-
Website
http://www.scripting.com/ -
Original page
http://www.scripting.com/stories/2009/10/14/whatsObviousAboutNetbooks.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
- The Atom processor operates at 1.6 GHz and is as powerful as a mid range Pentium-4 - ver nice performance indeed.
- each core in a multicore CPU like a core-duo runs at ~1 GHz (or less in some cases!).
- Most applications that came from the windows desktop world are NOT designed to run on multi-cores (most windows server type apps are though). As a result, multicore systems often don't use all of the cores most of the time. Some applications that came out of the Unix world (eg OpenOffice) can take advantage of multicore CPUs.
- By adding DVD player software and a USB DVD drive, movies can play just fine, full screen.
- the 1 GB memory size is a artificial limit set by MS - the first thing I have my clients do is buy either a 2 GB or 4 GB memory module (depending on which chipset is in the unit) and throw away the 1 GB memory module. instant performance boost.
- There is plenty of profit margin in netbooks since all of the components cost much less than in the bigger laptops. LCD prices are based on the size - the bigger the panel, the more it costs. The Atom processor was targeted at cell phones and embedded systems so it costs much, much less than core duo, etc. The 160 GB HDD (also required by MS) is a mature, low cost design.
The bottom line is netbooks based on the Atom chip sets are more than adequate for over 90% of the people in the world! Basically the hardware folks are so far ahead of the apps vendors that CPU specs don't make a bit of difference these days.
Full disclosure - I used to help design Omnibook laptops and tried for years to get a low cost "student laptop" to market, but always got shot down because a low cost laptop would steal customers away from the high margin "business" laptops. That is one of the reasons it took so long to even get "consumer" laptops. Even though we knew that laptops had an average lifetime of less than 3 years, businesses were still willing to spend thousands of dollars for them. I am glad to see netbooks on the market and really encourage my clients to get them. Before netbooks I would tell my clients to not spend more than $750 for a laptop, now I tell them to not spend more than $400.
However, the idea that anything under a 14" screen is too small is totally nonsensical, the best selling Apple laptop comes with a 13" screen, and I can't imagine buying a notebook anything bigger than that anymore.
Personally, I find netbooks to be a little too small and underpowered, but I realize that not everyone is like me.
Also, the uber-fast desktop is a personal computer, but it may be a shared resource, and a pinch point if multiple people in a household want to use it. It plays a public role. The iPhone is a personal appliance, one per customer. The netbook can be a shared or dedicated resource, much like a landline or television, at a cost that makes it feasible to invest in multiples.
I could buy a Macbook, perhaps, but I prefer something that is not expensive, in case I lose it or break it.
So yes, I think netbooks are the future.
As for there being a mid-point between iPhone and netbook, check out the Archos 5 Internet Tablet. This is a seriously interesting device, once they get the software stable (it's in Archos' favor they just kicked out a firmware update this week):
http://ebooktest.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/archo...
I think a better starting point would be the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project. They had the concept for a super-light, super-cheap "$100 laptop" long before anyone else, which got them huge buzz (and huge fights with Intel, who desperately wanted to preserve the laptop pricing controls Dave spoke of).
The key is breaking the cartel pricing for laptops would have been impossible for a mainline OEM to do, because it was both a highly speculative and highly dangerous move -- there was no guarantee that a market for such devices was even there, and Intel and Microsoft would come down hard on anyone who tried to find out. OLPC was in a unique position to not care so much about that, so they went in where everyone else feared to tread, and demonstrated that what would eventually become the netbook market did in fact exist. Once the demand was demonstrated, Asus decided to take the risk of breaking the cartel in hopes of seizing this new market, and the rest is history.
to make a OLPC computer, they offered what they came up with, and users
decided it was a general purpose computer, not primarily for children.
Had they stubbornly insisted on being the visionaries they would have said
"The users are wrong, they are buying these for the wrong reasons, we need
to educate them and tell them not to buy it." Which would have of course
been insane.
Instead they listened to the users and gave them what they want. This meant
offering XP in addition to Linux and adding a hard disk, and making the
keyboard and screen a little larger to accomodate adult hands and eyes.
So that's how I can "clam the users took over" -- cause they did. It takes a
company like Asus who sees themselves as servants not rulers to let the
users run the show.
The story of OLPC is a story of missed opportunities.
getting the whole thing started, which I do in my next post (the Open Letter
to Om).
"This means only one thing, and it's kind of obvious -- (Dell)'s losing money on each sale."
Not necessarily, and it goes to that earlier comment. He could have his ego wrapped up in "being right," and the money is irrelevant. Ego will frequently trump money as a motivation. Heck, ego can trump sex, depending on the circumstances -- which is why shy wallflowers exist.