Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 49 posts

Re: Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

#31

Post by bsharitt »

amelius wrote: post #29

Sigh, instead of "cloudbooks" we want "standalonebooks". The cloud only makes things slow, unreliable and prone to privacy invasion.

For Chromebooks that's a problem, but if I'm not mistaken, the "cloudbook" moniker is meant for Windows Laptops with Chromebook-like hardware(though the name may cover Chromebooks too, I'm not sure). In those cases, They're perfectly usable standalone, they just have anemic storage and give you A year or two trial to Microsoft, and maybe other, cloud services. But they're not tied to it as much as Chromebooks.

Re: Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

#32

Post by shawnee_ »

amelius wrote: post #29

Sigh, instead of "cloudbooks" we want "standalonebooks". The cloud only makes things slow, unreliable and prone to privacy invasion.

The processor connecting you to a LAN doesn't actually care what "cloud" you decide to connect to. My guess is that the point of this infrastructure option is to optimize for the worker bees, in which case a super-reliable network connectivity (thin client) would be valued for its ability to not slow down from the outside world's "cloud".

Re: Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

#33

Post by scholia »

0x006A wrote: post #25
pjmlp wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OEMs don't pay a $120 fee to Microsoft. I have seen quite a few laptops online where getting Linux pre-installed is actually more expensive than getting Windows. You can get them without OS, but then good luck getting everything to work.

That's because OEMs have to pay Microsoft for all devices sold, not all devices with Windows pre-installed. They get a better per device deal that way, but it also makes sure the version without Windows is not cheaper.

> That's because OEMs have to pay Microsoft for all devices sold

That's not true, and it has never been true.

Two decades or so ago, Microsoft offered a deal like that for DOS, but the US Justice Department stopped it almost immediately.

Re: Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

#34

Post by Narishma »

clarry wrote: post #28
mtgx wrote: post #4

Another platform for which to overcharge customers and OEMs by $70-$120 by using the names "Celeron" and "Pentium", for what is essentially a $30 mobile chip. And they use the name "Lake" in there, too, to make people think it has anything to do with the Skylake and Kaby Lake platforms (which it doesn't from a CPU point of view - Intel stopped using the Core architecture for Celerons with the Haswell version). When I…

Does AMD have integrated graphics to match or outperform Intel's offering?

Yes. Only the most expensive Intel chips with eDRAM outperform AMD's integrated graphics.

Re: Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

#35

Post by scholia »

daveguy wrote: post #9
akc1 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why Linux in particular?

FreeBSD would work too. When talking about low cost computers adding a $120 Microsoft fee kind of defeats the purpose.

The fact that you can buy Windows laptops for $150 to $199 surely ought to make you realize the absurdity of that claim.

Even when Windows was at its marketing peak in the late 1990s, the largest OEMs were only paying $40-$45 for a pre-installed copy of Windows. Some were probably paying less (IBM complained to the US government when Microsoft increased its price from $9 to $27).

The low cost version of Windows XP for netbooks cost $11 to $15, and Windows 8 with Bing went for $0* on systems with 8-inch or smaller screens.

I don't know where you think you got your $120 from, but that number wouldn't have figured even in Ballmer's wildest dreams.

* It cost $10 with a $10 refund for setting Bing as the default search engine.

Re: Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

#36

Post by ccozan »

monk_e_boy wrote: post #27
NicoJuicy wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people don't even know what Pentium or Celeron is.. And the ones who do will propably check online reviews ;)

I don't know anyone who really cares what is inside the computer. They care that office works quicker, they can browse the web and for schools that the computer will run minecraft.

Intel did a really aggressive campain with the "intel inside", just to make sure people will _look_ for what is actually inside their computing device.

So far, it seems it's working.

Re: Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

#37

Post by scholia »

pjmlp wrote: post #18
daveguy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FreeBSD would work too. When talking about low cost computers adding a $120 Microsoft fee kind of defeats the purpose.

OEMs don't pay a $120 fee to Microsoft. I have seen quite a few laptops online where getting Linux pre-installed is actually more expensive than getting Windows. You can get them without OS, but then good luck getting everything to work.

That's because it's more expensive for a Windows OEM to pre-install and ship Linux than it is to install Windows.

You have extra hardware qualification and software testing costs, extra accounting, distribution and advertising costs, and massively higher support costs.

Not only does it cost more to pre-install Linux, you lose all the payments for distributing third-part software (ie installing crapware) in Windows, which in some cases means you can install Windows at a profit. (If a user signs up for the pre-installed anti-virus, the PC manufacturer can make more than the cost of Windows.)

Re: Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

#38

Post by justinlardinois »

monk_e_boy wrote: post #27
NicoJuicy wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people don't even know what Pentium or Celeron is.. And the ones who do will propably check online reviews ;)

I don't know anyone who really cares what is inside the computer. They care that office works quicker, they can browse the web and for schools that the computer will run minecraft.

Minecraft? I'm sure there's plenty of people who play it at school, but I'm not sure that's in the mind of whatever school employee is in charge of purchasing.

Re: Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

#39

Post by voltagex_ »

petecox wrote: post #15
orbitingpluto wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Bay Trail devices only came with a 32-bit UEFI making it impossible* to boot Linux. (*annoyingly obtuse to get it to work).

That was 2 gens ago. Did Cherry Trail have the same limitation?

It's likely 32 bit (http://www.legitreviews.com/intel-compute-stick-stk1aw32sc-r...) but I'd be very happy to be proven wrong.

Re: Intel Unveils New Low-Cost PC Platform

#40

Post by verbify »

orbitingpluto wrote: post #7
akc1 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why Linux in particular?

Because Bay Trail devices only came with a 32-bit UEFI making it impossible* to boot Linux. (*annoyingly obtuse to get it to work).

It is possible to boot into Linux on some baytrail chromebooks, although it seems only through google's custom build of coreboot, good luck trying to compile coreboot yourself for it.

[Source](https://johnlewis.ie/custom-chromebook-firmware/rom-download...)

Post reply on HN