ASUS Eee PC 901 (EEEPC901-BK002X) Netbook
Out of stock |
Similar in Laptops
- Weight: 2.4 lb.
- Mobile Technology: Wi-Fi Certified
- Operating System: Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition
- Processor: Atom 1.6 GHz
- Laptop Type: Ultraportable Laptop Netbook
- Installed Memory: 1 GB (DDR2 DRAM)
- Overview
-
Reviews
-
Compare Prices
User ReviewRead All Reviews »
595
From the Makers of the Original EeePC...
Pros
SSD drives are relatively quick, Intel Atom CPU, excellent battery life, large touchpad
Cons
Small keyboard, pricey
Recommended it?
No
The Bottom Line:
With Acer's Aspire One looming over Asus, there's good reason why Asus should be shakin' in their boots.
From the company that created the first netbook comes one of the more powerful netbook with 9.8" of real estate. The Asus EeePC 901 packs in the new Intel Atom N270 CPU, which runs at 1.6 GHz. Previously, to get decent performance in a small package and to keep the price point low, Asus used an Intel Celeron 900 MHz CPU that was underclocked to keep temperatures and energy usage low. The Intel Atom was built from the ground up to be very energy efficent while offering decent performance. In practice, the Atom is as fast as a Pentium M at 1.2 GHz, which is a good deal faster than the Celeron CPUs Asus was using.
A lot of people were waiting for an Intel Atom-based netbook. Asus was the first to announce one for their EeePC line. However, when it finally came out, the price was kind of out there. At around $600, it was coming too close to the price of those "cheap" 15.4" laptops. And what is worse is that those cheap laptops pack more power and storage space than the EeePC 901! It killed one of the main selling point of the original netbooks - price.
It almost seems that the Intel Atom CPU was the main culpirt for the drastically higher price. Until, of course, Acer came out with their Aspire One for much less (for as low as $350 with Windows XP).
Still, despite the price, I wanted to give Asus a fair shake, and reviewed their Atom-based netbook and compare it to the Aspire One.
Units Tested
On the Asus side, I have a Pearl White EeePC 901, with an Intel Atom N270 1.6 GHz CPU, 9.8" LCD, 12 GB (total) SSD (4GB OS, 8 GB data), Windows XP Home Edition, 1 GB of RAM, and 6-cell battery.
On the Acer side, I have a Blue Aspire One, with an Intel Atom N270 1.6 GHz CPU, 9.8" LCD, 120 GB HDD, Windows XP Home Edition, 1 GB of RAM, and 6-cell battery.
They both are vicious and vying for the same market. As you can see, they are both very similar in specs. The biggest difference here is the storage configuration, which seem to make a difference in price, noise, and battery life.
Lets get ready to RUMBLE!
Design
The first thing I noticed about the 901 (besides being small) is that the hinges look less elegant than the One. They keyboard is also noticably smaller as well. The touchpad, however, was actually larger than the One, and the mouse buttons are located just below the touchpad like on a traditional laptop.
The overall fit and finish feels less polished than the Aspire One, but it's not that bad. It's not something you'll notice unless you've spent a lot of time with both netbooks. It has less curves than the Aspire One, which makes it seem less refined, but it doesn't shout "I'm 8 years old" either. It's less of an Apple product fighter than Acer's Aspire One.
Unlike the Aspire One, the EeePC 901 only comes in two colors - Ebony Black or Pearl White.
In Use
While in use, the Asus EeePC 901 was pretty quick. I did not notice any major lag. Even the included Microsoft Works suite was responsive (compared to the Office 2007 trial on the Aspire One). I must say that it performed similarly to the Aspire One.
The EeePC is also much more quiet than the Aspire One. Since Asus refuse to give out hard drives in any of their available configurations, all both their Windows XP and Linux variations uses a SSD for their storage. The Linux version comes with 20 GB (4 GB + 16 GB), while the Windows XP Home version (as tested here) comes with a 12 GB version (4 GB + 8 GB). Also, the fan doesn't kick on the whole time like the Aspire One does.
As stated above, it's not really one large solid "drive". It's actually a 4 GB SSD drive along with another physical drive. And it's a wonder why the Linux version gets a larger drive than XP, since XP is a disk hog. The 4 GB drive is where XP resides, and I must say, is much faster than the 8 GB SSD drive included with the Linux version of the Acer Aspire One.
The biggest killer is the keyboard. The keys are smaller than the Acer Aspire One, which makes touch typing more difficult. I find myself fat-fingering keys, even though I have somewhat boney fingers. While I can do around 80 wpm on a standard keyboard and around 75 wpm on the Acer Aspire One, I can only muster around 45 wpm with the Asus EeePC 901. The worst offender is the right Shift key, which the "up" arrow key is in the way. I may hit the "up" arrow key, bringing my cursor up a line, and then when I continued to type, it'd just be a hair-ripping experience.
The screen is comfortable to use, despite being 9.8" in size. It actually seems a bit brighter than the Acer Apsire One. However, I found at the brightest setting, the Aspire One is already too bright for my taste, so I always keep the backlight down anyways. While it's not something that makes or break my decision, it may be for you.
While the keyboard is hard to use, the touchpad is a joy! It is much larger than the One's, and also the buttons are in the right place. Some complain about how hard it is to click the buttons (needs some force), but I didn't run into any troubles. It felt natural enough for me that it didn't hinder my use.
The 1.3 Megapixel web cam can only do 640x480 video, just like the One, but fairs a bit better with color rendering. You do give up a bit of light sensitivty though, as indoor rooms tend to look darker than on the One's camera.
Lastly, the battery life - seems much better than the One. While the 6-cell version I have lasted 6 hours in the begining, I noticed that the One's battery life seem to have settled to just under 5 hours after a month of use. The EeePC seem to last 7.5 hours when I first used it, but after a month or so, I found that it settled down to 6.5 hours. Looks like these batteries do have a ticking timer as far as their total capacity goes. Still, the EeePC 901 seem to out last the One by an hour. This may be due to the SSD rather than including a HDD that Acer uses.
The Upshot
Before I posted this review, the Asus wanted $600 for this machine. However, you can now find them for $499. That doesn't mean that the price gap is gone! Acer also lowered the price of their machines. A comparable Aspire One now goes for $399 (6-cell XP), so Asus is still a good $100 more.
After using the two for quite a while, I wholely recommend the Acer Apsire One over the Asus EeePC 901. The keyboard is better, and so is the price. While you'd think having a SSD drive would be a benefit, the space afforded by going to a HDD is a better trade off. Laptop HDDs are more robust than most people give them credit for.
A lot of people were waiting for an Intel Atom-based netbook. Asus was the first to announce one for their EeePC line. However, when it finally came out, the price was kind of out there. At around $600, it was coming too close to the price of those "cheap" 15.4" laptops. And what is worse is that those cheap laptops pack more power and storage space than the EeePC 901! It killed one of the main selling point of the original netbooks - price.
It almost seems that the Intel Atom CPU was the main culpirt for the drastically higher price. Until, of course, Acer came out with their Aspire One for much less (for as low as $350 with Windows XP).
Still, despite the price, I wanted to give Asus a fair shake, and reviewed their Atom-based netbook and compare it to the Aspire One.
Units Tested
On the Asus side, I have a Pearl White EeePC 901, with an Intel Atom N270 1.6 GHz CPU, 9.8" LCD, 12 GB (total) SSD (4GB OS, 8 GB data), Windows XP Home Edition, 1 GB of RAM, and 6-cell battery.
On the Acer side, I have a Blue Aspire One, with an Intel Atom N270 1.6 GHz CPU, 9.8" LCD, 120 GB HDD, Windows XP Home Edition, 1 GB of RAM, and 6-cell battery.
They both are vicious and vying for the same market. As you can see, they are both very similar in specs. The biggest difference here is the storage configuration, which seem to make a difference in price, noise, and battery life.
Lets get ready to RUMBLE!
Design
The first thing I noticed about the 901 (besides being small) is that the hinges look less elegant than the One. They keyboard is also noticably smaller as well. The touchpad, however, was actually larger than the One, and the mouse buttons are located just below the touchpad like on a traditional laptop.
The overall fit and finish feels less polished than the Aspire One, but it's not that bad. It's not something you'll notice unless you've spent a lot of time with both netbooks. It has less curves than the Aspire One, which makes it seem less refined, but it doesn't shout "I'm 8 years old" either. It's less of an Apple product fighter than Acer's Aspire One.
Unlike the Aspire One, the EeePC 901 only comes in two colors - Ebony Black or Pearl White.
In Use
While in use, the Asus EeePC 901 was pretty quick. I did not notice any major lag. Even the included Microsoft Works suite was responsive (compared to the Office 2007 trial on the Aspire One). I must say that it performed similarly to the Aspire One.
The EeePC is also much more quiet than the Aspire One. Since Asus refuse to give out hard drives in any of their available configurations, all both their Windows XP and Linux variations uses a SSD for their storage. The Linux version comes with 20 GB (4 GB + 16 GB), while the Windows XP Home version (as tested here) comes with a 12 GB version (4 GB + 8 GB). Also, the fan doesn't kick on the whole time like the Aspire One does.
As stated above, it's not really one large solid "drive". It's actually a 4 GB SSD drive along with another physical drive. And it's a wonder why the Linux version gets a larger drive than XP, since XP is a disk hog. The 4 GB drive is where XP resides, and I must say, is much faster than the 8 GB SSD drive included with the Linux version of the Acer Aspire One.
The biggest killer is the keyboard. The keys are smaller than the Acer Aspire One, which makes touch typing more difficult. I find myself fat-fingering keys, even though I have somewhat boney fingers. While I can do around 80 wpm on a standard keyboard and around 75 wpm on the Acer Aspire One, I can only muster around 45 wpm with the Asus EeePC 901. The worst offender is the right Shift key, which the "up" arrow key is in the way. I may hit the "up" arrow key, bringing my cursor up a line, and then when I continued to type, it'd just be a hair-ripping experience.
The screen is comfortable to use, despite being 9.8" in size. It actually seems a bit brighter than the Acer Apsire One. However, I found at the brightest setting, the Aspire One is already too bright for my taste, so I always keep the backlight down anyways. While it's not something that makes or break my decision, it may be for you.
While the keyboard is hard to use, the touchpad is a joy! It is much larger than the One's, and also the buttons are in the right place. Some complain about how hard it is to click the buttons (needs some force), but I didn't run into any troubles. It felt natural enough for me that it didn't hinder my use.
The 1.3 Megapixel web cam can only do 640x480 video, just like the One, but fairs a bit better with color rendering. You do give up a bit of light sensitivty though, as indoor rooms tend to look darker than on the One's camera.
Lastly, the battery life - seems much better than the One. While the 6-cell version I have lasted 6 hours in the begining, I noticed that the One's battery life seem to have settled to just under 5 hours after a month of use. The EeePC seem to last 7.5 hours when I first used it, but after a month or so, I found that it settled down to 6.5 hours. Looks like these batteries do have a ticking timer as far as their total capacity goes. Still, the EeePC 901 seem to out last the One by an hour. This may be due to the SSD rather than including a HDD that Acer uses.
The Upshot
Before I posted this review, the Asus wanted $600 for this machine. However, you can now find them for $499. That doesn't mean that the price gap is gone! Acer also lowered the price of their machines. A comparable Aspire One now goes for $399 (6-cell XP), so Asus is still a good $100 more.
After using the two for quite a while, I wholely recommend the Acer Apsire One over the Asus EeePC 901. The keyboard is better, and so is the price. While you'd think having a SSD drive would be a benefit, the space afforded by going to a HDD is a better trade off. Laptop HDDs are more robust than most people give them credit for.
