Print 81 comment(s) - last by Clauzii.. on Jan 16 at 6:03 AM

Everex decides to take the fight to ASUS

The ASUS Eee PC has had the market to itself for the past few months when it comes to sub-$400 sub-notebooks. The two-pound Eee PC 4G comes with a 7" 800x480 widescreen display, 630Mhz Celeron M processor, 512MB of DDR2 memory, a 4GB solid-sate disk (SSD) running Xandros Linux.

The Eee PC, however, is finally getting some competition in the form of the two-pound Everex CloudBook (formerly known as the NanoBook). The CloudBook also retails for $399 and comes with better specs than ASUS' popular Eee PC.

The CloudBook features a 1.2GHz VIA C7-M ULV processor, 30GB (4200RPM) HDD, 4-in-1 media reader, two USB 2.0 ports, DVI output, a 1.3MP webcam, 4-cell battery (good for 5 hours of battery life) and the gOS V2 "Rocket" operating system. Like the Eee PC, the CloudBook has a 7" 800x480 widescreen display, 802.11g wireless and a 10/100 network port.

"The overwhelming success of our gPC desktop generated countless inquires from customers seeking additional Open Source mobile platforms," remarked Everex General Manager John Lin.  "With the launch of the new CloudBook our vision remains the same:  Provide mainstream users with their favorite applications wrapped in a no-compromise, low-cost, consumer friendly product."

ASUS had better get on the ball with its second generation Eee PC because Everex is definitely upping the ante with comparison to the Eee PC -- especially when it comes to storage space. The Eee PC maxes out at 8GB of storage space and that is with the $499 8G model. The Eee PC might have the advantage of faster response times with its SSD, but it’s really hard to ignore 30GB of storage space in a device of similar dimensions – even if the HDD only spins at a mere 4,200 RPM.

Everex was able to incorporate a 30GB HDD and longer battery life in a form-factor that mirrors the Eee PC (9.06" x 6.73 x 1.16" for the CloudBook vs. 8.9" x 6.3" x 1.3" for the Eee PC) -- even the weight for the two devices is exactly the same.

The first shipments of Everex CloudBooks are already on their way for sale on sales will begin on January 25; however, there is no indication that Wal-Mart brick and mortar stores will carry the CloudBook.

The introduction of the CloudBook marks another missed opportunity for Microsoft to win over an expanding portion of the computer market. If the Everex CloudBook turns out to be as popular as the Eee PC (with Wal-Mart’s backing, that shouldn’t be a problem), Microsoft might find itself in the position of trying to rethink its strategy on inexpensive, lightweight operating systems for ultra-mobile devices.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Even though a bit thick :)
By TomZ on 1/9/2008 8:57:46 PM , Rating: 2
My guess is that the Celeron is going to be faster. Most of the Via processors are generally pretty slow.

RE: Even though a bit thick :)
By overzealot on 1/9/2008 9:07:39 PM , Rating: 2
Strange, my guess was going to be that the VIA was slightly faster - very close in performance IMO.
I'm only using Sandra scores to approximate a comparison, though.

RE: Even though a bit thick :)
By sprockkets on 1/9/2008 9:16:15 PM , Rating: 2
Seeing how I can encode in realtime mpeg4 and mp3 video with my tuner card on a 1.2ghz Celeron based on core arch, and if I try doing the same on a 1.5ghz VIA C7 processor it just manages to encode 3 frames or less a second, I'd say VIA's C7 sucks.

RE: Even though a bit thick :)
By elpresidente2075 on 1/9/2008 9:35:08 PM , Rating: 5
FYI, the Celeron in the EEE (the obvious comparison) is not Core-based. C7 vs Celeron in this instance, the comparison is much closer. I too would like to see a direct comparison for real numbers though.

Of course, your Core-based Celeron would blow both out of the water, but then again it costs 3-10 times as much.

RE: Even though a bit thick :)
By Gravemind123 on 1/9/2008 11:27:44 PM , Rating: 1
Although it isn't Core based, it is still Pentium M based, and Core was based heavily on that design. The Core based processors gain a small amount over the Dothan core Pentium M.

The CPUs will probably end up being close, as VIAs CPUs have poor amount of instructions processed per clock. According to Whetstone benchmarks I had found the Celeron M based on the Dothan core scored nearly twice as high at the same clockspeed as a C7M, same was true of Drystone score. These are the only comparative values I could find for the two differing architectures.

RE: Even though a bit thick :)
By drebo on 1/10/2008 10:38:38 AM , Rating: 2
I guess it's important to note that the C7 in the Cloudbook is clocked at nearly twice what the Celeron in the EeePC is clocked. And battery life doubles.

RE: Even though a bit thick :)
By sprockkets on 1/15/2008 1:30:06 AM , Rating: 2
OK, I'll clarify, it was the first gen D201LGY board, which was core arch (which people say was PM), not core2. You know, how Intel likes to mess around with names.

"It's okay. The scenarios aren't that clear. But it's good looking. [Steve Jobs] does good design, and [the iPad] is absolutely a good example of that." -- Bill Gates on the Apple iPad

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki