What makes you think that 90% of mainstream consumers wouldn't be willing to pay a $200-400 price premium for a laptop that fits their criteria of good battery life, thin form factor, high quality materials, nice screen?
Their best shot with this strategy is to target countries with lower income levels and emerging markets. It will be very hard to gain traction in US/Canada where most consumers in the Ultrabook segment would rather pay more $ for a nicer laptop that they'll use for 3-4 years than cheap out and get a crappy $400-500 laptop that's "good enough." The whole point of Ultrabooks is to deliver a more premium laptop experience, not a budget laptop experience. Perhaps in 4-5 years most Ultrabooks will cost just $400-500 and has magnesium/carbon fibre bodies, but not today.
As it stands, Trinity's CPU performance is still slow and battery life is behind:
Furthermore, budget laptops don't have SSDs that Ultrabooks have. This will hurt the overall user experience.
More and more people who go to college realize their computer will serve them for 4 years. Professionals wouldn't be caught dead with a cheap looking laptop with a crappy screen. Most of these customers would rather get a decent laptop for $700-1,500 than a cheap crappy laptop for $400-500. The $700 Intel laptop will also entitle them to a FREE Xbox 360 that they can sell, making the Intel laptop just as cheap, despite offering superior CPU performance and battery life.
Free Xbox with a $600 laptop in Canada and $700 laptop in US:
The Trinity A10-4600M GPU is laughable for games as it can't even play Diablo 3 smoothly at 1080P (sure it's better than HD4000 but that doesn't say much). http://www.notebookcheck....-Benchmarked.74918.0.html
The fact of the matter Trinity APU still falls way short of the performance compared to even GT630M:
Soon there will be plenty of Intel laptops for $700-800 with fast i5 CPUs, superior battery life and GT630M/640M Kepler GPUs. Most consumers will go that route, except for countries where income is low and in cases where such laptops are unaffordable.
Also, Ultrabooks currently represent an upper mid-range to high-end segment of the market, where the target consumers are paying for thin form factor, battery life and high quality materials. AMD currently doesn't have a single win in this area from any
Instead this is the type of laptops they are putting their APUs in - $400-500 level:
I think you are confused about what the Ultrabook segment is and what consumers it's meant to target. At this time Ultrabooks are not $400-600 budget laptops with plastic casing. Therefore, Trinity does not directly compete with them. If AMD gets some design wins, and introduces more quality laptops, then they might start competing.
The reason Trinity will succeed is because it will target the budget $400-600 market segment. In terms of performance and battery life the Intel + Kepler combination is far superior in every way imaginable for most consumers, but of course it will cost more $. AMD has found a market segment that Intel doesn't care to occupy since the margins are too low in this space. Basically AMD has chosen to go after a niche segment - budget laptops. It is a smart strategy since Intel is more focused on the mid-range and high-end markets.
To state that Trinity will steal "Intel's Ultrabook" lunch is like stating that Honda Civic will steal BMW M3's lunch. They are competing in entirely different price segments targeting entirely different consumer income levels. When AMD has Ultrathin laptops for $800-1,300 that can compare to Asus X32UVD, HP Spectre, MacBook Air, Samsung Series 9, Lenovo U300, Lenovo X1 Carbon, then you can start making that statement. Until then Trinity is for budget laptop segment.