1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

Google unveils Chromebook Pixel, expects you to pay $1,299

By Jos · 45 replies
Feb 21, 2013
Post New Reply
  1. drjekel_mrhyde

    drjekel_mrhyde TS Rookie Posts: 101   +7

    It get up to five hours of battery time
  2. avoidz

    avoidz TS Guru Posts: 460   +55

    Yeah, no need to worry about online storage, safe as houses. Nothing ever went wrong with data stored online :|
  3. Railman

    Railman TS Booster Posts: 708   +101

    I would rather build a hi spec PC with the money. You could get a super CPU and graphics card and have money spare for twin monitors.
  4. amstech

    amstech IT Overlord Posts: 1,710   +869

    An i5 isn't much in a laptop. My i5-2430M (In my XPS L702x) is a great CPU but its nothing more then dual core with HT and turbo boost. 4GB isn't much these days either, I consider it to be the bare minimum.
    It takes some power to fly around on the web now with many sites having advanced media and flash built-in ,and anything less then 900p for a resolution is trash IMO.
  5. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    Yes, 4GB is not much these days for Windows, Linux, and OSX PCs. More advanced OS'-such as Windows-have more capabilities than Chrome OS, and therefore need to cache more processes and use more memory. The reason they bumped the memory from 2GB (from cheaper Chromebooks) to 4GB is probably because of the shared memory with the graphics.
  6. davislane1

    davislane1 Inquisitor Posts: 4,495   +3,495

    According to this article, someone just out appled Apple. Never thought I'd see the day.
  7. ArthurZ

    ArthurZ TS Rookie Posts: 79

    Every piece of data hitting the Cloud is replicated across several different locations making daya loss nearly impossible.
  8. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    Not with the price tag. you can get a 13 inch retina MacBook Pro for $1500 and it has a much more robust system with more capabilities.
  9. davislane1

    davislane1 Inquisitor Posts: 4,495   +3,495

    That was my point...
  10. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 12,515   +2,309

    It should drive full HD Blu-Ray with no problem.

    At least the desktop version will. It's all about home theater, not gaming on a grand scale.
  11. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 12,515   +2,309

    "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing". (Edmund Burke).

    So then,"good men", should buy something else. After all, Google can't expand into a market that that isn't open to them, now can they?
  12. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    I feel like this is the issue with running at high resolutions it does it fine, but as for the 15 inch MacBook Pro, I dont get why apple only offers 1GB of VRAM when it should be 2GB @ those resolutions
  13. The internals of the Samsung series 3 Chromebook are perfectly adequate for running Chrome OS, would have brought the price down massively, as well as running cooler and quieter and allowing a thinner form factor, so why they felt the need to lumber it with an i5 is beyond me. The logic behind the use of the 3:2 aspect ratio for the screen is similarly lost on me.
  14. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    Yeah I hate square screens
  15. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 12,515   +2,309

    Good thinking, but rather backwards. They're not trying to drive the price down, they're trying to drive it up with an i5. I think the children call it, "street cred"!
    The "3:2" aspect ratio is, and has been for decades, the format for the 35mm camera. (1:66:1:00). Hi-Def aspect ratio, (IMHO) is useless below about 23" diag!

    Common photo image ratios are as low as 4:5, (8" X 10"). You simply can't render them at 1:1 with 16:9 monitor smaller than about 22". So, you can't use a stinking hi-def laptop to show granny's 8 x 10 vertical portrait @ 1:1

    If this is in response to our illustrious guest's post, 3:2 isn't square, 2:2 is. (Customarily this is given the LCD(*) treatment. So then "square" = 1:1)

    Why does it need 2GB of Vram? It's not intended as a gaming platform.

    Besides, the "Retina Display" is mostly smoke, mirrors, and bulls***. You can't possibly put enough graphics power in a laptop to drive the display at its native resolution. They're supplying the same information across several pixels. At least @ 2:1, possibly 3:1.

    Think about it. 300 ppi, would be a total resolution of 3000px on a screen of 10 inches. At 15 inches, 300 ppi would 4500px. Now tell me where you're going to find a laptop VGA that will drive at a resolution of 3000 x 4500?

    (*) "LCD", archaic acronym for "lowest common denominator".
  16. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    I am confused... where did ya get 3k by 4.5k? Isnt it a 2560 by 1600 resolution? Also yeah, it isnt for gaming, but if you use a Mac for professional purposes, making a video or image at that resolution will be tough without 2GB of VRAM
  17. ViperSniper2

    ViperSniper2 TS Rookie Posts: 49

    Because it's not for just surfing the web. What do you fools think you are using literally on all other Operating Systems for local file management? Yeah.... basically your Browser Engine! lol.....

    NOW..... let's take this back to the days of Microsoft declaring that Explorer.... and therefore Internet Explorer was part of the system. Only difference is that Google doesn't allow their Chrome Browser to explore internal local system files and that's exactly how Apple designed Mac OS X, but w/o encrypted security of Cloud computing. You can use a CLI terminal in any of these operating systems including within Chrome OS. In fact the Browser GUI (, Finder, Sherlock, Safari Engine/Spotlight) is primarily wrapped up on top of the system. Yet only Google's Chrome OS keeps their Browser (file manager) GUI sandboxed off the system used primarily to manage it's Cloud Storage rather than local storage.

    This phenomenal Pixel laptop is around 10 times more secure than it's local stored competitors, that never bother to encrypt data to local storage drives. Yet.... Google Chrome can encrypt all your data on the fly (SSL) and it's all stored that way on Google Drive. Safe from hackers, or even Google's prying eyes, because only you have the keys!

    Basically the whole reason, Enterprise and Government are so interested in Cloud Computing is users are totally Anonymous and encrypted. So hackers not only have to hack Google (let's say), but they have to hack each and every encrypted Cloud based user and even the NSA has a hard time doing that. Because they don't know who you are until they hack Google first and then hack you. This is the primary reason for Cloud Computing in the first place. Your computing is done locally, but all stored securely in the Cloud among a myriad of other encrypted users..... so YOUR SECURITY IS ACTUALLY ENHANCED and GUARANTEED!

    So there you have it..... somebody could hack your new Chromebook Pixel locally, steal it or break it, etc, but it really doesn't matter. Because all your data is stored remotely totally encrypted on top of that anonymity. You never lose your data and so even if the system crashes, your data is still SAFE! .....and yet you never lose even one single key stroke. Because Chrome OS has it all saved securely in the cloud for your instant retrieval! ....Chrome OS using Chrome as it's GUI is totally irrelevant!!!
  18. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    It is still not worth 1300 bucks out of my pocket. Heck, I feel like this could be a step in the wrong direction but could also help push high resolution in the PC market. Maybe if they lower the price tag next version, make it slimmer and more stylish, maybe give it an i3, and increase its functionality. I would probably pay at most 800 for a chromebook, and that is a bit too much.
  19. captaincranky

    captaincranky TechSpot Addict Posts: 12,515   +2,309

    This is partly due to the fact I steer well clear of Apple's product and Apple's hype.

    To the best of my knowledge Apple is calling their "Retina Display", in the iPhone, a "retina display" because it has the same resolution as the human eye, which ostensibly, (at least according to Apple), is 300dpi.

    If they've decided that that is no longer the case, or if they've chosen to call lower pixel per inch "retina display" as well, I'm not aware of it. Or if they're not calling the Mac Book Pro a "retina display" I'm not aware of that either. Any calculations I put down, were based on the iPhone BS.

    From my point of view 2GB of Vram isn't necessary (? :confused: ), at the anticipated refresh / framing rates, which in the case of this notebook, should be nearly the same. (60 FPS).

    I understand that that high end gaming cards have huge amounts of Vram, but their game framing rates can be in excess of 200FPS. In the case of the stated resolution of the Mac Book Pro, the video is only going to scale standard 1080P to the 2500ppi, not run a game at that actual resolution. When playing a 1080P source, does the Mac Book have black bars on the screen?

    As far as the "retina display" concept goes, I continue to think it's nonsense. The smaller you make a pixel, the smaller it's angle of emission becomes. As that happens, the worse its off angle viewing becomes. I suspect the quickest way to resolve that, it to engineer light leakage between the cells. And doing so, kind of defeats the purpose. (IMO, of course).
  20. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,515   +974

    Interesting, thanks for the explanation.
  21. ikesmasher

    ikesmasher TS Evangelist Posts: 2,863   +1,183

    Its for people that have everything in the clouds.
    C wat I did thar

    And yes I am aware this article is ~10 months old. but TS did just link to it.

Similar Topics

Add New Comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...