Ego's purse-like fashion laptops

egolifestyle.jpgThe Ego Lifestyle is a luxury laptop designed to simulate the look of a hand bag when closed. It certainly looks swank: the handmade leather skins are easily swapped from alligator to leopard print according to your ensemble, for example. And even the specs are pretty nice: there's a real machine here. The price, however, is jaw dropping: over $4,000 for the basic model. But let's face it... when the official website constantly bombards you with glamor shots of millionaire fashionistas carrying their purse-like luxury laptops while Indian bellhops struggle behind them to lug 200 pounds of luggage up to the penthouse suite, you know they're marketing exclusively to twats.

Ego Lifestyle Notebooks [Official Site]


Discussion

Take a look at this

Do people really want to buy a product called Ego? Isn't that like buying a sports car called Small Penis?

Take a look at this
#2 posted by Anonymous , May 22, 2008 4:12 PM

4000 is cheap considering there are handbags that cost as much without any computing power.
however, if their target market exist -> rich + cares about fashion + carries a laptop

Take a look at this

Can I say that I find the use of "twats" mildly upsetting, when "twits" would have suited just as well, without the sexual baggage associated with "twat"?

("Bruce Arthurs: Pedant or Prude? Cast Your Votes Now!")

Take a look at this
#4 posted by Takuan , May 23, 2008 7:02 AM

agreed, Pedant.

Take a look at this
#5 posted by univac Author Profile Page, May 23, 2008 10:55 AM

Hey, finally there is a market for the old "toilet seat"/"handbag" Apple G3 iBooks. The resemblance is remarkable!
I'll just take a few out of the heap of electronics in my garage, spiff 'em up with a few crystals and leather, and charge $2000. How's that for undercutting!
I'm sure the buyers won't notice the complete lack of any modern useful hardware...they aren't using it so much as a laptop as a fashion accessory.

Take a look at this
#6 posted by cperry , May 24, 2008 8:06 PM

agreed, Bruce. we don't need more misogyny, thanks.

Take a look at this
#7 posted by cha0tic Author Profile Page, May 26, 2008 2:19 PM

I dunno, John Cooper Clarke gives a good definition of the word Twat.

Take a look at this

It's funny, the Brits treat twat like a regular swear word, but in the US it's a much bigger deal, worse than "fuck," here, I think.

Take a look at this
#9 posted by Tenn , May 26, 2008 4:03 PM

It's funny, the Brits treat twat like a regular swear word, but in the US it's a much bigger deal, worse than "fuck," here, I think.

Used to be worse than fuck, but I think (from personal experience which we all know is about as reliable as the Titanic) I think it's losing its strength in common parlance. I called someone a twat-toupee once within hearing of an administrator and received only a verbal warning. Fuck gets you a suspension, though.

Take a look at this

Nothing wrong with the word "twat",fine anglo-saxon term that it is .People need to be a bit less cuntish about language....

Post a comment

Anonymous