Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Hardware

Samsung Unveils Chromebook Plus V2 (betanews.com) 74

Posted by msmash from the new-offerings dept.
Brian Fagioli, writing for BetaNews: Samsung announces its latest such laptop -- the premium, yet affordable, Chromebook Plus (V2). This is a refresh of the first-gen "Plus" model. It can run Android apps and doubles as a convertible tablet, making it very versatile. Best of all, you won't have to wait long to get it -- it will go on sale very soon. "The Samsung Chromebook Plus (V2) puts productivity and entertainment at consumers' fingertips and at the tip of the built-in pen. At 2.91 pounds, its thin design makes it easy to slip into a bag and carry all day -- or use throughout the day with its extended battery life. Flipping its 12.2-inch FHD 1920x1080 resolution screen transforms it from notebook to tablet to sketchbook -- and back -- with two cameras for making it easier to stay connected with friends and sharing with the world. Plus, Chrome OS helps users get more done by providing access to millions of Android apps on Google Play," says Samsung. The Chromebook Plus, powered by Intel Celeron Processor 3965Y and 4GB of RAM, goes on sale later this month at $499.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Samsung Unveils Chromebook Plus V2 More

Samsung Unveils Chromebook Plus V2

Comments Filter:

  • $500 for 4GB and a Celeron? (Score:3)

    by afidel ( 530433 ) on Thursday June 14, 2018 @02:50PM (#56785098)

    Why would you buy this over any of the myriad of cheaper or better equipped options? It doesn't even have a killer screen which I could see paying a premium for from Samsung, 12" 1080p is just meh.

    • Re: $500 for 4GB and a Celeron? (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Please list your myriad

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by darkain ( 749283 )

        My Acer Aspire One for $300 at purchase in 2012 has comparable specs to this machine.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by jon3k ( 691256 )
      My last Chromebook was an Acer Chromebook 14 [amazon.com] that has an all aluminum chassis, 14" IPS (!) display and a nice, huge trackpad, and also had 4GB of RAM and a quad core Celeron. And it cost me $275, it's even a little less expensive now. I've had it for well over a year. I can't imagine why anyone would choose this device. Maybe the tablet functionality? I certainly have no interest in that, personally.

      • Re:$500 for 4GB and a Celeron? (Score:4, Informative)

        by joh ( 27088 ) on Thursday June 14, 2018 @03:17PM (#56785280)

        If you want to run Android apps (which you can now) having a touchscreen and tablet mode certainly makes sense. If you don't need any of that of course you'd need to be crazy to pay for it.

        • Most android apps will work perfectly well with a keyboard/mouse. At lease from a UI standpoint. And technically, I would imagine the mouse/finger emulation is fine.

          Heck, most trackpads support multitouch too!

      • The Acer has Atom, which is pathetic. This Google thing has core arch, which is better.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jon3k ( 691256 )
          No, it's not an Atom, it's a Celeron N3160. If you click on the link I posted you can read the specs. And the Samsung also has a celeron, it's right there in the summary:

          The Chromebook Plus, powered by Intel Celeron Processor 3965Y and 4GB of RAM, goes on sale later this month at $499.

          • N3160 is an atom. [wikipedia.org] Don't get sucked in by the marketspeak.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by jon3k ( 691256 )
              You can call it whatever you want, the literal name of the product is Celeron. I'm really not going to argue with you about it. The point is the Samsung has a Celeron processor as well.

              • You are an idiot. There is a distinct difference between Atom arch and Core arch. Executive summary: Atom has crappy instructions per clock and power/performance.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by jon3k ( 691256 )
                  I never claimed there wasn't a difference between the two. Read the thread again. And the name calling is really unnecessary. The argument you were trying to make was a comparison between Celeron and Atom, which isn't even relevant to the discussion.

                  You claimed the Samsung had a Core-based CPU, it doesn't. It says right in the summary it is a Celeron.

                  • You are confused. Celeron is a marketing term, it does not describe the chip architecture. Some celerons are core arch and some (sucky ones like the one in this thread) are Atoms. Just avoid the latter.

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by jon3k ( 691256 )
                      I'm not confused at all, there's nothing in this reply I disagree with. Your original post claimed the Samsung device had a "Core" based CPU and that the Acer Chromebook 14 had a poor "Atom" CPU. They both have Celeron CPU.

                    • I erred in saying the Acer Chromebook 14 has an Atom-based celeron, in fact it has a Braswell-based N3160, which is Core arch. You erred in claiming that "Celeron" implies not Atom. This is false. There are Silvermont and Goldmont [wikipedia.org] Celerons that are Atoms. So Celeron is a marketing term, not a processor architecture, as I said multiple times. Clear now?

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by jon3k ( 691256 )
                      Whether or not it is a marketing term is not relevant. That's what it is, a Celeron branded CPU, not an Atom branded CPU. You can argue over how different it is from an Atom processor (because it's obviously different) but that doesn't mean they aren't different.

                    • So I got it right the first time, you are an idiot.

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by jon3k ( 691256 )
                      At least previously you were trying to twist this into some other argument that you could try to win, now you're just resorting to name calling. Grow up, admit you were wrong, move on with your life. This is just sad.

                    • I'm not the one regurgitating Intel marketspeak as if it were technical specs. BTW, you come across as a 14 year old, I would suggest not trying to tell others to grow up.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by darkain ( 749283 )

            At this point in time, Celerons and Atoms are pretty much the exact same CPU with different marketing, so the entire argument is moot anyways.

            "High powered Atom processors are now mostly branded as Celerons."
            - https://www.urtech.ca/2015/10/... [urtech.ca]

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by mcl630 ( 1839996 )

              True, but the 3965Y used in the Samsung is built on the Core arch (specifically Kaby Lake), not the Atom arch. The Acer referred to uses the N3160, which is built on the Atom arch (Braswell). The 3965Y outperforms the N3160 handily in most applications despite the 3965Y being only a dual-core while the N3160 is quad-core.

        • The Acer has Atom, which is pathetic. This Google thing has core arch, which is better.

          Some knuckledragger with mod points does not understand what a chip arch is. Mod points should be kept out of the hands of knuckledraggers.

          • The Acer has Atom, which is pathetic. This Google thing has core arch, which is better.

            Some knuckledragger with mod points does not understand what a chip arch is. Mod points should be kept out of the hands of knuckledraggers.

            Another knuckledragger showed up. Like roaches, there's never just one.

        • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:$500 for 4GB and a Celeron? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Thursday June 14, 2018 @03:04PM (#56785208)

      What's sad is that this $500 chromebook has a better display than a $1000 MacBook Air.

  • I love Chromebooks and think that Google really has a nice approach to a thin client that would be excellent in the home as suggested in TFA.

    However, I never see that happening in a big way. Storing data on "The Cloud" is going to be scary for people used to working with hard drives and I think that applications that access large amounts of data for phones, tablets, cameras and video recorders such as iTunes, (Android) Transfer and video editing software will be a sticking point for most users.

    Thinking abo

    • Thinking about it, Linux would be the best for everyone's desktops, Chromebooks would be best for everybody's laptops

      Chromebooks running Linux, except for the pathetically limited amount of flash, designed to frogmarch you into Google's cloud whether you want that or not.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jon3k ( 691256 )
        With Chrome you can use flash drives, your own "cloud" storage (ie Seafile, NextCloud, etc) or NAS. Personally, I need very little local storage on my Chromebook. I recommend using something like a very low profile USB drive [amazon.com]. They aren't extremely high performance, but are plenty fast to stream music or movies, or copy documents back and forth. You can also leave it in the device for the most part because it barely protrudes from the side, and it's curved, so it doesn't catch on edges as easily getting

        • Good suggestion, with caveats. 1) Only two usb ports, is that enough when one is gone for storage? 2) You need a usb-c stick, does anybody make that in low profile?

          Anyway, it has a micro sd slot, so that's ok. Now the issue is, the price is a bit high for only 4GB ram and HD resolution. Not stupidly overpriced, but no great deal either.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by jon3k ( 691256 )
            $500 is definitely more than I'm willing to pay for a Celeron with 4GB of RAM.

    • Storing data on "The Cloud" is going to be scary for people used to working with hard drives...

      Scary and stupid, according to me, unless you have no other option and your data is throwaway. Never mind the rampant privacy risk.

  • I really like my chromebooks - some run ChromeOS (with full Linux via crouton), and some even run Windows 10 - but I buy them for less than 200$, and I see them as kind of disposable, which is great for my use case.

    But what's the point of these expensive ChromeBooks? The super duper expensive Pixel books I can kind of understand - it's just Google showing of how nice things could be.
    But these 500$ ones?

  • The one I especially like about my old Chromebook is that's it's cheap. It cost me about $150 when I bought it, years ago, I could replace it for $75 today.

    I take it with me travelling, it's small and light, the batteries last like ten hours, and if anything happens to it, it's no great loss.

    $500, when I can get a decent windows laptop for $300, seems a bit much.

  • powered by Intel Celeron Processor

    More like "underpowered".

Slashdot Top Deals

Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky

Close