Half in fun and half in earnest I want to know what "High End" means.

I as recently "told off" (in good humour) for calling Apples laptops high end. Now I see advertisments for high end netbooks.



I take the view that in any given product the top third of machines are high end. The other two thirds being mid range and low end.

Am I right? If not what terminology should I use?

CC

You judge hardware by how many extra letters they add onto the name, paying special attention to the letter "X". Exotic techy words also add to appeal.

For example.

Ultra Tachyeon eXtreMe GTXoXHDXPSPXboXGTGSTXXwing HiggXchrödinger DarkX Antimatter netbook = high end

I'd say the top 25% of units sold would be "higher end". That is the upper quartile of what's being sold today. If you have a box in that bracket, then it's more powerful than the vast majority of computers in use.

To be considered truly "high end" though, you'd need to have something "exotic". I guess that would be <1% of units sold.

If you think of audio or camera equipment, then "high end" stuff is stuff you can't afford.

Agreed!!!

So should I use terms like "higher end" rather than "high end" for stuff you can buy in normal shops?

Wow, thinking your Mac isn't high-end has really upset you hasn't it CC? Honestly, it doesn't matter, it really really doesn't.

I agree with JJ. Exotic, expensive, bleeding edge of technology. That's high-end.

That's the phrase I use, and although it looks similar I think it conveys the meaning well. You might also say "above average" which lets face it, doesn't sound as grand as "high end".

You could also qualify your statement. For example, "It's at the high end for machines available at Amazon".

The performance difference of a truly high-end machine compared to anything PC World stock is absolutely staggering. You're talking 10x to 100x faster, especially the graphics. I'm sure the CPC guys have already given you examples, because of course people who read "Custom PC" tend not to run "stock" machines. It kinda goes without saying.

Not thinking that my ageing Mac isn't high end. Being labelled a troll because I did not groc the gamer usage of the phase did irk a little. As I said above, part in fun and part in earnest I would like to understand how people "in the know" use the phrase.

So is the netbook mentioned above "high end" or did the journalist get it wrong too? It did include an "atom" processor.

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=18148

CC

it's higher end because of the processor

Spec / price is a joke though, $600 is proper notebook territory

I would say £350 max, as the NC10 is in that range

See, they qualified it: "a reasonably high-end netbook". It's towards the high end for a netbook.

It's not "proper" high-end, it's "reasonably" high-end. And it's a netbook, which is generally considered to be a euphemism for "cheap". If you compare that to a Sony "Ultra-compact notebook", then it just doesn't stand up. But then, it's only a fifth the price.

I also baulked slightly when it said it had 1GB not upgradeable. I find it hard to believe, considering my HP netbook costs £160 and has 2GB. I might also add, mine has a higher resolution screen which is very important to me. As Fin pointed out, the Tosh has quite a nice processor for a netbook. In that respect alone, it's much better than mine.

2 things, this is a netbook, not a notebook and second it is way over priced.

I think it is just an overpriced netbook. For me, a netbook should hit the €299 price mark. Anything over that seems to defeat the point of a netbook - small, cheap and cheerful, something you'll throw in your backback without worrying about whether it will get bumped around a bit.

High-end notebook? Look at the new Lenovo 17", dual screen (it has a slide-out secondary screen), a Wacom tablet built into the case (with a holder for the stylus), quad core processor. professional graphics chip and 8GB of RAM. It comes in over the €5K mark.

I would class "high-end" notebook as something with a quad core processor, pro graphics or Crossfire/SLi graphics chips and oodles of RAM (> 4GB).

I would separate high-end (performance) from high-quality (build quality and cases). The Apple's are certainly high-quality, but their specifications put them in the upper mid-range, in terms of specification.

That Armari thing was definitely high end - it had everything. It was ludicrously expensive, had epic hardware and a completely insane case and cooling system.

I must admit I find it amusing watching the press and seeing the difference / lack of difference, between netbook and notebook machines.

There is a large grey buffer zone which many products of both names can be placed into.

Another thing is "high-end" price.

With some high-end kit, the price has little or nothing to do with what you actually get for that money! Look at the Adamo from Dell, they want ridiculous money for the machine, yet, apart from it being relatively compact, it is very underspecified for the price.

Apple fall somewhere in the middle, their kit is pretty much "high-end" price, but the specifications of the hardware is usually bordering on the low- to mid-range. Look at the MacBook, it is a mixture. From its core specification, it is definitely "low-end", although above entry level, so is competing with €500-800 laptops from rivals, but is just shy of €1,200. However, it does have the unibody case, which is much more sturdy than its rivals - that said, I've never had any problems with the rigidity of my "plastic-fantastic" Acer, from 5 years ago.

The same goes for the MacBook Pro 15", the specification isn't anything to write home about, you can get a similarly specced laptop from other manufacturers for around €1000 - €1200, you can also find more expensive "boutique" laptops with the same or lower specifications. Again, the unibody design is its saving grace, it does separate it from the "plastic-fantastic" rivals, but, given that a majority of people don't have any problems with the rigidity of their laptops, an extra €500 for a bit of "laptop viagra" is a little steep for many.

Apple's hardware design (and its prices) are certainly high-end, but in "real terms" (i.e. performance), the cheaper laptops offer the same or better performance for a fraction of the price. The same goes for "boutique" laptops, the average punter is more interested in value for money than "ohh, shiny", therefore they tend to have an even worse reputation than Apple among the tech cognisenti.

And that is why, no offence CC, when Apple products are compared to over priced boutique tat, the arguments are generally laughed at. The people who claim that the Apple products are over priced are even less likely to look at / buy the boutique c**p than they are a MacBook.

I am getting there but have still not quite "got it"

There seems to be agreement that the words "high end" should never be applied to a netbook, no matter what the spec. This being because by definition a net book is a cheap computer.

So going into PC World and asking for a high end netbook the sales chap should say "well if you really want high end you need to buy a…"


And this is where I need more guidance. If the journalist got it wrong with the high end netbook article. Has this one got it right with a high end notebook?

http://www.dealgiant.co.uk/archive/sams ... ook-specs/

It has a Intel 2.26 GHz Core 2 Duo CPU

Or there are 10 "High end" notebooks tested here.

http://www.zdnet.com.au/reviews/hardwar ... -11,00.htm

CC