Unfortunately, every attempt at this concept has included too many compromises to justify their often surprisingly high prices. I’ve been testing the latest effort at such a device, the Eee PC, from a Taiwan-based laptop maker called Asus. It does better than some of the earlier contenders in certain respects, such as text entry and price. But it still is likely to prove unsatisfying for many road warriors.

Asus doesn’t even call the Eee a computer, referring to it as a “mobile Internet gadget.” Instead of using Microsoft Windows as its operating system, the Eee uses a specially designed version of the open Linux operating system, and comes preloaded with a variety of open-source programs for Web browsing, performing office tasks, playing music and videos, running games and managing photos.

The Eee has a much smaller footprint than even the subnotebook category of laptop, such as the much-publicized MacBook Air unveiled by Apple this week (which I’ll review after I have thoroughly tested it), or subnotebooks from Sony and Lenovo. It weighs a mere two pounds, is just under 9 inches wide and just over 6 inches deep. It is thicker than the new Apple and some other subnotebooks, ranging from 0.79 inches at its thinnest point to 1.26 inches at its thickest. The overall effect is small, but stubby.

The Eee’s price is only a fraction of what typical subnotebooks cost — from $300 to $500, depending on configuration. The model I tested, called the Surf, is the base $300 entry. With its pastel blue lid, and tiny size, it looks like something Barbie might use. But it can perform real work, even though it comes with only 512 megabytes of memory and a scant two gigabytes of storage space.

One reason the device costs and weighs so little is that there is no hard disk. Files are stored on memory chips. It is possible to add storage by popping in a flash memory card or by connecting a USB drive to one of the three USB ports.

Unlike some computers in its category, the Eee isn’t a tablet. It takes the clamshell form of a traditional laptop and, when opened, reveals a full, if very cramped, keyboard. By including a real keyboard and charging so little, Asus has overcome two of the problems that plagued Samsung’s Q1 ultramobile computer awhile back.

Asus Eee PC

The user interface on the Eee is simple and clear. It consists of tabs labeled Internet, Work, Learn, Play, Settings and Favorites. Each tab contains large, colorful icons. For instance, the Work tab includes icons for Documents, Spreadsheets and Presentations. These tabs lead to various modules of the free OpenOffice suite, a competitor to Microsoft Office.

The Internet tab has various icons, such as Web Mail, Web and Wikipedia, that open the Firefox Web browser. You get to this tabbed screen by just pressing a Home button.

In my tests of the Eee, I was able to use all manner of Web sites, send and receive Web-based email, compose and open Microsoft Word documents from other computers, play music, and view photos.

So, with a low price, a small size, a real keyboard, and a clean user interface, what’s not to like about the Eee?

Well, for starters, its tiny 7-inch display is just too stingy for serious work. You can make up for a small screen size with high resolution, but the 800 by 480 resolution on the Eee — which can’t be changed — is so wimpy that very few lines of text can be seen at any one time. This means you’ll have to do so much scrolling, it’s likely to drive you crazy.

Also, the lack of a hard disk, and the relative paucity of truly simple Linux software, means that most nontechie users will be stuck with the included programs, which can’t be removed and which don’t include a calendar or contacts program, or even an email program. You can only use Web-based email.

And just below the Eee’s simplified user interface lurks the complicated terminology and software design characteristic of Linux. Some error messages I saw were indecipherable.

Beyond that, many of the Linux programs included were far cruder and harder to figure out than, say, Microsoft’s Photo Gallery or Apple’s iTunes. The Eee wouldn’t automatically reconnect to a known wireless network, and it wouldn’t recognize my Kodak digital camera.

Some of these problems can be solved if you install Microsoft Windows XP on the Eee. Asus includes instructions on doing so. But you have to supply your own copy of Windows.

The Eee is a valiant effort, but it still has too many compromises to pry most travelers away from their larger laptops.

Email me at mossberg@wsj.com. Find all my columns and videos online, free, at the new All Things Digital Web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.

New languages have been added to the traditional lists and Arabic, in particular, has been in demand recently. I spent the past few weeks tinkering with four free online services, translating various texts from English to Arabic and vice versa to test their speed and accuracy. I tested Google’s Language Tools and services from Applied Language Solutions, WorldLingo Translations and Systran.

Customers who have been waiting for such services to be perfected will find improvements are slow in coming. Overall, I found the Arabic-English translations rife with syntactic and semantic errors — from the merely too-literal to the laughably bad.

For the purposes of my test, I selected different texts: conversation, news stories, and legal and scientific documents. First, I picked an Associated Press story that started with the sentence: “A wintry storm caked the center of the nation with a thick layer of ice Monday…”

I got a variety of imprecise translations into Arabic (which I’m interpreting below).

Applied Language and WorldLingo offered identical translations, which were slightly better than the other two: “A storm covered the center’s storm from the nation with a thick layer snow Monday.”

Systran: “A stormy storm covered the center for the mother with a thick layer snow Monday.”

Language Tools: “The storm grilled bloc in the middle of the nation with a thick layer of snow Monday.”

The translations would have been nearly impossible to understand were I not fluent in both languages. It’s worse in Arabic than it seems above. Arabic has masculine and feminine nouns, verbs and adjectives that have to agree in a sentence; otherwise, the sentence makes a native speaker wince.

Next, I processed some longer news stories. Only Language Tools didn’t set text limits. WorldLingo and Applied Language each had a 150-word limit. Systran didn’t specify a limit, but it rendered only a short part of the text.

Language Tools came out ahead this time. It was the only one to translate the word “Taliban” from Arabic to English contextually correct, as a movement. The other services translated it literally from the Arabic as “two students.”

The services were better at translating everyday phrases, but even these sometimes came out missing a word, or were scrambled.

In this category, I again found translations by Google’s Language Tools closest to the original texts. Still, there is much room for improvement. Google, for example, translated from Arabic to English the simple question, “Do you speak English?” as “Do they speak English?”

Other services got the pronoun right but botched other parts of the sentence. With the exception of Google, all three services, oddly, attempted to write the Arabic word for “English” in the Roman alphabet (aalaanklyzyh) in the middle of an Arabic sentence.

All the services did a terrible job with metaphors and other figurative uses of the language, whether Arabic or English.

The weakest performance by all the services was the translation of legal and scientific texts. Only Language Tools correctly translated the word “noncompliance” in a legal text, for example. Instead of using the proper word in Arabic, the other services transliterated it phonetically into a meaningless word.

All four services have an interface that is easy to use, with a pull-down menu listing several languages. Each has two text boxes, one for the original language and the other for the desired translation. They also translate entire Web sites, but the translation again tended to be awkwardly verbatim.

Google also has a feature that lets you translate search results free. (It also offers users an option to send in a better translation.) The others require you to become a paid subscriber. English and Arabic results appeared side-by-side.

I also liked WorldLingo and Applied Language’s email-translation feature. After clicking the email button, a window with two text boxes pops up. You enter your name and email address, and the recipient’s name and address. When you send the message with WorldLingo, both recipient and sender see the message in both languages. Neither Google nor Systran has this feature.

Systran has a convenient swap button that lets users easily flip the source and target languages. This saves time when going back-and-forth between two languages. The other services have you use pull-down menus. Systran’s interface also allows prompt translation of a text as soon as it’s pasted in a text box, without the need to click a “translate” button.

Free online translation tools help travelers or those curious about languages, but I found them unreliable for important documents. Use with caution.

Write to Sarmad Ali at sarmad.ali@wsj.com Walt Mossberg is on vacation.