RSSGigabyte's low-cost Atom-powered portable gets a name
By Tim Conneally | Published April 28, 2008, 3:01 PM
The much anticipated, 8.9-inch, Intel Atom-powered ultra-low-cost PC from motherboard manufacturer Gigabyte, expected to hit the market in June, now has a name: M912.
Unfortunately, that's still all it officially has. As DigiTimes reported this morning, The M912 is reportedly being both designed and manufactured in-house so the company can release it in a timely fashion. If Gigabyte's current UMPC/MID offerings are any indication, the device could take on the "slider" form factor instead of the traditional "clamshell" laptop/notebook design.
Gigabyte vice president Richard Ma said earlier this year that the company's OEMs will remain Arima Computer (Flextronics), Compal Industries, and Quanta Computer.
According to a Digitimes source, the M912 will support either Linux or Windows XP, and potentially support Bluetooth, something many low-cost PCs do not.
In early April, Intel listed some companies which would launch devices powered on its Atom processors this summer, but did not include Taiwanese company Gigabyte even though the company was supporting the low-power architecture when it was only known by the codename "Menlow."
For me, the keyword is "slider". If it is, isn't the screen highly vulnerable?
I'd also like some quantification of "ultra-low-cost", because for example I don't see the Asus eeePC as cheap for what it is.
Still, can't wait to see Atom based PCs released, it can only be good news for batteries :) And from what I've read, its performance is superior to the Via C7.
Score: 0
|"I don't see the Asus eeePC as cheap for what it is"
Then you prob don't know what you are talking about. The cost of miniaturization has always been high and in this context the eee is a great value proposition.
Score: 0
|Miniaturised hardware costs more for identical technical specifications, which is not quite the case. According to your argument, Pocket PCs should cost well over the eeePC, despite lower processing power and memory (albeit small LCDs surely cost less).
Even if you are (were?) correct, you could have done so equally well without your holier-than-thou attitude.
Score: 0
|the most important part of the subject headline is
ultra-low-cost
Score: 0
|lol...
They all have to be ulra something nowadays, that's what sells them apparently, but the cost is alot of the same, $400+...which you can pick up a 14.1 to 17 inch screen laptop with 2-3gb of Ram and 160-200gb hard drive for at Best Buy/Circuit City/CompUSA/Office Depot for on a lucky/sale day.
This seems to be a fad to me.
Score: 0
|Another one who doesn't get it. These machines do NOT compete with 14"+ laptops.
Score: 0
|