4 ms·

People were snapping up $200 to $300 netbooks because they were broke, thus it stands to reason that these people were holding out to pay north of $700 for a to

People were snapping up $200 to $300 netbooks because they were broke, thus it stands to reason that these people were holding out to pay north of $700 for a touch tablet with an incomplete OS you couldn't run two programs on simultaneously? What killed the netbook is simply that the price of a genuine laptop went down in price. Picking up a brand new 15" laptop for $400 was unheard of 2 years ago. Hell, I bought my i5 w/ 6 gig Ram for $550 brand new. That would have been the price of a mid-line netbook two years ago.

stinos 14y ago
seems legit. I'm not into the tablet market enough but are there small cheap tablets that you can hook up to a projector and use to present your powerpoints and documents? That's what most people I know having a notebook use it for: they don't want to drag around a laptop
sterna 14y ago
I bought a netbook because I wanted a computer that I could easily bring along while traveling because I went to a lot of meetings abroad at the time. I could easily have afforded a laptop but they were not nearly as portable at the time, so the MacBook Air style computers have also had a big impact on netbook sales for people like me.
meric 14y ago
Perhaps the price of laptops was forced lower in order to compete with tablet devices.
- IheartApplesDix 14y ago
  Perhaps the opposite of that since laptops came first, by a bit.
timerickson 14y ago
I think the point you raise is valid, but the way you arrive to it is disingenuous. North of $700? The iPad starts at $500, and recently, the iPad Mini at $330. Granted the Mini is late in this timeline, but it stands to reason the price point is closer than you're making it out to be. Secondly, an "incomplete OS" is a fallacy. It's complete to the spec it was designed for. Yes, that means its not intended to be a fully-fledged desktop OS, but its not inherently incomplete, just focused. Thirdly, "running two programs simultaneously" – I'd wager that many netbook users (myself included) found the netbook so limiting and simple that it was only ever used for doing one thing at a time, such as reading email, browsing the web, listening to music or reading a book; all of which now accomplished by the iPad.
- dizzystar 14y ago
  Fair points. I'm sort of going by the price points from when the iPad first came out and I really don't recall the real price, but the baseline was definitely higher than today's baseline models. Quick search suggest $500 for the baseline, which isn't competitive to $300. Yes, I agree that the "incomplete" OS is sort of a fallacy, but not in all cases. Even if the iPad started up at $300, I'm pretty sure most people, especially those who had no computer at all, would dive toward a netbook, since yes, you could run Word + Browse the Web + listen to music (no flash! no youtube!), plus, you know, type on it. The big fallacy with the article is that the author is suggesting that an iPad could have replaced a netbook, and this, I hope you agree, simply was not, and is not, the case, and I really don't believe that many people would have bought an iPad if they didn't already have a computer of some sort, though I could be wrong here. In regards to how much you can push an Intel Atom. Well, let's see here. I watched youtube lecture videos, ran Python IDLE, and even had other programs open while doing all of this. I also had successfully installed and ran MySQL, Xampp, Drupal, Gimp, and Emacs simultaneously. Not saying this is optimal, but just saying that you could do it. I ran Eclipse and Java for a week to test those waters too. It was fine for my first forays into development, so I think it would have been okay for the Average User. I still have the thing sitting on my shelf.
  - fpgeek 14y ago
    > I really don't believe that many people would have bought an iPad if they didn't already have a computer of some sort, though I could be wrong here. When the iPad came out didn't you need a computer (with iTunes) to activate it? I vaguely recall Apple offering to activate iPads at Apple Stores at some point, but I'd presume the vast majority of iPad users didn't need that.
adrr 14y ago
What killed the netbook was smart phones. Why by a netbook when i can buy a smart phone and browse the web while in bathroom and also use it outside the house and as a phone.
- stinos 14y ago
  You have to go throug some hassle to make your pone display pdf/ppt/xls/whatnot files, let alone it's a pleasant experience on a small screen. But you cannot (easily) hook up your phone to a bigger screen. You cannot add all kinds of common usb devices to your phone. You cannot quickly start an ssh session to your server. Etcetera. These are all valid use cases for netbooks. Not for phones, no matter how smart they are. Face it, your phone OS is kinda limited compared to whatever OS running on a pc. .
  - Shorel 14y ago
    Cue Ubuntu Phone.
lifeguard 14y ago
Just like they snapped up Vista laptops because they were too broke to buy MacBooks?

stinos 14y ago

seems legit. I'm not into the tablet market enough but are there small cheap tablets that you can hook up to a projector and use to present your powerpoints and documents? That's what most people I know having a notebook use it for: they don't want to drag around a laptop

sterna 14y ago

I bought a netbook because I wanted a computer that I could easily bring along while traveling because I went to a lot of meetings abroad at the time. I could easily have afforded a laptop but they were not nearly as portable at the time, so the MacBook Air style computers have also had a big impact on netbook sales for people like me.

meric 14y ago

Perhaps the price of laptops was forced lower in order to compete with tablet devices.

IheartApplesDix 14y ago
Perhaps the opposite of that since laptops came first, by a bit.

timerickson 14y ago

I think the point you raise is valid, but the way you arrive to it is disingenuous. North of $700? The iPad starts at $500, and recently, the iPad Mini at $330. Granted the Mini is late in this timeline, but it stands to reason the price point is closer than you're making it out to be. Secondly, an "incomplete OS" is a fallacy. It's complete to the spec it was designed for. Yes, that means its not intended to be a fully-fledged desktop OS, but its not inherently incomplete, just focused. Thirdly, "running two programs simultaneously" – I'd wager that many netbook users (myself included) found the netbook so limiting and simple that it was only ever used for doing one thing at a time, such as reading email, browsing the web, listening to music or reading a book; all of which now accomplished by the iPad.

dizzystar 14y ago
Fair points. I'm sort of going by the price points from when the iPad first came out and I really don't recall the real price, but the baseline was definitely higher than today's baseline models. Quick search suggest $500 for the baseline, which isn't competitive to $300. Yes, I agree that the "incomplete" OS is sort of a fallacy, but not in all cases. Even if the iPad started up at $300, I'm pretty sure most people, especially those who had no computer at all, would dive toward a netbook, since yes, you could run Word + Browse the Web + listen to music (no flash! no youtube!), plus, you know, type on it. The big fallacy with the article is that the author is suggesting that an iPad could have replaced a netbook, and this, I hope you agree, simply was not, and is not, the case, and I really don't believe that many people would have bought an iPad if they didn't already have a computer of some sort, though I could be wrong here. In regards to how much you can push an Intel Atom. Well, let's see here. I watched youtube lecture videos, ran Python IDLE, and even had other programs open while doing all of this. I also had successfully installed and ran MySQL, Xampp, Drupal, Gimp, and Emacs simultaneously. Not saying this is optimal, but just saying that you could do it. I ran Eclipse and Java for a week to test those waters too. It was fine for my first forays into development, so I think it would have been okay for the Average User. I still have the thing sitting on my shelf.
- fpgeek 14y ago
  > I really don't believe that many people would have bought an iPad if they didn't already have a computer of some sort, though I could be wrong here. When the iPad came out didn't you need a computer (with iTunes) to activate it? I vaguely recall Apple offering to activate iPads at Apple Stores at some point, but I'd presume the vast majority of iPad users didn't need that.

adrr 14y ago

What killed the netbook was smart phones. Why by a netbook when i can buy a smart phone and browse the web while in bathroom and also use it outside the house and as a phone.

stinos 14y ago
You have to go throug some hassle to make your pone display pdf/ppt/xls/whatnot files, let alone it's a pleasant experience on a small screen. But you cannot (easily) hook up your phone to a bigger screen. You cannot add all kinds of common usb devices to your phone. You cannot quickly start an ssh session to your server. Etcetera. These are all valid use cases for netbooks. Not for phones, no matter how smart they are. Face it, your phone OS is kinda limited compared to whatever OS running on a pc. .
- Shorel 14y ago
  Cue Ubuntu Phone.

lifeguard 14y ago

Just like they snapped up Vista laptops because they were too broke to buy MacBooks?