Just because something
sells out, that doesn't mean that it's up to snuff. Substantiating said claim is the Everex gPC, which recently did an outstanding job of frustrating and disappointing reviewers at
PCMag. Put simply, the gPC was found to be aggravatingly underpowered, and was deemed "one of those PCs you buy as a gift for the holidays and return to the store in January." Additionally, the crew stated that it really functioned best (read: only) as a web-based PC, and while we're sure the operating system will strike people differently depending on their level of computer literacy, these reviewers found a myriad reasons to pile on the hate. Overall, the 1.5 out of 5 rating essentially speaks for itself, but if you're curious to see how a desktop could be slammed
this hard, feel free to hit the read link and take a gander.
posted Dec 26th 2007 5:44PM
So basically what I am told is that I can't use this computer directly out of the box?
I do like the price though I have to admit I know virtually nothing about Linux since I have only used computers that ran windows.
I have read all the comments already made and I am in the process of making since of it all.
Here are a couple questions I have that maybe I am not clear on......
#1. is there a program i can download from the internet that will allow me to run windows programs especcially games? Example I want to be able to play Sim City Societies, somethng that came out reciently.
Oh come on. The PC World editors are basing their rating on things completely different than what the computer was made for. It's not made for your average joe, its made for people who need a cheap PC to go on the internet, email, and do word processing, as in Grandma and Grandma, or young kids. For the things that it is intended, it is a great computer.
This review is like somebody reviewing a car, and giving it a 1/5 because it couldn't fly. Well duh it can't fly, thats not its intended purpose.
I have to agree - I didn't see anything substantial in that "review" to warrant ANY rating, much less a mediocre one.
$200 for a fully functional PC!?
That sounds like a winner to me.
Lesbian grandparents?
Agreed.
Of course, a just-as-capable-if-not-more-so socket A machine could be built for under $50 using parts from eBay and Craigslist (with a little bit of patience)... I actually built a dual-Athlon MP (1800+'s) rig for around $75... It's unfortunate our evil overlords prevent basic computer know-how from seeping into the masses...
They didn't give it a low rating because it was a car that couldn't *fly.* Cars don't fly. They gave it a low rating because it was a small, cramped, noisy, ugly, unreliable, underpowered car that would only hit 55 miles per hour while being driven off a cliff.
It's the Yugo of the PC world.
Lord only knows why Google let their name get plastered all over this product, with its "Google conceptual OS." (Is that like a beta?) Perhaps the future is like Terry Gilliam's "Brazil?"
I guess it can be said a Yugo beats not having a car at all, but it seems like there might be better choices out there (e.g. factory refurbished PC, ASUS Eee). Consumer Reports told people that a nice used car was better than a new Yugo; perhaps the same advice applies here.
I agree...
That reviewer is a plodding tosser if you ask me.
"Cons; blah blah, meh meh, does not run programs intended for Windows or OSX, yak yak, ..."
'Does not run programs intended for OSX or Windows'... what the hell is up with that???? What did mister Santo-rocket scientist-Domingo expect?? The machine runs bloody Linux. That's a DIFFERENT OS, it is not supposed to run .exe files nor whatever those macheads call their executables. Solaris, Unix, Amiga and all the rest are probably also bad OS-es since the don't run win32!!!
Ah and oh, it doesn't run WSÜberXGA... what a surprise. Was he expecting to play Crysis at high rez on the damn thing? Supermarkets are full with run of the mill notebooks that only sport 1280 by 800.
What a fairy.
They don't get their money from Microsoft if they say a Linux PC is good. What they do is tell you it's terrible because you can't go buy software for it and you can't run windows applications. That's it, that is the whole reason he lambasted it, other than being pissed off that flash wasn't included by default in the browser. Which BTW is like a 2 minute add to firefox extension.
Here's his list of negatives:
-Doesn't run windows or mac applications
-Has google apps but isn't sponsored by google.
-Applications don't pop up an hourglass while starting.
-Doesn't run Vista
-Flash isn't installed by default
-Search box opens in webrunner instead of firefox
-Energy efficient (he says 60% more efficient), but not certified energy efficient
-The default resolution doesn't match the monitor he had which doesn't come with the computer
-Linux is too scary
All in all I would say it's probably the worst review I've ever read, short of the reviews by "Chad" on somethingawful.com.
@karim
I can't really see the Asus ePc as being much of a substitute for this, considering it's twice the price. Yes, it's a cool device, and great for what it's built for, but you could get two of the Everex machines for the price of one ePC.
One thing I found odd about the review is the reviewer kept harping that the machine was slow and that you would be better buying a machine with more RAM - which seems like a silly complaint, given how easy and cheap it is to add RAM to a PC.
At one point, ClubIT was selling just the motherboard (with the VIA processor included) for this machine for around $60 - I've been debating buying it and building a machine to fool around with, since I have the rest of the parts I need.
I can't say i've tried the hardware, but after attempting to use their horrible "gOS," I came away surprised that they could make ubuntu that bad. I'm not a linux man myself, only using eLive or the gParted Livecd occasionally, but I couldn't believe google agreed to put their name all over this piece of crap which is infinitely worse than it's somewhat-better-than-windows parent.
Did you not even read the review? The computer is hideously user unfriendly. Try reading it again and you'll see that the lesbian elderly will have a huge problem using this, just like everyone else would.
I DISAGREE WITH YOU.
If you are going to market this "thing" as a PC, then it better at least do the things you'd expect a PC to do. #1 it should be able to actually WORK out of the box and #2 it shouldn't require advanced browser knowledge to reset resolutions and make clicked on icons actually load.
By your logic, I should be able to sell you a computer the size of a file cabinet from the 1960's for $200, and there should be no dissapointment with it.
i'd take it one step further and claim they didn't even try to test it. I have one of these (sans case) in my car for my audio fix. It even powers my Nav System. Neither of these functions bog the other down. The computer works fine for very basic needs.
I've never really played with it, but i'm sure it could probably handle a DVD without much trouble. Obviously it's not going to play Crysis, but who cares? It's $200.... name a PC that costs $200 that can.
PC Mag just benched this against some fancy pants rig (Mac Pro ;)) and deemed it poo... they would probably do the same with the EEE and OLPC.... so really who cares?
My car can fly...I know what you mean though, its like anything that isn't Dell is garbage.
wait... Dell isn't garbage?
"You got a fast car, is it fast enough so we can fly away?" -- Tracy Chapman
Actually no it's not. Maybe their Computers aren't top-notch but they are definitely getting better. They make excellent monitors and their Axim PDAs were one of the most powerful of their time.
wakka: I hate dell as much as the next geek, but have you ever actually done OEM PC shopping for someone else? I mean, best computer I've ever owned was a Gateway...about 12 years ago, thing's still running. Motheboard died once, it was about 2 years since the warranty expired, and they still replaced it for free. But in terms of price, nothing beats a dell. I do recommend the extended warranty though. Only thing I'll recommend that on, but they do use cheap parts, and our hard drive died once _two days_ after the warranty expired and they wouldn't do anything. Other than that though, it's been pretty nice. Nice to work with inside too. HP/Compaqs I know are always built REALLY weird.
FACT 1: Dells are garbage, my friend payed 2000$ for a garbage pc which was louder than my xbox 360 (now THAT is an insult), and just yesterday I got a msg from him saying that the psu needs replaced (it died)
FACT 2: Compaqs are easy to exchange parts they arent weird I've had a compaq presario for years and its just now all spiraling out of control (Everythings failing, harddrives, mobo, psu, usb ports :( )
FACT 3: Dont buy branded computers.
FACT 4: http://newegg.com/
VIA CPU + integrated graphics = Low performance.
You can't expect a desktop which cost the same as an iPod Nano to satisfy a power user. You get what you pay for.
What I do think would have made the computer more attractive would be if it had come in a much smaller casing, like mini ITX. It's too big for the performance it offer and I doubt that anyone buying it cares about upgrading.
The board is mini-ITX. They made it this big because larger computers sell better. http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/31/everexs-199-green-pc-attention-ignorant-wal-mart-shoppers/
Still a very small form factor like the Apple TV would have made it a killer computer to give a way as a gift. Small and cute which you can have in the kitchen, under the TV, in the bedroom or use like a small client anywhere in the home.
Something like this:
http://www.komplett.se/img/p/400/315065.jpg
I do think they should have made the case as small as possible - at $200 I might just have bought one...or two!
The motherboard isn't miniITX, Engadget was wrong. It's bigger than miniITX, but somewhat smaller than microATX. There is a standard called flexATX that it is pretty close to. Anyway, the case is microATX because its much cheaper than custom building a flexATX case, and it means they could use a cheap standard ATX power supply.
It annoys me when Engadget gets things wrong, because people tend to regurgitate Engadget posts as facts.
I think they do make a valid point when they said it would be better to ditch gOS and just use plain old ubuntu (or even the lighter variant xubuntu)
I did a review of this a while back, it's at:
http://thearmbut.deviantart.com/journal/15792923/
Take a look, if you would?
Derek, checked your link.. wish you'd given it a bit of a runthrough as-is (before tossing XP or xubuntu or whatever on it) so we could have a sense of how valid PCMag's complaints are.
I must say, I ran the gOS on my macbook via Fusion and found it.. fine. Yes, the massive google search pane in the upper right irritated me (esp given the macbook's limited screen space) and yes the scrolling nature of the "dock" clone was less than intuitive, but I thought the OS was fine. More visually appealing right out of the box than Ubuntu, far easier on the eyes than anything M$ has put out and it beats the heck outta KDE.
It was responsive enough in virtualization that I had no complaints, even with multiple workspaces running, firefox with many tabs, Abiword (easily added), few consoles running across them. The system preferences default to a very basic but easily adjust to Advanced (or go into the console and go crazy), but I didn't see much that'd send the average pair of lesbian grandparents running for the hills. Or their nearby tech guru.
I went in predisposed to dislike the reviewer and find myself.. more neutral on him. His "it won't run windows programs!" caution was reflected early on in many Engadget/Gizmodo comments with people claiming the Wal-mart shoppers would buy it expecting it to run the Win-centric software sold nearby; he merely reiterates the caution that this is not the case.
I think he does a disservice to the device, however, in not giving us load times for the various web pages he tried out.. this is, after all, the device's main intended use. I don't think he wrote a review panning the car that wouldn't fly, but I agree that he wrote a review pissing that the $200 computer won't thrash the nearby supercomputer in a game of chess. We know that it won't. Tells us what using it was like, that'd be helpful.
Karim, where did you get your fact / idea g stand for google in gOS? It actually stands for the color - g.
Thanks for recommending it on your holiday thing (you should fix that right now engadget)
Programs written for Mac or Windows will not run.
Jesus. Christ.
IT RUNS LINUX, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT?
Just like the first person said, it's not intended to run Crysis.
They diss it for not having a 56k modem because this alienates the low end crowd. I actually agree with this.
But then, they come back and then they're mad that it doesn't support resolutions greater than 1280x800 because of integrated graphics. It's not EVERYONE'S PC, it's targeted at a niche market.
It would be like giving the Asus eee a bad review for its screen size and "toy-like" weight.
I thought they dissed it because it had a non working 56k modem (no current drivers) and the computer needs to be connected to the internet to use all its applications, I may have misunderstood.
Boy, if this machine doesn't support 1680x1050 resolution, it sure has my 22" monitor fooled...
Jokes aside: the review was right about frustrations with video configuration. I had them with getting this machine set up (and with a brand new monitor, no less), but is very misleading to think it can't be done.
I've spent about 48 hours with this machine now, and am preparing a review that will hopefully be somewhat more rational, while maintaining attention to the criticisms that have been dealt the machine.
My review should be out in the next week or so. I have a web site already interested in publishing it.
The correct idiom is "up to snuff".
Stupid Bias engadget!
What kind of hardware can you get for $199????
And as for The gOS I've tried it our on even slower systems than the everex and it runs just as good as ubuntu, both out perform xp and vista by leaps and bounds on the same systems!!!
So why don't you guys shove m$ payoff money up yours and stop with this stupidity!
Linux IS NOT SCARY what is, is how m$ is pumping out this pathetic pile of code and calling it an OS.
Hey! don't trash engadget; they were just quoting the original article.
Dude, new reader? I mean, seriously, Engadget's had nothing but praise for this thing since it came out. As someone else mentioned, I believe it appeared on their holiday gift guide. So now they're reporting an article saying it might just not be all it's cracked up to be...and you call that bias? So reporting both sides of something is bias? Wow. I must have been misusing that term my entire life....because, ya know, I was pretty sure that was the exact opposite of bias.
engadget is tobias
I can't believe people are saying "that's not what the gPC was intended for, it's for grandma and grandpa!"
Did you not even read the review? "Grandma and grandpa" would be screwed 10 minutes into using the thing. Not only that, but when they'd click something and get no indication of it working or opening, they'd be even more frustrated. Read the motherf*$#^ng review before you complain about it. The reviewer makes MANY valid points about its user unfriendliness and lousy performance.
Thank You. I was wondering if anybody actually read the review. While I agree that PC Mag is a bit...uh... weak in many of their reviews and it certainly is not the magazine it once was, in between some of their oft used pointless points (doesn't run Mac/PC software) are several quite valid points.
This thing is supposed to do once thing well. Be able to get John Q KnowNothing to be able to work out of the box without actual knowledge. It fails in this endevour in several important areas. So in the end, the people that can actually make use of this machine, would never consider running such a hunk of junk, and those that don't know any better won't be able to use it. That qualifies it as trash worthy, regardless of the price.
"up to snuff." What is "Snuff"????! For $199 I would call that a lot better than something they snuff.
"aggravatingly underpowered" Again for $199 you can barely get a decent video card let alone an entire system capable of browsing the web and doing a multitude of other things that any system with minimal specs like that would be capable of doing. If you want a powerful computer don't expect something that is for online apps and the like to be comparable in any way to a modern computer.
"we're sure the operating system will strike people differently" I found the gOS to be different, but not in an bad way. For starters I don't think it could be any more easy to install and use, everything is pretty much dummy proofed, if you can't use it and find it easy to use your either a computer power user who would freak if he couldn't the terminal or an absolute nut job. (No offense to anyone*)
"Hey! don't trash engadget; they were just quoting the original article." than why create such a crappy title like "Everex gPC gets reviewed, thrashed" I think engadget need to stop using stupid titles to attract visitors.
"Dude, new reader?" No NOT new reader, been reading stuff on engadget for about a year now. as of late engadget has been losing my respect like a landslide.
"According to the dictionary the meaning of the verb “to snuff” is to sniff something, to inhale it, to “draw up through the nostrils”, or (in other words) to smell it."
The phrase is related to fox-hunting
From this article: http://www.abc.net.au/newsradio/txt/s1648682.htm
That is the ugliest computer I have ever seen. Products like this should fall under some kind of anti-pollution act.
One very very very very quick and short comment: gOS is NOT affiliated with Google.
A PCMag review... Wow that means a lot. This mag is a joke and so is the website. After reading this short article I wouldn't even call it a review.
It's a PC.
What can you expect besides crap crap and more crap?
Unless it has linux that is
It does have Linux. So, how does your foot taste?
Like fungus.
I love mushrooms!
There's plenty of proof how poor this product is:
- casing: bigger, since those buyers expect bigger = better. It could be a nice product, sized like a Mac mini
- advertisment: advertised as "green" and low power - but they do not even name it's power consumption. What they name: 2 Watts - would be great, but that's the standby consumption of the CPU itself, not the full computer, not even the board
- documentation: everex still lacks to put the docu online
- operating system: gOS and gPC got written google all over it. It's not google. It's even unclear what kind of licencing does apply. They once put this stuff which is based on Ubuntu under a creative commons licence. Nowadays they do not even name the licencing.
It could have been a nice niche product. They raised too high expectations and do too much wrong...
OK Look this is what I would like:
o VIA C7 1.5 - check
o A small silent green box the size of iTV - uncheck
o low power - 1/2 check
o Optimized ubuntu OS specialy for VIA C7 - 1/2 check.
o Enlightenment, light wait, Google theme desktop - check.
o Fully configured Firefox complete with *ALL* plugins. Flash, Java, media-player-of choice. - uncheck.
o Special Firefox theme for greenness - uncheck
o Fully configured PMP software for audio video and DVD playback - 1/2 check
o Latest Wine installation, with automatic updates, for running MS software faster that XP, and definitely faster then Vista - uncheck
o Output to TV and HD - check
o $199 - check
Well I have all above right here on my desk, why is it not available? So PC-Word are right, but for all the wrong reasons.
Boaz