Funny. I did the same thing yesterday.
www.umpcportal.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=622
Q1b vs Q1P battery drain testing.

What is so amazing in 4:16 hour’s battery time?
Sony Vaio UX180/280/380 has more then this time battery life and performs at least 2 times better then VIA.
Why the hell we have to be so amazed with VIA? VIA performs as good as Transmeta and all of us know that TRANSMETA (and now VIA) are not performers at all. Just stop praising this low end CPU.

It's pretty interesting that you think the Sony Vaio UX180 has longer battery life, do you have any reviews to back that up?

A quick look on Google shows the Sony Vaio UX180 gets about 2 hours of battery life.

www.pocketables.net/2006/08/review_vaio_ux1_2.html

http://meansquare.info/UXReview/vsOQO2.html

Vaio's (Intel Core Solo) battery lasts 2 times longer in comparison to OQO(VIA CPU).
And let us not forget the performance of Vaio(Intel Core Solo 1.2Gh): 2-3 times better then the VIA 1.5 Ghz CPU.
So VIA does not come even close to Intel platform-it is waste of money to buy a CPU that performs like the old Transmeta from 5 years ago.

It looks like someone did not read that article clearly.....

what could be more clear then this:
UX battery times are still under testing and subject to revision Battery Times Charge Time High use "Normal" use Low use
UX 2600 2 hours, 15 minutes 2 hours, 10 minutes 3 hours, 30 minutes 4 hours, 53 minutes
OQO 4000 2 hours, 5 minutes 1 hour, 6 minutes 1 hour, 25 minutes 1 hour, 48 minutes
UX 5200 3 hours, 30 minutes 4 hours, 25 minutes 7 hours, 0 minutes 8 hours, 53 minutes
OQO 8000 4 hours, 11 minutes 2 hours, 5 minutes 3 hours, 30 minutes 4 hours, 53 minutes

The UX battery is 30% bigger, but the times are 100% better. So Core Solo is more efficient.

Performancewise - just see the results.
I have done my own tests using Crystalmarks and the result is: Core solo performs 2 times better then VIA.

At the end of the day everybody makes his choice. The question is how long the VIA hardware will be able to support the newcoming software? With VIA you will need to upgrade your UMPC quite often.
I had this experience with Fujitsu P2120 based on Transmeta (that performs exactly the same as VIA) and had to replace my notebook after 6 months-it was so slow that became unusable.

And just to add a little bit clarification about the new Intel CPU-A110:
It is just Core solo with less cash (512K instead 2Mb) and reduced clocking rate - 600/800Mhh against 1.2/1.33Ghz.
This reduces the power consumption, but then the CPU performs like VIA C7. That is all.
It is better to look what ULV Dual Cores are coming from Intel. Then VIA C7 (and the devices based on it) has/have to be sent to the dust pin.

Please, read the article you linked to. That is the OQO model 01 which has a Transmeta processor and has nothing to do with the VIA C7-M processor found in the OQO model 02.

Transmeta and VIA are different companies that make different processors. Comparing the battery life of an Intel platform with a Transmeta platform doesn't really say much about the battery life of the VIA platform.

The point I am trying to make with these articles is that on the same device with the same form factor and same batteries the VIA platform does get significantly longer battery life.

The performance tests include OQO model 2. And they are pathetic.
Maybe the battery tests do not include Model 2, but having in mind the performance, OQO Model 2(based on VIA C7) performs like Model 1+ ( with Transmeta).
So I am not keen to buy a computer that performs like computer designed in year 2001/2002 with “maybe longer battery fife” and to wait longer for something to happen (get executed or served) on it.
The right comparison is Performance per vat and that is what you (VIA guys) avoid to recognize.
At the end of the day the money is yours and you spend them the way you like. Maybe you have to spend more often your money with VIA based computers-it is a personal choice.
I have to admit that OQO design is more appealing to me, but it is not my personal choice because of the CPU. Actually I personaly will not buy any UMPC based on VIA, until I see that VIA performce close to Intel.

Hello :D,

I will buy a VIA UMPC because i don't need a very powerfull UMPC (my desktop PC will ALWAYS be very more powerfull and very cheaper than any of these UMPC machines).

For a true mobile device, i place the battery life at top of my demandings.

Bye. :grin

i think you missed the whole point of "long battery life" and completely compared it on performance

:sigh :sigh :sigh :sigh :sigh :sigh :sigh :sigh :sigh

you had me at hello - ok at representing the UX - i'm buying!

thanks for the info (visitor)