<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PixelQi&#8217;s Low Powered Screens to Be Found in Netbooks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.laptopmag.com/pixelqis-low-powered-screens-to-be-found-in-netbooks/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.laptopmag.com/pixelqis-low-powered-screens-to-be-found-in-netbooks</link>
	<description>News and views on today&#039;s hottest laptops, cell phones, and other mobile devices.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:37:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Viveka Weiley</title>
		<link>http://blog.laptopmag.com/pixelqis-low-powered-screens-to-be-found-in-netbooks/comment-page-1#comment-22774</link>
		<dc:creator>Viveka Weiley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 01:43:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.laptopmag.com/?p=12258#comment-22774</guid>
		<description>@Dreamer: I think the delay is because they&#039;re not making the same screens that were made for the XO - this is a new generation of tech beyond that, and they needed some development time. Check their corporate blog now - they&#039;ve started making demo units, and they look pretty amazing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Dreamer: I think the delay is because they&#8217;re not making the same screens that were made for the XO &#8211; this is a new generation of tech beyond that, and they needed some development time. Check their corporate blog now &#8211; they&#8217;ve started making demo units, and they look pretty amazing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dreamer</title>
		<link>http://blog.laptopmag.com/pixelqis-low-powered-screens-to-be-found-in-netbooks/comment-page-1#comment-18312</link>
		<dc:creator>Dreamer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2009 22:33:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.laptopmag.com/?p=12258#comment-18312</guid>
		<description>The only boat being missed is the shipment boat that should have delivered these things a year or so ago.  The XO came out in 2006.  Why PixelQi have you taken so long to get these screens out?  Is it laptop companies&#039; fault for not buying into the tech?

Anyway, they&#039;re not dictating the kind of battery that goes into the laptop -- they&#039;re just making the screens.  Her preference (and mine) is to not put in the larger and heavier battery (which drops to two hours battery life anyway and becomes a paperweight) but to focus on reducing the power-draining components, i.e. screen and processors.  I agree that&#039;s a smarter move, but in the end the laptop companies will bow to the public&#039;s desire to leave computers on all day for no real reason.  Give me a super low power comp I can solar or crank charge, and then I don&#039;t need to worry about a plug nearby regardless of how long my battery lasts.  A 20-hr 6-cell once dead won&#039;t help you when you&#039;re driving around away from the socket, while something that draws far less could easily be recharged on the dashboard.  This may not seem like a big deal in the city where you have plugs and car chargers everywhere, but what happens when you go somewhere without the infrastructure?  Travelling in the countryside?  The outback?  An &quot;underdeveloped country&quot;?  Ahh...I could go on.  Bravo PixelQi, but I still think you&#039;re taking too long.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The only boat being missed is the shipment boat that should have delivered these things a year or so ago.  The XO came out in 2006.  Why PixelQi have you taken so long to get these screens out?  Is it laptop companies&#8217; fault for not buying into the tech?</p>
<p>Anyway, they&#8217;re not dictating the kind of battery that goes into the laptop &#8212; they&#8217;re just making the screens.  Her preference (and mine) is to not put in the larger and heavier battery (which drops to two hours battery life anyway and becomes a paperweight) but to focus on reducing the power-draining components, i.e. screen and processors.  I agree that&#8217;s a smarter move, but in the end the laptop companies will bow to the public&#8217;s desire to leave computers on all day for no real reason.  Give me a super low power comp I can solar or crank charge, and then I don&#8217;t need to worry about a plug nearby regardless of how long my battery lasts.  A 20-hr 6-cell once dead won&#8217;t help you when you&#8217;re driving around away from the socket, while something that draws far less could easily be recharged on the dashboard.  This may not seem like a big deal in the city where you have plugs and car chargers everywhere, but what happens when you go somewhere without the infrastructure?  Travelling in the countryside?  The outback?  An &#8220;underdeveloped country&#8221;?  Ahh&#8230;I could go on.  Bravo PixelQi, but I still think you&#8217;re taking too long.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Netbook Fan</title>
		<link>http://blog.laptopmag.com/pixelqis-low-powered-screens-to-be-found-in-netbooks/comment-page-1#comment-17847</link>
		<dc:creator>Netbook Fan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:24:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.laptopmag.com/?p=12258#comment-17847</guid>
		<description>I think they are missing the boat here.  Better to go with the 6 cell battery and extend battery life beyond 8 hours for all day use vs. keeping netbooks at the under 8 hour level.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think they are missing the boat here.  Better to go with the 6 cell battery and extend battery life beyond 8 hours for all day use vs. keeping netbooks at the under 8 hour level.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

