It looks Windows RT or Surface RT is back - here is link about a surface device supposedly coming on with a newer 845 chips that has around speed of iPhone 6S
An 845... speed of an iPhone 6S? What are you relying on, Geekbench?? Hahah...
Anyway performance will be excellent for ARM-compiled apps but it should run x86 software well enough too based on existing demos. Plus it brings with it the possibility of affordable low-power Windows devices again, after Intel killed off the ULP Atoms.
It gets tiring after a while. Just let it go man and let them say whatever they want. I don't believe even Apple's latest is any better from the current Snapdragon 835, and definitely not the current Exynos (or even last year's).
But sure, whatever. Use all the rigged benchmarks you want.
I'm perfectly content using only windows store apps and the new office optimized for ARM if I can get 15 hours of battery life out of a thin and light device.. I have a 10" windows tablet for meetings, presentations and using on the place, and this will be the perfect upgrade if they ever make a 10".. It's so nice to not have to carry around a power supply or bulky device when going to customer meetings.
This'll probably go the way of Core M. The NovaGo in particular is far too expensive for a light-use-case device that can hardly run x86 at any acceptable speed.
Chromebooks have won in this sector imo. Cheap as hell, fast, good battery life, and the ability to install full Linux distros.
Combine Apple's marketshare + Window's marketshare. Then add 70% more. That's how well Chromebooks do in education, at least in the US (58% marketshare vs 19% and 22% respectively).
Yeah, I'm sure your conjectures on a country of 300+ million people (or globally) are more accurate than the data I linked. I think your problem is your small sample, ;)
What's the point of more data...if we give you data and, instead of finding a methodological flaw or weak analysis, you just claim, "Uh. I don't know anyone who owns a Chromebook. So you can go ahead and throw out that market data. It's...uh...obviously wrong. Anandtech readers are a representative sample...of....uh...low-cost computing. I mean, at least computing. We...uh...yeah. We're really into what schools are buying...uh...they have IT. Actually, you know, I buy computer parts and computers...basically, we're the same population, me and IT departments at school districts. So, uh, please find me data that supports my reality. It is the data that is wrong--not me!"
Just to clarify, if you know an education department sponsoring iPads and MacBooks...you have very little idea of how much funding *most* education departments get. Get out of the headlines and start exploring your country for a moment, eh? Or maybe get out of an Apple ad spot, where they pander to teachers frequently? I've no idea where your logical fault lies, but the data is right in front of you.
You lost all credibility will that last sentence: very few consumers are going to install a new operating system and even fewer will pick Linux (i.e., Hackintoshes).
Who said "can hardly run x86 any acceptable speed"? Completely baseless speculation. See Qualcomm's benchmarks. This is MORE than good enough:
Chromebooks are for people who don't want to run proper Windows. These are an enormous boon for normal consumers: familiarity of full Windows, battery life of tablets. It's actually going to do pretty well.
It's not competing against Chromebooks, in functionality or performance. It's competing against entry-level laptops.
Wow. Your post is less credible than the average Trump tweet.
First off, x86 emulation is very slow, and Geekbench supports this assertion. I could care less about the stupid benches Qualcomm does. However, that said, this platform will run basic x86 applications fine.
The problem I have with these is the price. $600-700 is a ludicrous asking price for an ARM notebook- these are in no way competing with entry-level laptops.
I posited Chromebooks as an example because Microsoft's ARM platform is basically targeting the same subset of consumers- power users who want good battery life and decent performance- in this case, with the added benefit of being able to run some x86 applications. Given that Chromebooks now basically have full Android app support along with the Chrome ecosystem I see no reason why ARM Windows should exist.
If you can't be bothered to learn about what you're hoping to criticize...oh, huh, that sounds like someone's tweets, eh? ;) Don't get left behind, gramps. Catch up now.
>Geekbench supports this assertion
Oh, gosh. I totally missed all the $800-laptop purchasers who were concerned with Geekbench. These are 5W SoCs--what did you expect?
>However, that said, this platform will run basic x86 applications fine.
What...do you think most consumers run? What is the most popular application open on a typical consumer's laptop? And it's more than "fine"; I'd consider it an i5 in day-to-day usage.
>The problem I have with these is the price. $600-700 is a ludicrous asking price for an ARM notebook- these are in no way competing with entry-level laptops.
...for you, a person who reads Anandtech and dares to quote Geekbench about comparing laptops. Come on--you must realize, normal consumers aren't like you. They don't care if the Geekbench is 10 or 20% faster/slower. They care how it feels. They care how long the battery life lasts.
Chromebooks: maybe in a few purchasers mind, sure, they'll switch. But I think more people are drawn to their software simplicity (i.e., no viruses, no system file manager, no managing how many "GBs of files I have") of Chromebooks than their battery life or performance.
>I posited Chromebooks as an example because Microsoft's ARM platform is basically targeting the same subset of consumers- power users who want good battery life and decent performance...Given that Chromebooks now basically have full Android app support along with the Chrome ecosystem I see no reason why ARM Windows should exist.
You're joking.... Chromebooks are targeted at "power users"? I'll laugh for us both. Chromebooks are ultra-cheap laptops for people who don't want to deal with "computers", yet still want the familiarity of a web browser. This is...education, this is not-technology-savy friends and family, this is "I just need to browse the web and I can't really pay more than $300 for that". That is the market of Chromebooks. The battery life is--on average--good to great. The performance is--across the board--"good enough for Chrome".
But I do see a lot of people who have more money to spend, but they don't see a major appreciable difference in battery life between $500 and $1000 laptops. People are always clamoring for more battery life. You get 4 hours or 8 hours. That's not "changing your behavior".
Or people who want a Windows taskbar with Windows file management.
Or people who have a few random x86 programs they're attached to (i.e., specialized device-based software [dashcams, Android devices, etc) or a PDF editor or anything simple that we neglect Chromebooks won't ever be able to run).
Or people who don't want an 11" screen (i.e., see most Chromebooks) and don't want to deal with all the hardware compromises a $300 notebook has (screen? keyboard? trackpad? input? build quality?).
People who have been told their entire lives that they're intelligent are so easy to manipulate. You can flatter them by telling them how much smarter they are than the people you want them to look down on, and you can browbeat them into submission by calling their unorthodox opinions idiotic.
I wonder if they have a plan, other than UWP, to make it easier to port x86 apps to run natively on ARM. There are also apps that aren't CPU bound or spend most of their CPU time in the kernel or MS-provided libraries; it's an open question to me how much is translated, how well it works, and practical performance overall. For sure won't run Crysis.
The claimed 22 hour battery life + LTE connectivity are things my Chromebook Plus doesn't have, and it's priced at $350 (launched at $450). I'm not at all sure this will succeed, but it doesn't sound way off target compared to some other devices.
The programs are recompiled from x86 to ARM on first-run. Then Windows itself has extra DLLs that they've targeted to run ARM-native. In the end, everything....should just work like a normal laptop.
Yup, I don't see the point of the novago when I can get an XPS13 for the same price. 13hrs vs 22 but so what, it lasts a whole work day. Connectivity? Yup I have a cell phone I can tether like everyone else.
Compared to which x86 process - probably Atom CPU in performance and i3/i5/i7 in die board size.
I am typing this on Intel Compute Stick which is about a size of deck of cards - this m3-6530 based and not atom.
I think for such device - they should have totally skip x86 application emulation which is likely to be extremely flakily - 32 bit only with limited application support.
Motherboard sizes have barely shrunk on Intel's now three 14nm platforms. Surely you have seen the inside of an Ultrabook before?...
No thin-and-light, sans the MacBook Air's PCB, has reached that tiny amount of board space. I think the MacBook Air's PCB would seem pretty large even now to the SD835 board.
So it's probably not faster than Atom in windows, but at the same time it seems positioned on "premium" devices. Maybe the rational is if you pay $600 for a crap device instead of $300 you'll convince yourself to not be disappointed?
Realistically this device should be pretty well on .net applications - but x86 should be dog slow - but that is probably what Microsoft wants to do all the time - make everything .net in the long run - but realistically with today's applications that is impossible.
Read a little. Google. Bing. Yahoo. Ya got lots of opportunities. I think it's actually going to do incredibly well in the consumer space; people have been begging for longer battery life for ages and this is a noticeable increase.
The battery life of a Chromebook, but running Windows 10 x86.
Yeah ok you linkout to an image showing it performing dog slow. Installing real apps people use like VLC double the time of the mystery competitor. Count to 10, that's already slow, now double it. No one is going to be happy with that performance, heck no one is happy with Atom.
LMAO. You ignored 95% of what a user spends their time doing (oh, because those benchmarks were quite good for Qualcomm, right?) and concentrated on this arduous, almost hourly task, of having to install programs.
The install tasks like every other week a long ass windows update/rollup/patch? How about a benchmark of a big update like creators update update. One like that will probably take two hours.
...you're grasping at straws. The benches clearly show slower installs and so probably Windows updates, too (but I'm curious if the installs are just because of compiling the ARM-native code from the x86 code).
But...who cares how long a Windows update takes? Run it at night, like Windows automatically schedules.
😂 Mate, lots of people to fact check. How can “Anandtech commenters” be so ill-informed? I’ve never seen such a huge divide between the level of the writers and the level of the commenters. Do you all...understand or even finish reading Anandtech’s longer deep dives? If you all read the SD835 Arch. Review, you’d think you would have wholly understood these by now.
White knight? Please. Microsoft is inane more years than not this past decade. Squandered mindshare and opportunity.
But you all presume nothing has been done for emulation. It’s...almost as if you’ve never read the articles yet. 😂
I don’t think so. How many hardware compromises are there in $250 to $400 systems? Way too many. TN screens. Lousy trackpads. Creaky build quality.
These are viable as long-battery life x86 notebooks that aren’t thick nor unsightly and check most day-to-day tasks. They’re worth the price if you care about “everything else but the internals”—but I wish they had been SD845. Maybe we’ll get some SD845 systems today?
Yea I am not looking forward to these devices at all. It was bad enough back in the day to have all of those non worthy Atom net books every where which were so under powered that it was a pain to use them. Then they decided oh lets make them dual and quad cores and sell them in full sized laptops and desktops. Ok so they had a bit more power but were still pretty much useless for more than internet surfing.
Now they want to take basically a mobile ARM platform and run a full version of Windows 10 on it and have x86 emulation. This will most likely be just as slow and useless as the past attempts to use very lower power chips in a modern & full blown OS like windows. Then if it does not sell well MS will do what it always does and just drop the platform leaving everyone that bought into it high & dry. I work on computers for a living and I do not look forward to subjecting myself to these types of systems when they break down.
Yeah-yeah, I see your cheerleading posts all over this board. Regardless of performance claims and the magic of "chippies", I will remain completely skeptical and sure as heck am not going to take staged demonstrations as indicative of real world performance. Cmon its 2017 and you are still buying that crap?
Even buying Microsofts claims, again, why would you pay mid-market laptop prices for a laptop that is "near native" in its code performance for everything you will run? Entering the market with the value proposition of "yeah its worse than everything its price competitive with thats also already available everywhere, but its just a LITTLE worse!" is a recipe for failure for MS. Again.
Yeah, yeah: it's called being up to date. It's like all of you just heard about this today. "Oh, God, emulation." "Oh, God, Windows RT." "Oh, wow, Atom/Celeron! My panties are already twisted. What a fail."
Get a grip; you'll should have already read the emulation walkthroughs, the Snapdragon 835 architecture and platform review (written on Anandtech), and
Eh, sure: please, don't you dare buy anything until you see benchmarks. Actually, you better never buy one until you've actually used it. I plead you: don't buy them now. Don't buy them until you see reviews. Don't buy them--don't you dare--until you can use one for some time. No cheerleading--but the emulation/Windows RT junk is worthless and outdated. Y'all pick up buzzwords and attack. Take a step back. And hold tight, ;)
Why? Because of battery life, Cygni. Come on, now. You can't be presuming to ignore every claim of "man, I wish it had better battery life" from laptops. Or maybe you like to carry your power cord for your laptop. I don't know.
Again--"near-native"--my dudes, my dudes, my dudes. You are not--and will never be--the target market of these devices. If you're looking for the highest performance in a $800 laptop and will forgo expected ~50% to 75% battery life hit, you are a small part of the market.
It's better than everything its price competitive with in battery life. Full stop. If you think laptops have "good enough performance", but not "good enough battery", then this is for you. But if you're upset or frustrated with laptop performance, don't you dare touch this device. Don't waste your money. Don't waste your time. Don't touch them.
These won't beat an i5 or an i7 in CPU-bound benchmarks. Or GPU-bound benchmarks. Never. Impossible. From a 5W SoC? Get outta here--ridiculous. But, you know what? A lot of people don't care about 1.5s vs 1.0s loading, yet they care a lot more about 10-hours vs 22-hours of battery life.
Yeah, yeah, benchmarks by the people peddling the product! I'll wait as should you too. Read the independent reviews. Come on, seriously, have you used one? Where you there at the event? Or are you just so excited and wishing this to be true that any naysayer on here has committed the ultimate sin of pushing in on your reality distortion field.
I was a huge fan of Windows phone. I loved the idea of one OS to rule them all. MS failed RT, they failed Windows Phone, abandoned it and their userbase. Destroyed Nokia from the inside while they were at it. This seems like another side project that I question whether or not it will take off. I remain skeptical and will wait for independent reviews and benchmarks. At the price they're asking, until I know what kind of performance I can expect along with that battery life, and they can show me how this is better than an android tablet or anything else on the market, Ill remain as skeptical as everyone else.
Seriously , how many times have we heard x86 emulation that just works come out before? Until there is proof this is just a reinvented broken wheel.
Asus and HP launching a 13.3" flip laptop and a 12.3" tablet 2-in-1 just shows the conservative nature of PC manufacturers, where it actually makes less sense since Intel Core CPUs are competitive in this space (in that battery life is okay and performance is good with Intel solutions).
Microsoft is gonna need Surface products to push these guys into other form factors just like they did with the Surface Pro line. Give me a premium 8" tablet with 12+ hr battery life that I can dock and use as a home PC. Intel gave up in this space after Cherry Trail, with 4-6 hr battery life and terrible performance.
I wouldn't touch these devices with a mile-long pole. Use on a machine that can only emulate x86 will be severely limited along with how ever the heck memory address would work. Plus, this is too similar to Windows Mobile with lipstick. I own and use a Windows Phone, so I have one of the better vantage points to rip on these devices.
Battery life could be definitely great. But there will be many limitations, like the Windows RT. A leaked document reveals some of the cons of Windows on ARM. For example, you can't play some games, and create virtual machines. http://www.windowsphonearea.com/windows-10-arm-lim... The price should also be a main factor for a success. If these laptops are way cheaper than traditional ones, Windows 10 on ARM could be a hit.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
59 Comments
Back to Article
Samus - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Why was Microsoft so confused for so long until now?junky77 - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Were busy issuing office licensesHStewart - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
It looks Windows RT or Surface RT is back - here is link about a surface device supposedly coming on with a newer 845 chips that has around speed of iPhone 6Shttps://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/snapdragon...
Alexvrb - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
An 845... speed of an iPhone 6S? What are you relying on, Geekbench?? Hahah...Anyway performance will be excellent for ARM-compiled apps but it should run x86 software well enough too based on existing demos. Plus it brings with it the possibility of affordable low-power Windows devices again, after Intel killed off the ULP Atoms.
lilmoe - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
It gets tiring after a while. Just let it go man and let them say whatever they want. I don't believe even Apple's latest is any better from the current Snapdragon 835, and definitely not the current Exynos (or even last year's).But sure, whatever. Use all the rigged benchmarks you want.
scstraus - Thursday, December 7, 2017 - link
I'm perfectly content using only windows store apps and the new office optimized for ARM if I can get 15 hours of battery life out of a thin and light device.. I have a 10" windows tablet for meetings, presentations and using on the place, and this will be the perfect upgrade if they ever make a 10".. It's so nice to not have to carry around a power supply or bulky device when going to customer meetings.negusp - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
This'll probably go the way of Core M. The NovaGo in particular is far too expensive for a light-use-case device that can hardly run x86 at any acceptable speed.Chromebooks have won in this sector imo. Cheap as hell, fast, good battery life, and the ability to install full Linux distros.
HStewart - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
This computer is less than Core m in performance - likely Pentium or Atom in performance. Chromebook would be good candidate.damianrobertjones - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Chromebooks? Winning a sector? Any proof of that at all?ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Chromebooks do quite well in education--but the closed-garden SOFTWARE is what's the killer here, not necessarily the price or performance.https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/27/as-chromebook-sa...
Combine Apple's marketshare + Window's marketshare. Then add 70% more. That's how well Chromebooks do in education, at least in the US (58% marketshare vs 19% and 22% respectively).
HStewart - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
I think we need better data and this - Apple has pretty much a solid market on Schools - especially with iPad and even MacbooksI have yet to know a real person that actually owns a Chromebook personally.
ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Yeah, I'm sure your conjectures on a country of 300+ million people (or globally) are more accurate than the data I linked. I think your problem is your small sample, ;)What's the point of more data...if we give you data and, instead of finding a methodological flaw or weak analysis, you just claim, "Uh. I don't know anyone who owns a Chromebook. So you can go ahead and throw out that market data. It's...uh...obviously wrong. Anandtech readers are a representative sample...of....uh...low-cost computing. I mean, at least computing. We...uh...yeah. We're really into what schools are buying...uh...they have IT. Actually, you know, I buy computer parts and computers...basically, we're the same population, me and IT departments at school districts. So, uh, please find me data that supports my reality. It is the data that is wrong--not me!"
Just to clarify, if you know an education department sponsoring iPads and MacBooks...you have very little idea of how much funding *most* education departments get. Get out of the headlines and start exploring your country for a moment, eh? Or maybe get out of an Apple ad spot, where they pander to teachers frequently? I've no idea where your logical fault lies, but the data is right in front of you.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/02/technology/appl...
https://www.pcworld.com/article/3194946/computers/...
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/23...
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2017/03/chrome-os-marke...
ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
You lost all credibility will that last sentence: very few consumers are going to install a new operating system and even fewer will pick Linux (i.e., Hackintoshes).Who said "can hardly run x86 any acceptable speed"? Completely baseless speculation. See Qualcomm's benchmarks. This is MORE than good enough:
https://images.idgesg.net/images/article/2017/12/p...
Chromebooks are for people who don't want to run proper Windows. These are an enormous boon for normal consumers: familiarity of full Windows, battery life of tablets. It's actually going to do pretty well.
It's not competing against Chromebooks, in functionality or performance. It's competing against entry-level laptops.
negusp - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Wow. Your post is less credible than the average Trump tweet.First off, x86 emulation is very slow, and Geekbench supports this assertion. I could care less about the stupid benches Qualcomm does. However, that said, this platform will run basic x86 applications fine.
The problem I have with these is the price. $600-700 is a ludicrous asking price for an ARM notebook- these are in no way competing with entry-level laptops.
I posited Chromebooks as an example because Microsoft's ARM platform is basically targeting the same subset of consumers- power users who want good battery life and decent performance- in this case, with the added benefit of being able to run some x86 applications. Given that Chromebooks now basically have full Android app support along with the Chrome ecosystem I see no reason why ARM Windows should exist.
ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
>First off, x86 emulation is very slowNope. Read the docs or watch the videos. Your emulation worrying sounds like you buried your head in the sand after Windows RT: wake up, it's 2017! ;D
https://youtu.be/A_GlGglbu1U?t=1
https://youtu.be/DRBMBkL7SCM?t=378
If you can't be bothered to learn about what you're hoping to criticize...oh, huh, that sounds like someone's tweets, eh? ;) Don't get left behind, gramps. Catch up now.
>Geekbench supports this assertion
Oh, gosh. I totally missed all the $800-laptop purchasers who were concerned with Geekbench. These are 5W SoCs--what did you expect?
>However, that said, this platform will run basic x86 applications fine.
What...do you think most consumers run? What is the most popular application open on a typical consumer's laptop? And it's more than "fine"; I'd consider it an i5 in day-to-day usage.
>The problem I have with these is the price. $600-700 is a ludicrous asking price for an ARM notebook- these are in no way competing with entry-level laptops.
...for you, a person who reads Anandtech and dares to quote Geekbench about comparing laptops. Come on--you must realize, normal consumers aren't like you. They don't care if the Geekbench is 10 or 20% faster/slower. They care how it feels. They care how long the battery life lasts.
Chromebooks: maybe in a few purchasers mind, sure, they'll switch. But I think more people are drawn to their software simplicity (i.e., no viruses, no system file manager, no managing how many "GBs of files I have") of Chromebooks than their battery life or performance.
>I posited Chromebooks as an example because Microsoft's ARM platform is basically targeting the same subset of consumers- power users who want good battery life and decent performance...Given that Chromebooks now basically have full Android app support along with the Chrome ecosystem I see no reason why ARM Windows should exist.
You're joking.... Chromebooks are targeted at "power users"? I'll laugh for us both. Chromebooks are ultra-cheap laptops for people who don't want to deal with "computers", yet still want the familiarity of a web browser. This is...education, this is not-technology-savy friends and family, this is "I just need to browse the web and I can't really pay more than $300 for that". That is the market of Chromebooks. The battery life is--on average--good to great. The performance is--across the board--"good enough for Chrome".
But I do see a lot of people who have more money to spend, but they don't see a major appreciable difference in battery life between $500 and $1000 laptops. People are always clamoring for more battery life. You get 4 hours or 8 hours. That's not "changing your behavior".
Or people who want a Windows taskbar with Windows file management.
Or people who have a few random x86 programs they're attached to (i.e., specialized device-based software [dashcams, Android devices, etc) or a PDF editor or anything simple that we neglect Chromebooks won't ever be able to run).
Or people who don't want an 11" screen (i.e., see most Chromebooks) and don't want to deal with all the hardware compromises a $300 notebook has (screen? keyboard? trackpad? input? build quality?).
mapesdhs - Thursday, December 7, 2017 - link
And PS, Trump tweets are awesome. :)jospoortvliet - Thursday, December 7, 2017 - link
Yeah, they are fun the way somebody with down syndrome is: maybe fun in some ways but you shouldn't laugh as it is sad if anything.Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Thursday, December 7, 2017 - link
People who have been told their entire lives that they're intelligent are so easy to manipulate. You can flatter them by telling them how much smarter they are than the people you want them to look down on, and you can browbeat them into submission by calling their unorthodox opinions idiotic.twotwotwo - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
I wonder if they have a plan, other than UWP, to make it easier to port x86 apps to run natively on ARM. There are also apps that aren't CPU bound or spend most of their CPU time in the kernel or MS-provided libraries; it's an open question to me how much is translated, how well it works, and practical performance overall. For sure won't run Crysis.The claimed 22 hour battery life + LTE connectivity are things my Chromebook Plus doesn't have, and it's priced at $350 (launched at $450). I'm not at all sure this will succeed, but it doesn't sound way off target compared to some other devices.
ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
There's no porting. It's transparent emulation. Microsoft explains better herehttps://youtu.be/DRBMBkL7SCM?t=372
The programs are recompiled from x86 to ARM on first-run. Then Windows itself has extra DLLs that they've targeted to run ARM-native. In the end, everything....should just work like a normal laptop.
ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
EDIT: I said "everything", but IIRC, 64-bit apps will not run.Manch - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Yup, I don't see the point of the novago when I can get an XPS13 for the same price. 13hrs vs 22 but so what, it lasts a whole work day. Connectivity? Yup I have a cell phone I can tether like everyone else.HStewart - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Compared to which x86 process - probably Atom CPU in performance and i3/i5/i7 in die board size.I am typing this on Intel Compute Stick which is about a size of deck of cards - this m3-6530 based and not atom.
I think for such device - they should have totally skip x86 application emulation which is likely to be extremely flakily - 32 bit only with limited application support.
HStewart - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Very deceptive image of board - impossible to tell what x86 platform they are comparing it too.ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Motherboard sizes have barely shrunk on Intel's now three 14nm platforms. Surely you have seen the inside of an Ultrabook before?...No thin-and-light, sans the MacBook Air's PCB, has reached that tiny amount of board space. I think the MacBook Air's PCB would seem pretty large even now to the SD835 board.
ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
"Totally skip x86 application emulation" = you mean Windows RT? No way--never again.>likely to be extremely flakily - 32 bit only with limited application support.
32-bit isn't a huge loss for *software*; they can still run 8GB of RAM. They've priced these laptops accordingly, IMO.
HStewart - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
At $599 and $799 you can buy a real notebookhttps://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/asus-novag...
ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Not one with 22 hours of battery life that runs full x86 programs and doesn't look like a brick from 2005, ;)Gunbuster - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
So it's probably not faster than Atom in windows, but at the same time it seems positioned on "premium" devices. Maybe the rational is if you pay $600 for a crap device instead of $300 you'll convince yourself to not be disappointed?HStewart - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Realistically this device should be pretty well on .net applications - but x86 should be dog slow - but that is probably what Microsoft wants to do all the time - make everything .net in the long run - but realistically with today's applications that is impossible.ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
It's not dog slow on x86. At all. Y'all have not taken the five minutes to research anything before posting:https://images.idgesg.net/images/article/2017/12/p...
Read a little. Google. Bing. Yahoo. Ya got lots of opportunities. I think it's actually going to do incredibly well in the consumer space; people have been begging for longer battery life for ages and this is a noticeable increase.
The battery life of a Chromebook, but running Windows 10 x86.
Gunbuster - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Yeah ok you linkout to an image showing it performing dog slow. Installing real apps people use like VLC double the time of the mystery competitor. Count to 10, that's already slow, now double it. No one is going to be happy with that performance, heck no one is happy with Atom.ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
LMAO. You ignored 95% of what a user spends their time doing (oh, because those benchmarks were quite good for Qualcomm, right?) and concentrated on this arduous, almost hourly task, of having to install programs.Thanks for the chat, kid.
Gunbuster - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
The install tasks like every other week a long ass windows update/rollup/patch? How about a benchmark of a big update like creators update update. One like that will probably take two hours.ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
...you're grasping at straws. The benches clearly show slower installs and so probably Windows updates, too (but I'm curious if the installs are just because of compiling the ARM-native code from the x86 code).But...who cares how long a Windows update takes? Run it at night, like Windows automatically schedules.
Gunbuster - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
grasping? you're the one running from one post to another on the Microsoft white knight pony. Well gold star to you sir defense-a-lot.ikjadoon - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
😂 Mate, lots of people to fact check. How can “Anandtech commenters” be so ill-informed? I’ve never seen such a huge divide between the level of the writers and the level of the commenters. Do you all...understand or even finish reading Anandtech’s longer deep dives? If you all read the SD835 Arch. Review, you’d think you would have wholly understood these by now.White knight? Please. Microsoft is inane more years than not this past decade. Squandered mindshare and opportunity.
But you all presume nothing has been done for emulation. It’s...almost as if you’ve never read the articles yet. 😂
jjj - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Now they got to cut prices in half and they got viable products.ikjadoon - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
I don’t think so. How many hardware compromises are there in $250 to $400 systems? Way too many. TN screens. Lousy trackpads. Creaky build quality.These are viable as long-battery life x86 notebooks that aren’t thick nor unsightly and check most day-to-day tasks. They’re worth the price if you care about “everything else but the internals”—but I wish they had been SD845. Maybe we’ll get some SD845 systems today?
rocky12345 - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Yea I am not looking forward to these devices at all. It was bad enough back in the day to have all of those non worthy Atom net books every where which were so under powered that it was a pain to use them. Then they decided oh lets make them dual and quad cores and sell them in full sized laptops and desktops. Ok so they had a bit more power but were still pretty much useless for more than internet surfing.Now they want to take basically a mobile ARM platform and run a full version of Windows 10 on it and have x86 emulation. This will most likely be just as slow and useless as the past attempts to use very lower power chips in a modern & full blown OS like windows. Then if it does not sell well MS will do what it always does and just drop the platform leaving everyone that bought into it high & dry. I work on computers for a living and I do not look forward to subjecting myself to these types of systems when they break down.
Cygni - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Running x86 through an emulation wrapper layer, through a low performance CPU, for a premium laptop price. Nearly as bad as the Surface RT.I mean I know Microsoft needs to keep Intel honest, and they need to have Windows running on ARM, but this is a dud of a product at the price.
ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Have you seen the benchmarks? Have you used one? Were you there at the event? Did you watch the livestreaming of them running Photoshop?Cygni - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Yeah-yeah, I see your cheerleading posts all over this board. Regardless of performance claims and the magic of "chippies", I will remain completely skeptical and sure as heck am not going to take staged demonstrations as indicative of real world performance. Cmon its 2017 and you are still buying that crap?Even buying Microsofts claims, again, why would you pay mid-market laptop prices for a laptop that is "near native" in its code performance for everything you will run? Entering the market with the value proposition of "yeah its worse than everything its price competitive with thats also already available everywhere, but its just a LITTLE worse!" is a recipe for failure for MS. Again.
ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Yeah, yeah: it's called being up to date. It's like all of you just heard about this today. "Oh, God, emulation." "Oh, God, Windows RT." "Oh, wow, Atom/Celeron! My panties are already twisted. What a fail."Get a grip; you'll should have already read the emulation walkthroughs, the Snapdragon 835 architecture and platform review (written on Anandtech), and
Eh, sure: please, don't you dare buy anything until you see benchmarks. Actually, you better never buy one until you've actually used it. I plead you: don't buy them now. Don't buy them until you see reviews. Don't buy them--don't you dare--until you can use one for some time. No cheerleading--but the emulation/Windows RT junk is worthless and outdated. Y'all pick up buzzwords and attack. Take a step back. And hold tight, ;)
Why? Because of battery life, Cygni. Come on, now. You can't be presuming to ignore every claim of "man, I wish it had better battery life" from laptops. Or maybe you like to carry your power cord for your laptop. I don't know.
Again--"near-native"--my dudes, my dudes, my dudes. You are not--and will never be--the target market of these devices. If you're looking for the highest performance in a $800 laptop and will forgo expected ~50% to 75% battery life hit, you are a small part of the market.
It's better than everything its price competitive with in battery life. Full stop. If you think laptops have "good enough performance", but not "good enough battery", then this is for you. But if you're upset or frustrated with laptop performance, don't you dare touch this device. Don't waste your money. Don't waste your time. Don't touch them.
These won't beat an i5 or an i7 in CPU-bound benchmarks. Or GPU-bound benchmarks. Never. Impossible. From a 5W SoC? Get outta here--ridiculous. But, you know what? A lot of people don't care about 1.5s vs 1.0s loading, yet they care a lot more about 10-hours vs 22-hours of battery life.
ikjadoon - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
*and at least other, independent benchmarks of ARM on Windows besides those offered by Qualcomm & MS over the past 5 years.Manch - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Yeah, yeah, benchmarks by the people peddling the product! I'll wait as should you too. Read the independent reviews. Come on, seriously, have you used one? Where you there at the event? Or are you just so excited and wishing this to be true that any naysayer on here has committed the ultimate sin of pushing in on your reality distortion field.I was a huge fan of Windows phone. I loved the idea of one OS to rule them all. MS failed RT, they failed Windows Phone, abandoned it and their userbase. Destroyed Nokia from the inside while they were at it. This seems like another side project that I question whether or not it will take off. I remain skeptical and will wait for independent reviews and benchmarks. At the price they're asking, until I know what kind of performance I can expect along with that battery life, and they can show me how this is better than an android tablet or anything else on the market, Ill remain as skeptical as everyone else.
Seriously , how many times have we heard x86 emulation that just works come out before? Until there is proof this is just a reinvented broken wheel.
lazybum131 - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Asus and HP launching a 13.3" flip laptop and a 12.3" tablet 2-in-1 just shows the conservative nature of PC manufacturers, where it actually makes less sense since Intel Core CPUs are competitive in this space (in that battery life is okay and performance is good with Intel solutions).Microsoft is gonna need Surface products to push these guys into other form factors just like they did with the Surface Pro line. Give me a premium 8" tablet with 12+ hr battery life that I can dock and use as a home PC. Intel gave up in this space after Cherry Trail, with 4-6 hr battery life and terrible performance.
Hurr Durr - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Maybe now I can have a new phone.leo_sk - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Is it confirmed that they will support and allow installation of win32 apps (outside the store)?Meteor2 - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Yes.Luciano Augusto de Souza - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
I do not really like notebook with keyboard facing down, but I was looking forward to this release.Now is to be able to import to Brazil, another battle rsrsrs.
If someone wants to send and charge a commission, let me know that I am willing to pay.
Luciano Augusto
[email protected]
http://softwarelivre.org/lucianoaugusto/blog
we - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
I wonder how the graphics of the 835 / 845 will compare with Intel HD graphics.mxnerd - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
It will be a flop because it can't run x64 software.Just x86 compatibility is not enough
HardwareDufus - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
So do we see C-Shell here as the native UI?It's 64bit only, correct?
audi100quattro - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
Convergence in the coming months? Yes, more like M&A.MrSpadge - Wednesday, December 6, 2017 - link
It will be intersting what Chuwi can do with this platform and how SD835/845 will compare to their atom devices.HStewart - Friday, December 8, 2017 - link
I believe one of primary purpose of Windows for ARM from Microsoft will be related to new product from Microsoft - called the Surface Phonehttps://wccftech.com/microsoft-surface-phone-snapd...
Sounds like it uses the 845
Comdrpopnfresh - Saturday, December 9, 2017 - link
I wouldn't touch these devices with a mile-long pole. Use on a machine that can only emulate x86 will be severely limited along with how ever the heck memory address would work. Plus, this is too similar to Windows Mobile with lipstick. I own and use a Windows Phone, so I have one of the better vantage points to rip on these devices.michael366 - Tuesday, February 20, 2018 - link
Battery life could be definitely great. But there will be many limitations, like the Windows RT. A leaked document reveals some of the cons of Windows on ARM. For example, you can't play some games, and create virtual machines.http://www.windowsphonearea.com/windows-10-arm-lim...
The price should also be a main factor for a success. If these laptops are way cheaper than traditional ones, Windows 10 on ARM could be a hit.