POST A COMMENT

103 Comments

Back to Article

  • MartinT - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    So I guess Intel thoroughly broke notebook ergonomics by mandating touchscreens (and hence reflective surfaces) on Haswell Ultrabooks.

    This is just sad, Asus was doing so well with their matte Zenbook Primes.
    Reply
  • redmist77 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Bring it on. Matte screens look horrible. Reply
  • Inteli - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    I feel the exact opposite. I love matte screens and hate glossy. Reply
  • eallan - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    I used to agree and was a die-hard matte fan. Owning a rMBP completely changed my POV though. I still hate those glass covered double-glarey old MBP style displays though, but I'm done with grainy matte. Reply
  • DERSS - Wednesday, June 12, 2013 - link

    Matter screen dissipate all of the incoming lights that fall onto the screen equally in all directions, and this is why you do not see strong mirror effect there.

    However, along with this process, matte screens kill blacks and wash out colours *everywhere*, *all the time*, *at all angles*. Glossy screens reflect incoming light to a certain point and you can almost always find an angle so you would not see reflections, but rather high-contrast, deep black picture.

    Glossy screens are the only choice for people who work with colour, by the way, as this is the only variant how you can get accurate colours.
    Reply
  • rareburgers - Friday, June 21, 2013 - link

    This is insanely misinformed. Working professionals need matte screens for accurate colors. Glossy screens are NOT the choice for people who work with color. Do you know anything about retouching, photography, graphic design? Glossy is terrible, it puts strain on the eyes and distorts images and there are constant reflection issues to deal with. I'm really floored that you would put such a ridiculous piece of misinformation on the internet, you might as well have said t he sun revolves around the earth. Reply
  • blearghhh - Thursday, June 27, 2013 - link

    I used to to graphics and retouching. And pretty much everyone who did that kind of stuff worked with the lights out specifically for that reason. That was back in the days of CRT screens, which were of course glossy. The really good retouchers had their own specially darkened offices to do that kind of work.

    Of course, it's all kind of moot in this discussion since nobody who is actually a serious professional retoucher at the level that it matters about all that kind of stuff is going to be doing it on a 13" laptop.
    Reply
  • Flunk - Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - link

    Really? I guess your memory is a little hazy because I recall people using CRTs with diffusing coating or light filters for image editing on CRTs.

    Also, high-end monitors E.G. Dell UltraSharps. are always matte. Maybe they do things differently in your country (where ever that is).
    Reply
  • pixelstuff - Saturday, August 03, 2013 - link

    I'm pretty sure there's not a single high end desktop display (those in the $1,000 and up range) with a glossy screen. Reply
  • JPForums - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    I've always found matte to look better, especially outside.
    Glossy is only tolerable to me when I can setup in a location that prevents all of the reflections.
    Reply
  • FlyBri - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    I used to feel the same way, but the matte screen on the Zenbook Prime is amazing. There really is a HUGE difference when it comes to glare, which matters to some people. And after owning a matte screen Zenbook Prime, I can now say that I would prefer a matte screen display, at least when it comes to laptops. Reply
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Don't mix up "horrible matte TN screens look horrible" with "matte screens look horrible". With IPS (or anything even better) matte looks great, and for many noticeably better than glossy.

    Actually, before we had touch screens the only reason for the glossy craze was that with them you could extract a bit more color out of bottom-of-the-barrel TN panels.
    Reply
  • jetter - Sunday, August 04, 2013 - link

    I can't disagree with you more...glossy screens are great if you work/live in a cave or you are extremely vain and love seeing yourself in the reflection...otherwise Matte displays are the way to go... Reply
  • ZeDestructor - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Lenovo has an AG touchscreen. Remains to be seen how long until it reaches production.

    Or you can go the Wacom dual-digitizer route (as on the X-seriesTablet) and get stylus + at least 2-finger capacitive stylus input.
    Reply
  • peterfares - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    Wacom dual-digitizer has full 10-finger support nowadays. Reply
  • ZeDestructor - Saturday, June 08, 2013 - link

    Sweet!

    For some reason though, despite all the literature saying I have 5-finger multitouch and having the drivers installed, Win7/8 still thinks its only a 2-finger on my X220 :(
    Reply
  • nportelli - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Is there some unwritten law that touchscreens have to be gloss? Reply
  • Flunk - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    The rule is that glass-covered screens have to be glossy. All recent touchscreens are of the glass-covered variety so they have to be glossy. Reply
  • B3an - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Wrong. Matte touch screens exist. Pretty much all touch screens already have a anti-finger print coating. Theres no reason why they cant have a matte coating. Reply
  • augiem - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Flunk said GLASS-COVERED screens have to be glossy. Do you know of a matte glass screen? Reply
  • peterfares - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    My Lenovo X230 tablet, Dell XT3 tablet, and HP EliteBook 2740p tablet all have matte glass touchscreens. Reply
  • whyso - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Matte coating gets worn away when you touch it constantly. Reply
  • Sufo - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    yeah, perhaps the real solution is a very finely sandblasted glass layer, or one of those halfway house matte/gloss coatings Reply
  • OoklaTheMok - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    The Lenovo X1 Carbon has a matte touchscreen Reply
  • mikeymop - Sunday, June 09, 2013 - link

    I dont think I've ever seen a capacitive plastic touchscreen. I'm convinced you need the glass to conduct your fingers. Reply
  • jeffkibuule - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    No one is forcing ASUS to put in a touchscreen into this laptop, however they won't be able to call it an Ultrabook and they get no co-marketing money from Intel. Reply
  • zoxo - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Reflective screen is not a requirement for touch... at all. Matte works perfectly fine. Hell I had a notebook in 2004 that had an active digitizer and was matte. You can even buy matte screen protector films for touch phones without affecting touch functionality the slightest. Reply
  • deeps6x - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    You are so very right MartinT. Screw you Intel and your useless touchscreen mandate. I frickin' hate glossy coatings on laptops. Matte rules. Matte makes sense. Matte isn't annoying.

    Everyone from Intel should be FORCED to use the touchscreen and have their touchpad removed.
    Reply
  • JDG1980 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    I wonder how much Microsoft paid Intel to cram that mandate in there. Reply
  • Homeles - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    I think the matte vs. glossy war ended over 6 years ago. Someone's bitter.

    I almost guarantee that the Haswell Zenbook line would have featured touchscreens regardless of Intel's requirements.
    Reply
  • peterfares - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    Touchscreens don't have to be glossy. There are matte ones. ASUS chose to use a glossy one. Reply
  • kozza3 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    http://www.amazon.com/Kuzy-Anti-Glare-Protector-Al... wow bro... wasn't that difficult to find Reply
  • tuxRoller - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    You don't have to have glossy with touchscreen. Look at some of the thinkpad tablets. Reply
  • Franck Bender - Saturday, June 08, 2013 - link

    I'm not very knowledgeable about screens, but I have a Lenovo ThinkPad x220t that a has a very good, responsive matte IPS touchscreen that's got great viewing angles (although the resolution really isn't anything to write home about).
    So my guess is that it's possible to have both a good screen and a multitouch layer, most laptops just won't have them because of the cost, because most people don't care about screen quality; and finally because the thing that's "in" right now with the marketing of displays is RESOLUTION.
    Reply
  • n13L5 - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Hopefully they figure out how to make matte touch screens real soon!

    And hopefully the 1440p resolution is just an option, cause the IRIS GPU may do ok at 1080p for games, but 1440p will not only bog it down in games, it will stress the GPU needlessly in regular use, reducing battery life and increase heat and cooling fan noise...
    Reply
  • jetter - Sunday, August 04, 2013 - link

    Totally agree with you....I wish Asus would provide an option for an anti-glare/matte display...even if it isn't a touch display. Glossy displays look sexy in the store but they are a b*tch on the eyes unless you work/live in a cave. I'm pick usability over sexy anytime...if the Asus Infinity offered a Matte display I'd have both...if you are listening Asus please at least provide a Matte/anti-glare option. Does anyone know if it is technically possible to have a Matte touch screen. It seems that I have seen other laptops with the matte touch displays...also others on this thread seem to indicate that they exists as well. Reply
  • Laststop311 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    im so upgrading my ux32vd to the zenbook infinity Reply
  • neevan - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    asus have made impressive devices with sturdy build in the past with good choice of hardware, but has not made the mark as a giant in the industry.. Hope these newer devices help them get there... any word on the pricing?? Reply
  • karasaj - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    This is the one notebook that makes me consider breaking the budget I had loosely set. Its unbelievably gorgeous. Reply
  • warisz00r - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    No photos of the vents? Reply
  • jabber - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Yes hopefully this will start a trend from all the makers to pull their fingers out and start actually making properly and attractively designed products that people will actually want to part money with.

    The Likes of Acer/Toshiba/Lenovo/Fujitsu etc. have all got very lazy in all their product ranges except for the odd top of the range limited edition boutique edition.

    The mainstream designs need a firm kick up the backside.

    Maybe Anand should do an expose on these manufacturers bottom of the range laptops, the kind they sell a lot off in the megastores. Some of them like Toshiba are truly shocking quality.

    Not to mention the bloatware.
    Reply
  • jeffkibuule - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    When you're making a computer for $450, why bother. The margins are too thin on that computer to make anything worthwhile. Reply
  • Flunk - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    There are some reasonably-priced reasonable looking laptops around if you look. The ASUS S line for example. If people stopped buying the garbage ones they would stop making them. Reply
  • seapeople - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Agreed. I still don't understand why people are so weird about screens though. Just recently someone asked me if there's anything they should look for when they buy a new laptop, and the conversation went something like:

    Me: "Well, you liked your new Ipad display, and complimented your work laptop screen due to it's upgraded resolution. So I suggest looking for an upgraded IPS and higher resolution screen."

    Them: "No, I don't care about anything like that."

    Me: "But you specifically told me that your new work laptop screen looks nicer than your last one and you can get more done on it. The screen is why."

    Them: *Eyes glaze over* "Maybe that's important for you, don't see why I would need to pay money on the screen."
    Reply
  • JDG1980 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    "Maybe Anand should do an expose on these manufacturers bottom of the range laptops, the kind they sell a lot off in the megastores. Some of them like Toshiba are truly shocking quality."

    Seconded. I want to see a review of craptops!
    Reply
  • Kepe - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Thirded!(?) I want to see that too. Get the cheapest laptops from all makers you can and see how they're built. Reply
  • tipoo - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Strangely I want to see that too. Fourth'ed. I wonder if any 400 dollar Wal-Mart specials are actually decent devices. Reply
  • Old_ITGuy - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    I would like to see that review also. The question management asks constantly is "why should I pay $1,200.00 when I can go to <local computer superstore> and get one for $450.00. And then the technical explanation puts them to sleep in 3 milliseconds. These craptops are only very rarely properly reviewed. I do understand that you only have so much time and resources for reviews and you like to review devices that are promising, but it is helpful to see what the shortcomings of these devices really are. This type of review would help people to make informed decisions about exactly where on the price/performance/features curve they want to buy. Reply
  • pixelstuff - Saturday, August 03, 2013 - link

    Sixthed.

    I need more ammo for arguments around why buy a $1,200 laptop instead of the $450 one. And when the argument fails I would like to know the very best of the $450 category to recommend as a the only option.
    Reply
  • Homeles - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Laptop aesthetic quality has been going up considerably since Intel's ultrabook initiative began. Reply
  • DigitalFreak - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Based on how Asus has been lately, you probably won't see this thing until Q2 2014. Reply
  • Homeles - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Asus has been fine lately. Reply
  • B3an - Saturday, June 08, 2013 - link

    They took forever to get the damn Taichi out. Reply
  • evilspoons - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    OK... nice. Very nice.

    Now, can I have this in a thicker chassis with a dedicated GPU and a 45-watt quad-core i7?
    Reply
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    An Ultrabook with a 28 W CPU is actually the first I'd really consider.. altough it won't be quiet under load. Also needs a silent mode (cTDP). Oh, and the Thinkpad Helix chassis ;) Reply
  • Freddo - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Really like the design of this, at the moment it feels like the chances of me buying this device are very high. That said, I would actually prefer to have a lower 1080p resolution, since my laptop is connected to the TV a lot. Reply
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Agreed - that resolution seems crazily-unneeded to me. Reply
  • peterfares - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    2560x1440 makes sense. That way you can set 200% scaling. This has a huge benefit. Older programs that are not DPI-aware will be able to be rendered at 1280x720 and pixel-doubled to 2560x1440 without re-sizing artifacts. Reply
  • jramskov - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Love the look of this, but I'm quite worried about having glass (even though it is gorilla glass) on the back. Reply
  • B3an - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    If only the screen was also a detachable tablet. Not going back to a plain old laptop. Reply
  • n13L5 - Wednesday, June 26, 2013 - link

    I'm glad its a plain old laptop.

    I don't care for the drawbacks that come with all those convertible frankentops, like extra weight, less battery life, glossy displays that are useless outdoors, bad display ergonomics in laptop mode cause you can't adjust the display angle (Sony Duo 13, Samsung Ativ book 9 etc) and bad tablet ergonomics from heavy weight.

    If an artist / painter buys a 13" hybrid to use with a stylus like a giant Wacom tablet, because 10.1" display size is kinda small for that line of work, I can understand.

    But normally, I need a touchscreen like a fish needs a bicycle when I want to get actual work done. I'd rather buy a laptop and a separate tablet, where both excel at that one function.
    Reply
  • ShieTar - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Any word if ASUS is planning to also update the 15" Zenbook with a 1440p screen? Reply
  • gxtoast - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Yeah, wondering if this design and build will make it into the 15" version with a HQ Crystalwell part. If they can't put an HQ into such a thin and light form-factor will Asus use the design and build to create a chassis that can? Reply
  • User.Name - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Horrible DPI scaling in Windows 8? As long as you are using the 125% or 150% options rather than an arbitrary value, I have found scaling in Windows 8 to be a significant improvement over previous versions.

    In Windows 8, when an application does not have explicit support for scaling, it is rendered at 100% and scaled as if it were an image, which is the same way that OS X handles scaling.

    Previous versions of Windows tried to scale every application, which often left them in a completely unusable state.
    Reply
  • JDG1980 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    "In Windows 8, when an application does not have explicit support for scaling, it is rendered at 100% and scaled as if it were an image, which is the same way that OS X handles scaling."

    I think this has been the default behavior since Vista.
    Reply
  • User.Name - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    It has been a while since I last tested this, but I seem to recall even Windows 7 having trouble scaling some applications, which were scaled up without any problems (as an image) in Windows 8. Reply
  • Zeratul56 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    I am pretty tired of people and especially Anand saying this, I have toyed around with the dpi scaling and it performs okay. It doesn't look that great on my laptop because is only 1080p at 15" which is usable at regular dpi. Perhaps someone with accsess to a higher resolution screen can do some of their own testing but I think to call the DPI scaling in windows 8 horrible is an injustice. It may or may not be up to par OSX but it is not useable. I think they should do a comprehensive article on DPI scaling in windows 8 and OSX so I can understand how its horrible in windows 8 compared to OSX. Reply
  • WeaselITB - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Running a Microsoft Surface Pro here -- no problems with DPI scaling. I have good eyes, so I actually dialed it back to 125% from the default 150%.

    -Weasel
    Reply
  • xaml - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    Thankfully I found the scaling option so I could change it to 100% on the 1080p XPS 13 because the taskbar notification area icons, Internet Explorer's top right buttons, which were too big, and thicker top bezels of windows looked off. Reply
  • User.Name - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    In many ways I actually prefer how Windows handles it to OS X. In Windows you either have an application rendered at high DPI 1:1 on the display, or rendered at 100% and scaled up.

    In OS X there is also the possibility of the desktop being rendered at 200% (HiDPI) and then scaled *down* to fit the display so that nothing is rendered 1:1 on the display.
    Reply
  • araczynski - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    i didn't see any pictures of a beautiful laptop anywhere in the article, am i missing something? All I see is some same 'ol same 'ol winbox laptop/ultrabook looking thing. Reply
  • Kepe - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Jealous of how boring your iWhatever looks compared to this? =) Reply
  • MySchizoBuddy - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    ignorance is bliss. there is no iWhatever in laptops. it is in tablets and phones Reply
  • johnny_boy - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    It's not like the thing is so slim they can't put a full-sized HDMI port on it. Reply
  • twtech - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Did you spend any time typing on the keyboard?

    I bought an ASUS RoG laptop back in 2009, and it had serious problems with the keyboard. It could only handle one or two simultaneous keypresses, and it frequently skipped keypresses if you are a fast typist. It basically made the keyboard unusable. The trackpad was also pretty bad, and would frequently click by accident.

    Since that experience, when I look at laptops, I mainly focus on the screen/keyboard/touchpad. I know I'm probably not going to end up playing games on it anyway.
    Reply
  • Tanclearas - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Why is it that with ultrabooks it's always "but NEXT year, they're gonna be awesome"? Reply
  • kyuu - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    There are already awesome ultrabooks, so I dunno what you're talking about. Plus this ASUS looks better than any other ultraportable on the market to me. Only issue is it's going to be expensive, of course.

    Still waiting on a nice but affordable ultraportable (or even better, a convertible with a detachable screen) with AMD silicon.
    Reply
  • tipoo - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Because it's always true, unless Intel just decides to give up one year Reply
  • superjim - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Due out in Q4? Way to tease us Asus. This thing won't be cheap, better start saving. Reply
  • tuxRoller - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Any word on the battery? Reply
  • GTRagnarok - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Looks very nice, but Asus needs to do like Samsung and make the bezels much smaller. Reply
  • Check101 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    Please Please Please Please Please ASUS... Please offer this with the same resolution IPS Matte display... or just give me a matte display option.

    I am a proud owner of a Zenbook Prime UX31A, and the screen is the whole reason I bought it 8 months ago. (Although I love the speakers as well...)

    I don't want a touch panel. I'll live with a non-touch Windows 8 and learn keyboard and mouse shortcuts. I don't want a glossy display. I may take a glossy display if reports say it is not as reflective as normal. But I will be one of the first customers if the screen in this product line stays the best of the best.

    Pretty much the only products keeping me from recommending a Mac (hardware wise) as a better experience are the Razer Blade or the Zenbook... I hope it stays that way...
    Reply
  • boeush - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    THIS is what passes for "most beautiful notebook"?? [note the word 'notebook', no 'ultrabook'] (I'm starting to wonder, whether Anand might be on ASUS' payroll...) Personally, I see a lot of flaws, for a notebook design. Here's three observations just about the screen alone:

    First, not sure what the point is of that lower screen edge propping up that end of the laptop higher. Ergonomics dictate that the keyboard should slope away from the arm, that is down, not up.

    Second, what's the point of that huge resolution in a 13.3 inch display? This isn't a smartphone, nor is this a tablet. Nobody is going to hold that screen 5 inches in front of their nose. On a screen this size and intended for this form factor, the ultra-high resolution is a waste of money, battery power, and CPU/GPU cycles. Maybe on a 17 inch screen it would make more sense, but even there I'm doubtful.

    Lastly, what's with the enormous bezel around the screen? Is that considered either "beautiful" or in any way useful, these days? I'd rather have edge-to-edge screen, to maximize use of available real estate. The huge bezel would only make sense if the screen were detachable for use as a stand-alone tablet...

    Now, as far as general notebook design goes: with a 28 W CPU (never mind the rest of the system/display power budget), and ultra-thin form factor, what's the expected battery life on this thing? (I very much doubt there's any room for even a 90 Wh battery in that package...) Wouldn't be much point in an "ultra-portable" that can't last longer than a couple of hours off the mains. Personally, I'd rather have it twice as thick and heavy, but last 3x as long on battery...
    Reply
  • seapeople - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    I've said this for years now: Give me the ULV parts and state of the art power saving technology in the same footprint as of old, and fill the rest with battery. Then you have a machine that can get real work done, handle the occasional game, and give you 15+ hour battery life when you need it.

    The response I always get to this is "6 hours is all you need to get through an 8 hour day anyway". SMH.
    Reply
  • nehway0912 - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    So ASUS is using panels from Sharp for this one it seems (based on the display code). I wonder if this is using IGZO technology or just normal LTPS one. Reply
  • WestHej - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    When the leap motion is integrated (they have a partnership with ASUS I believe), then I guess they can ditch the glossy screen. This would make the perfect portable notebook for me! Reply
  • cditty - Thursday, June 06, 2013 - link

    I will buy this as soon as it comes out. This looks like exactly what I have been waiting for. I have been hanging with my Macbook Pro (running Windows, as that is where all my work apps are). I had committed to not upgrade until Haswell (for the battery). This is a gorgeous laptop. Reply
  • peterfares - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    4GB RAM? Are you fucking kidding me? Reply
  • Zeratul56 - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    Do you need much more than that? My 8 gig win 8 laptop is only using 1.4 right now. Adding more ram uses more battery life. This is not a high voltage part nor is it equipped with a discrete GPU so adding more memory would not be incredibly useful. You would be wasting battery life more often than you would ever use more than 4 gigs.

    There are plenty of laptops with more RAM available, this one is designed to be ultra portable not ultra high performance.
    Reply
  • piroroadkill - Sunday, June 09, 2013 - link

    Yes, you do need more than 4GiB. Especially since it has an integrated GPU that doesn't suck - it'll be chewing on system RAM for GPU use. 4GiB is pitiful. Reply
  • seapeople - Tuesday, June 11, 2013 - link

    In addition to using less battery life you get much faster hibernate times with 4GB RAM. And if you need more than 4GB then maybe an ultrabook isn't for you? Reply
  • JulesLandry - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link

    According to AsusFrance it will have 8GiB! https://twitter.com/AsusFrance/statuses/3430102136... Reply
  • Mumrik - Friday, June 07, 2013 - link

    But I don't want a laptop to look like jewelery. I want it to be understated, functional and well-made. Reply
  • xand - Saturday, June 08, 2013 - link

    Nicer than the Vaio Pro 13? Reply
  • piroroadkill - Monday, June 10, 2013 - link

    Get rid of the gloss and touchscreen, make it 1680x1050 (get rid of the ASUS logo and fill that height!). I really don't care 1% about these insane res screens, I'd rather pay less and use Windows at 100% size. Reply
  • Laststop311 - Sunday, June 16, 2013 - link

    Can't wait for the 15 inch version with the gt 750m-gtx760m. It will totally be replacing my ux32vd Reply
  • JulesLandry - Tuesday, June 18, 2013 - link

    Asus France confirmed on Twitter that this beauty will have 8 Gb of RAM!
    https://twitter.com/AsusFrance/statuses/3430102136...
    Reply
  • rareburgers - Friday, June 21, 2013 - link

    I own a zenbook prime because of the color gamut, and the IPS MATTE screen. Emphasis on MATTE.

    Glossy, touch screens are a nightmare for visual arts professionals, retouchers, etc. I'll pass on this one. Too much form over function in this society.
    Reply
  • n13L5 - Wednesday, June 26, 2013 - link

    Form over function seems to be winning in every area at an alarming rate.

    I keep saying that form following function makes for more beautiful objects.

    Because when the form does not follow function, it is a lie for one thing and intrinsically inefficient for another, because things were added that are not necessary.

    There is plenty of room for designers who follow function, it is by no means a straight jacket squashing the freedom to design. Good designers relish working with this constraint, it is the path toward perfection and even just traversing a short way on that path is rewarding for designers and users.

    In regards to your specific complaint, it is Intel's fault, as they have made a touch display mandatory to be able to carry the name "Ultrabook". I find that to be a mistake, especially after its taken so many years to get a fair number of manufacturers to offer non-reflective displays.
    Reply
  • n13L5 - Wednesday, June 26, 2013 - link

    2 points:

    1) Microsoft can't "fix the dpi scaling problems". Windows itself already scales just fine. The problem was caused by developer tools failing to prod software developers to make their individual applications scale well. So, while even Windows 7 scales just fine on an 1800p display, a lot of applications don't.

    2) The release schedule of Haswell systems has less to do with Windows 8.1 release than it does with Intel being forced into a staggered release, due to having to work out the USB 3.0 bug. No doubt, Intel is readying those chips first they are most eager to sell, apparently the cheaper to make HD-4x00 based models. So sadly, we have to wait for IRIS based Ultrabooks till Intel engineers verified and tested the USB fix on each CPU line.
    Reply
  • n13L5 - Wednesday, June 26, 2013 - link

    you cannot express the weight of infinity in mere numbers ;-) Reply
  • jetter - Sunday, August 04, 2013 - link

    Any word if this system will be user upgradeable (e.g., add memory? upgrade storage?, etc.). I would need at least 8GB of RAM and would prefer expandability to 16GB. I am app developer and run LOTS of virtual machines. Lack of upgradeability is a showstopper for me and I believe for many other users. Unfortunately Vendors like to charge exorbitant fees for more memory and disk capacity...if you can't upgrade your system as your needs change you are stuck! I like my systems to be light and portable (~3lbs) but will trade off some weight and thinness for upgradeability...but would not willing to go to a 5.5-6lbs to get it. Sony's S series is/was a great machine!!!...had a nice blend of upgradeability and yet very portable...but it looks like they will be killing it...it's been removed from their Japanese and European websites...sad to see it go. Hoping that the Infinity will provide what i need. Reply
  • jetter - Tuesday, August 20, 2013 - link

    I have two wishes for this system....

    1) It's more reasonably priced than the rest of these other Haswell based systems. ASUS you have an opportunity with this system to gain significant market share in this laptop category only IF you price this system aggressively....otherwise it will just be another beautiful system that people admire in the store but doesn't sell well. You and other PC vendors need to realize that their is more competition than ever for the consumers expendable income (e.g., smartphones, tablets, smart watches?, etc.). Don't try and out do Apple by using their pricing as the benchmark for your pricing...be aggressive with the pricing and you'll be rewarded with sales...now is your chance to become a major player in the laptop space with this system...don't blow it.

    2) Give it more than a paltry 4GB of RAM (12GB would be even better). For a "high end" system 4GB is no longer sufficient or competitive. I (like many others I suspect) will mark this system off of their list if it only has 4GB of memory.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now