The new OQO specs "model 2+"

[Guest]

[ecsk2]

Looks good, might actually consider buying from OQO again.

Ditto

[ecsk2]

 $700 is a bit steep though, I wonder if it's the same 1.8" ZIF PATA interface?

No kidding!?

"The three new models come in 60GB, 120GB, and 240GB flavors, priced at $149, $249, and $499..."

http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/08/sandisk-unveils-new-faster-bigger-laptop-ssds/

[galtoid]

 $700 is a bit steep though, I wonder if it's the same 1.8" ZIF PATA interface?

No kidding!?

"The three new models come in 60GB, 120GB, and 240GB flavors, priced at $149, $249, and $499..."

http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/08/sandisk-unveils-new-faster-bigger-laptop-ssds/

I looked at the Intel chipset schematics and it has a single PATA channel, so it's definately a 1.8 PATA, same as the 02.  The 1.8 form factor puts a large premium on the drive and limits size to a degree.

[trf]

. . .

What I have hated in the last year:
800x480 resolution --> no, you really can't live with only 800x480 in a 1024+ world.  Interpolation sucks.  Unfortunately, the 02+ continues this trend.
. . .

I agree with this, after getting a UX to replace my OQO I have become addicted to the higher resolution screen and am disappointed that I'll end up having to completely pass on the 02+ because of something like that. a 1000x600 or better screen has definitely become a make or break feature for me.

Same here, I will pass just as I did after use of the 01 and its lame resolution. My eye's are still good let me use them.

The higher resolution would actually be harder to read and more difficult on your eyes since the fonts would be smaller.   I think the 800x480 is a good native resolution for the size of the screen.

[Stuart]

Fonts aren't the problem.  Fonts are DPI aware and 10pt is 10pt.  The problem is with apps and web sites that aren't DPI aware and used pixel sized fonts (and other resources).

[ecsk2]

But you could still set YOUR default resolution to alower value, if you so anted to even if the panel's resolution was higher. But now you don't have any real options.

[Stuart]

And it would look nearly as bad as setting the 800x480 display to a higher resolution.

[ecsk2]

And it would look nearly as bad as setting the 800x480 display to a higher resolution.

No why would it, any monitor supports going DOWN in resolution!?

[Bungee]

And it would look nearly as bad as setting the 800x480 display to a higher resolution.

No why would it, any monitor supports going DOWN in resolution!?

I think Stuart's point is that because it's not the native resolution, it might look blur as well when blown up, inspite of the sharper screen. It's kinda like if you set your desktop monitor at 640x480 or watch SD content on a HD TV without up-scaling.

[2disbetter]

LCD based screens do not pan like CRT monitors. Pixel real estate is all actual pixel space. So if a screen's native resolution is 1024 x 600, that is precisly how many pixels are comprised in the screen. Turning your resolution down would then leave you using only 800 x 480 for example of those pixels. Some screens have built in firmware to help pan or stretch these, but this would look pretty crappy unless an aspect ratio was mantained in the varying screen resolutions.

At any rate, I can see why OQO might have decided to keep the screen resolution. But I hope that in future resolutions they will give us a higher res screen. R&D, sourcing, etc. be damned.

[ecsk2]

Ok I'm not claiming to be any resolution expert by any means, I just know that back in the 01 times I was glad that it was (unlike some others in its class) able to run some sw I used that then required 1280x1024 (now it runs on "any" resolution).

My last live post from my plane seat on my way to CES

[kyone]

People have to stop confusing graphic resolution and pixel resolution.

No matter what the resolution, 800x480 or 1900 x 1200, most would agree that the text they are reading now is a good size.  "If you increase the resolution you would still want the text to be this size".  The only difference is density of the image. 

If your menus are too big and off the bottom of the screen then its poor application programming.  To fit the same amount of text on a screen this size the only way to do it is either reduce the size of the text or increase the resolution (this is doing the same thing).  For some this is a good option but as I stated earlier most would agree that this text size you are reading now is good for most.

It was talked about for Vista having a graphical zoom that would change the resolution of the entire desktop on a scaling algorithm (like with fonts, ie not by pixel as with the current OQO zoom but with maths scaling of the image like font size) but it was not implemented.. Maybe Windows 7 will have this feature.

FYI the pixel density of the OQO screen is double that of a 24" at 1900 x 1200.   For people that say the resolution is too low are actually saying the screen is too small.  No one wants a bigger screen ! (well 1/2 inch more would be nice)

[qryptiq]

i wonder if i can install the SSD myself?

BTW, could anyone explain to me what HSPA is and how to use it?

I'm in NY.

[Dave P]

i wonder if i can install the SSD myself?

BTW, could anyone explain to me what HSPA is and how to use it?

I'm in NY.

High Speed Packet Access (HSPA) is a collection of mobile telephony protocols. The most common is High-Speed Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) which is available in the US through AT&T.

As far as the SSD, the fact that it's a ZIF (Zero Insertion Force) drive would imply that you could but the drives offered by most SSD manufacturers are not the same interface so you need to be careful buying one. I don't know that the money saved (if any) will make up for the warranty lost.

[qryptiq]

High Speed Packet Access (HSPA) is a collection of mobile telephony protocols. The most common is High-Speed Downlink Packet Access (HSDPA) which is available in the US through AT&T.

Thanks Dave,

With regards to HSDPA - do i need a cell phone for this? If so, it defeats my purpose of not having to get a phone. If not, how what do you know about AT&T's service and rates?

As far as the SSD, the fact that it's a ZIF (Zero Insertion Force) drive would imply that you could but the drives offered by most SSD manufacturers are not the same interface so you need to be careful buying one. I don't know that the money saved (if any) will make up for the warranty lost.

i agree, not worth the risk...