a few accidental spills. Our one and only complaint is the sizable bezel. The fortified glass panel alone is the size of a Droid X, and that extra millimeter or so of width is just enough to make reaching across the screen with your thumb uncomfortable.

Motorola RAZR open for unlocked bootloader business, if the carrier says so

Motorola RAZR to get updated to Ice Cream Sandwich in early 2012

Motorola Droid RAZR hits FCC with Verizon LTE, global GSM radio

Towards the top of that slab of glass is a 1.3 megapixel camera for video chats, which stands out oddly thanks to the small square of transparent glass that interrupts the otherwise stark black bezel. Underneath the mirror-like sheet of Gorilla Glass is a 4.3-inch 960 x 540 qHD Super AMOLED Advanced panel. How exactly it differs from Super AMOLED Plus isn't clear, but we do know that it does away with the controversial PenTile matrix. (Update: There seems to be some confusion as to whether or not the screen sports a PenTile matrix, we're waiting on clarification from Motorola and will update when we hear back.) (Update 2: Despite initial reports to the contrary, it appears that the RAZR is, in fact, sporting a PenTile matrix display.) We didn't have any major complaints about the display, but it didn't quite live up to our expectations either. It was sharp, contrasty and bright enough to satisfy, but had a slight green hue that was very apparent at lower brightness settings. It also couldn't match the brightness produced by the old-school TFT LCD on the Droid X or the IPS panel on the iPhone 4, though, its contrast levels were noticeably better.

The RAZR also has more accessories than you can shake a fine print-laden two-year contract at. We didn't get any in time for our review, but the two main attractions are the Lapdock 500 and Lapdock 100. These laptop-style docking stations (14- and 10-inches, respectively) turn the RAZR into a portable (if underpowered) computer running Webtop.

Performance and battery life

The TI OMAP 4430 inside the Droid RAZR isn't the most cutting-edge mobile processor on the market, but its dual 1.2GHz cores should be enough to satisfy even the most demanding smartphone nerds. Gingerbread 2.3.5 and the extremely flashy don't-call-it-Blur hum along relatively smoothly. We encountered a few odd hiccups and stutters, primarily while placing and resizing widgets, but we'll chalk that up to Moto's liberal use of 3D animations. For the most part, though, transitions were smooth, navigation was speedy and apps were plenty responsive.

	Droid RAZR	Galaxy S II	Amaze 4G
Quadrant	2,798	3,200	2,514
Linpack (single-thread)	50	55	51
Linpack (multi-thread)	95.66	81	77
Nenamark1	50.34	59.8	51.4
Nenamark2	27.54	49.1	31.5
Neocore	59.98	59.8	59
SunSpider 9.1	2,140	3,369	3,193

Benchmarks didn't turn up many surprises. The RAZR notched an average of 2,798 on Quadrant, which puts it a bit behind the Galaxy S II, but ahead of the 1.5GHz Snapdragon-powered Amaze 4G. Moto's sleek handset and the S II essentially traded victories, with the latest Droid beating Sammy's flagship on the multi-threaded Linpack test (but not the single-threaded) and eking out a triumph in Neocore with 59.98 fps to 59.8 fps. But it lost the Nenamark 1 battle, pulling off just 50.34 fps, while the S II managed 59.8 fps. The one shock the phone had in store for us was blowing through SunSpider in just 2,140ms, putting it well ahead of most of the Android pack and even besting the iPhone 4S, which averaged 2,200ms. And that's great news since you'll want your browser to chew through code as fast as possible to take advantage of the RAZR's blazing LTE radio. In our limited testing, we averaged just a hair shy of 19 Mbps down and 6.5 Mbps up.

Motorola promises that the non-removable 1,780mAh battery will deliver up to 8.5 days of standby time and 12.5 hours of talk, but it survived just five hours and one minute in our battery rundown test. In our less scientific testing we managed a full day of moderate use. After an afternoon of browsing the web, syncing our data and placing a few phone calls, the RAZR was still going relatively strong, only dipping below the 15 percent mark as we approached midnight. Under light usage you may be able to squeeze two days out of it, but most likely you'll need to plug it in every night before you go to bed. If you're the type who really pushes their phone to the limits, we suggest you pack the charger -- without a removable battery you'll be stuck when the integrated power pack gives up the ghost.

Camera

The camera in the RAZR is quite similar to that found in the Bionic. Both are 8 megapixel shooters capable of capturing 1080p video with a single LED flash and they produced very similar results. Pictures taken outdoors in broad daylight were decent, though the colors were a little muted. While indoor shots under artificial lighting were acceptable, you could easily detect some noise in the images without the flash. The phone actually takes surprisingly good macro shots, allowing us to get up close and personal with our keyboard and a flower (before the winter chill snuffs them all out). It was quite easy to fire off shots in quick succession thanks to the very short shutter lag, but the autofocus couldn't keep up with our taps and often had trouble zeroing in on its target.

Motorola Droid RAZR sample shots

Video performance was certainly above average. The 30-second 1080p clip we captured was compressed down to a surprisingly miserly 59.3MB, but the video still looks relatively crisp. Color reproduction was good and it managed to capture a decent amount of detail in the shadows. The camera has an image stabilization feature which is far from perfect, but certainly makes video captured by some of our more shaky editors less nausea-inducing. The pair of mics can also be switched between several different configurations, the most useful of which is "wind reduction" -- for canceling out extraneous noise when you're narrating from behind the lens.

Software

Like most Android skins, Motorola's tweaks are a love-it-or-leave-it affair. It's not quite as intrusive-feeling as Sense, but if you're a fan of vanilla Gingerbread the customizations will leave you feeling cold. Sadly, where we found the Not-Blur shipping on the Photon 4G and X2 to be pleasantly restrained, the RAZR is more akin to the Bionic and loaded with gaudy animations that distract from -- rather than add to -- the Android experience. Linux users may spot a few similarities between Compiz and the wobbly widgets and zoomed out wall of home screens on the RAZR. Still, the OS is instantly recognizable as Android, and, outside of the overzealous use of superfluous eye-candy, it sticks to all the Gingerbread paradigms you're used to.

There are, of course, some carrier and manufacturer apps loaded on the handset, many of which fall firmly in the crapware category. But, a few are welcome additions to the standard Android setup. Some of the pre-installed apps can easily be uninstalled, like Blockbuster and Let's Golf 2, but those specifically bearing the Verizon or Motorola brand cannot. Like many of its Moto siblings, the RAZR comes loaded with QuickOffice, Citrix and MOTOPRINT, but the real standout, and new kid on the block, is Smart Actions. Similar to Tasker, Smart Actions lets you choose a set of rules that trigger particular actions. Motorola is primarily pitching this as a way to extend battery life, but it's loaded with possibilities. It can do anything from turn off the ringer and data syncing at a certain time of night, to send out a text message whenever you're in a particular neighborhood (great for those friends and family members who complain you never visit).

Wrap-up

So has Motorola succeeded in reclaiming the prestige that once belonged to the RAZR brand? Unequivocally, yes -- the handset is just physically stunning. It's thinner than almost any phone on the market and makes no sacrifices to attain its slim physique. It's solidly constructed from premium materials like diamond-cut aluminum, Gorilla Glass and a sheet of super-slick Kevlar. Few phones out there can even be put in the same category when it comes to build quality. It's not the most ergonomically sound handset on the market, but for those who cherish form over function (the very targets of a so-called fashion device), that's a sacrifice worth making.

Don't get us wrong -- the RAZR's beauty is not only skin deep. The LTE radio, 1.2GHz dual-core processor and 1GB of RAM make sure this sleek number is ready to run with the big boys. It kept pace with, and in some cases clearly outclassed its high-end competition. Despite its deficiencies in the display department and underwhelming battery life, the RAZR looks to be a perfectly viable alternative when considering the similarly-pricey Rezound and Galaxy Nexus, but we'll have to wait for our full reviews of those devices to say for sure. And don't forget: this one will only get better when ICS comes to Moto's slim slab of sexy.

Read More

Kindle Fire vs. Nook Tablet...fight!

By Brian Heater

Feature

There seems little doubt that the Kindle Fire will prove one of the holiday season's biggest hits. At $200, the budget tablet will no doubt prove too good a deal to pass up for many consumers not ready to make the price commitment to the industry-leading iPad or a top-tier Android tablet like the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. Of course, the Fire wasn't the only budget Android tablet to launch this week -- heck, it wasn't even the only budget Android tablet launched by an e-reader producer. Barnes & Noble's Nook Tablet also, conveniently, hit stores earlier this week. The company took what it got right with the Nook Color, souped it up a bit internally and wound up with a solid competitor to the Fire.

So, which of these products should budget-friendly gadget shoppers pick up this holiday season? We take a look at their hits and misses after the break.

Form factor

Barnes & Noble certainly didn't go out of its way to distinguish the Nook Tablet from its predecessor, the Nook Color. The company really took an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach to industrial design -- after all, the Color was a good seller, so why reinvent the wheel here? And, for better or worse, the Nook is certainly one of the most distinctive designs in a world of iPad lookalikes, with its long body, hard plastic casing and the loop jutting out from the bottom left-hand corner. Standing out from the pack was clearly not a concern for Amazon, on the other hand. The little rectangular tablet looks a lot like the BlackBerry PlayBook.

Both tablets are a good size for one-handed reading, though the Nook edges out the Kindle here a bit, with its slightly lighter weight (14.1 ounces to the Fire's 14.6). The Nook's subtly convex back and plastic bezel make a bit easier to hold. Ultimately, however, this round comes down to aesthetic preference, and the Nook is certainly sure to be the more polarizing of the two options.

The whole physical button versus touch conversation also comes down to a matter of person preference, of course. In that department, the Nook has more to offer -- volume buttons, power, and the lowercase "n" home button, to the Kindle's single power button.

Performance

[Kindle, left; Nook, right]

Both devices rock 1GHz dual-core processors, but the Nook has an edge here, with its 1GB of RAM to the Fire's 512MB -- and certainly the difference is noticeable, even when booting up something as simple as a game like Angry Birds. Things are even more pronounced during video playback. We took Shutter Island for a spin via Netflix streaming on both devices, and it was really like night and day. Motion is far less choppy on the Barnes & Noble device. The HD playback on the Nook also picked up subtle imagery like patterns on ties, which were largely lost on the Fire.

Browser performance is pretty much a toss up. The Kindle tended to load text more quickly, but the Nook had a better time with images. Scrolling and pinch-to-zoom is fairly comparable in the browsers, as well. Interestingly, Nook scored a low 4,135 on SunSpider 9.1, vs. the Fire's more impressive 2,440, a fact that might owe something to the Silk browser that Amazon's been talking up, which does the heavily lifting on the company's own servers.

Display

As with a number of elements, Barnes & Noble left the display in tact from the Nook Color. Placed side by side, the Nook appears brighter, if only slightly. Most users likely won't notice a huge difference between the two. Barnes & Noble has been talking up the Tablet's viewing display -- we also didn't notice a huge difference on that front, though the Nook did manage to handle glares better than the Fire.

Software

Both tablets are running Gingerbread, albeit highly customized versions. Amazon really went out of its way to make its UI virtually unidentifiable as Android. Fittingly, given the tablet's nature as a a content distribution device, a bookshelf is at the center of the experience, offering up books, magazines, comics, apps, webpages -- pretty much all of the content you'd like to get at on the device.

Kindle Fire review

Nook Tablet unboxing and hands-on

Kobo Vox unboxing and hands-on

The Nook's UI is more immediately identifiable as Android, defaulting to a homescreen onto which you can drag and drop apps. There are, however, some key differences, including a scrollable bar of recently opened apps and texts, a static menu at the bottom of the homepage with links to multimedia content and a book icon that will always bring you back to whatever you were last reading. Clicking Library will bring you into a bookshelf format similar to the one offered on the Fire -- albeit one that's slightly less visually appealing. The Fire meanwhile, also offers up an apps view, similar to the Android layout, albeit still contained in the bookshelf.

Amazon certainly has Barnes & Noble beat in terms of proprietary entertainment services.

Amazon certainly has Barnes & Noble beat in terms of proprietary entertainment services. Both companies have solid bookstores, but Amazon is also levering its Cloud Drive for music streaming and free movies and TV shows via Prime. That said, both devices offer access to top tier multimedia apps, like Netflix, Hulu and Pandora -- and yes, since both are Android-based, there's plenty of opportunity for workarounds.

Reading

Of course, you've got all of the drawbacks of LCD devices when it comes to reading here -- the backlighting can be hard on the eyes after a while, and neither are particularly great when reading in sunlight, which is to say that, yes, e-ink devices do have their advantages. Reading prose is fairly similar on both readers: you swipe or touch in a margin to advance, while tapping a page toward the center will bring up a menu where you can adjust things like text size -- though the Nook does offer up a few more options here like adjusting the brightness and sharing passages via social means. Holding down on a word on both devices brings up options to highlight, add notes or check out the definition.

Both product handle children's books fairly similarly, and in this case, simpler is certainly better. Here the Nook does have a bit of a leg up, with its terrific Read and Record feature, which lets parents record narrations to books using the device's built-in mic.

Neither device has quite mastered comics via its proprietary app. Both have their advantages and drawbacks. The Fire has a great panel by panel feature, similar to the one found in Comixology's app (which, incidentally, is coming to both devices), while the Nook does a better job zooming and previewing via a small gallery mode. The fight here really comes down to whether you side with Marvel (Nook) or DC (Kindle).

Etc.

Ultimately, this is a pretty tight race between the two devices.

When it comes to storage, the Nook's got the Fire beat at 16GB to 8GB. Things are a little tricky here as well, however, since the Nook is currently only offering up 1GB of its built-in storage to non-B&N-purchased content. That said, the Nook has a microSD slot, so there's plenty more where that came from. Also, the company promised that it is working on content deals with third parties that will utilize the 12GB devoted to B&N content on the reader.

Price, of course, is a biggie -- the Kindle is $50 cheaper than the Nook. That number makes a significant difference when the base price of the Fire is just $199. Of course, those who want to lop $50 from the Nook Tablet's $249 price can still pick up last year's Nook Color.

Ultimately, this is a pretty tight race between the two devices. Spec-wise, the Nook Tablet has the Kindle Fire beat, but between Amazon's pricing and suite of service, the Kindle comes out ahead on this one, if only just barely.

Read More

Toshiba Portege Z835 review

By Dana Wollman

Review

Toshiba should know a thing or two about skinny, featherweight laptops. Back in 2007, the company unveiled the Portege R500, a 2.4-pound laptop measuring what was then an anorexic 0.77 inches (19.6mm) thick. Much to everyone's disbelief, it managed to squeeze in an optical drive.

Fast forward four years and it's entering the Ultrabook market with the Portege Z830 (that's the Z835 if you get it at Best Buy). And here comes the déjà vu: it's even lighter than the competition, at 2.47 pounds, but still houses a full suite of ports, including USB 3.0 and 2.0, HDMI and Gigabit Ethernet. It also promises more than eight hours of battery life, besting claims made by the likes of Apple, Acer and ASUS. Not to mention, with a price of $800 (Best Buy only), it undercuts competing models -- and at a time when every other Ultrabook seems to have some fatal flaw, whether it be a flaky touchpad or skimpy battery life. Clearly, there's lots of room here for something more carefully thought-out. So is Toshiba's Portege know-how just what the market needs? Let's see.

Toshiba Portege Z835 review

Look and feel

For a machine that's going to sit on the shelf at the Best Buy, the Z835 looks like it would be more at home under the arm of some suited, late '80s businessman. We're not sure if it's the drab black-on-gray color scheme, the chintzy chrome accents or some combination thereof, but put together they make for a design that's at once dated and stuffy.

It doesn't help that there's a lot going on here: in addition to the power button, the area above the keyboard is home to two launch keys, including ones for Intel Wireless Display and Toshiba's eco utility (more on that later). There's also a thin strip below the touch touch buttons that houses six LED lights that glow green and orange. Wedged in between the space bar and the touchpad is a button for turning off the trackpad. In a quirky touch, the fan sits on the bottom side, protruding ever-so slightly. The hinge, meanwhile, has a metal shoulder on each end that matches the reflective material used in the touch buttons. That wouldn't be so noticeable if it weren't for the fact that there's thin cutout above the hinge in both those spots, putting about an eighth of an inch of blank space between the hinge and the corners of the display -- an optical illusion that fools you into thinking the screen is sitting higher than it is. As a finishing touch, the palm rest comes plastered with four stickers. You can remove these, of course, though we wish more OEMs would paint them on the bottom, as Lenovo did with the IdeaPad U300s.

It's a shame because in a blind hands-on, the Z835 feels exactly like we'd always hoped Ultrabooks would feel. At 2.47 pounds, it's almost half a pound lighter than the Air, and believe us when we say you can feel the difference. What's incredible, too, is that despite being so featherweight the Z835 still crams in more ports than anything else we've seen. These include a USB 3.0 socket and Kensington lock slot on the right; an SD reader and headphone and mic ports on the left; and a buffet of openings 'round back that includes twin USB 2.0 ports, Ethernet, HDMI, VGA and the power port. Of those USB 2.0 sockets, one of them uses Toshiba's Sleep and Charge technology to charge gadgets while the laptop's dozing fitfully.

The only Ultrabook that come close to this kind of spread is the new HP Folio 13 and, as it happens, it's also the heaviest of the bunch, at 3.3 pounds. Otherwise, almost every Ultrabook is missing something. The 13-inch MacBook Air has two USB 2.0 ports, an SD slot and a Thunderbolt port, for which there aren't yet many compatible peripherals. The ASUS Zenbook UX31 has USB 3.0 and 2.0, mini-HDMI and mini-VGA, and comes with Ethernet and VGA adapters. The U300s, meanwhile, has HDMI, USB 3.0 and 2.0, but no SD slot or Ethernet jack. Finally, the Acer Aspire S3 -- one of Toshiba's main competitors at this price point -- houses two USB 2.0 ports, as well as HDMI-out.

With lightness, though, comes mixed build quality. Although the Z835 is made of magnesium alloy and has the same honeycomb caging you'll find inside other Porteges, it feels less solid than other the Air or UX31. When you grip it in one hand, the whole thing feels sort of hollow, especially as you press your fingers into the bottom side. We also noticed the lid wobbles, especially after you set the laptop down. Then again, that brushed metal casing proved immune to both scratches and fingerprints, so however flimsy it felt, we never felt compelled to handle it with kid gloves.

Keyboard and trackpad

The Z835's keyboard is on par with those belonging to some of the other Ultrabooks we've tested, but that isn't exactly saying much. As with so many other chiclet arrangements, the keys here don't offer much travel. Worse, still, each individual key has a squat shape, leaving barely enough vertical space for even small fingertips. Suffice to say, that didn't stop us from typing portions of this review (and with few spelling errors, at that). We suspect you'll adapt, as people often do to imperfect keyboards, though we'd remiss if we didn't warn you that there's a learning curve.

Still, Toshiba wisely extended the keyboard from one end of the deck to the other, wasting very little space on the sides. As a result, most of the major keys -- Enter, left and right Shift, Caps Lock -- are amply sized and easy to hit if you're touch typing. (Others, such as the Fn and right Ctrl buttons, have been reduced to the size of a fingernail, and are no larger than any of the lettered keys.) The typing here is also pretty quiet, with the keys making a comforting, low-pitched sound. Another bonus: it's spill-resistant, showing Toshiba is indeed putting its business-centric Portege expertise to good use here.

The Z835's keyboard is also backlit -- not too shabby, considering the $900 Acer Aspire S3 doesn't have this feature (the $900 HP Folio does, however). Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but we noticed it isn't particularly bright. If you sit on the side of the laptop (you know, away from the keys), you'll see white lights glowing beneath the buttons. To Toshiba's credit, the backlighting does become more obvious as your surroundings get dimmer, which means it'll come in handy the next time you attempt to work through an overnight flight. But even then, the lighting feels more subtle than what you'll see on the Folio or Air: you're not going to see white light pooling beneath the keys; just a faint glow from the keycaps, leaving you with barely enough of a glow to type in the dark.

The 1.75 x 3.3-inch touchpad, though short, offers a smooth, low-friction surface that makes it easy to drag the cursor across the screen -- nope, no lag or jumpiness for once. It even pulls off pinch to zoom reasonably well. The problem is that the pad is small enough that you'll have to angle your hand just so in order to have enough room to stretch those fingers out. Even then, you'll likely feel your fingertips bump against the edges of the trackpad. It also supports one- and two-fingered scrolling, but for whatever reason, neither gesture is enabled out of the box; you'll have to go into Synaptics' device settings and select these options yourself.

The two touch buttons should serve as evidence that sometimes, a staid design can have its advantages. Yes, those buttons are made of a tacky reflective metal that collects your oily fingerprints. But there's something to be said for not having to put up with a touchpad with a built-in buttons -- you know, the kind we often rail on for being too flaky. Here, the buttons are reliable, easy to press and fairly quiet.

Display and sound

Like every other Ultrabook offered at this price, the Z835 has a 1366 x 768 display. We figure, if more pixels are a necessity, you shouldn't have any qualms about spending an extra three hundred bucks on the UX31, which comes standard with a 1600 x 900 panel. As for everyone else, that 1366 x 768 pixel count should be enough for checking email and scrolling through webpages. So our real gripe about the screen actually has very little to do with specs but, rather, the quality. Granted, TN displays in general don't offer great viewing angles, but they seem particularly narrow here. If you look at the display head-on with the brightness cranked up, you'll enjoy pleasant colors and crisp-enough detail. Dip the lid forward, though, or watch from the sides and you'll see the picture become washed out with more severe contrast. As with so many other displays we've tested, it's adequate, but you will have to remember to adjust the screen carefully before settling in for your next True Blood marathon.

Toshiba also threw in its Resolution+ technology, which promises to upscale video to as high as 720p. While it doesn't hurt to have this feature, it's more of a marketer's bullet point than anything else. For one, you can only use it in Windows Media Player 12, which means this won't compensate for the amateur quality of home videos on YouTube and Vimeo. Even when we used it in Windows Media Player, though, we didn't notice much of a difference. Grainy videos looked as pixelated with ever.

Here's your first clue that audio quality wasn't a top priority for Toshiba here: the volume controls are built into the "3" and "4" buttons, while the main row of function keys is given over to things like locking the computer, going into hibernation, adjusting the brightness and disabling the touchpad (an odd thing when there's also a discrete button for that). Oddly, too, there's no onscreen indicator showing the volume level as you adjust it.

As it turns out, the sound quality is fairly ho-hum, though volume is the least of its failings. It's not as loud as, say, the Bang & Olufsen-equipped UX31, though it's on par with other Ultrabooks, such as the U300s. No, the real weakness is the way tracks sound -- and that's despite MaxxAudio software on board to help enhance the quality. Pop songs by the likes of Lady Gaga sound alright at median volume settings, but they take on a distant, metallic quality as you pump the volume. Rap tracks and more bass-heavy numbers are predictably thin as well.

Performance

We're willing to bet that with a 23-second startup time, some of you won't fret too much about the raw performance scores.

The $800 configuration we tested sports a 1.4GHz Core i3-2367M processor, 4GB of RAM, a 128GB SSD and an eight-cell battery rated for 8.28 hours of runtime. Given its price, it performs well. Thanks in part to its Hi-Speed Start technology, it boots in 23 seconds -- almost half the 45-second startup time we observed with the similarly priced Aspire S3. Its benchmark scores are higher across the board, too: it notched a 500-point lead in PCMark Vantage and a nearly 400-point gain in 3DMark06. And, as you'd expect, the Z835's SSD offers much faster read speeds than the 5,400RPM hard drive that comes with the entry-level S3. In the disk benchmark ATTO, the Z835's mSATA drive managed read speeds that peaked just below 200 MB/s, while the S3 topped out at 80 MB/s reads.

For our part, the Z835 didn't get in our way while we worked (actually, it did sometimes, but that's a function of the obnoxious bloatware load, which we'll tell you about in a bit). During our testing, we carried on our normal routine of juggling tabs in Chrome, writing emails, reading blogs and streaming YouTube videos. The machine didn't hiccup, even when we started downloading and installing programs and running a full system scan in the background using Norton Internet Security. We did notice a slight lag as we opened a new tab while playing a web video, but other than that, multitasking was smooth.

	PCMark Vantage	3DMark06	Battery Life
Toshiba Portege Z835 (1.4GHz Core i3-2367M, Intel HD Graphics 3000)	5,894	3,601	5:49
Lenovo IdeaPad U300s (1.8GHz Core i7-2677M, Intel HD Graphics 3000)	9,939	3,651	5:08
ASUS Zenbook UX31 (1.7GHz Core i5-2557M, Intel HD Graphics 3000)	10,508	4,209	5:41
Acer Aspire Ultrabook S3 (1.6GHz Core i5-2467M, Intel HD Graphics 3000)	5,367	3,221	4:11
13-inch, 2011 MacBook Air (1.7 GHz Core i5-2557M, Intel HD Graphics 3000)	9,484	4,223	5:32 (Mac OS X) / 4:12 (Windows)
Samsung Series 9 (1.7GHz Core i5-2537M, Intel HD Graphics 3000)	7,582	2,240	4:20
Notes: the higher the score the better. For 3DMark06, the first number reflects score with GPU off, the second with it on.

Curiously, though, the Z835's solid-state drive couldn't match the S3's HDD in write performance: it reached about 50 MB/s, whereas the S3 at least maxed out around 75 MB/s. Either way, the Z835's SSD isn't fast compared to other solid-state drives. The U300s, for instance, achieved 250 MB/s reads and 200 MB/s writes, while the UX31 remains the champion with 550 MB/s reads and 500 MB/s writes. Then there's one other area in which the S3 triumphs over the Z835, though, and that's resume time: the S3 takes just two seconds, whereas with the Z835 you'll wait four. Not a deal-breaker, though it does dovetail with some of the other ways in which the Z835's performance seems to trail the competition.

Additionally, it didn't take much to get that fan whirring. You might think that because it's tucked on the bottom side of the laptop any noise would be muffled. Wrong. Even when coming out of hibernate mode the system piped up, and that noise continued even after we logged into Windows. The result, at least, is that the machine never got hot. Yes, the area above the keyboard gets warm to the touch (not that you'll touch it much anyway), but the keys themselves stayed nice and cool. Still, we'd be concerned about working in bed with the Z835, and having pillows or blankets wrap themselves around the vent on the bottom side, making it more difficult for the laptop to keep its surface temperatures under control.

So are these imperfections enough to justify spending an extra $300 to $500 on a higher-end Ultrabook? That's a question you'll have to answer for yourself. For some benchmark junkies reading this, they'll be a deal-breaker. But we're willing to bet that with a 23-second startup time, some of you won't fret too much about the raw performance scores.

Battery life

The best we've seen so far in an Ultrabook -- albeit by a margin of just eight minutes. In our rundown test, which involves looping a movie off the hard drive with WiFi on and the brightness fixed at 65 percent, it lasted five hours and 49 minutes. If you were to buy the identically priced Acer Aspire S3 you'd have to settle for an hour and 40 minutes less runtime (ditto, more or less, for the $1,349 Samsung Series 9). Still, though it's technically the best, the Z835's longevity is comparable to the Zenbook UX31 and, to a lesser extent, the MacBook Air. Needless to say, we'll be curious to pit this against the HP Folio 13, which costs the same and is rated for nine hours of use. We know, we know: battery life ratings are often exaggerated bunk. That said, we wouldn't be too surprised if we soon had a new battery life champ.

This is probably a good place to explain that eco utility we mentioned earlier. Though it looks like a dashboard showing the display brightness and power consumption, in practice it's just a pre-configured battery-saving setting. So, if you enable eco mode, the keyboard backlight turns off, the display dims and the system will turn off the screen and hard disk sooner than it normally would. From what we can tell, it's an app dedicated to flipping on one particular power management profile: there are some advanced settings, but so far as we can tell, you can't adjust any of those metrics (at least not here -- you'll of course get more options in Windows Power Options). And though it's interesting seeing the real-time graph illustrating the power consumption, we suspect that's not what most consumers will use this utility for.

Software

Toshiba loaded the Z835 with bloatware, but in an interesting twist, most of it's software the company wrote itself. These programs include: Toshiba Assist, Disc Creator, DVD Player, Face Recognition, Fingerprint Utility, HDD/SSD Alert, HDD Protection, HW Setup Utility, Media Controller, Password Utility, PC Health Monitor, Recover Disc Creator, Service Station, Security Assist, Sleep Utility, Value Added Package and the laptop's webcam software.

Among these apps is Bulletin Board, which Toshiba has been bundling on its laptops for some time now. With this app, you get a canvas for posting to-do lists, sticky notes and a calendar widget, along with "written notes" (these will be about as legible as if you scribbled them in MS Paint). Any time you want to remove something from this hodgepodge of reminders, just drag the pin that's attaching it to the virtual board, and it'll fade away. It works well enough, though we can still think of some tweaks that would make the app more intuitive. First, Toshiba should pull in calendar entries from Google Cal and other services so that you don't have to manually enter appointments. Also, a local weather widget might be more useful than the analog clock currently included as an option.

Moving along, ReelTime opens a scrollable carousel showing your activity on the PC in chronological order. That means apps you've used, documents you've opened and websites you've visited. We can see it being a handy way to pull up things you accidentally closed that perhaps didn't have a quick desktop shortcut. At the same time, though, we're not sure we'd get much use out of this, given that Windows 7 lets us pin key apps, docs and sites -- not to mention the fact that most browsers let you reopen recently closed tabs.

Still with us? Good. Because we're not done yet. Toshiba also added Microsoft Office Starter 2010, Windows Live Essentials, Google Toolbar and Google Chrome -- you know the stuff you're resigned to seeing on your spanking new laptop.

Worst of all, if you buy this through Best Buy, you'll be greeted by the retailer's own app store, which takes over most of the screen almost as soon as you start up. Actually, let's clarify that: you'll see the shop, along with a smaller overlay window that summarizes what the store is all about. (Spoiler: Best Buy wants to sell you stuff. Lots and lots of stuff.) You can remove this from your list of startup items, of course, but the reality that this is what you get in exchange for scoring such an inexpensive Ultrabook is still quite frustrating. You know what they say: there's no such thing as free lunch.

Configuration options

The $800 configuration we tested, the Z835, is a pre-built version that's only available at Best Buy. To recap, it comes stocked with a 1.4GHz Core i3-2367M processor, 4GB of RAM, a 128GB SSD and a eight-cell battery rated for more than eight hours of battery life.

The price goes up if you order through Toshiba's website, but at least the options expand -- a little, anyway. Even here, you'll find pre-configured models, which means you won't have the option of cherry picking the processor or amount of pre-installed RAM. Starting at the low-end, there's the Z835-ST8305 ($880 after instant savings), which comes with identical specs as the Best Buy model, except it costs eighty bucks more. Best Buy's bloatware aside, we can't see why you wouldn't go with the cheaper option.

Next in line is the Z830-S8301, a pre-configured model that rings in at $1,200. It would seem here that you're paying 50 percent more for that 1.7GHz Core i5-2557M CPU, since this model, too, has 4GB of RAM, a 128GB SSD and integrated graphics. Kind of an outrageous price when you consider that the HP Folio starts at just $900 with very similar specs. The most tricked-out model on display is the Z830-S8302, which costs $1,430 and is also pre-configured. For that chunk of cash, you get a Core i7-2667M CPU, 6GB of RAM, a 128GB SSD and integrated Intel graphics.

Okay, technically that's not the last configuration you can buy. There's also a configurable model, the Z830-BT8300, but with a starting price of $1,100 and entry-level specs that include a Core i5 CPU, 2GB of RAM and a 128GB SSD, there's no reason for consumers to choose this option. Maybe that's the point: your only OS choices with that configuration are Win 7 Professional or Ultimate, which makes it pretty clear this particular model isn't for mainstream users.

The competition

Acer Aspire S3 review

ASUS Zenbook UX31 review

Lenovo IdeaPad U300s review

This is the part of the review where we usually weigh an Ultrabook against its competitors, all them imperfect in some way. The Z835 is no exception, though it does trump its opponents in several key categories. Its battery life is the best we've seen so far, though the ASUS Zenbook UX31 isn't far behind. It offers a more robust selection of ports than any other Ultrabook (save the HP Folio), and still manages to weigh roughly half a pound less than the others.

When it comes to specs, the Z835 loses a little bit of its shine now that we know what the Folio will be bringing when it goes on sale December 7th. Whereas the Z835 starts at $800 with a Core 3 CPU, the Folio will go for $900 and up with a Core i5 processor and a battery that purportedly lasts up to nine hours (we'll be the judge of that). Otherwise, they both have 128GB SSDs, backlit keyboards and 4GB of RAM. We'll break down the Folio's performance in our review, but for now, it's clear you can get more processing power at roughly for a small premium.

Still, the Z835 is a better deal than the $900 Acer Aspire 3, which starts with no backlit keyboard and a slower 5,400RPM drive. It's no wonder it trails the others in all of our performance benchmarks.

Toshiba has proven it's quite possible to make an exceptionally light, long-lasting Ultrabook that costs well under $1,000.

With us so far? The Z835 is the lightest, most longevous Ultrabook we've seen. Now that we've got that squared away, here are some downsides: it's not offered with a 256GB SSD. By most metrics, it's not an extraordinarily fast performer. The Air, UX31 and U300s all of combine an SSD with either a Core i5 or i7 processor and, as you'd expect, they eat the Z835 for breakfast. Then again, the 13-inch Air starts at $1,299, while the UX31 and U300s start at about $1,100. Seems fair to us, more expensive machines offering superior performance

In terms of ergonomics, you'll find better keyboards and larger trackpads on the Air and U300s. Still, the Z835 isn't the worst in this area either: its keyboard is better than the UX31's and no worse than the S3's. Also, while its trackpad is nothing to write home about, it's still much more reliable than the UX31's.

And then there's design. On the one hand, to each his own. If you don't mind the Z835's buttoned-up look, ride off into the sunset with it and don't mind our nitpicking. We'll also say that the Z835's lightness helps make it pretty in a way that its shiny chrome accents don't. In other words, industrial design includes more than just aesthetics. Still, we're inclined to say it's objectively less attractive than the Air, UX31 or U300s, each of which are striking in their own way.

Wrap-up

We can only ding a laptop so much for being homely. Once you get past the Z835's dated looks (and you will as soon as you pick it up), it's actually among the best Ultrabooks we've seen. After all, it's earned a bunch of superlatives here: lightest, best battery life and most robust selection of ports (that one's a tie with the Folio). Not bad for $800, especially considering many of its chief competitors cost three, if not five hundred dollars more.

If you'll indulge us in a game of devil's advocate, though, we can think of reasons besides the design that you might think twice about this. So far, three competitors (the Air, U300s and UX31) perform markedly faster. Of those, the UX31 and Air each have higher-res displays. And while the Z835's keyboard and trackpad are adequate, the Air's and even the U300s' are better. Still, those seem like minor quibbles considering everything this laptop has to offer at this price. So, if you don't mind the design and dig the price and long battery life, carpe diem! No regrets, we say. And even if you don't take the bait, we suspect you'll soon be seeing more laptops like the Z835: after all, Toshiba has proven it's quite possible to make an exceptionally light, long-lasting Ultrabook that costs well under $1,000. If Toshiba can pull it off, well, everyone else is just going to have to follow suit.

Read More