Conclusion: But Who is This For?

Now here's an interesting opportunity: while Anand mostly skirted the ultrabook discussion with his review of the ASUS Zenbook UX21, I have the chance to tackle it head on. But first...does the Toshiba Portege Z835 stand on its own, irrespective of Intel's big ultrabook push? Is this a notebook that we can recommend?

As far as portability is concerned, Toshiba has mostly a homerun on their hands. If you don't take the price tag into account, the Portege Z835 is in many ways directly superior to most netbooks out there. The HD 3000 is a faster graphics core than NVIDIA's NG-ION or AMD's Radeon HD 6310, two pieces of graphics hardware that are unfortunately tied to netbook-class processors. And while the Intel Core i3-2367M's paltry 1.4GHz, turbo-free clock speed is slower than just about anything AMD is willing to sell you above Zacate, it's still substantially faster than Atom or the E-350. To top it all off, the Z835 is cool, quiet, lasts a long time on the battery, and is actually lighter than many netbooks on the market.

The problem is that we do take the price tag into account, and even at $879 for our model, the Z835 is a hard sell. The difference in processor power is great, but I don't think it's enough to open up entirely different usage models from a traditional netbook. Having an SSD standard is also a major benefit, but it's also not something another $100-$200 can't fix when buying a netbook...and that's still going to leave a healthy deficit between the netbook of your choice and the Z835. This also ignores the Z835's mediocre keyboard. Speaking candidly, if I had to choose between the Z835 at $899 and Lenovo's ThinkPad X120e at half that, I'd take the ThinkPad. The E-350 may be a lot slower, but it's still fast enough to handle the same tasks the Z835 would, and it has a more comfortable build. So what if it's a pound heavier? At least it's built to last through several years of use.

Honestly I think a lot of the problems with the Z835 can be laid squarely at Intel's feet, not Toshiba's. The ultrabook initiative invites direct comparison to the Apple MacBook Air, but it's tone deaf to what the appeal of the MacBook Air is. Intel instead came up with a list of bulletpoints and said to vendors, "have at it," but ultimately this is a market that I'm not sure really exists. The MacBook Air has Apple's cachet behind it, and it is the only ultraportable choice Apple offers. If you don't care about OS X, we've had good and even affordable ultraportables available for Windows users for some time now.

The difference between 2.5 lbs. and 3.5 lbs. is comically minor as far as moving a notebook around is concerned. Fighting to get the form factor under an inch thick is just as pointless, an exercise in style rather than practicality. I could be completely blind and out of my depth here, but I just don't see the market an ultrabook serves that a Lenovo ThinkPad X220, Dell XPS 14z, or Sony Vaio SB series couldn't have already served...and better. Windows users who just want something portable to handle word processing and media on have already had the HP dm1z around for a year.

Time could very well prove me wrong on this one. If the ultrabook as a concept appeals to you, the ASUS Zenbook UX21 is probably going to be a better buy. The $999 model may be $100 more than Toshiba's Portege Z835, but it has a much faster CPU, a slightly better screen, better build quality, and a vastly superior SSD. As we're fond of saying here, there are no bad products, only bad prices. Even though comparatively speaking the Z835's $899 price tag isn't unreasonable, in practice I honestly think it would need to go south at least $100-$200 before being worth considering instead of a thicker ultraportable or a netbook. That may not necessarily be Toshiba's fault, but unfortunately Toshiba's stuck with it. The Portege Z835 feels like the best of a bad situation.

Update: The price tag of the Z835 is just $799 at Best Buy. That does make the unit more competitive and definitely worth a second look, but my sentiments regarding ultrabooks in general still stand.

Unfortunately the Display is Dire
Comments Locked

76 Comments

View All Comments

  • r3loaded - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    Amen to that. I also find it difficult to understand why it's so hard for them to put an IPS screen on them either. Practically every tablet that wants to be taken seriously has such a screen, yet it's a rarity outside of Lenovo/HP's top-end models. They shouldn't moan about cost either - it's a premium product, it deserves premium components and hence should have a premium price (which I and many others are ready to pay for).

    Tablets have 1280x800 IPS screens in a 10-inch form factor. We shouldn't have to put up with 1366x768 TN in a premium 13-inch ultra portable in 2011/2012.
  • solipsism - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    IPS costs more money and users more power. On a 7" or 10" display that isn't too bad, especially when you powering it off ARM, but consider a proper notebook with a 13", 15," or 17" IPS panel. Thing gets a lot tricker.

    This will eventually change just as HiDPI resolutions on notebooks will eventually change, but that time just isn't hear yet. You can look at Apple's limited product line for examples: iPHone and iPad are iPS, iMacs and Cinema Displays are IPS, notebooks are all TN.
  • Penti - Thursday, November 17, 2011 - link

    15" HP's with IPS-panels uses panels specced to 15W for example. You can't really use something that aren't manufactured.
  • Narrlok - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    ASUS UX31 Zenbook

    1600*900 on 13.3"
    - check

    Super good contrast and good brightness
    - super high brightness like the MBA according to Anand's review of the UX21, contrast suffers though

    Offer matte and glossy
    - nope, no other alternatives either currently :( Sony does offer Vaios with a matte 13.1" screen with a 1600*900 resolution
  • medi01 - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    16:9 and 16:10 screens suck badly. Bring good old 4:3 back and I'm sold.
  • tzhu07 - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    Are you 65 years old or something?
  • HMTK - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    No, he probably wants to do other things than watch movies. Like... work.
  • JoeMcJoe - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    Exactly.

    16:9 display ratios even on desktop monitors aren't the best for working on.
  • tzhu07 - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    Oh really? I think my 2560 X 1440 desktop monitor suits me just fine for poductivity work. But then again, once you get up to the 2560 spec, 1440 or 1600 is plenty.
  • MrSpadge - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 - link

    My 1920x1200 IPS at work is also very nice for work. And with enough vertical space you can actually start to use the horizontal space by not running everything full screen.

    MrS

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now