Samsung netbook - fast enough?

woodstock

woodstock

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
9,342
Location
Out of a suitcase
Display Name
Display name:
iTravel
Hi

I might make an impulse purchase tonight. I already have a travel laptop, but, it's almost 2.5 yrs old and is about 5 pounds. It's perfectly adequate, have been happy with it.

But.

I can get a netbook that is almost half the weight and definitely smaller for my carryon. They are under 400 bucks now.

Would this one be fast enough? I would only use it to upload photos and check email, and some surfing. That's it.

It uses Windows 7.

Samsung - Netbook with Intel® Atom™ Processor - White
Model: NP-N210-JA02US | SKU: 9708149

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Samsung...hite/9708149.p?id=1218163687501&skuId=9708149
 
Absolutely is! I bought the Lenovo S10 more than a year ago for 300 bucks (you can get the Aspire One on Woot.com occasionally for ~200!) and it replaced my home desktop and laptop.

definitely a great buy. Get it with 2gb of ram (or upgrade) and you'll be happy.
 
I love my Asus netbook. Bought spring 2009, added the extra 1G of RAM. Works fine for web browsing, email, light office applications, downloading pictures from camera, light photo editing (I did not install Photoshop, but use a much more compact but less capable photo editor).

When in Prague and Budapest last year, I downloaded from the camera, light editing, built photo albums, and uploaded to my server. Very easy.

The netbooks have only improved since then.

Get the larger battery. And use an AV program that doesn't consume massive system resources - I use ESet (NOD32).

Before you get it, make sure you like the screen. The screen on mine is smaller and has a "shrink" mode to emulate 1024x768. It's not perfect and the emulation makes things a bit slower. That's my biggest complaint. Try screen before you buy in multiple modes.
 
I travel with my Asus every week and have no complaints. It gets bounced around a good bit and keeps on working. Speed is fine for what I use it for (like you, pix, email, etc). One consideration, you'll need to download open office or some other program should you wish to use MS software.
 
but but but....it's not an iPad! :)

Congrats on your purchase!
 
I would strongly recommend the Dell 2100 Netbook.
They are available from the Dell Outlet for <$300
http://www.dell.com/us/en/dfb/newar...d.aspx?refid=laptop-latitude-2100&s=dfb&cs=28

I bought several of them for the Office of Emergency Management as disposable machines, but they have great keyboards, great screens, rubberized and semi-rugged (I dropped one from chest height to a hard floor, landed on the corner of the case without damage).
Battery life is well over 6 hours with wifi on and backlight at full bright. Wifi off and screen at 60% I've gotten over 9 hours.

For a frequent use machine, don't underestimate the value of a high quality keyboard and trackpad. Cheap ones drive me nuts.
 
I wouldn't recommend Dell to my worst enemy. I've given up with them. The lowest-cost-bidder-parts-bin build strategy just creates too many problems when coupled with Windows, which has its own little hodge-podge problem.

I've bought 2 HPs, a laptop and a netbook, both of which I'm very happy with. The two Dell laptops I had, eh, not so much.

No matter, I'm replacing the big Dell desktop in the house with a iMac. the fact that it just went TU in an unrebootable way just seals the deal for me.
 
woodstock said:
Would this one be fast enough? I would only use it to upload photos and check email, and some surfing. That's it.
Click to expand...

Cap'n Jack said:
but but but....it's not an iPad! :)
Click to expand...

Actually, the use case above fits well with the iPad. Plus, no speed worries and the iPad has the battery life to provide entertainment on those long international flights... I bet she'd have loved the iPad. (It was a big hit at the FlyBQ!)
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Actually, the use case above fits well with the iPad. Plus, no speed worries and the iPad has the battery life to provide entertainment on those long international flights... I bet she'd have loved the iPad. (It was a big hit at the FlyBQ!)
Click to expand...
As long as she can get the pictures from the camera into the iPad, I agree that it would suit her needs. I think it has USB connectivity from its dock?
 
Cap'n Jack said:
As long as she can get the pictures from the camera into the iPad, I agree that it would suit her needs. I think it has USB connectivity from its dock?
Click to expand...

I don't think the Canon download programs work on the iPad. You can use a CompactFlash adapter on a USB port to get the pictures... that is if Apple decides to allow you to.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
As long as she can get the pictures from the camera into the iPad, I agree that it would suit her needs. I think it has USB connectivity from its dock?
Click to expand...

wsuffa said:
I don't think the Canon download programs work on the iPad. You can use a CompactFlash adapter on a USB port to get the pictures... that is if Apple decides to allow you to.
Click to expand...

The Camera Connection Kit for the iPad has a USB port and will download pictures directly from the camera into Photos on the iPad - No "Canon download programs" needed, just like on the Mac (iPhoto).

Though the CCK is supposed to be for plugging in cameras, people have found that it also works just fine for pulling photos off of storage devices plugged into it. USB microphones also work fine, as do USB keyboards.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
The Camera Connection Kit for the iPad has a USB port and will download pictures directly from the camera into Photos on the iPad - No "Canon download programs" needed, just like on the Mac (iPhoto).

Though the CCK is supposed to be for plugging in cameras, people have found that it also works just fine for pulling photos off of storage devices plugged into it. USB microphones also work fine, as do USB keyboards.
Click to expand...

Camera Connection Kit? You have to buy a kit from The Steve just to download pix to the iPad? :dunno:
 
kevin47881 said:
Camera Connection Kit? You have to buy a kit from The Steve just to download pix to the iPad? :dunno:
Click to expand...

No, you have to buy a kit to get a USB port that you otherwise wouldn't need. I have over 6,000 pictures on my iPad (and they look beautiful on that screen!) but I had no need to get the camera connection kit because I have no need to put the pictures DIRECTLY on the iPad - I plug the camera into my laptop, and they end up on the iPad after my next sync.

In the case of someone who wants to offload/preview pictures WITHOUT carrying a laptop, such as in this case, THEN you need the camera connection kit. (Fancy name for a tiny box with a 30-pin iThing plug and a USB port.)
 
I will likely end up with an iPAD, but after a few iterations.

I'm really happy with my new little gateway. It's so light and the rez is excellent.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
No, you have to buy a kit to get a USB port that you otherwise wouldn't need. I have over 6,000 pictures on my iPad (and they look beautiful on that screen!) but I had no need to get the camera connection kit because I have no need to put the pictures DIRECTLY on the iPad - I plug the camera into my laptop, and they end up on the iPad after my next sync.

In the case of someone who wants to offload/preview pictures WITHOUT carrying a laptop, such as in this case, THEN you need the camera connection kit. (Fancy name for a tiny box with a 30-pin iThing plug and a USB port.)
Click to expand...
All the digital cameras I have had can plug directly into a USB port using the cable that comes with the camera. The computer senses the camera as a disk drive with no additional software needed. I have tried the software that comes with cameras but can't understand why anyone would use it. It's so much easier just to connect directly.
 
Everskyward said:
All the digital cameras I have had can plug directly into a USB port using the cable that comes with the camera. The computer senses the camera as a disk drive with no additional software needed. I have tried the software that comes with cameras but can't understand why anyone would use it. It's so much easier just to connect directly.
Click to expand...

Well, it's kinda like VFR... ;)

Most of the software that comes with cameras kinda sucks, IMHO. However, for whatever reason, my sister really liked hers - Something to do with how it organized things by the time they were taken. (Of course, iPhoto's "Events" does that these days too.)

For me, iPhoto (which comes not with a camera, but with every Mac) does enough nice things WRT organizing, editing, viewing, and sharing photos that I do tend to prefer it over the drag-and-drop method you describe.

As far as the software that comes with cameras, though - Yecch. And what do you do if you get a new camera from a different manufacturer - Then you have two programs, one to view your old photos, and one for your new photos? No thanks.

Does Windoze have any sort of analog to iPhoto that works with any camera, or are you stuck with the choice between the drag-and-drop method and the crappy software that comes with the camera?
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Well, it's kinda like VFR... ;)

Most of the software that comes with cameras kinda sucks, IMHO. However, for whatever reason, my sister really liked hers - Something to do with how it organized things by the time they were taken. (Of course, iPhoto's "Events" does that these days too.)

For me, iPhoto (which comes not with a camera, but with every Mac) does enough nice things WRT organizing, editing, viewing, and sharing photos that I do tend to prefer it over the drag-and-drop method you describe.

As far as the software that comes with cameras, though - Yecch. And what do you do if you get a new camera from a different manufacturer - Then you have two programs, one to view your old photos, and one for your new photos? No thanks.

Does Windoze have any sort of analog to iPhoto that works with any camera, or are you stuck with the choice between the drag-and-drop method and the crappy software that comes with the camera?
Click to expand...
I do like the software from Canon. Much to my surprise, it works with any photograph; just picks it up off a memory card. It worked fine with a Nikon P&S. Microsoft Pro Photo Tools allows you to change the EXIF data. I use it to geotag photographs- I know there are similar tools for macintosh.

For the most part, Windows treats the camera like a thumb drive and allows some organizing, but little editing. One can view a filmstrip in Windows with a larger view of the selected image. If I need to edit, I'll use the Canon software, Paint Shop Pro, GIMP, or ImageJ. For sharing, I'll use Flickr or shutterfly- the people I share with are on the other side of the planet.
 
Last edited:
Cap'n Jack said:
I do like the software from Canon. Much to my surprise, it works with any photograph; just picks it up off a memory card. It worked fine with a Nikon P&S. Microsoft Pro Photo Tools allows you to change the EXIF data. I use it to geotag photographs- I know there are similar tools for macintosh.
Click to expand...

+1. One of my Canon digital cameras uses the older Raw format, the 7D uses the newer Raw format. Most photo programs are incapable of extracting the older Raw (the older camera saves either in Raw or JPEG, if you shoot in Raw you need a program to extract JPEG from the Raw images on the comuter). The Canon program does that easily and in a batch mode. The 7D will save Raw & Jpeg simultaneously. The older camera will not support downloads of the Raw images using Windows 7 PPTP protocol (the 7D will), and requires that you remove the card and use a CF to USB adapter.

I've got several image manipulation programs, ranging from Canon's Digital Photo Professional to Irfanview to Photoshop to Gimp.

For the most part, Windows treats the camera like a thumb drive and allows some organizing, but little editing. One can view a filmstrip in Windows with a larger view of the selected image. If I need to edit, I'll use the Canon software, Paint Shop Pro, GIMP, or ImageJ. For sharing, I'll use Flickr or shutterfly- the people I share with are on the other side of the planet.
Click to expand...

I'm currently running the photos on my personal server using Jalbum to handle the resizing/reprocessing/thumbnails/uploads via FTP. Works well, but is not for everyone.

I'm glad Kent likes his iPad.

It's not for me, at least not until Apple opens it up a bit for both accessories and programs. The purpose of my netbook (or laptop) is to download the pictures from the camera while on the road, process, and upload them. Having to spend $100 on top of the iPad price, when a netbook costs $300+/- seems expensive and counterproductive.
 
Bill, I think the current version of Paint Shop Pro will open the new RAW files, so the software writers are slowly catching on. I haven't upgraded because Paint Shop Pro has been bought by Corel and I've been burned by Corel in the past. GIMP also has a plug-in for Canon RAW, however, GIMP doesn't yet have the bit depth the Canon puts out. I still find the Canon program easiest to use.

Someday, Google (or someone else) will put all these apps on the 'net and the whole Microsoft/Apple thing will be moot. The photosharing I mentioned is a net application, ImageJ is a Java application.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Bill, I think the current version of Paint Shop Pro will open the new RAW files, so the software writers are slowly catching on. I haven't upgraded because Paint Shop Pro has been bought by Corel and I've been burned by Corel in the past. GIMP also has a plug-in for Canon RAW, however, GIMP doesn't yet have the bit depth the Canon puts out. I still find the Canon program easiest to use.

Someday, Google (or someone else) will put all these apps on the 'net and the whole Microsoft/Apple thing will be moot. The photosharing I mentioned is a net application, ImageJ is a Java application.
Click to expand...

I don't use Paintshop Pro.... Photoshop does a pretty good job (though I have an older version) - and it does support the full bit depth. The Canon software can convert directly to Photoshop format. I like Gimp for what it is, but it's not 100% either. For simple stuff, Irfanview does just fine. There are some other options, too....

Canon 7D and older DSLR, plus a Canon Pixma9000 Mark II. I've also got a Spyder3 monitor and printer calibration unit.
 
wsuffa said:
I don't use Paintshop Pro.... Photoshop does a pretty good job (though I have an older version) - and it does support the full bit depth. The Canon software can convert directly to Photoshop format. I like Gimp for what it is, but it's not 100% either. For simple stuff, Irfanview does just fine. There are some other options, too....

Canon 7D and older DSLR, plus a Canon Pixma9000 Mark II. I've also got a Spyder3 monitor and printer calibration unit.
Click to expand...
Photoshop is really good...but too expensive for me for home use. Photoshop handles the JPEG really well- a good decoder.

I use a Nikon CoolPix because it is very portable and a Canon Xsi if I want nicer shots. You're more careful than I since nothing I have is color calibrated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top