Final Words

A company that can very easily be held as complicit in the mismanagement and decline of the mainstream PC industry, HP did nothing short of a tremendous job with the Chromebook 11.

Under Google’s influence, HP has built a near perfect example of what an entry level PC should be. It boots fast (< 13 seconds even in dev mode), has a great display, comes with dual-band 2-stream 802.11n WiFi, has good sounding speakers, looks stylish, is light and feels well built. The keyboard is great and even the clickpad isn’t as bad as it is on far more expensive PCs. You honestly get one of the best examples of a portable machine for $279, and that’s without even relying on the benefits of Chrome OS to help sell the bundle. Anyone looking for a glorified web browsing, email checking, internet terminal will be right at home with Chrome OS. Flash works and you obviously get what’s arguably the world’s best web browser. You don’t have to worry about updates, malware or viruses, all of that is taken care of for you. It’s the modern typewriter equivalent, a true entry level computer, and HP/Google have done an excellent job in bringing this to market.

Chrome OS is extremely purpose built and it is something that should bring about great concern to those at Microsoft. I personally don’t have a problem with Windows 8, but purpose built is hardly a phrase that applies to the OS - at least if you’re talking about it on a more traditional PC. I suspect by the time we get to Windows 9, Microsoft will have a better answer to the critics of 8/8.1, but that gives Google and its Chrome OS partners at least another year of marketshare erosion. At the beginning of this mobile journey I remember x86 being an advantage for Intel, and we all know what happened to that. Similarly, I remember Windows/Office being advantages for Microsoft. If Microsoft doesn’t find a quick solution for making low cost Windows PCs just as well executed as Chrome OS devices, it’ll find itself in a world where Windows no longer matters to entry-level/mainstream users.

My only complaint about the Chromebook 11 really boils down to silicon selection. Samsung’s Exynos 5250 is just too slow. A pair of Cortex A15s running at up to 1.7GHz draws too much power and doesn’t deliver the sort of multitasking performance that we’ve come to expect in 2013. You can forget about having a good experience multitasking while playing YouTube videos. Streaming music in the background while you surf the web is about as far as you’re going to be able to push the Chromebook 11 without incurring significant lag. There are clearly better options on the market today, either Snapdragon 800, a quad-core A15 based design or my personal pick for this type of a machine: Intel’s Bay Trail.

If you’re looking for the Chromebook 11 to last you for 5 years, I’d be very concerned about you running out of CPU power well before then. For lighter use you’ll be fine, but with things like the Haswell Celeron based Acer C720 selling for $250 it’s clear that HP went a little too slow on the CPU front. I haven’t seen the C720 in person but my guess is you’re sacrificing display for CPU performance. HP got the mix nearly perfect with the Chromebook 11, with a faster CPU this wouldn’t just be a great machine for light use but likely the perfect entry-level notebook.

Battery Life & Charging
Comments Locked

90 Comments

View All Comments

  • lightsout565 - Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - link

    Yes, I believe you can.

    https://support.google.com/chromebook/answer/18310...
  • lightsout565 - Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - link

    If only it had Bay Trail... Sigh.

    I was very disappointed by the batter life figures. The HP Chromebook 11 and the Asus T100 both have nearly identical battery sizes (30 Wh vs 31Wh respectively) but the Asus has a reported 11 hours of battery life. Clearly Windows 8/BayTrail just blow the ChromeOS/Exynos away when it comes to power managment.

    Do you plan on reviewing the Asus T100? Thanks and awesome review!
  • shwetshkla - Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - link

    I have a genuine question.. why don't chromebooks use amd chips?? It might further lower the costs. :/
  • shwetshkla - Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - link

    and have enough power for chromeOS.
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - link

    The same reason AMD has such a tiny mobile share in general. Their chips need significantly more power for a given performance level.
  • Krysto - Thursday, October 17, 2013 - link

    I would go for AMD chips, if they move to 14nm FinFET, as soon as it's available in 2015 (or even next year if that Samsung 14nm chip is real for 2014, but I doubt it).
  • epr118 - Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - link

    Why didn't you have the Samsung Chromebook from last year in the comparison? You say this is the successor to it, so I would like to see how favorably/unfavorably in performs. I can assume the display and build quality are better, with the performance around the same.
  • jaydee - Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - link

    It's an interesting device, but for someone like me, who has an iPad, I don't really see much that a Chromebook can do that I can't with a tablet+bluetooth keyboard. Sure there are a few applications where you can really use the touchpad, and there are certain apps that you just can't do on a mobile OS, but going to my desktop isn't that inconvenient for those things.

    If you don't have a tablet already, then I can see the draw, but for a household that has a tablet, a laptop and a desktop, I'm not sure where this fits in. A real laptop is much powerful and has 90% of the mobility of a Chromebook at maybe 150% of the price (~$450 is a decent base price for a basic i3 laptop). A real tablet is much more mobile, with the same amount of power, 90% of the application at about the same price. I can maybe see this in a household that has a desktop and wants something to blur the lines between laptop/tablet at a low price point, but I don't think there's that much of a market.
  • kyuu - Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - link

    ChromeOS is less fully featured than any OS, whether you're talking full Windows, Windows RT, iOS, or Android. It really has no reason to exist other than to push Google's cloud services.
  • mschira - Tuesday, October 15, 2013 - link

    Yea Chrome OS is an odd beast. I wonder if the same hardware with android installed would be a better choice?
    Then again lack of features is the point of Chrome OS. Less features means less can go wrong.
    Good for grannies I guess.
    M.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now