text:
ASUS Reports Disappointing VivoTab RT Sales, Stops Making RT Tabletsby Jarred Walton on 8/9/2013 4:39 PM EST
- Posted in
- Asus
- Mobile
- Tablets
- Windows RT
- Vivo Tab
83 Comments
Back to Article
DanNeely - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkCan't say I'm surprised. For about the same price you can get an 11" atom based slate that is about as fast as the fastest arm based tablets (and much better than the tegra3 based winRT tablets being ignored on the marketplace), will last about as long on battery, and can also run traditional windows apps if paired with a keydock. Intel's success in improving standby/idle power levels destroyed the potential market niche for win 8RT.
If metro apps are able to almost fully displace traditional windows apps then Win9 RT might make sense at the very low end segment of the market but that would come down to relative hardware performance levels between A57 and atom-2015 processors and the only people with enough knowledge to make informed speculations about this work for the chip makers and and snarled in NDAs. Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkWasn't that kinda the not so subtle point of Windows RT tho? To force Intel's hand as far as pricing and Atom's update schedule (or lack thereof)... Even if RT ends up being an utter failure (tbh I'd be surprised if they put out a second ARM Surface), it still accomplished Microsoft's goal. I'm sure they'd take that half loss/half win if it means cheaper/faster x86 tablets in the end. I doubt they were ever gonna recoup the very low end of the market, sub $300's gone forever at this point. Reply
DanNeely - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkMS didn't need to blow almost a billion on unsold Surface RT tablets to make the threat. Just by it existing they've made that point. IF they'd done a better job of matching supply to demand and could point to a modest profit from the project even if it's market share was still miniscule their standing would be much stronger than the current situation where everyone is snickering about how badly they screwed up. Reply
skiboysteve - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkEven if winRT failed in sales it is a success.
the point if it was to point a gun at Intel. Mission accomplished. Ms can go back to leaning on Intel innovation again.
trust me, when MS told Intel about winRT years ago, they reacted. Even if sales failed... The roadmap of Intel now, and Intel products on the shelf now, wouldn't be the same without winRT. Reply
sixmemos - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkThose are some pretty rose-colored glasses sir. Microsoft wrote off nearly $1B last quarter in to account for RT's sales failure, to "point a gun"?
The gun at Intel's head was already cocked, loaded, and discharged, not by MS, but by iOS and Android. Reply
chizow - Friday, August 09, 2013 - link"The gun at Intel's head was already cocked, loaded, and discharged, not by MS, but by iOS and Android."
And ARM, but I think he does have somewhat of a point. Both MS and Intel were hedging their bets and peeking under the kimono of the other's main competition. ARM for Microsoft, and Android for Intel. By doing so, both showed they weren't going to be completely reliant on the other anymore, breaking the WIntel monopoly.
I think Microsoft still has work to do, Intel's task is much easier (already plans to run Android on it's Atom Bay Trail SoCs). Microsoft really needs to put a TON of money into RT development to get all those Android and iOS makers to port their apps to RT, or it's going to be game over.
Either that, or have some type of emulated version of x86/x64 Windows 8.1 running on their ARM powered surfaces. Reply
boozed - Friday, August 09, 2013 - link"Microsoft really needs to put a TON of money into RT development to get all those Android and iOS makers to port their apps to RT, or it's going to be game over."
Then it is game over, since they tried that, and failed. Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkWhy bother, it's not like they're every gonna give Windows RT away for free... They're never gonna be able to compete with the low end tablets like a Nexus 7 (much less the cheaper off brand stuff)... Silvermount/Win 8 devices should be able to fight those off and carve out their own space in the market below ultrabooks/Surface Pro and above ARM's assault, although I guess for that to work in the long run you still need a healthy Metro ecosystem. I'd cut RT off before long tho, it's simplify things so much... If they ever do want to move into the low end tablet space they can just do it thru WP. Reply
nofumble62 - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkWin8 emulation on an ARM? who has the patience, beside does it has enough memory needed for Window?. Reply
Krysto - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link$1 billion RT loss (so far), $1 billion Surface Pro loss (so far), and $1 billion Surface advertising loss (so far).
The losses are much bigger than they make them seem to be. Reply
boozed - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkWhich I find to be a bit of a shame because I think the Surface Pro is a good product, it's just not where the tablet market is. Reply
kyuu - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkWhich is fine, looking at it from the point of view of a consumer (instead of being an armchair CEO like most commenters). Another upsized smartphone OS on a tablet wouldn't have been interesting. If the only choices were iOS, Android, or Windows RT, I'd choose Windows RT any day. With full Windows 8 tablets on the market, it's understandable that Windows RT really isn't getting any traction. Especially now that Intel and AMD silicon will provide superior performance to any ARM solution with comparable battery life. Reply
steven75 - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkEven with the pitiful app selection? Even iOS has had a full touch-based office suite for 3 years now. Reply
jwcalla - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkI hear a lot of criticism about Windows RT failures but has the Surface Pro fared appreciably better? Reply
Death666Angel - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkOne device vs one whole range of devices. Not quite a good comparison. Reply
chizow - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkSurface Pro received a lot of criticism for it's high price, but it's utility and functionality is generally regarded as a success because it runs full x86/x64 Windows and all associated apps, and also opens some new usage patterns with the pen digitizer and tablet/typepad hybrid.
RT on the other hand also has a high price (relative to Android), but the OS leaves it very limited in the apps and software it can run. Reply
dolph0291 - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkI don't know why Surface Pro proponents always point to the keyboard as something new, or a new way to use a tablet. ALL iPads and many Android tablets have keyboards available. The iPad in particular has many. So how is the ability to buy a keyboard to attach to a Surface Pro anything except old news? Besides, no one will ever convince me that a 10" screen is ideal for editing spreadsheets (the code phrase is "get real work done" or "be productive") or that tapping Windows File and other menus with a stylus on a 10" screen is anything but annoying and a waste of time. Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkA keyboard is more of a gimmick for an Android/iOS tablet... And I say that after living with an OG Transformer + dock for two years, I actually like the complete package and I'd buy it again if I were going back in time (got a good deal on it back then), but I wouldn't buy a similar package today. Sure it's useful to have a keyboard to answer emails etc... But at the end of the day if you need to get some work done or do any real amount of content creation then the ecosystem on iOS/Android just isn't conducive to it.
OTOH you can definitely do anything you can do on a regular laptop on Surface Pro... I'm right there with you tho, I agree it's far from comfortable or ideal... But a lot of highly mobile consumers will take that tradeoff in order to carry one device instead of two. Plus you can always hook up Surface Pro to a real keyboard and a large display, very easily.
Surface RT is flawed for the time being, whereas Surface Pro is simply more of a niche product and/or a tough value proposition for many, but also a perfect solution for some. Reply
name99 - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link"I agree it's far from comfortable or ideal... But a lot of highly mobile consumers will take that tradeoff in order to carry one device instead of two."
There's an awful lot of dreaming and wishing in this claim.
Mobile (and non-mobile) consumers ALREADY carry two devices --- a phone and a laptop. For your argument to work you have to show that either
- the laptop is so extra heavy and large (even a good Ultrabook or MBA) that people would rather suffer the lower productivity of trying to do their work on a tablet OR
- the tablety things they want to do (play games? watch movies?) don't work well on their phones. And remember as you play this game that, if a large screen on a phone matters to them, they can buy a phone with a variety of large screens.
Heck even if you still believe there is some space in between the phone and the laptop (maybe you really like reading eBooks?), for most use cases that can be filled by one of the really light 7" tablets --- iPad mini or equivalents, or even a classic Kindle. Those things are cheap to cheap as dirt, and very small and light.
This fantasy that people would prefer a single crappy device rather than three different devices which each do their job well JUST because, yay single device, is precisely the delusion that has destroyed Microsoft. It represents a complete misunderstanding of compute history, compute present, and human nature. (It's actually VERY similar to IBM imagining that PCs would not threaten mainframes but would act as terminals to them because, yay, single device...) Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkI agree with you that the vast majority of people are better off with two (or three) discrete devices... But there IS a market for Surface Pro and several people even amongst these article's comments have voiced that. It might be a niche market but it does exist. Students, writers, and generally anyone that never stands still can benefit from carrying something like the Pro vs an Air and a small tablet... And it isn't even about the weight/space factor at times, more about having all your stuff in one place with a semi contiguous experience, or seamlessly go from reading to annotating or from taking notes to leisure, etc. Reply
name99 - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link"more about having all your stuff in one place with a semi contiguous experience, or seamlessly go from reading to annotating or from taking notes to leisure"
You mean EXACTLY the problem iCloud exists to solve...
The whole point of iCloud is not to be a replacement for DropBox or Netflix or Pandora or Picasa.
It is to make the use of multiple personal devices very easy by ensuring that the data that is important for sharing is in fact shared across all devices. Like any project which is both very ambitious and doing something completely new, there have been teething problems with iCloud, but it's mostly working now (apart from issues with Core Data object storage which will presumably be fixed in iOS7) and it really does work very well.
What you're going to see going forward is just more and more small pieces of data and functionality moving to iCloud, so that all Apple devices work ever more seamlessly together. Things like making sure pages are synched across eBook apps on different devices are only the beginning...
This is what I mean about MS solving yesterday's problems tomorrow. In theory MS has all the pieces in place to create the iCloud "experience" --- all the pieces except the vision. They have things like Skydrive, they've been working on "sync" as a problem forever, and that was, of course, Ray Ozzie's big obsession. But they cannot get their minds around the fact that the future is multiple devices, so they don't have the glue APIs to tie it all together, and the marketing message that this is what apps should be doing.
Google is certainly closer to Apple in this respect than is MS. Personally I think they're starting from fundamentally the wrong place --- start with servers and the data living there, and work to having it sometimes live on the device. Apple starts from data lives on the device, and pushes changes to the server.
IMHO Apple's model uses less bandwidth (bandwidth is ALWAYS going to be slower and less available than local storage because of physics), and is more respectful of the user --- the starting idea is "this is YOUR data on your device, and as a convenience we will store it temporarily (if you want) so we can push it to your other devices"; Google's starting point is "you've created the data to live on our servers, and if and when we find it convenient we'll let you cache it on your devices".
But the differences here between Google and Apple are minor. Both at least get the point of distributed devices --- the PERSONAL network is the computer. MS is so determined to recreate the desktop model in mobile that it's going to make the company irrelevant. Not bankrupt it --- IBM is not bankrupt, Oracle is not bankrupt. But no-one gives a damn what they do --- they are irrelevant. They matter to corporate IT officers, but no-one else, and that's where MS is headed. Reply
railhan - Sunday, August 11, 2013 - linkThat's both true and not. Casual users are a considerable chunk of the market but the corp world is still driving the car. And the corp world is where IBM, Microsoft, Oracle and etc., are doing very well. That's no place for both Apple and Google's OS ecosystem.
If your corporate network is using MS services, Lync and a ton of Office documents then a Windows flavored device even with it's flaws will suit your needs best. MS products are still a preferred way to maintain a private network of thousands of users. Reply
steven75 - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkI was with there until you said Oracle is irrelevant. They are anything but irrelevant to the business market. Reply
name99 - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkIt's perceived as a success by people who WANT to perceive it as a success...
Personally I don't think they're being honest. Their success stories always boil down to anecdotes ("I have one and I like it") or unfounded claims ("It's perfect for students"), never to actual sales numbers.
The demand for this sort of product is simply not there, never has been, because it's built on a fundamentally flawed model of where computing is headed. Reply
Ted T. - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkIn fact the Surface Pro sales were much worse than those of the Surface RT. So the Pro, for all its positive press on tech blogs is an unmitigated disaster as a real life product. Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkThey both accomplished some goals for MS tho, sometimes you have to take it I'm the chin to ultimately get what you want... RT might eventually turn out to be a failed product altogether and all it accomplished was putting some market wheels in motion, but Pro proved high end x86 tablets are very viable and they can be somewhat slim and consumer friendly (unlike almost every other recent x86 tablet short of recent Slates etc). They'll probably hang around and thrive even if they're never mainstream... Whether MS remains in the hardware game is another story. Reply
name99 - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link"They both accomplished some goals for MS ". God that's BS. What goals for MS were accomplished here?
The ONLY thing that has been accomplished it to make it absolutely clear that no-one considers MS software worth paying a premium for. Apple can charge what they do for iPhone and iPad and get away with it because people ARE willing to pay more for Apple software. What MS has shown is that this definitively does not hold true in any space where backward compatibility is not important.
This not only means huge losses immediately (for RT, on Surface Pro, and, let's not forget, on that other failure Win Phone 8), it means huge losses on the future. Regardless of what MS' contract with Ford says today, they're not going to be able to get any future auto maker to pay them much for in-car software. They're not going to get anyone to pay them much for say future smart watch or smart glasses software.
They're stuck to their ghetto of servers, desktops and laptops, and manufacturers are going to start chipping away at the latter two of these unless MS reduces prices, with experiments like laptops that run Android, but which ship with a good built-in Windows Remote Desktop client... Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkYou think Windows 8 was a failure and you're simultaneously pinning for a laptop that runs Android and VNCs unto a desktop? I don't even...
Surface Pro is a good concept, it just serves a very small niche... It does prove x86 can keep going into smaller and smaller form factors tho (in a more high profile way than stuff like Medfield etc). The only mistake was in trying to make such a big hooplah about it... None of the usual OEM partners were gonna risk a project like that tho, MS has the money to do so.
RT had to happen in one way or another or we'd possibly be waiting another two years for Silvermount... It's ridiculous that MS has to resort to a project like Windows RT to pressure Intel in light of ARM's ever expanding reach, but it's reality. Reply
name99 - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkIn your fantasy world, how has MS pressured Intel into anything?
- Has the price of Haskell's dropped compared to historical Intel prices? No.
- The driving force behind Intel caring about low-power for the high end was APPLE, not MS.
- The lead time to design an Atom-class x86 CPU is around 5 years (for Haskell class it's about 7 years). Which means the Atoms we're going to see soon were in no way, shape or form influenced by MS.
Saying that Surface Pro serves a small niche is the same thing as saying it's irrelevant. You think MS are going to continue pouring a billion dollars a year into a business that has no hope of growing?
And I am in no way pining for an Android laptop which offers limited Windows compatibility through Windows Remote Desktop --- I buy Apple kit so I don't give a damn what happens in the Windows or Android markets. But when I analyze the computing world, I analyze it based on what I consider to be reality --- what people seem to want to buy, at what sort of prices they seem willing to pay --- rather than based on the emotion of "My team, regardless of what the facts say".
I have given you what I consider to be a number of very good arguments for why Surface Pro is a foolish product, a mistake that was obviously a mistake before it was launched, and what the effects of it and RT will be on MS' long term future. You're welcome to believe that I'm wrong. But if you want to convince people who don't already share your theology, you're going to have to do better than "Surface is a great niche product" or "RT was a genius plan to force Intel to do [what exactly?]" Reply
Impulses - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkThe price of Atom based parts did drop significantly, AFAIK they now represent one of Intel's lowest profit margins in years. Not gonna bother arguing anything beyond that, you're being more than a little disrespectful with all the team/theology comments (nevermind the Apple rah rah chant, they're the biggest niche there is)... For the record, I don't own either Surface and the only Windows machines I use are DIY desktops and an old netbook occasionally. Reply
JPForums - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkInteresting. You state it took 7 years to design Haswell. In 2006 Apple had less than 5% of the PC market: http://appleinsider.com/articles/06/06/01/apples_s...
I thought the typical processor design cycle was about 5 years, but even then Apple wasn't fairing much better. Do you really think such a light weight in the industry at that point in time could drive the direction of the design cycle of Intel. While it is true that significant change can be introduced in the midst of a design cycle, the further in, the fewer things can change. Despite what a very vocal minority would have you believe, It is unlikely that such change would come as a result of the demands of a company that could offer so little return on investment (Apple even today is below 15% PC market share). Most likely it was the demands of the server market that drove Haswell's design. Power consumption and performance per watt is a huge deal here. Though minor changes that fell in line with this goal could certainly have been accommodated (I.E. the Mac specific processor package for the Air).
In any case, IF Windows RT was meant to drive Intel's design, it wasn't the large chips that they were targeting. They would have been looking for cheaper, lower power designs (Hence Atom). In 2008, Android didn't have any real influence on Intel. Intel wasn't feasible in phones and Android didn't have any appreciable tablet market share until Honeycomb launched in 2011. It is possible that their success here had some influence on Intel. Apple, however, had zero influence on Intel in this sector as they opted to use their own in house designs. There was no realistic expectation that anything Intel did would get them any money out of Apple.
Now consider that Intel assuredly knew about WinRT long before we did. Work on WinRT/Win8 started even before Win7 launched in 2009. Also, at this point in time, Intel had no reason to believe that WinRT would flop or that Microsoft wouldn't retain their >80% market share. There is every reason to believe that Intel would have acted to keep ARM manufacturers locked out. I think it is safe to conclude that WinRT did have some effect on Intel's Atom line, though I'd suggest that Androids post-Honeycomb success probably helped more than a little as well. Silvermont and across the board cheaper Atom processors are the current results of this influence. Most likely, Broadwell/Airmont will be the first designs fully under this influence, though as Sivermont was probably already in the early stages of development.
Now, was Microsoft's reason for making Windows RT simply to give Intel a warning? I doubt it. They've stated multiple times that they are committed to WinRT. They are also putting out another one, even though the suggested goal has already been accomplished. No, I think Microsoft wanted the option to use ARM chips. If ARM makes headway into the server market, Microsoft would be foolish not to have an OS ready for the platform. From that standpoint, it makes some sense that Microsoft would want to continue with WinRT. Reply
Krysto - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkNo, it lost about a billion dollars, too. Reply
nerd1 - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkRT is a joke - atom tablets are as light, as cheap and way more capable and why bother with winRT at all? Reply
chizow - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkMS wanted to break their reliance on x86 chips from Intel and also wanted to hedge their bets by breaking into the ARM market. It was a good strategic decision imo, just poorly executed. They made way too many Surface RTs and the price was too high, on both the Pro and RT, imo. Reply
fteoath64 - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkYeah. this is where MS blew it with RT mainly becuase it was a crippled feature product compared to Pro. It is also locked down so much so that app development is not conducive on it. Many said it was the incompatibility with x86 that was the problem but I think that was just an excuse to point out the key weaknesses RT has feature wise. Performance wise, it does not have much of an issue, price wise it does have an issue due to heavy Android tablet competition. iPad is NOT a competitor as that is a specialized tablet and way better built compared to Surface RT.
MS has a chance to make RT open and full featured but they had to "protect" the legacy which always fails in the market. There is no focus on what RT wants to be!. Just a junior version of Pro is not a segment people want to be in especially with the variety of Android tablets with JellyBean OS. This would be the crowd who COULD consider an RT tablet. iPad users will buy it no matter what because it is Apple. MS is no Apple by a long long short. Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkI don't know that an IPad is really way better built... I think RT's design was great, I wouldn't have bought one at launch even if it debuted at $350 with the keyboard included tho... Most people wouldn't unless or until MS lured enough developers, and I'm not sure that was ever really their intent.Honestly, other than some pricing/stock issues, they probably executed the whole RT strategy pretty well...
It might've made more sense to keep it as a one off than to lure partners like ASUS in, but then it would've been taken even less seriously. The crucial decision will be whether to keep pushing it or know when to give up on the experiment and go full on with x86. Either way they still need more people developing for Metro, but it might be a whole lot simpler if they decide to kill RT sooner rather than later.
The whole concept of writing an app once for phone/tablet/laptop seems nice, but ultimately few things actually need (or benefit from) that level of inter-operability... And a lot more is shared between tablet and phone than either and laptop/PCs. WP probably needs to gain a whole lot more traction before their tablet strategy will. Otherwise people will just keep looking at convertibles as an oddity... Which would be a shame, since Silvermount convertibles could do a lot to keep ARM tablet pricing in check in the long run. Reply
Krysto - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkAtom is also a joke for the full Windows. It's a low-end chip that gets frustrating when used with the full blown/bloated Windows. Reply
MartinT - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkI'm almost certain that this era will soon be a textbook example of how to hasten one's demise in a declining market by screwing one's partners, screwing one's customers, and generally over-estimating and over-playing their perceived lock-in.
Can't help but wonder if Microsoft could've gracefully ridden this wave down, while still trying to gain a foothold in the maturing mobile and tablet markets. Clearly, they didn't think they could. Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkEhh, I wouldn't count them out just yet... It'll take a much bigger screw up for this to cease being a three way race. If they push ahead with a second Surface RT and basically repeat their mistakes for a second year (now that there's nothing to gain from developing RT) and somehow Intel doesn't deliver with Silvermount, then that could be the first nail. Acting like this was a complete fiasco is a bit much IMO. Reply
steven75 - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkSales show that Surface Pro and Surface RT have both been flops. Tablets are expected to overtake PC sales *this year*.
What is your definition of "complete fiasco"? Reply
Impulses - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkThat's a good point, if you think a compete fiasco is MS failing to get any traction in the tablet market within 12 months then yes, it's a COMPETE fiasco (nevermind it took several years for Android and even the iPad was largely viewed as an oversized phone at first). It's not a complete fiasco yo the extent that the above comment is making it out to be tho, Surface by itself won't lead to MS demise... There's a lot more to the world than tablets, a good chunk of the people buying one today probably weren't gonna buy a new PC anytime soon so tablet sales overtaking PC isn't some doomsday scenario for the former. Reply
MartinT - Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - linkApple didn't sacrifice the Iphone market to come out with the Ipad, Google didn't sacrifice it's advertising business for it's push into tablets.
Microsoft screwed the OEM partners it relies on to ship Windows. Microsoft screwed the 99+% of its current users that don't use a touchscreen devices. Microsoft even devalued Office by bundling it with the mess that is the Surface RT.
My point is that Apple and Google made (relatively) small, low-risk bets on a newly popular product category and won big so far. Microsoft came in late, put a lot of chips on the table, and has nothing but bruises to show for it. Reply
MonkeyPaw - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkIMO, the RT tabs launched at the wrong price. Selling for $500+ was too high. ARM is for affordable hardware, and Surface and others failed to do that. Had these tabs launched for $350, then I think we'd be saying something quite different today.
For the record. I just bought a Surface RT at the new price. With 8.1 preview, its a nice device Reply
chizow - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkEven at $350, it's pitted against the high-end ARM tabs and if it came to a decision between Android and WinRT, I think the nod still goes to the Android tab (for now).
Question though, with Win8.1 preview on the Surface RT, that's still ARM version OS right? It can still only run the legacy RT apps? Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkObviously, the internals aren't gonna transform and magically run x86 Win on Tegra... Was that a rhetorical question? :P Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkI bought a Transformer with keyboard dock for $420 two years ago, I've generally been pretty happy with it and I was exited about the new Windows tablets initially... But I doubt I would've bought an RT tablet at launch even at $350. Not when I know Atom tablets exist and can be way more versatile with little to no sacrifices, obviously at that point Atom devices would be $100-200 more expensive... But I don't see how RT can manage to prosper in that tiny sliver of a market, the price doesn't change much in the end (other than saving a bit of face for MS, but they would probably anger partners like ASUS even more if they went after margins that thin). Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkI wouldn't buy a $400+ Android-based convertible in today's market either btw (maybe a $350 one, if it came with the dock). Reply
steven75 - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkCan you scroll through Twitter without jumpy lag all over the place? This has been the low bar set in 2007. Reply
jnmfox - Friday, August 09, 2013 - linkMicrosoft scaled the wrong OS: They should have scaled up Windows Phone to work on tablets, not scale down Windows 8.
This would have also forced them to invest more and iterate faster. Kinda sad to see a former monolith slowly dying. Reply
speconomist - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkNow that's an insightful comment.
Thank you Sir. Reply
kyuu - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkDefinitely not. We didn't need another upsized smartphone OS on tablets. iOS and Android already have that covered. Windows RT on its own was already a far better experience for tablet usage due to things like having an honest-to-god file browser and real multitasking (which it inherited from desktop Windows). With full Windows 8 running on silicon that's higher performing than ARM solutions but still providing competitive battery life, personally I can't find a single reason to choose an iOS or Android tablet. Reply
jnmfox - Sunday, August 11, 2013 - linkSadly for you and Microsoft only a very few agree. If someone wants those features there is the Surface Pro. Windows RT gives the perception of Windows performance and usability but it is just a poor tablet experience and too limited as a Windows machine.
If they had used Windows Phone they would have a touch centric OS to build around and apps that were designed for touch. Reply
steven75 - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkYou're firmly in the minority in that opinion, but I would guess you're well aware of this.
I, on the other hand, can't think of a single reason to call RT a "far better experience" than either iOS or Android. Reply
Impulses - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkWell, multi tasking is better... But there's less relevant apps and services to multi task between so... :P I'm sure they could implement the side by side stuff on a scaled up WP based OS. Reply
CBone - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkI think the low sales were due to the vivotab being expensive garbage. I tried it in 2 stores with 3 different devices and they were all crappy with touch recognition problems and lagging.
Didn't help that RT was called windows rt instead of just Microsoft RT. Microsoft could have changed the game if they could have let go of windows and all that name entails. Reply
Krysto - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkThe problem with using the "full Windows" as the base for Windows RT is that even the *highest end* ARM chips that run Android or iOS amazingly well, feel like "low-end chips" when you make them run Windows RT/Windows 8(when we're talking about Atom).
Windows RT/8 are just not "mobile" operating systems in any way, form or shape. They're bloated operating systems that needed something like a $300 Core i5 to run well. Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkDid you actually pick up a Vivo or Surface RT and find them to be laggy or slow? That wasn't my experience at all when I tried them, but maybe I'm just a lot more tolerant... After all, I've got a first gen Atom netbook (with an SSD upgrade) that still gets some use... Granted, a lot less use than the two Android tablets I've had. I don't know that performance was really RT's biggest issue, there just isn't any reason to get one over an iPad or a cheaper Nexus... Everyone knew that'd be the case before they even launched tho. Reply
maximumGPU - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkNothing really wrong with RT tablets. What was wrong was the price. not only the price of the tablet itself, but more so the insulting amount they wanted for a keyboard.
the price should have reflected the middle of the road hardware such as the SoC and the low res screen. Reply
Wraiththe - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkI suppose this would have nothing to do Google dropping Samsung and contracting with ASUS to manufacture the new Nexus 10 tablets?
It is a shame that the aps seem to be less available for MS as Android or Apple.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think the RT's Achilles heel also has to due with:
Screen Resolution as well as price. (Android, Kindle, Ipad)
Pricing games for features are annoying.
***The Asus did not come with the office RT suite; pushing it even further above the price of the Surface RT.
All to often the market is determined by the masses, which all to often is based on mass uneducated choices frequently based on marketing... Also unrestrained by a lack of understanding of ULA's and awareness. I am guilty too (takes one to know one.) It just seems to me that we are all being herded as sheep.
It is unfortunate as Google/Android can market it all so cheap. Not just because of hardware, but because the user pays in non cash ways. The user is basically whored out in terms of personal data and marketing. Most people do not understand or care.
Having to deal with the different companies (hardware, software, OS.) should problems arise they often do not get resolved (Worse with android.) Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkThat's a good point about Office, even tho Windows RT was a decent strategic move they might've been better off following the Nexus model (commissioning one popular OEM for Surface RT rather than going it alone) or simply leaving RT devices to their partners... I'm not sure a lower price and higher res screen save RT tho. Would that attract more developers? It's a catch 22 deal, but none of those factors would make anyone buy an RT device over similar Android/iOS devices unless they were gonna undercut or out-iterate either (fat chance). Reply
MonkeyPaw - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkVivo RT came with Office 2013. It was largely the same guts as Surface, but different shells and keyboards. Reply
JarredWalton - Sunday, August 11, 2013 - linkI've read the rumors that ASUS is going to make the Nexus 10, but unless you have an official confirmation they're just that: rumors. We'll have to wait and see, but if they do make the Nexus 10 it's certainly a sign of where ASUS thinks things are heading. Nexus 10 couldn't possibly be less of a success than the VivoTab at least.... Reply
jwcalla - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkLet's also not forget that the overarching strategy for Microsoft here is to get people out of the freedom of the desktop and into their app store. They recognize that app stores are the cash cow that they need to get a piece of and that's why they followed the Apple model (locked down walled garden, etc.). We see this clearly in the design of Windows 8, even the desktop version which placed an emphasis on the Modern UI, a kind of synonym for "get your stuff from our app store". Clearly they can't cut off the desktop cold turkey, but they would love to if they could. In that sense, RT isn't necessarily irrelevant as it's their ideal goal (all apps come from the app store only). Reply
name99 - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link"Of course, long-term the story for Windows RT is far from over. Microsoft needs Windows RT or they are locked out of a huge market. "
This is not true. MS COULD try to save the situation by moving Win Phone 8 up, rather than trying to move Win 8 down. Of course this would mean admitting that Apple had the right idea all along, which will be a bitter pill for MS to swallow internally, but easy enough to spin externally: "Customers have told us they love Win Phone 8 so much they would like to experience it on a larger screen..."
Doing this also helps Win8 by increasing the pool of target devices for developers.
Of course this IS Microsoft we're talking about, so rather than move forward on a plan like this, with results due this year, we'll get a year of internal fighting over it, then a year of dithering after the decision has been made, and by the time anything ships the world will have moved on and no-one will care anyway. Reply
Impulses - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkEven tho we may disagree on the value of Surface Pro and whether RT should've happened, I can completely agree with that. They need to make a decision on RT quickly and not drag it out... x86 convertibles could still carve out a market after Silvermount, and there'll always be space at the high end for something like Pro even if it's a niche... But both of those as well as their WP strategy depends on attracting developers, and RT muddles matters a lot.
If they can absorb a blow like Vista surely they can shuffle RT away in a somewhat timely manner... WP8 tablets don't even need to happen overnight, just don't keeppromoting RT and alienating more customers. Reply
kyuu - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkWhat the hell is the difference between an upscaled Windows Phone and Windows RT? The Win8 start screen basically *is* Windows Phone upscaled. You just also get the benefit of inheriting things from desktop Windows like proper multitasking, a file browser, a device manager, support for lots of USB peripherals and USB thumb drives and so on. The price is a little bloat on the size the OS. Big whoop, especially with USB thumb drive support, microSD, and the progress of storage technology in general.
We didn't need or want another feature-crippled, upsized smartphone OS. iOS and Android have that covered. Reply
name99 - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - link"The price is a little bloat on the size the OS. Big whoop, especially with USB thumb drive support, microSD, and the progress of storage technology in general."
You (and the five people who actually bought a Surface RT tablet) might consider that "price" a reasonable tradeoff. The rest of the world does not.
This is the thing about selling products --- you have to design them based on what the BUYERS consider important, not what YOU consider important. Reply
domboy - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link"You (and the five people who actually bought a Surface RT tablet) might consider that "price" a reasonable tradeoff. The rest of the world does not."
I guess I'm one of those five people, sort of. I also don't want Windows convertible tablets to run a mobile OS... I bought a Surface RT because it was very much like a full desktop OS... though I will admit I wouldn't have if it weren't for the jailbreak. I want to make use of the desktop on RT as well. I would never have given it any consideration if it had been running Windows Phone OS.
While it is sad that Asus is canceling this product... I don't like where Microsoft is going with Windows RT... i.e. a locked down modern UI only OS. I had hoped that they would open it up more, but it isn't looking good with the 8.1 RT preview. So far that reason, I think Asus is headed in the right direction. Reply
Impulses - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkWhat's the desktop useful for beyond Office tho? Everything else kyuu mentioned is doable on a mobile OS, they don't need full blown Windows on ARM for that... Android already has file managers, USB storage/device support, etc. Multi-tasking on RT is nice but I don't see why that too couldn't work on WP (there's OEM/user takes in the concept on Android...). Blowing away a few GB on the OS is a pretty high price IMO, and RT was headed in that locked seen direction from the start. Reply
steven75 - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkThe things you keep mentioning simply aren't important to consumers in 2013. Reply
Subyman - Saturday, August 10, 2013 - linkMS's biggest problem is their lack of a strong message to the consumer. Why Windows RT? You say that to a normal consumer and they think of PCs. "I don't want a PC tablet." They need a better name, a name that distinguishes it from Windows so people don't automatically think of their Dell when they hear it. Android and iOS are interesting names and the consumer knows it isn't a Mac or Linux or they have no idea and want to know more.
They should have just called the entire ARM line Metro and marketed that. Its a neat name and it throws aside any comparison to a PC, its new and fresh. Consumers are interested. They need to liven things up. Having the Windows name anywhere near it will immediately bring Dell, 90's computing, Vista, or whatever other baggage people associate with the name to people's minds. Something that you do NOT want to do if trying to be new and interesting especially when competing head to head with Apple. Reply
ET - Sunday, August 11, 2013 - linkI think that Microsoft really needs to replace Windows RT with Windows for ARM. Basically, allow desktop programs to run on it. That's the strength of Windows. Sure, ARM and x86 aren't compatible, which means a more limited software selection, but if Visual Studio could just retarget to ARM, if .NET programs could be run as is on ARM, that would provide a decent and growing selection of software. Reply
JarredWalton - Sunday, August 11, 2013 - linkThat was the whole point of Windows RT. It was called "Windows on ARM WOA)" during development and then eventually the name was changed to RT -- likely because that means MS has the option of porting it to more than just ARM devices. Reply
Impulses - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkDid they ever indicate it'd be opened up to more than just market apps tho? Making development easier is nice, they're still not attracting a significant number of developers tho, or giving people a reason to pick RT over Android/iOS. Reply
eanazag - Sunday, August 11, 2013 - linkI'm for RT and ARM based Windows. I'm against the execution. I think the lack of a desktop environment results in a cut down user experience. It needs to be priced in the same low end Android market. It simply lacks the software today to be a large market device.
Including Office is a great move, but it was a necessary one. People get high on "Brand" thinking because we are doing it then it will sell. It is too much like an iPad and at the same time not an iPad. The same simple interface with a lack of software. It is ironic to think that the whole reason Windows is so popular is because my program runs in Windows. The reason Linux is not mainstream. And the reason Mac OS X is the second desktop OS behind Windows.
Real world example:
I'm trying to get my Surface Pro to do everything my iPad does. VMware view, so I download the version from the MS App Store and the first time it is missing a certificate function. Fail. An update comes out for it and I update. Now the app fails again for a different reason. I give up and install View in desktop mode. RT users are complaining in the reviews. I had an out. RT users are hosed. It isn't MS's fault, but it is reality. This is one of the use cases for RT and it fails for now till VMware cares enough, which may never happen. Reply
steven75 - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link"I'm trying to get my Surface Pro to do everything my iPad does. "
That there, my Surface-using friends, is when you know your product is a flop. Reply
xTRICKYxx - Sunday, August 11, 2013 - linkWhen RT was first announced, I was so excited. I feel like Microsoft flubbed this. Windows RT needs a userbase quickly. They shouldn't have locked the bootloader, which is a requirement for RT. When RT was first announced, before Surface was, I had high hopes to install RT on my Transformer Prime. The locked bootloader, coupled with the 1366x768 requirement (1280x800 screen), nobody could attempt it. An open OS is what Microsoft got popular in the first place.
Microsoft didn't become to dominate the desktop market by only giving licences to OEMs and setting strict standards. Reply
Visual - Monday, August 12, 2013 - linkI wanted to buy one so I can try developing for RT.
But I wanted a maxed out one - at least 64GB, 3G, GPS, keyboard dock.
They never released this combo here. They kept trying to sell cut-out versions missing at least some of these aspects, without adequately lowering the price. Reply
CosmoJoe - Tuesday, August 13, 2013 - linkI've said it many times; MS blew the Surface RT and Pro launch by pricing them too high. I have 2 RT devices (won them both at tech shows) and I love them as web browser devices and for watching movies. We bring both devices with us on long trips and the kids can watch recordings of their shows. While I could certainly do this on an Android or Apple device, I have a pretty extensive Windows network infrastructure at home with Active Directory, so it is very easy for me to just copy media files back and forth on these devices as needed within the Windows UI.
My Surface RT by the way ... to give you an idea of how solidly those things are built, I left it on the roof of my wife's SUV and we drove away; the thing flew off on the highway and was run over a few times before we could stop and retrieve it. The thing is scratched up and touch doesn't work on a portion of the screen but aside from that the device still functions just fine.
I think Microsoft should have taken a page from HP with their Touchpad firesale and really just aimed to flood the market with these devices at very low prices. The 32GB RT should have been priced at $149 and the 64GB at $199. The Pro should have started at $350. When you are trying to make inroads into an established market, you need to give consumers a huge incentive to choose your product. Reply
wumpus - Monday, August 19, 2013 - link"The gun at Intel's head was already cocked, loaded, and discharged, not by MS, but by iOS and Android."
In other words, Windows on ARM is an ongoing attempt to get onto ARM when (not if) they barge into the server room and datacenter. They already are bringing Android and Linux (and Apple would have to not care or fumble badly to miss with iOS there: looks like don't care), and Microsoft needs to get windows in that mix. Reply
Wolfpup - Monday, August 19, 2013 - linkRT needed to have x86 compatibility. Simple as that. Even slow emulation would be 100x better than nothing. It needed to be open like real Windows too. Even then it would be an uphill battle against AMD's CPUs which IMO make a lot more sense in a Windows tablet, but MAYBE it could have competed with 8/x86.
Regarding small notebooks...maybe there's not the glut of ultra-low end ones that there were a few years ago, but I'm not sure that's bad for the industry. XP's gone, I haven't seen Windows 7 Starter (is there even an 8 starter?) in years. There's still tons of better-than-ever small notebooks, but they cost more like $350-1000+, and use Bobcat and its successor, and Intel's full chips. Doesn't seem like a bad thing. Reply
cheshirster - Thursday, August 22, 2013 - linkWhy do you think W8 x86 needs "Core i3 or faster" ? Forgot about Atoms?
Asus's Atom tablets with full W8 are CHEAPIER then theirs RT tablets. What were they waiting for?
Everybody is going crazy while trying to analyze last generation MS products. Reply
andrejg - Thursday, August 22, 2013 - linkThe biggest advantage of RT tablet is MS Office, USB and cover keyboard with Surface. The rest is more or les comparable to Android or Apple. I wouldn't buy Asus tablet without kbd. Just too expensive. It's the duality of RT machines, that could lure buyers that need to write, travel and exchange with MS oriented environment.
Just the tablet would have to be very cheap, if I was to buy it...and it is NOT.
And Windows8 with RT are still lacking some features, promised to be fixed in 8.1 in a month or so.. Reply


text:
Object: Untitled. Plate 7 from 'Sheep'
This image has No Known Copyright Restrictions.
To the best of Te Papa's knowledge, under New Zealand law:
- there is no copyright or other intellectual property rights in this work in New Zealand; and
- the work may be copied and otherwise re-used in New Zealand without copyright or other intellectual property rights related restriction.
Te Papa will not be liable to you, on any legal basis (including negligence), for any loss or damage you suffer through your use of this material, except in those cases where the law does not allow us to exclude or limit our liability to you.
|Untitled. Plate 7 from 'Sheep'
de Bye, Marcus (artist), circa 1664, Netherlands
|Medium summary
|ink, paper
|prints, etchings, works on paper
108mm (Height)
x 134mm (Width)
Support: 114mm (Height) x 138mm (Width)
|Credit line
|Gift of Bishop Monrad, 1869
|Registration number
Related information
Results from DigitalNZ
Searching 27 million digital objects from over 150 content partners across New Zealand
- Untitled (Mataura Ensign 7-1-1913) - National Library of New Zealand
- Untitled (Mataura Ensign 23-7-1907) - National Library of New Zealand
- Untitled (Daily Telegraph, 21 June 1897) - National Library of New Zealand
- Untitled (Daily Telegraph, 29 January 1884) - National Library of New Zealand
Disclaimer: This information was created from historic documentation, and may not necessarily reflect the best available knowledge about the item. Some collection images are created for identification purposes only and may not be of reproduction quality. Some images are not available due to copyright restrictions. If you have information or questions about objects in the collection, contact us using our enquiry form. You can also find out more about Collections Online.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Corsair Obsidian 550D: Starting to Specializeby Dustin Sklavos on 3/29/2012 3:01 PM EST
- Posted in
- Corsair
- Cases/Cooling/PSUs
- mid-tower
58 Comments
Back to Article
cbgoding - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkWhy do reviewers throw a ton of voltage at a chip for a weak overclock? 1.38v is what I use to hit 4.9GHz. Just strikes me as weird. Reply
Dustin Sklavos - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link1. Stability.
2. Ease of testing. For the case, whether or not the overclock itself is fast is irrelevant, we're just looking to see how it dissipates the heat. Reply
compudaze - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkNot all chips are created equal. I have had one 2600K that hit 4.8GHz on 1.32V while another took a whopping 1.48v to hit the same 4.8GHz. They call it the "silicon lottery" for a reason. Reply
pdjblum - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkThere are still some of us who prefer aluminum to steel. What I am saying is that the material is as important to some of us as are the dimensions and other specs, so it would be great if it was also listed in an easy to find location. Reply
Rasterman - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkIf you use quality fans at low speeds, there is no reason you need an isolation, dampening design to block noise, there simply is no noise. I went with a Lian Li AL case, short ATX, 2 unused 5.25 bays, it is absolutely silent at idle, plus it weighs less than 20# which makes moving it around a hell of a lot easier. Overclocked to 4.9GHz I don't need to ramp the fans for the CPU, I have a similar video card that does ramp though and it is by far the loudest thing at load, probably similar to this review. Reply
Iketh - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkYou've never had a computer running on hard floors then... Reply
jabber - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkSo some form of dampening material under the PC is required?
Cork tiles or suchlike.
I used to use a Mission Isoplat. Reply
ssddaydream - Saturday, March 31, 2012 - linkI respectfully ask that you don't preach cases being "absolutely silent" when indeed they are not. I have worked with many components that advertise extremely quiet when they actually have very irritating noise characteristics.
Your computer may be silent to your ears, but other people may have more acute hearing.
I have a "silent" computer- it uses absolutely no fans and it only uses an SSD (no conventional HDD). It, for all practical purposes, is silent. If you put your ear up to the power supply, you can barely hear the faint switching and other noise, which is measurable by my mic with RTA. In any case, I can't hear it when my ear is 5" or more from the PSU.
A case with conventional HDDs and fans is never silent- only quiet. How quiet is a matter of the listener unless measurements are taken.
I don't expect a detailed RTA analysis for case reviews, so I try to find the quietest gear available based on many people's reviews as well as professional reviews. Many sites that review case fans, etc, will post actual recorded noise so you can get an idea of the noise signature.
Unfortunately, the more powerful the computer, the more noise. I relocated some of my machines into a different building where I use Remote Desktop / VNC to access them.
Thanks Anandtech for bringing to light cases like this. I am all for acoustic and thermal comparisons and recommendations between any cases you guys have experience in. Reply
haelio - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link"In terms of thermal performance, it's tough to make a direct comparison to Corsair's other cases."
No it's not, you get other cases, put the same hardware in it and then take measurements again.
I've seen better case reviews by random purchasers on enthusiast forums. This was just a series of subjective opinions on the aesthetics and then a few graphs without any context, mention of the ambient temperatures or fan layout (presumably stock?).
I expect more from a site like Anandtech. If this review popped up on CNET I wouldn't be complaining.
For a better comparison of:
CPU temps: http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/chassis/36473-corsai...
Noise: http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/chassis/36473-corsai... Reply
SilthDraeth - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkI have to agree with the above poster. Though, I am guessing you guys do not keep review hardware around forever. However, it would make sense to have a pretty standard case review test suite with a standardized hardware setup. Presumebly something you know will get quite hot in a poorly designed case.
Then just keep that stuff in house and when new cases come for review, you pop the stuff in and run the tests, then you can easily pull up your numbers for other cases and compare and contrast. Reply
SilthDraeth - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkActually, in following up, I express my ignorance for not reading the review first. It appears they built a standardized test bed for cases, and this is the first case to be tested with the new test bed.
Also, going on the assumption that review hardware doesn't sit around indefinitely, I would gather that future case reviews will be done with the standard test, as I mentioned in my above post. Reply
haelio - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkI'm sure there must have been more than this case around in Anandtech HQ :) Adding even one other case for comparison would improve this review immensely.
I hope this review's graphs are updated when other cases are used with this test bed. Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - link"AnandTech HQ" is where each of us happens to live; I'm in WA, Dustin's in CA, Anand is in NC, Ryan is in OR, Johan is in Belgium, and Brian is in AZ, just to name a few. I'm sure Dustin does have more than one case at his home/apartment, but going back to "re-review" some cases means he basically doubles (triples) the workload for an article just for the sake of graphs. The next review should have two cases listed, and once we have half a dozen or so reviewed this won't be much of a problem.
Just for the record, we originally tried to come up with a good testbed so that we wouldn't have to change it after just one year, but first attempts sometimes fall short. So now we have a new testbed that should last Dustin several more years. :-) Reply
MrMaestro - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkThat's fair enough, Jarred, it's just that the next case review probably aren't going to be all that relevant. I don't really care how this case compares to your average value or gaming case, I want to know how it compares to its competition - the Antec SOLO II, Fractal Define R3, Cooler Master Silencio and the Silverstone FT02, to name a few. Dustin even mentions that the FT02 is better in the conclusion. Ok, it's not direct competition, since the FT02 is $100 more expensive, but I would like to know if that $100 is worth it.
I guess I'm a little disappointed because I'm tossing up quiet cases for my next build, and this review just isn't all that helpful to me. I don't mean to bitch and moan, as the writers such as yourself are doing a great job, and I get to enjoy it for nothing. I also don't envy Dustin's job of repeatedly building and tearing down systems for case reviews. I was looking forward to this review and it was a little disappointing is all.
Cheers. Reply
Dustin Sklavos - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkYou can draw a rough comparison between the stats for this enclosure and our previous reviews by adding ~23C to the thermals. Noise levels aren't so fortunate.
The reason I suggest the FT02 as a superior option is because I'm actually using an FT02 for my personal desktop. Overclocked i7-990X and two GTX 580s sandwiched together in SLI; with an aftermarket fan controller, the FT02 is actually able to keep all of that both cool and remarkably silent under load. Subjectively, the FT02 is a hair louder at idle than the 550D, but DEFINITELY quieter under load. Reply
mtoma - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkDisappointment I wouldn't call it: after all it is tested a new model of quiet computer case (and the enthusiasts know they aren't to many models to chose from).
The fact that we don't have any reference to say ... Antec P280, is unfortunate, but let's not forget that vibration problems are important too (not only noise and thermals), and if there is a chance that to occur in Corsair.... I'm sorry.
Not last, we should remember that changing the testing methodology is a good thing, is a progress. We shouldn't blame progress, and we shouldn't blame a reviewer before reading an article. Reply
kevith - Saturday, March 31, 2012 - linkHi Jarred.
Would it be possible to do a sort of "here-we-are" article on the structure and people of Anandtech?
We all check in almost every day to read the articles by the well-known signatures, but we don't know how you look - apart from Anand - we don know what your "labs" look like, where you're located or how you coordinate the "mag" etc. etc.
Will you share that with us? Reply
gordo453 - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkon the top of the second page you say 500D instead of 550D Reply
8steve8 - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkfull size ATX cases seem utterly irrelevent now days...
I love anandtech, but i wish they spent more of their case-reviewing energy on smaller, more modern designs.
with mobos like the Asus Z77-I Deluxe for those who can make due with 2 dimm slots, and countless high end micro atx mobos with no relevent concessions for their smaller size, i find it dubious to think full size ATX is required outside of very rare cases where you need a large number of pcie cards. Reply
JCheng - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkIf Amazon's "Most Popular" sorting is any indication, full size ATX is alive and well, as 16 of the top 20 cases are ATX or bigger. Reply
zcat - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkIt's not just you.
There is no good reason anymore, imo, for full-size ATX systems, unless you really *need* all those extra bays for internal HDDs as a file server, and/or you need more than the 4 expansion slots that microATX offers (maximum) in a space_heater/gaming_rig for something like 2x double-wide video cards + audio + h/w raid + "futureproof-something".
If you search newegg, you'll find that there's almost as many microATX motherboards for sale as there are ATX at very similar prices, and many of the microATX cases even approach the size of full ATX.
In fact, the vast majority of people, even hardcore gamers, could opt for miniITX (vs microATX), as long as they choose one of the few cases that can fit a single full-height & full-length & double-width video cards (like the Sugo's or a few of Lian Li's). Room enough for 2 8GB sticks of ram, an SSD, and HDD, but no insane CPU coolers. Reply
Risforrocket - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkCan you give me one reason that is relevant to me why I should use a small case for my computer?
I think of my computer as a workstation, it has to do everything. And it does. Yes, it has a RAID card and 4 drives in RAID. Yes, it has a full sized ATX deluxe motherboard. Is that ok with you? I also don't believe in water cooling so I like plenty of room for the air to flow around and I like plenty of full sized low speed fans.
Some day I might build a mini computer to use for... well, something. Maybe as a music/video player. Until then I guess I'll just keep on building my big beautiful workstation computers for no good reason and put things in there that I don't really need. Reply
zcat - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkSo YOU are utilizing the extra space -- good for you -- but most people don't.
Good reasons to go smaller when you can -- which is most of the time -- is to save on wasted space, materials, and energy. It's called being efficient for the increasingly common case. Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkMy experience is that mATX with a high-end graphics card (e.g. GTX 580 or HD 7970 or similar) is going to either run hot, run loud, or both. Mini-ITX is almost impossible to get a reasonably quiet system with a high-end GPU. Meanwhile, if you look at our previous tests of full-towers, there's a reason many of them are quieter and run cooler than mid-towers, never mind mATX.
So unlike those who "see no use for full ATX anymore", I'm the exact opposite: unless space is at a premium, I see no use for mATX. I have three desks, and they all have a spot for a mid-tower. If I had an mATX case instead of my current case, all I'd end up with is a foot of empty space above the box.
In case you're wondering, my current main desktops are using a SilverStone Raven (dual 5870 GPUs), an older Lian Li PC7 (single GTX 580 -- this case was not good for dual GPUs), an old Gateway FX530 with a single slot GPU for the display and a dual-slot GPU for GPGPU work (5670 and 5850 currently installed), and the last is some weird Ultra case that was designed to be high-end but really isn't... but it still works well enough for my wife's PC. Reply
zcat - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkIf highest-end SLI + RAID5 are in your vocab, then, sure, you probably want full ATX, else microATX usually strikes the best balance, especially if you choose your case wisely (for silence & air flow).
My perspective is that of 'good enough' systems (~80th percentile performance) where you save on money, energy, and space by default; not on building the 98% BEST gamer/workstation systems. Reply
7Enigma - Thursday, April 05, 2012 - linkI'm in complete agreement with you Jarred as well. I think a lot of people like the wow factor of cramming a bunch of components into a shoe box. I'm not one of them. I, like you, would have no use for the extra bit of space a smaller enclosure/mobo would provide (actually it'd be MORE annoying as I'd have to bend down farther to turn on), not to mention the increased difficulty during the build/upgrade as components are closer together, and the increased heat issue of having power-hungry parts adjacent to each other.
If you're a mobile gamer or living in a dorm room where every inch counts I get it. But for a large percentage of people I just don't see the attractiveness of a smaller form factor. Reply
kenyee - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkIf you're comparing a case on noise/cooling, it'd be really useful to compare it to other cases in this price range like most other sites do.
There was mention that the design copied some of the techniques from Fractal Design's cases, but no comparison on performance. I'd have loved to have seen a comparison with the Fractal Define R3 which I think is a direct competitor with possibly less plastic. Newegg's comments also mentioned a lot of damaged cases during shipping so I'm surprised you didn't talk about the packing since you talked about aesthetics ;-) Reply
kyuu - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkPlease read the article. The reason there are no cases for comparison is stated on the very first page: they revised their testbed and methodology and, therefore, results from previously reviewed cases are not directly comparable. Reply
ExarKun333 - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkThen AT needs to do a 'silent case' or 'performance case' or the like shootout to get some numbers. The new methodology makes great sense, but what is a review with nothing to compare it to? Reply
ggathagan - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkSo you would have them wait until they've tested 3 or 4 cases and *then* put out the results? No thanks.
It's a new test bed and new methodology. They have to start somewhere. Reply
earthrace57 - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkI kind of wish there was a grace period in which you guys would test both testbeds, and after x number of tests, the new testbed tests would be released, that way we have a frame of reference. (I hope this is easy enough to follow). Reply
sfroom - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkI can't believe I'm the first to mention this, but the card pictured (and presumably tested) is not the one listed in the testing methodology or description of the new test bed. What gives?
The card listed in the methodology is an open air cooler whereas the Zotac pictured looks like a blower. This would surely affect the whole data set (CPU temps, etc).
Can you explain? Reply
Dustin Sklavos - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkGood catch.
Photography was done before we swapped out the graphics card, and future cases will be using the ASUS, but the photos are still useful since they're intended to show how assembly goes. The photos have the Zotac, but the testing was actually done with the ASUS; this was the last piece I standardized on, and the reason was that the GTX 560 Ti that Zotac provided was unfortunately just too hot and loud and would've skewed all of our test results. Reply
tilandal - Thursday, March 29, 2012 - linkI bought this case to replace my Lian Li V1000. There is a lot I like about it but I can't help but pine after the build quality of the V1000. The 55D is great to work in and keeps my system running silently without any thermal problems but the plastic does feel cheap and the side panels are a little on the thin side. I bought my Lian Li for $200 and I would gladly pay that much for a case with the same layout but higher quality panels. For $120 after rebate I feel I got good value but I doubt I'll keep it around as long as my V1000 (Almost 9 years). Reply
piroroadkill - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkStill seems a better buy. I actually use ALL the 3.5" drive bays in the Define R3, but only have one HD-DVD/Blu-Ray/DVD writer drive in a 5.25" bay (although I have an SSD mounted in the other 5.25" bay).
Who really needs 5.25" bays anymore? Posers with those screens you used to get for them? Seems like you need one, maybe two, tops. I just think the Define R3 represents a better use of the space.. Reply
Dustin Sklavos - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkI actually use four in my tower.
1. Optical drive.
2. Fan controller.
3. Card reader.
4. Hotswap bay.
I do understand reducing the number in modern enclosure and I'm definitely an unusual instance, but notice how I have a whopping one optical drive yet I'm using four bays. Reply
ShieTar - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkMy fileserver box also uses four 5.25" bays:
1. Optical drive.
2. 1x3.5" toolless hotswap bay
3. 2x2.5" toolless hotswap bay
4. Card reader.
Maybe not quiet typical, but not really a rarity either.
Of course I built it into my old Coolermaster Stacker 800, which does provide me with an overkill of eleven 5.25" bays, and only a single adapter for 3.5" units. With the Card Reader and the 2.5" Hotswap you do have some flexibility to use either sizing, I guess. Reply
Rick83 - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkNo such thing as overkill.
I've got the same original Stacker, and I'm left with one free 5.25 slot (and theoretically a disk I could put there, but ATA cables are too short to connect it, so it floats freely in the case :( )
I bemoan the loss of cases such as the Stacker, because right now, I'd be hard pressed to find a case that comfortably fits 12 hdd's below $250, with decent ventilation or hot-swap. There certainly is a use case for all those 5.25" slots. It's just, that it's not for the average user, who has between one and three 3.5" HDDs, and an optical drive or rarely two.
My current desktop has zero 5.25" bays, (no, I don't mean devices, I mean bays - ODD is SFF slot-in). Optical media is on the way down though, so this should hasten the demise of the three to four bay designs, which I find ugly and boring.
Anyway, it seems that case makers are loath to cater to more exotic needs, and will instead churn out the billionth iteration of a 20 year old design. There are very few makers who come out with avant-garde designs, and usually at extreme price points (that Lian-Li Snail is a brilliantly eccentric looking thing, but the price is out there), so the main stream is stuck with those 60-120 dollar cases, that all look the same, except some have got chintzy plastics and lighting.
Oh well, I haven't given up quite yet, and at least Lian Li is continuing to explore the cube, with it's more pleasing aspect ratios. All the while: Someone bring back the old school Stacker - style cases. That case is, for me, still the ultimate in understated performance and utility, excepting the odd choice of 80mm fans in some places. It's got the size and fittings so that you can do anything with it, and the price wasn't even that extreme (compared to some current 300$+ cases...) Reply
Grandpa - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkThank you for acknowledging noise as an issue. So many times the important thing is how much overclock with complete disregard for noise. To me, I don't care how fast a machine is if I can't enjoy the experience. So noise is always a top consideration. I wish there was a standard method of measuring the noise so it could be used in every review, for every part, and every build. Reply
cactusdog - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkA silent computer has more to do with the components you buy like CPU cooler and GPU cooler. The case just needs 120mm fans running at 1000-1200 RPM or under to be silent, but more important is your GPU fan, CPU fan and PSU fan.
My case is silent even with the side off, and I have an overclocked 930 CPU and overclocked 6970.
ExarKun333 - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkThis is very true. Also, buying a quality fan can make a HUGE difference on not just airflow but noise as well. All 80mm fans are not created equal, same with 120mm, and so forth. Reply
Folterknecht - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkAn other point is available space. Ok - if you just build that machine, use it and never touch it again fine, there small cases are ok maybe . But every time I tinker with my builds (midi/big towers) I m happy with my choices because my hands can reach the desired parts without problems. As a bonus you have better thermals with bigger cases, resulting in less noise if you choose the correct case and invest some thoughts into the right components and fans (their placement and direction of airflow). Reply
Rick83 - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkI'm not completely bought by the argument of bigger volume = bigger cooling.
Indeed, the bigger volume creates more "dead space", while a smaller case can have more airflow along the surfaces that actually need to be cooled, by more selective "ducting". While this allows for a longer, more gradual ramp-up of temperatures with open-air GPUs, and top-blower CPU-coolers, in the end the final in-case temperature is a direct function of the air passing out of the case (surface are radiation is so small, that I am going to ignore it). Component temperature is a function of cfd along the cooler, cooler surface, and delta-theta of the cooler surface and the air flowing past. I argue that a small case optimizes the first parameter, while the other parameters should be equal, after a burn-in period.
An exception would be a power profile that emits frequent short bursts of thermal energy - in this case a big enclosure has a larger buffer, before the in-case air temperature rises.
The advantage of a bigger volume case is, that you have more area for suction/exhaust with the environment, but you also have less airflow "effectiveness", unless you actually use the space.
Also, few people regularly tinker with their builds. And a well laid out small case may still be superior to a not so well designed large case. Reply
ExarKun333 - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkBigger cases allow for bigger fans which = better cooling at lower noise levels. Reply
DMisner - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkI hate when people, especially reviewers, use a Micro-ATX motherboard in an ATX case. Just a pet peeve Reply
ShieTar - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkI assume this decision was made in order to test both ATX and µATX cases with the same board, and as such it does make sense.
On the other hand I do understand your point too. I did once buils a system into a (admitedly very cheap) case where the cable of the front-USB port was just a tad too short too reach the connectors at the very bottom of the full ATX board. That is a problem that you may not detect when testing with a µATX only.
Not that I expect this kind of problem from a modern Corsair case. Reply
JCheng - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkDustin, thanks for this review. New testing methodology notwithstanding, your case reviews are the best I have ever seen, not only in terms of the depth of your coverage and very good writing, but also case selection that mostly matches the cases that I personally find interesting/appealing.
I am thinking about buying the 550D today or tomorrow (NewEgg's $20 rebate expires tomorrow) for a new build that will have an OC'd 2600K or 3930X, along with a single low-to-midrange passively cooled GPU (I am going to use it as a Linux development workstation). The CPU will frequently be flogged with doing parallel compiles using as many threads as the CPU can handle concurrently. I would like the system to remain extremely quiet under these loads.
My question is whether you think the 550D's "underwhelming" thermal performance would be fixed by the addition of 2 slow 120mm fans, either behind the drive cages (practically empty--I only need 1 SSD for storage) or as intakes on the top panel. Or whether, since I'm not expecting to have the GPU generating much heat, it is even worth worrying about. I would prefer the CPU not reach 80 degrees under any circumstances.
Any thoughts would be appreciated... thanks! Reply
Nje - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkI'm also interested in this - although my plan was to add one or two intake fans on the side because of the conclusions drawn in 'The Big Air Cooling Investigation' at BitTech where they tested fan placements. They did use the R3, but I'm guessing the results would be pretty similar on the 550D. It seems that the most beneficial extra fans are the ones placed to blow air directly onto the motherboard. Reply
JCheng - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkI didn't know about that BitTech article, thanks--really helpful information. I'd only worry whether there's enough clearance to put in a side fan if I go with a big tower cooler like Noctua NH-D14. Reply
Nje - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkThat's a good question, especially since I'm planning to get the Noctua NH-D14.. I'm still waiting for Ivy Bridge and some custom GTX680 cards to get into the stores though. Presumably at least one of the side fans would still have enough clearance? Reply
Nje - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkThe side panel can also fit a 200mm fan, would be interesting to see if it is possible to fit a 200mm fan and a NH-D14.. Reply
stratosrally - Friday, March 30, 2012 - linkI have SLI'd GTX580s and a Corsair H60 with push/pull 120mm fans in my Scout. It is a noise machine - and that is with a custom solid side window - no vents or fans on it. I added a second 140mm intake in the 5.25"bay area under my single ODD so there are 2 front 140mm intakes, 1 top 140mm exhaust, and the 2x120mm push/pull rear =exhaust.
I'd really like to try this case, the only change from as AT tested would be add an additional 120mm bottom fan next to the PSU, and keep my push/pull on the rear exhaust. I'd want to leave the solid side and top panels installed to keep noise at a minimum.
I wonder if I'd see a temp rise? My Scout is just crammed full, it has 1 SSD and 2 HDD and an audio card. Reply
jimmyzaas - Saturday, March 31, 2012 - linkI like everything about this case except for the Front IO/power button position. If you have something plugged in to the USB port, like a usb cable for your cellphone or a usb thumb drive, you won't be able to open the door to access your optical drive or other 5.25" devices without first unplugging your device. This is just stupid IMHO.
Many cases out there got this simple thing right by placing IO and buttons on TOP of the case. Why do you have to be special and put it in some ugly color-mismatched rectangular cutout in front of the case that feeds through a hole in the front door?
Sure you can remove the front door completely but why would you want to go that route? If I wanted something that looks like a Silverstone RV03, I would have bought that. I'm getting this case for the minimalistic look with the door in tact. Reply
Death666Angel - Sunday, April 01, 2012 - linkIt is, as you correctly denote in the graphs, "Degrees Celsius". Which is not "C" but rather "°C". But since you are dealing with deltas here, it would be much simpler to just use "Kelvin", "K", as most people do. :-)
Thanks for making the switch to deltas though! :D Reply
1ceTr0n - Sunday, April 01, 2012 - linkBut you honestly do the worst case reviews with the worst reviewer possibly Reply
helvetio - Monday, April 02, 2012 - linkI just built a new system with this case and I really like it. The door can open to both sides, but the clips that allow this to happen are a bit delicate and I already broke one. Fortunately two spares are included.
Since I keep the PC on the desk, it is important to me that the front ports and buttons are on the front, not on the top.
The PC is very quiet, even to my hypersensitive ears, the loudest part of the build as an evga GTX 460 but the sound proofing further lowers its noise. Reply
Mosab - Tuesday, April 03, 2012 - link1- From what I have seen the GC is Zotac not ASUS GeForce GTX 560 Ti DCII TOP.
2- (GPU thermals are at the 90C) that is toooooo much for the GTX 560 Ti. I have GTX560Ti and I think that 90C is extreme even for over clocked one Reply
cyberguyz - Tuesday, April 03, 2012 - linkThey sink in the motherboard pan appproximately 1/4". If you are using a mATX board like the one in this article, you are fine, but if you have a full size board like an ASUS Maximus IV Extreme Z that has that lovely bank of 'lay down' SATA ports right at the edge of the motherboard, get set to break out a hammer and do some remodelling of that case.
You see that raised area surrounding the motherboard pan area? It is just high enough that it blocks access the bottom-most sata ports on these motherboards. You just can't get a SATA connector into them. In short, unless you want to ding up your case to fit that really expensive full size motherboard with SATA connectors facing to the edge, I would suggest steering away from any of the Corsair Obsidian, Carbide and possibly the Graphite series cases.
As you can guess, this is from bitter experience after buying a Carbide 500R, getting it home and being faced with this conundrum. Reply


text:
Logging in 05/10/2017If you had an account and can't log in as of 5/9/17, this may be because of a change in logins with new forum software. You can log in using your publicly displayed name (not your username) or your email address and the password you used before. If you have problems with this, please ask any of the mods or admins.
Let's Play Geneforge 5
Started by
365 posts in this topic
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new account
Sign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now


text:
1999 Weekend Warrior
M-3205 Classic
|Research another travel trailer/5th wheel
|Truck Deals, Pricing and Values
Floor PlanPrint
RVs for Sale
RV Insurance
Sell your RV
Rent Your 1999 Weekend Warrior
Make thousands of dollars renting your RV to people in your area. See how much you can make
Try before you buy! Search RV rentals here