Asus U33Jc: Much Ado About Bamboo
by Vivek Gowri on July 29, 2010 9:01 AM ESTASUS U33Jc - Conclusion
I will confess upfront - I really like this notebook. To me, the ASUS U33Jc has everything - style, performance, portability, battery life, and value. It’s a sub-$1000 system with a full powered processor, a dedicated graphics card that intelligently switches off to conserve power, and up to 10 hours of battery life if I need it, all in a 3.97lb package that looks like it came from the center console of a Mercedes S-class. Where do I sign up?
Ah yes, but here’s the rub - other than the bamboo trim and the addition of Intel’s WiDi (which is useless without the $99 adapter, sold separately), the U33Jc is fundamentally identical to the slightly thinner and lighter, aluminum-cased U35Jc, which carries a pricetag some $150 lower. That’s a significant savings for what is 95% the same computer under the hood - the only differences other than the bamboo and WiDi are the addition of Bluetooth, the lone USB 3.0 port, and a higher resolution 2.0MP webcam. Bluetooth is about a $20 upgrade, USB3.0 somewhat more, but ultimately you're paying for the bamboo.
Unless you’re absolutely in love with the bamboo aesthetic or with the WiDi concept of a wireless HTPC, you don't have much reason to spring for the U33Jc. Also complicating the decision is the trusty old U30Jc, now updated with WiDi and the same Intel Core i3-370M. Would you be willing to trade 0.8lbs and the wood trim for an integrated DVD drive, aluminum casing, and a savings of $80? Yes, the U33Jc is a very capable and competent portable notebook, but it’s more expensive than it’s closest cousins in ASUS' stable and doesn’t offer significantly more features or functionality beyond the unique aesthetic to demand such a price increase.
What I said about the look is relevant to the rest of the notebook too - it starts and ends with the bamboo. The rest of the notebook isn’t particularly unique, you can get the same stuff for cheaper by going to the next item number and picking the U30 or U35. If you like the look of the bamboo, the subtlety of the graining, the uniqueness of having a wood-finish laptop, the overall elegance, the U33Jc is a nice laptop. If you could care less, the message is obvious - skip the U33Jc and wait for the U35Jc. Based on our experiences with the U30 and U33, it’s bound to be a brilliant little computer.
As I said before, I’m personally a fan of ASUS' Bamboo Collection. The bamboo gives the notebook this graceful and luxurious feel to it that most other computers simply don’t have. Is that worth around $100? That depends on how much you like the look; some will spring for it, but on the whole we'd stick with aluminum. While the distinctive look is definitely nice and feels awesome, paying ~10% more for a wood veneer on a plastic laptop is a tough sell. If you fall truly, deeply, madly, head-over-heels in love with the U33Jc’s bamboo cover, go for it. Otherwise, wait for the U35Jc.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
34 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link
I'd guess Apple probably spends about $50 more on their LCD... $100 tops. RGB LED backlit panels are prohibitively expensive, but for standard LED backlighting at a fixed size of 13.3", you're looking at probably $100 for a base panel and $150 for a quality panel. The problem is, most marketing departments are focused on all of the other stuff: you can loudly proclaim better battery life, a faster processor, USB 3.0, etc. but when was the last time you saw a consumer notebook on sale with a sticker that says, "High contrast, high color LCD with an 800:1 contrast ratio!" The closest I've ever come to seeing that is with RBG LED backlighting... which adds ~$150 to $200.Souka - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link
Too bad on the LCD.I suspect if they had a "+" model which had a better LCD for $100 more they'd sell.
Oh well... my wife's IBM Thinkpad T30 (Pentium 4M cpu) will have to last a bit longer! :)
AnnonymousCoward - Tuesday, August 3, 2010 - link
I agree, Jarred, that it's probably marketing to blame. I hate TN and would always pay for IPS given the choice. Also, 16:9 sucks, as does 768 vertical pixels on a C2D machine.VivekGowri - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link
While that's true, remember back to before Core 2010 released. The MBP13 was as fast as any of the regular Core 2 Duo notebooks and still had the same screen. So while the current MBP is basically Apple getting away with highway robbery (again), it's not like they can only put in a good display because they're fleecing customers. It's always had a good display. Fair point with the 20% more expensive, but see if you can find me a $1200 13" notebook with a decent display. PC makers just figure to save money with the LCDs in all but the highest end notebooks, which is really disappointing.(The base MacBook is a whole different story - Apple's as guilty as anyone for mediocre quality screens there.)
erple2 - Saturday, July 31, 2010 - link
How's the display on the Envy 14 with the 1600x900 display? That's about 1100 for the "Radiance Display"...PlasmaBomb - Saturday, July 31, 2010 - link
It's supposed to be pretty good, and when the E14 first launched it had the radiance display at $999.crydee - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link
But I needed a laptop sooner than that. Disappointing this is it after such a long wait. Even on the JTszoxo - Thursday, July 29, 2010 - link
Arguably the most important part of a notebook is the display, since afterall it is the part you stare at, yet manufacturers consistently try to shove these horrible displays down our throats.Stupid glare-type surface, horrible contrast, bad colour representation, terrible black levels, narrow viewing angles. I really don't understand why people buy those things, and some even seem to like them...
Atleast manufacturers now seem to realise that the mirror-like surfaces on the palm rest, keyboard, and bezel are not necessarily good things, and try to move towards matte/textured surfaces.
AstroGuardian - Friday, July 30, 2010 - link
Why would you say that? When being a PRO only thing you care while using the laptop is visible characters and performance. Why would it be crucial for the display to be high quality? Display is a display. On that kind of computer it's enough for the display to be clear and illuminated. But i agree with the fact that 1366x762 is a lousy resolutionzoxo - Friday, July 30, 2010 - link
When I work on a computer, and look at the screen, I want to see what's on the screen, not my reflection/the window or whatever is behind me. I want to actually be able to distinguish red from orange, black from gray. I think a screen is extremely important when you want to look at it for more than 10 minutes at a time.