<p>What do you think: Acer Aspire One (full features: 160 GB XP and 1.6 Ghz) vs Asus EEE PC 901 (full features too). Would this coupled with a small desktop be good enough for college? The portability is fantastic and its quite cheap!</p>
<p>Why not just get a quality laptop and skip the desktop? Having mediocre computers seems like more of a hassle than one quality one you can take around with you anywhere. Idk how much those Acer ones are (I know they're relatively cheap but not exactly how much), but that and a desktop would be about the price of a mid range HP or equivalent I'd think...</p>
<p>1.6gHz seems like a disastrously slow processor to me...</p>
<p>Ah, I remember when my first computer had a 33MHz 68040, and that was considered middling-fast at the time. Then a 500MHz PIII, boy howdy now we're really blazing. 1.67GHz PowerPC G4 laptop? Look out, you might crack some missile codes, a-la WarGames.</p>
<p>Sorry, I guess I just feel old when someone says that 1.6GHz could be "slow." :)</p>
<p>I'm actually a big fan of a moderately powerful stationary computer in the dorm and a small cheap laptop for toting around. It's about what I have right now and the system works great. Mobile computing without breaking my back and high performance for dorm entertainment. Throw in a syncing software like foldershare and you're in business.</p>
<p>SBR: Yeah, I've seen some students toting "laptops" that ought to come with their own wheeled dolly and "FORKLIFT REQUIRED" stickers. Usually, they're the super-uber-gaming machines optimized for someone who carries it no farther than the nearest LAN party. Weight and battery life are irrelevant to that market. I wouldn't want to be carrying those beasts around.</p>
<p>The 15" MBP is just about perfect in that regard, which is why I use it as my only machine... but I wouldn't want to go any bigger for a daily road warrior. The 17" might only weigh an extra pound, but the weight+bulk=No thanks.</p>
<p>Fast, light, cheap: pick any two.</p>
<p>Asus EEE</a> PC 901? It's the one with the 12 GB hard disk for $350, right? For that price, you should get an EEE</a> PC 904HA instead. You get a 160 GB Hard Drive that way. Processor, screen size, and number of batter cells are the same, so you have nothing to lose.</p>
<p>Anyways, I've heard Acer is known for being cheap while having bad quality machines. These machines are pretty cheap, anyways, so I think you should go with an Asus.</p>
<p>If you're looking into netbooks, then definitely consider the MSi Wind - it's honestly spectacular. I own one, and it performs flawlessly. It also supports MSi overclock, so I'm running around 2 GHz. </p>
<p>Plus, it look really cool, unlike the EEE pc 1000h. The keyboard is still really nice, which is a big problem when going from normal sized laptops to netbooks.</p>
<p>I currently have a triple boot running - OS X, Windows XP, and Windows 7 (Pre-beta Build 6801)</p>
<p>Thanks.
I was favoring the Acer since it looks a lot nicer than the Asus and you can find it at any store so its really easy to buy. However, the MSI seems nice, but how is it different?
I've ruled out the Dell Inspiron Mini, the Lenovo, and the HP versions since they either have less RAM, a smaller processor, or a smaller hard drive and just lower ratings.
Is SSD really worth it? I mean 160GB is a lot more than 20 obviously, and i dont know if the increase in speed and durability is worth it (i dont plan to drop it very often:) )</p>
<p>bump (10 char)</p>