> The “netbook” form factor was absolutely on to something, but it failed to deliver. Completely agree here, I call Atom important stepping stone. However, as

> The “netbook” form factor was absolutely on to something, but it failed to deliver. Completely agree here, I call Atom important stepping stone. However, as you mentioned Intel does not make processors for descendant platforms. As I have elaborated in different comment, I guess the major reason Atom failed was market positioning. They were effectively eaten by ARMs getting more powerful from one end and mobile CPUs getting more power efficient from the other end. So while I agree that Atom based netbooks helped start the whole mobile compute market, my argument is that market positioning of Atom products meant that they were destined to be replaced. IMO success of Atom required a bit more useful PC-like devices AND high integrity SoCs for appliances.