Toshiba KIRAbook High Resolution Ultrabook Review

rated by 0 users
This post has 5 Replies | 0 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 24,877
Points 1,116,660
Joined: Sep 2007
ForumsAdministrator
News Posted: Thu, Jun 27 2013 12:46 PM
With the KIRAbook 13 I7, Toshiba is flexing its muscles and taking on the likes of Apple, Asus, and Lenovo in the ultrabook arena. And you know what? Toshiba seems to be on the right track. With clean lines, a 2560 x 1440 resolution display and a slick magnesium alloy body, the KIRAbook is anything but a typical laptop.

Hitting a home run in this market isn’t easy, because a true ultrabook should be as much about form as it is function. It should be thinner than a laptop, and lighter too. It needs processing power as well as decent battery life. But small, powerful hardware usually comes at a steep price, and driving the price too high invites unfavorable comparisons to other solutions.

There are areas where a certain level of compromise can be acceptable in a laptop, so long as the system is strong contender for it's particular target audience and use case. Ultrabooks, on the other hand, are expected to approach perfection. And (unlike more than a few ultrabooks) the Toshiba KIRAbook almost does.


Toshiba KIRAbook High Resolution Ultrabook Review
  • | Post Points: 95
Not Ranked
Posts 32
Points 320
Joined: Jul 2011
samwelaye replied on Thu, Jun 27 2013 4:44 PM

Its pretty terrible that a $2k computer that doesnt have ethernet doesnt even have dual-band wireless....

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 16
Points 125
Joined: Jun 2013
Location: United States

Looks to me like an over-glorified Macbook Air that costs about double . . . and like the guy above me says, not even dual band wireless?

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 2
Points 10
Joined: Jun 2013
DavidGuan replied on Thu, Jun 27 2013 9:43 PM

Looks like it's only for the touchscreen benefits. Dunno I don't think all the other stuff would fit many people. I have an i7 that goes at 2.3 GHz and could also be Turbo Boosted to something higher, and also HD 4000. And my laptop costed like $700. I dunno, maybe if you're willing to spend all that money...

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 8
Points 40
Joined: Jun 2013

This isn't very good....

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 619
Points 5,260
Joined: Dec 2011

I would buy the 15 inch non-touch version right now if it was 1300 instead of 1600. Touch is unnecessary and IMO, so is the i7, at least for my use.

Overall it sounds solid and battery life would suffice me. Screen size is just right and it doesn't sound flimsy. Gonna see if we carry them in the store, else I'll check them out at the competition.

I think some of these other commentators are missing some of the key benefits: mainly the high pixel density of the screen. I would love dualband wireless, but don't need it. I haven't attached a laptop to an ethernet port for years. USB3 with my external solves any storage woes I may have.

It's just 300 dollars too much for me.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (6 items) | RSS