Intel's Ultrabook Reference Design To Be Cheaper Than The Macbook Air

Earlier this year, Intel unveiled its plan to redefine the concept of a PC around an ultra thin-and-light chassis reminiscent of the Macbook Air and with a standard CPU TDP of just 15W. OEM reactions to the CPU giant's attempt to reinvent the personal computer have been mixed. For all the platform's theoretical advantages, price has been a major concern; the Macbook Air's $999 base price is nearly double the average selling price of a PC laptop. Historically, PC buyers have balked at the high price tags attached to then-current thin-and-light notebooks--such products may have niche value, but the idea of launching mainstream products built around the concept has made more than a few companies uneasy.

Intel has been working with its OEM partners to resolve their fears and has unveiled the reference specs for ultranotebook products. The cheaper ultranotebook model will be 21mm thick with a BOM (bill of materials) between $475-650. A second, thinner model (18mm thick) will have a BOM between $493-710. These figures represent the cost of the components within the systems, not the additional expense of assembling, testing, marketing, or distributing the units. Unlike netbooks, Ultrabooks will target the full range of consumer notebooks with screen sizes ranging from 11-17 inches. 

If DigiTimes is right, the new systems will eschew the use of module-based components in favor of directly soldering components to the motherboard. Other reports have indicated that Intel and its partners have had to research alternatives to an aluminum-based chassis. Apple, these sources report, has already spoken for most of the available aluminum unibody manufacturing capcity in the world. While we'll see some aluminum-magnesium products from PC OEMs, other materials like fiberglass are expected to dominate the segment.

Products, like the prototype UX21 Ultrabook Asus has shown, are clearly reminiscent of the Macbook Air

Ultrabooks are a risky investment, particularly for an industry where adding an extra USB port is often seen as a daring move. The leap of faith both Intel and the various OEMs are making may be driven equally by fear and opportunity. On the one hand, Ultrabooks are designed to blunt the damage a further surge in tablet popularity could do to Intel's business. We expect to see the various OEMs offering cheaper Ultrabooks as "tablet+" models, with such systems marketed as offering the same size and weight advantages of a tablet combined with the computing power of a traditional notebook.

At the same time, these new notebooks are a response to flagging demand for netbook-based products. When netbooks debuted, consumers snapped them up in huge numbers. This was partly driven by necessity--the recession left buyers unwilling to spend more than they had to--but also by the longer battery life and easy portability the diminutive systems offered.
Atom sales have fallen off sharply in the past year, thanks to a recovering economy (so much for that), recent strong competition from AMD, and Intel's own decision to hold Atom's performance steady at 2008 levels.* Long term, Intel still plans to introduce more advanced Atom platforms that can compete in handheld and mobile devices. Ultrabooks are meant to anchor the company's mobile strategy by providing the same benefits that made Atom so popular without requiring end-users to sacrifice performance.

Note:  While Intel has made dual-core 1.5GHz Atom processors available in netbooks, but these have done only a little to move the bar upwards--particularly when compared to the improved battery life and overall performance of both Intel's Core-based mobile hardware and AMD's own Ontario/Zacate/Llano
Via:  DigiTimes
OMEGADraco 3 years ago

"the new systems will eschew the use of module-based components in favor of directly soldering components to the motherboard."

Hmm... so basically these systems are being designed to be thrown out when something breaks down. With laptops electronics will almost always fail at some point at least in the experience that I h ave had with them. Don't accidentally drop one of these that's for sure.

Stormchild 3 years ago

omegadraco: "Don't accidentally drop one of these that's for sure."

…A delightfully absurd statement, if you think about it. :D

poke133 3 years ago

if it's module based, wouldn't it be easier to replace the damaged modules?

Joel H 3 years ago

Easier, but more expensive. Remember, the point is to give OEMs cheaper options. That doesn't mean ALL Ultrabooks will use soldered components--it means the option is there as a means of saving money.

JKelahan 3 years ago

If we look at the technical level of most consumers, when their computer breaks they buy a new one anyway. With that in mind, a system designed for that makes a lot of sense, with the exception of RAM. I wish I could upgrade my netbook past the 2gb limit. It's just too restricting.

Joel H 3 years ago


I suspect that very much depends on the nature of the break. Most owners I know replace the cheap components (RAM, hard drives) and only jump for new systems when a screen fails or a motherboard blows out. Given how low notebook ASPs are (below $600 in 2010), it doesn't make much sense to repair a system that's more than two years old.

OMEGADraco 3 years ago

See I look at this from a slightly different perspective as an enterprise user supporting 1000 laptop systems. When a component breaks it gets replaced under a 3 year warranty regardless. With these systems if they all components are soldered you end up replacing huge amounts of the system which are more labor intensive.

DWalsh 3 years ago

broken ones being fed to recycling robots then transferring material to other robots to build new ones with

acarzt 3 years ago

Dropping a laptop and breaking plastic... the parts are cheap, the labor is expensive...

Dropping an "Ultrabook" and breaking Carbon fiber???? That's expensive all around.

Carbon fiber is pretty strong. Stronger than plastic, that's for sure... but it is not very flexible. If you put a lot of pressue on a plastic case, it will give and bounce back to an extent. Carbon fiber will crack. If it's dropped it can chip. And fixing it will be expensive.

Hopefully tho... if they do use carbon fiber, they should make it VERY strong.

They should just make the cases out of titanium :-)

realneil 3 years ago

[quote user="acarzt"]They should just make the cases out of titanium :-)[/quote]

Or Marshmallows,....

Post a Comment
or Register to comment