What do you reckon the spces for a really classy portable computer should be? Twin micro floppies, 80x25 LCD, 256K of RAM, IBM compatible - go on, admit it, that's what you're thinking, isn't it?

Most of the world's micro industry thinks this too, as you'll see by the number of manufacturers falling over each other to get HP110 clones onto the market. The net result is that, if you're not careful, you'll find yourself salivating over a substantial piece of kit that... well, that keeps falling off your lap, for a start.

The first successful portable computers (aside from the likes of the Osborne and the rest of the luggable crowd) were the Tandy, Olivetti and NEC lap-portables based on the same Kyocera design. These are still fairly widely used, but manufacturers have looked at their perceived limitations and started designing them out.

Which means, if a 40x8 LCD isn't good enough you put on a bigger fold-up screen (so you're sitting tapping away on a bus, then the conductor brushes past and rips your screen off), while if the memory isn't big enough you install more of it, forcing up the price of the basic unit.

The end result is an expensive piece of hardware that has sacrificed a great deal of its portability. And it's decidedly low-tech.

Why low-tech? Because it's trying to be a self-contained unit, likely its desktop rivals, whereas the earlier portables were really remote terminals. These allow you to work on the move, and if they're used in conjunction with desktop or mainframe computers you can still have desktop power when you need it.

But there's one good thing about the new generation of portables. If the manufacturers convince enough mugs they're a good idea then the demand for the earlier portables will drop. The manufacturers will therefore have to drop the price, and then we can all buy one.