3 ms·

The success of the Chromebook contrasts curiously with the death (?) of the netbook: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/dec/31/netbooks-dead-2013 http:/

The success of the Chromebook contrasts curiously with the death (?) of the netbook: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/dec/31/netbooks-dead-2013 http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/dec/31/netbooks-de... I never bought a "netbook" -- always had top-end notebooks for travel and desktops for home/office, so there never was a reason to consider a netbook for myself. However, I just bought three Chromebooks for family members this Christmas because, compared with tablets, Chromebooks are nearly as good for content consumption and far better for content creation. Tablets, combined with popular online destinations and SaaS offerings, appear to have changed the market potential for newer netbooks such as the Chromebook.

lmm 14y ago
Netbooks were great for travel where you didn't want to lug around a big laptop, and I'd argue that ultrabooks are essentially a new name for netbooks. Even full-size desktop-replacement laptops have got a lot thinner (and with better battery life) than they were five years ago. So I don't think the netbook has failed; it's just been subsumed into the wider laptop market.
- drcube 14y ago
  My girlfriend got a netbook for $199 in 2009. Where's the ultrabook in that price range?
- muuh-gnu 14y ago
  > ultrabooks are essentially a new name for netbooks. The raison d'être of netbooks was not portability, it was the ridiculously low price. > I don't think the netbook has failed; it's just been subsumed No. Netbooks were new, trendy, selling well and overall successful. Everybody and their dog had them, bought them and would have kept buying replacements if they werent panically removed from the market and replaced with subnotebooks/ultrabooks at 2-4 times the initial netbook price.
  - DanBC 14y ago
    Smart phones had a significant impact. The original eee pc 701 had a small keyboard; a small (but I think nice) display and limited soldered in SSD storage. (4 gb). This was released 2007. That's the same year the first iPhone was released. While netbooks are useful for some people a lot of people just need to read email, noodle about on the web, and play games. I agree that it's really annoying that really cheap, portable, limited function machines are not available. Chromebooks are probably the closest, but the cloud thing is a bit of a worry for me.
mtgx 14y ago
On a Chromebook you're just using the web, and for that it's pretty fast - iPad-fast (or faster) - unless you're keeping like 20 tabs open, which is something you don't do on an iPad. But on Windows-based netbooks, every other program, and the OS itself seem pretty slow, which is probably why people don't feel like buying them anymore. Surface RT and all the Atom touchscreen hybrids are actually the same way - as they fall in the same performance range, and Windows 8 is not visibly faster than Windows 7, except for some animations that make you think it is. But when using the old x86 apps on them (just Office in Surface RT's case), they're just as slow as they've ever been on netbooks.
- drivebyacct2 14y ago
  I agree completely. Netbooks were fine until they started putting Windows on them. They sold more for a while, until everyone thought they were shit because they were slow, meanwhile, with a light linux distro on them, they were more than capable.
makomk 14y ago
The netbook didn't die, it was killed. Firstly by Intel and Microsoft licensing fees and hardware restrictions, and secondly by hardware manufacturers not actually wanting to make something quite so low-margin.
- simonh 14y ago
  Which is another way of saying they weren't economically viable at the prices consumers were willing to pay for them. The iPad killed Netbooks stone dead. I had a netbook, but 6 months later I got an iPad 2 and have literally don't believe I have even touched the netbook since. I currently have no idea where it is, but should probably trash it just on general data privacy principles.
  - r00fus 14y ago
    They were entirely viable for upstart/rising PC manufacturers like Acer, the form-factor and "just good enough" utility was a startling break from the 15-19" laptop form factors that were the rage back in 2006/2007 when netbooks Netbooks, if you remember, are the commercial response to OLPC, I saw one - it was a pretty sweet toy. So Intel wanted to not only kill the OLPC (and thus created Netbooks as a response), but then Microsoft saw that Linux was acutally taking hold, and decided to get in on the hit-job and whack the Netbook category before it cannibalized their bigger vendors' profits (and their own licensing profits). And yes, the iPad (and later the 11" MB Air) put a final stake in heart of the netbook - both more stylish and usable for real non-power users for "consumption" than either a netbook or standard laptop.
cooldeal 14y ago
Success of the Chromebook? Sure there needs to be more data than being at the top of Amazon bestsellers list? Real hard numbers from Google would be good but I don't think they're going to release them(no Nexus sales numbers). Statscounter and Net Applications numbers would be good for a proxy count.
thisone 14y ago
Just bought and did a big upgrade on a used Acer Aspire One ZG5. Great little machine. Perfect for working on the train, where space is very cramped, and since I'm already walking 4 miles a day with one full size laptop in my backpack, the low weight is a big plus!

lmm 14y ago

Netbooks were great for travel where you didn't want to lug around a big laptop, and I'd argue that ultrabooks are essentially a new name for netbooks. Even full-size desktop-replacement laptops have got a lot thinner (and with better battery life) than they were five years ago. So I don't think the netbook has failed; it's just been subsumed into the wider laptop market.

drcube 14y ago
My girlfriend got a netbook for $199 in 2009. Where's the ultrabook in that price range?
muuh-gnu 14y ago
> ultrabooks are essentially a new name for netbooks. The raison d'être of netbooks was not portability, it was the ridiculously low price. > I don't think the netbook has failed; it's just been subsumed No. Netbooks were new, trendy, selling well and overall successful. Everybody and their dog had them, bought them and would have kept buying replacements if they werent panically removed from the market and replaced with subnotebooks/ultrabooks at 2-4 times the initial netbook price.
- DanBC 14y ago
  Smart phones had a significant impact. The original eee pc 701 had a small keyboard; a small (but I think nice) display and limited soldered in SSD storage. (4 gb). This was released 2007. That's the same year the first iPhone was released. While netbooks are useful for some people a lot of people just need to read email, noodle about on the web, and play games. I agree that it's really annoying that really cheap, portable, limited function machines are not available. Chromebooks are probably the closest, but the cloud thing is a bit of a worry for me.

mtgx 14y ago

On a Chromebook you're just using the web, and for that it's pretty fast - iPad-fast (or faster) - unless you're keeping like 20 tabs open, which is something you don't do on an iPad. But on Windows-based netbooks, every other program, and the OS itself seem pretty slow, which is probably why people don't feel like buying them anymore. Surface RT and all the Atom touchscreen hybrids are actually the same way - as they fall in the same performance range, and Windows 8 is not visibly faster than Windows 7, except for some animations that make you think it is. But when using the old x86 apps on them (just Office in Surface RT's case), they're just as slow as they've ever been on netbooks.

drivebyacct2 14y ago
I agree completely. Netbooks were fine until they started putting Windows on them. They sold more for a while, until everyone thought they were shit because they were slow, meanwhile, with a light linux distro on them, they were more than capable.

makomk 14y ago

The netbook didn't die, it was killed. Firstly by Intel and Microsoft licensing fees and hardware restrictions, and secondly by hardware manufacturers not actually wanting to make something quite so low-margin.

simonh 14y ago
Which is another way of saying they weren't economically viable at the prices consumers were willing to pay for them. The iPad killed Netbooks stone dead. I had a netbook, but 6 months later I got an iPad 2 and have literally don't believe I have even touched the netbook since. I currently have no idea where it is, but should probably trash it just on general data privacy principles.
- r00fus 14y ago
  They were entirely viable for upstart/rising PC manufacturers like Acer, the form-factor and "just good enough" utility was a startling break from the 15-19" laptop form factors that were the rage back in 2006/2007 when netbooks Netbooks, if you remember, are the commercial response to OLPC, I saw one - it was a pretty sweet toy. So Intel wanted to not only kill the OLPC (and thus created Netbooks as a response), but then Microsoft saw that Linux was acutally taking hold, and decided to get in on the hit-job and whack the Netbook category before it cannibalized their bigger vendors' profits (and their own licensing profits). And yes, the iPad (and later the 11" MB Air) put a final stake in heart of the netbook - both more stylish and usable for real non-power users for "consumption" than either a netbook or standard laptop.

cooldeal 14y ago

Success of the Chromebook? Sure there needs to be more data than being at the top of Amazon bestsellers list? Real hard numbers from Google would be good but I don't think they're going to release them(no Nexus sales numbers). Statscounter and Net Applications numbers would be good for a proxy count.

thisone 14y ago

Just bought and did a big upgrade on a used Acer Aspire One ZG5. Great little machine. Perfect for working on the train, where space is very cramped, and since I'm already walking 4 miles a day with one full size laptop in my backpack, the low weight is a big plus!