The same downsides stated at the end of the article apply for an iPad, the difference is that at least Windows on ARM gives you the opportunity to make some serious work by running every win32 application with a mouse and a keyboard while the iPad doesn't.

The issue is that the benchmark software used on the Windows with ARM ran over an emulation.

It´s very possible that with a benchmark software running natively the score will get much higher.

Also it´s like if you run an emulated android version of the geekbench on Windows x86 the score you would get would be much slower.

For the only thing i think this works is to imagine how good the emulation performance will be on these machines, and i think is plenty good.

Imagine, native Windows Universal Applications will get maybe twice as better performance (maybe something compared to a i3 or a ULV i5)

While emulated applications will get a performance comparable to a Intel Pentium or Intel Celeron. Of course you can´t use this to emulate Crysis or GTAV, but for many legacy apps, maybe work apps will work well.

For most people is going to be much more than required

Right now I´m using a i3 2367m, running 1.4GHz dual core, scoring less than 3k on Geekbench; but performance-wise is more than sufficient to run everything i need for work and entertaiment; i´m not a power user nor a super light user. I´ve even used Premiere Pro in this machine! Doesn´t fly! but it works.

It´s going to be very interesting to see when Microsoft manages to squeeze the most of the Snapdragon CPUs and with future generations of the chips, better optimized to run Windows.

Also will be interesting when they began to release PC games for Snapdragon, as they have better GPUs than Intel.

Are they serious, its on the level of a core 2 duo and quad my old intel atom n beats this in 2011 and that was unbearably slow, but im a power user (mobile xeon,gtx 1070) and often rendering something

if it can run youtube video at 1080p 60 fps and also twitch streams i will gladly buy it as a netbook with it's outstanding battery life

Some of those benchmark scores are not the best for comparison. For example, there are better benchmark scores for Pentium N4200 in the Dell Latitude 3189 review on this site.

Great article and many good points (pricing, UFS storage, LTE capability, performance).
It's hard to argue with the benchmarks here...

I agree that these Qualcomm products may just be another netbook redesign, and well, we see where those devices are at now. It would be difficult to choose these devices just for their battery life, especially since on a similar Intel architecture I simply could lower the processing power to achieve better battery life. On the other hand, it wouldn't be possible if I wanted to achieve more performance with a Qualcomm CPU at the cost of battery life. There would be times where a consumer would want both options.