5 ms·

The netbook boom was nipped in the bud by Microsoft licensing. They gave away a free version of windows on it with heavy restrictions. Consequently hardware man

The netbook boom was nipped in the bud by Microsoft licensing. They gave away a free version of windows on it with heavy restrictions. Consequently hardware manufacturers brought out new models but stopped improving them (they topped out at a measly 1GB of RAM, upgradeable to 2). They quickly died out because of course they did. That's a ridiculous restriction. After my old one died I scoured for ages trying to find one that didn't adhere to those ridiculous restrictions to no avail. There were ~35 models available with a 2GB RAM restriction and zero without. The next year there were none.

scholia 11y ago
> They gave away a free version of windows on it... Not true. It was a low cost version of XP, for which OEMs paid $11 to $15. > ... with heavy restrictions. That's certainly true (as defined by Microsoft and Intel). However, it was arguably better for users to have machines with 2GB or 4GB of RAM and without letterbox screens, and there was no restriction on making those. Today there are dozens of "netbooks" with 10in screens that outperform the old netbooks, run full Windows 10, have touch screens, and cost a lot less than the old netbooks.
- ZenoArrow 11y ago
  > "it was arguably better for users to have machines with 2GB or 4GB of RAM" Microsoft intentionally restricted the RAM in netbooks during the main growth period for netbooks. This article shows that RAM was limited to 1GB for Windows 7, I'm pretty sure the same restrictions applied to Windows XP: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-windows-netbook-hardware-limits,7889.html http://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-windows-netbook-h...
  - scholia 11y ago
    Yes, as I've already said, that was part of the deal. OEMs could choose to design whatever they liked, or choose to exploit a netbook/nettop design package that provided some discounts on Microsoft/Intel technologies. Netbooks were originally intended for school uses (see Intel's Classmate) not to replace consumer laptops. http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education-solutions/classmatepc-clamshell.html http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education-solutions/c...
    - ZenoArrow 11y ago
      IIRC the Intel Classmate was announced after the first Asus Eee PC, so I wouldn't say they were originally intended for schools.
      - scholia 11y ago
        The original Asus Eee PC was designed for schools and was launched first in the UK by the then leading education supplier, RM. I was there. It had a Celeron inside. It was part of Intel's response to the threat of the OLPC.
rpgmaker 11y ago
Chromebooks are netbooks and they seem to be doing just fine. To me they're a bastardization of what the concept what's supposed to be but that's beside the point.
- dhimes 11y ago
  I thought they had a shitty hd? The netbook was awesome because it was a full-stack dev station that was wicked portable. It wasn't the best dev environment, but I could do whatever I needed- from mysql script updates to javascript to whatever else.
  - digi_owl 11y ago
    And MS&Intel choked the life out of them because they threatened to undermine those expensive ultraportables.
    - scholia 11y ago
      No, they didn't. In fact, under OEM pressure, Microsoft foolishly prolonged their life by providing support for a next generation of netbooks with Windows 7 Starter. Fact is that that you could get a proper laptop for the same money as a netbook, and this was much better for users. Note that the original netbook (from Asus) had a 7in screen, and this was a substantial part of the cost saving. However, market forces drove bigger screens into the netbook market: 10in became the standard, and some had even larger screens. Prices went up to match. The netbook actually died because OEMs reduced laptop screen sizes from 13.3in (which used to be very popular) while retaining the extra RAM (2GB or 4GB) and the extra screen resolution (1366 x 768). At this point, many real laptops with 11.6in and 10.1in screens were cheaper than netbooks, so you had to be an idiot to buy a netbook. Or to manufacture one, which is why they disappeared from the market. This had nothing to do with Ultrabooks. Note that Ultrabook is an Intel trademark and Ultrabooks were also required to follow Intel's specification, which made them premium products. But every OEM was and is able to make whatever thin-and-light laptops they like, regardless of the Ultrabook spec.
vlan0 11y ago
To make matters even worse, the ones that did have adequate RAM suffered from those terrible 8/16GB SSD drives. Heck, I bet even my 32GB SDHC card is faster than those drives were.
nostrademons 11y ago
I'd argue that the netbook boom was nipped in the bud by the introduction of the tablet. Netbooks, tablets, low-end laptops, and phablets that are too big to fit in a pocket are all the same market. They serve a person who wants to browse the web, check e-mail, instant-message, take notes, and do other information consumption tasks with a device that is small enough to carry around in a handbag or backpack but too large to fit in a pocket. I suspect that the decline in tablet sales comes from category confusion at the edges of this market. At the low end, people are buying phablets to stick in a handbag instead of 7" tablets. At the high end, some people have gone back to lightweight laptops like the Macbook Air, Microsoft Surface, or equivalents. The "market" - defined as the group of people with similar needs - continues to grow, but a growing percentage of people are picking products from a different category to satisfy it, as more such products become available.
- zanny 11y ago
  And now Chromebooks are eating some of the tablet market, and are absolutely replacements for the original netbooks, and are the most popular form factor of new notebook sales now.

scholia 11y ago

> They gave away a free version of windows on it... Not true. It was a low cost version of XP, for which OEMs paid $11 to $15. > ... with heavy restrictions. That's certainly true (as defined by Microsoft and Intel). However, it was arguably better for users to have machines with 2GB or 4GB of RAM and without letterbox screens, and there was no restriction on making those. Today there are dozens of "netbooks" with 10in screens that outperform the old netbooks, run full Windows 10, have touch screens, and cost a lot less than the old netbooks.

ZenoArrow 11y ago
> "it was arguably better for users to have machines with 2GB or 4GB of RAM" Microsoft intentionally restricted the RAM in netbooks during the main growth period for netbooks. This article shows that RAM was limited to 1GB for Windows 7, I'm pretty sure the same restrictions applied to Windows XP: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-windows-netbook-hardware-limits,7889.html http://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-windows-netbook-h...
- scholia 11y ago
  Yes, as I've already said, that was part of the deal. OEMs could choose to design whatever they liked, or choose to exploit a netbook/nettop design package that provided some discounts on Microsoft/Intel technologies. Netbooks were originally intended for school uses (see Intel's Classmate) not to replace consumer laptops. http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education-solutions/classmatepc-clamshell.html http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education-solutions/c...
  - ZenoArrow 11y ago
    IIRC the Intel Classmate was announced after the first Asus Eee PC, so I wouldn't say they were originally intended for schools.
    - scholia 11y ago
      The original Asus Eee PC was designed for schools and was launched first in the UK by the then leading education supplier, RM. I was there. It had a Celeron inside. It was part of Intel's response to the threat of the OLPC.

rpgmaker 11y ago

Chromebooks are netbooks and they seem to be doing just fine. To me they're a bastardization of what the concept what's supposed to be but that's beside the point.

dhimes 11y ago
I thought they had a shitty hd? The netbook was awesome because it was a full-stack dev station that was wicked portable. It wasn't the best dev environment, but I could do whatever I needed- from mysql script updates to javascript to whatever else.
- digi_owl 11y ago
  And MS&Intel choked the life out of them because they threatened to undermine those expensive ultraportables.
  - scholia 11y ago
    No, they didn't. In fact, under OEM pressure, Microsoft foolishly prolonged their life by providing support for a next generation of netbooks with Windows 7 Starter. Fact is that that you could get a proper laptop for the same money as a netbook, and this was much better for users. Note that the original netbook (from Asus) had a 7in screen, and this was a substantial part of the cost saving. However, market forces drove bigger screens into the netbook market: 10in became the standard, and some had even larger screens. Prices went up to match. The netbook actually died because OEMs reduced laptop screen sizes from 13.3in (which used to be very popular) while retaining the extra RAM (2GB or 4GB) and the extra screen resolution (1366 x 768). At this point, many real laptops with 11.6in and 10.1in screens were cheaper than netbooks, so you had to be an idiot to buy a netbook. Or to manufacture one, which is why they disappeared from the market. This had nothing to do with Ultrabooks. Note that Ultrabook is an Intel trademark and Ultrabooks were also required to follow Intel's specification, which made them premium products. But every OEM was and is able to make whatever thin-and-light laptops they like, regardless of the Ultrabook spec.

vlan0 11y ago

To make matters even worse, the ones that did have adequate RAM suffered from those terrible 8/16GB SSD drives. Heck, I bet even my 32GB SDHC card is faster than those drives were.

nostrademons 11y ago

I'd argue that the netbook boom was nipped in the bud by the introduction of the tablet. Netbooks, tablets, low-end laptops, and phablets that are too big to fit in a pocket are all the same market. They serve a person who wants to browse the web, check e-mail, instant-message, take notes, and do other information consumption tasks with a device that is small enough to carry around in a handbag or backpack but too large to fit in a pocket. I suspect that the decline in tablet sales comes from category confusion at the edges of this market. At the low end, people are buying phablets to stick in a handbag instead of 7" tablets. At the high end, some people have gone back to lightweight laptops like the Macbook Air, Microsoft Surface, or equivalents. The "market" - defined as the group of people with similar needs - continues to grow, but a growing percentage of people are picking products from a different category to satisfy it, as more such products become available.

zanny 11y ago
And now Chromebooks are eating some of the tablet market, and are absolutely replacements for the original netbooks, and are the most popular form factor of new notebook sales now.