Print 101 comment(s) - last by Smilin.. on Sep 5 at 7:20 PM

Toshiba Portege Z830
Toshiba's Portege Z830 is cheaper, lighter, and better equipped than Apple's 13" MacBook Air

Manufacturers are still trying to work out final details on pricing for Intel-based Ultrabooks, but the devices are on the way. For those that like the form-factor and weight on Apple's highly popular MacBook Air range, but can't be bothered with Apple’s pricing or OS X, Toshiba is serving up a fine alternative with the Portege Z830. 

Toshiba has worked some serious magic on the Portege Z830 as it manages to incorporate a 13.3" display (1366x768) and second generation Intel Core processors into a frame weighing in at under 2.5 pounds. Part of the low weight can be attributed to the Portege Z830's magnesium alloy body.

Although Toshiba won't tell us how fast the processors are in the Portege Z830, the specs are quite amazing. It will come with a 128GB SSD, backlit and spill-resistant keyboard, two USB 2.0 ports, one USB 3.0 port, GbE port, Secure Digital reader, HDMI-out, and stereo speakers.

According to Engadget, the notebook features an 8-cell battery, can be equipped with up to 6GB of DDR3 memory, and will have an optional Core i7 processor upgrade available.

"The Portégé Z830 Series sets a new standard for thin and light systems, not just in portability, but also in affordability for such cutting-edge designs," said Carl Pinto, vice president of product development, Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc., Digital Products Division. "Toshiba's engineering achievements and expert craftsmanship have resulted in a brilliant and fully thought-through innovation that exceeds expectations, perfect for both mobile business professionals and consumers." 

And keeping with Intel's mandate, the 0.63"-thin Portege Z830 will start at under $1,000 (we're guessing $999) when it launches later this year. That would make the lighter, better-spec'd Toshiba Ultrabook $300 cheaper than the entry-level 13" MacBook Air.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Sorry...
By quiksilvr on 9/1/2011 11:32:59 AM , Rating: 5
*cracks knuckles and crinks neck*
Okay here we go:
1) It's actually magnesium alloy covering this.
2) You're comparing 1366x768 with 1440x900 on a 13" screen. Trust me, no one will notice. You can make it 1280x720 and still wouldn't notice on a screen that small unless you are doing serious photo editing, at which point you would use a second monitor and not a paltry 13" screen.
3) Source please as to where you saw this as a non-multitouch touchpad.
4) It has a backlit keyboard as well.

RE: Sorry...
By quiksilvr on 9/1/2011 11:36:25 AM , Rating: 3
Phones are 16:9. Monitors are 16:9. Televisions are 16:9. And now most laptops and all-in-ones are (even the smaller Macbook Air and iMac). It's going to happen. It has to happen. We can't keep wasting materials for different ratios on this crap anymore when almost every single display (even the Apple Cinema Displays) are following suit.

RE: Sorry...
By Argon18 on 9/1/11, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry...
By Smilin on 9/1/2011 12:12:33 PM , Rating: 2

16x9, 16x10, 16x9 here. Widescreen rocks.

Outlook and Lync fit side by side on a screen. Network traces are a hassle on 4:3. Plus on widescreen you can Windows+< and Windows+> with two docs and you're good to go. On 4:3 you would have to enlist one of your alternate monitors.

Besides if you need vertical height so bad 16x9 is FAR better than 4:3.

RE: Sorry...
By geddarkstorm on 9/1/2011 12:18:13 PM , Rating: 2
Only if you believe you -have- to write a document in full screen mode. The beauty of wider screens is you can comfortably have multiple things going on at once, without the need for a second screen, since you have so much horizontal real estate.

So, I must disagree: 16:9 gives an increase in productivity for us who do a lot of multitasking. But that's my experience.

RE: Sorry...
By Reclaimer77 on 9/1/2011 4:29:03 PM , Rating: 1
Most every 16x9 that I've ever owned can be rotated vertically anyway if you need that much vertical pixels for something. So he's just being doubly stupid about this. Of course I've never actually used this feature because like you said, width is far more important in daily use.

RE: Sorry...
By Smilin on 9/2/2011 4:13:49 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Sorry...
By retrospooty on 9/1/2011 3:41:28 PM , Rating: 1
"The three 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 LCD screens on my desk beg to differ. 16:9 is cumbersome to use for doing real work"

I dont think anyone is disagreeing with you here, but the point is that LCD manufacturers arent making anything but 16:9 anymore other than small qualtities and they are charging premiums for it. The LCD industry has moved to 16:9 - I think it sucks rocks, but it is what has happened.

RE: Sorry...
By Reclaimer77 on 9/1/11, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry...
By corduroygt on 9/1/11, Rating: -1
RE: Sorry...
By quiksilvr on 9/1/2011 11:53:34 AM , Rating: 2
Screen QUALITY matters a lot. Resolution at these sizes don't.
1) You haven't used this laptop and have no idea what the color and quality of the screen is.
2) You spouted plastic being the skin when its clearly magnesium alloy.
3) You haven't used this touchpad yet to make any assumptions on its quality.

And as for PC equivalents:

11" equivalents in terms of hardware, the Lenovo Ideapad U160 and Asus UL20 do a handy job. And if you want a CPU equivalent, the Acer TimelineX does a handy job.

There are dozens of 13" superiors to the Macbook Air so all I'll say is go to Newegg and Amazon and see for yourself.

RE: Sorry...
By corduroygt on 9/1/2011 12:39:25 PM , Rating: 1
Check notebook forums which screen is the most popular option in the Sony Vaio SA (The only 13.3" laptop besides the more expensive Vaio Z and the MB Air that has more than 768p resolution). People get the higher 1600x900 resolution by far. 768p is woefully inadequate to do any real work. I have a 900p screen in my larger laptop and it's barely enough.

I have owned both the timeline X series and the UL30VT in the past. Their touchpads and chassis are garbage compared to the MB Air.

RE: Sorry...
By sviola on 9/1/2011 1:19:55 PM , Rating: 3
People get the higher 1600x900 resolution by far. 768p is woefully inadequate to do any real work.

Doing real work in a 13.3" laptop is terrible, no matter the screen resolution. It is good as a time-limited substitute on the road.

RE: Sorry...
By The0ne on 9/1/2011 3:15:56 PM , Rating: 2
Yep. But then again doing work on a heavy 17" laptop isn't all too fun either unless you're like me who loves using it a weight for a day walk or good hike :D

"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki