PC Mag review: old Q1, 2.5/5, new Q1 Ultra, 2.5/5


Q1ultra_press4Well if you just look at the overall rating that Cisco Chang gave the Q1 back in May and the Q1 Ultra today, you’d come away with the message that these two devices are still about the same bang for buck. Of course, it’s all in the details since we know that these two machines are very different in terms of screen resolution, input options and processor architecture.

Much as I respect Cisco’s work, I simply don’t understand one of his negatives for the Q1 Ultra: he says it needs higher resolution. That tells me the Cisco doesn’t use smaller screened devices very often or very regularly. Once you start cramming pixels in a small display you either get icons and text that are unusable or you need to bump up font and icon sizes which reduces the advantage of more screen space. The stated reason for res of 1024 x 768 as a testing option? To run Adobe Photoshop CS2, which is an outstanding photo editor to be sure but has viable peers in that product space; i.e.; you can edit photos just fine in 1024 x 600 (or less). Regardless, there’s some usable observations on the A110 processor and the pointing stick & mouse buttons to go along with this questionable one that still treats UMPCs like a specification-challenged notebook or desktop replacement.

Oh and PC Mag, I’d love to hear back from you on the e-mail I sent some weeks back: not to try and usurp Cisco’s deserved role in notebook reviews, but if you’re looking for UMPC coverage from an actual, everyday UMPC user, just reply back or ping me.


Jeff Lewis

“The 1,024-by-600 resolution is the same as the earlier Q1’s—not high enough to run certain applications, as you’ll see later in this review.”

Actually, he got a basic fact wrong – claiming that the Q1U has the same resolution as the previous Q1s (nitpick – Q1’s is incorrect – that’s a possessive, not a plural). In fact, the Q1P has 800×480 while the Q1U is 1024×600. He also has the length wrong and gets the price wrong.

“The Q1 Ultra’s touch screen functions are enabled by Windows Vista.”

Well, no. It’s enabled by virtue of being a touchscreen. I think me means the ‘tablet PC’ functions are enabled by Windows Vista – but I’m not sure why he puts it this way. I suppose he wants to distinguish it from devices which require some thirdparty add on. He also missed that at least one model of the Q1U runs XP Tablet Edition.

System memory is ‘officially’ maxed out at 1GB. Lots of people are sticking 2GB SO-DIMMs into them.

I found this to be a very unsatisfying review to be honest – riddled with errors and subjective opinions.


Go over to gottabemobile.com and go to the forum on Samsung and the thread on tweaks for the Q1U. Everything is pretty simple to do and it would have to be because I fall into the “casual geek” category and I am not into major changes. I think if I remember all it involved for me to get mine running well was asking Vista to adjust for performance, adding back in any eye candy you find invaluable, choosing vista basic theme, turning off indexing, and not using the side bar. Let me know if you have any questions–probably through the forum over there as we don’t want to “abuse” this great site.



Sure would appreciate a little more info. on how to get my
Q1U w/Vista running as well as my Q1P w/Win XP (both w/1meg ram). I find that my Q1U is unusable – I just grab the Q1P. Many thanks. The Q1U is my only experience with Vista.


With tweaks that are simple to do but do involve giving up sidebar and Aero and indexing, my Q1U runs pretty smoothly, not TIP lags, programs open as fast as my Fuji 5020 XP machine with 1 GB RAM. Scaled down a bit but still with the great tablet features, Vista does well on my Q1U.

I am amazed the writing experience is so smooth on this but I digress.

I certainly would not want higher resolution but find this native on this one to be just fine, and allow adequate screen space for most everything.

Michael Venini

I posted this when somebody suggested we could have a higher resolution on the Q1U

NO!! Booo…Hiss….

Give my eyes a rest!

On a serious note. I have seen a P1610 which is a 8.9 inch screen with 1280×800, and it’s was really hard on my eyes. I bumped up font sizes, nothing helped. So 1280×800 on a 7 inch screen would be bad, really bad.

At least for me.


Well, I can semi see his point. It can have a little higher res and still be readable. Let’s face it, there’s only a 100 pixel difference between what it seems he wants and what it has. With that said, I don’t know if I would want to be editing images with Photoshop CS3 onthis device. Also, I personally can’t see why they can’t seem to get the price around what Bill was saying it would be. Even at 500, it seems over priced when you look at machines like the Classmate PC which is soon going to be intro’d at 200 and the Asus Eee PC 701 and 1001 coming in around 200 with similar specs (oh and they have a better keyboard too). $799 is a bit much. Also, Vista is a bit of a stretch on this device. XP should be what they are using. My choice would be Linux and it would be the first thing I try on this since handwriting recognition is a moot point.

Comments are closed.