Rydertech

Introduction

The netbook—unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past year or so, you’ve heard this buzzword at some point.  But what the hell is it?  A netbook is a notebook computer with a small form factor (usually up to a 10″ screen), almost invariably an Intel Atom N270 processor, and similarly modest specs elsewhere.  We’ll address these more specifically shortly.  Essentially, netbooks are highly-portable, Internet-capable machines that run either a variant of Linux, or else Windows XP.  Netbooks allow one to surf the Internet, check E-mail, process documents, listen to music, and watch standard definition movies (usually streaming, because the devices lack optical drives), all with decent to very good battery life, and without the bulk and excess of a full-sized notebook.

Who is the targeted demographic for netbooks?  Why, everybody!  Netbooks, by and large, are very inexpensive machines—the most expensive rarely break the $500 USD mark, and some can be had for considerably less.  Though probably not suitable as a primary machine, netbooks make a fine supplementary computer.  Road warriors who don’t need exceptional processing power can benefit from the small footprint, reasonable performance, and long battery life of a netbook.  College students (and anybody else in this situation) can take advantage of the diminutive size of this machine when taking notes in cramped quarters.  And, when they’re done, they can just pitch the netbook into a bookbag and move about their business—it weighs considerably less than a thick textbook.  Netbooks make good first computers for children just starting middle- or high school—it keeps them off the main desktop (no more fighting over computer time) and offers a durable and affordable way to give each kid in the family his own computer.

Why am I getting one?  Well, as a current notebook owner, I recognize some serious limitations to that branch of mobile computing.  Namely, it’s scarcely mobile.  My 15.4″ Toshiba is a behemoth, weighing in at over six pounds (not including power brick), and it requires a case to carry both it and its power cord and accessories.  There has to be a better way, and I believe I’ve found it in the netbook.  I have recently ordered a Samsung NC10 and I eagerly await its arrival from Amazon, so I may type up an in-depth review for Rydertech.

But I’m not here to sell netbooks.  I’m here to sell the netbook.  Huh?  Are you off your rocker, Ryder? Thanks for your concern, but no, I’m perfectly fine.  Essentially what I mean is that I’m interested in explaining, spreading, and supporting the concept of the netbook, not in moving merchandise.  I don’t sell computers.  I don’t work for Intel or Microsoft, and if I did, I should actually be trying to do the exact opposite.  More on that later.

.

History of the netbook

It becomes very interesting when you consider just how young this phenomenon is.  The term netbook really only came about in the second half of the past year.  That’s not surprising because the device after which the netbook was fashioned only came into being around this time last year, in 2007.  Back then, smaller notebook computers existed.  They were classified as ultraportables, but should have been named ultrapriced because that’s exactly what they were.  Little more than middling notebook components shoved into a smaller form factor, they offered few benefits over full-sized notebooks, often ran hot due to inadequate cooling, and were prohibitively expensive.  Then, a rather inconspicuous offering from motherboard giant ASUStek entered the market: this thing.

The Eee PC.  Some saw it as little more than a novelty or a toy.  Others reserved judgment for a time.  As it turns out, the latter had the right perspective on the matter.  The original Eee was the precursor to the current netbook.  If you read through the above articles, you’ll notice that this term is never used—AnandTech came closest to the matter when its article pointed out that the Eee defied classification.  So a whole new paradigm was eventually created for it, and new and improved versions were marketed.

Enter Microsoft and Intel.  Despite salivating over the possibilities of a new market, F/OSS again got shut down pretty quickly.  The first thing people tried to do with their Eees was install Windows on them, and ASUS eventually offered a version with XP Home pre-installed.  Microsoft, embattled by the unpopular Vista OS (let’s NOT get into a debate over this here, please), had been increasingly forced to prolong the aging XP OS at the behest of extreme consumer pressure.  The result?  Microsoft decided to create a set of specifications by which they, inadvertently I’m sure, defined the netbook category.  Here’s an itemized list of the most important ones:

-Maximum 1.0 GHz processor (though some processors, such as the Atom, are allowed up to 1.6 GHz)
-Maximum 1 GB memory
-Maximum 10.2″ screen, 1024 x 600 pixel resolution
-Maximum 80 GB hard disk (though this has been relaxed)

Look closely—I’ve just outlined virtually every netbook on the market right now, more or less.  In what was really a last-ditch effort to exclude Linux from the emerging ULCPC (ultra-low-cost PC) market, Microsoft actually did more good than they could ever have imagined.  By keeping the specs so limited, MS ensured that bottom-bin parts would be used, which kept the price so low.  Additionally, for the first time probably in computing history, a combination of those bottom-bin parts actually yields a deceptively-powerful machine for basic computing tasks.  The netbook as we know it is born.

Enter Intel.  When Microsoft was penning its ULCPC specs, Intel was busily completing what had previously been known as its Silverthrone project.  This became the Atom CPU, which got an x86 variant aimed squarely at this emerging market.  Intel’s aim here, I’m sure, was to beat AMD to the punch—similar to Microsoft’s aim regarding Linux.  All of a sudden, these ULCPCs (netbooks) became very power efficient and sufficiently powerful to become a viable choice for those seeking a small, cheap, efficient computer.

And that’s why they need to be destroyed.

.

The coming double-threat to netbooks

The above is of course not my sentiments on the matter, but those of all three factions involved in the manufacture of netbooks: MS, who would like nothing more than to see XP die; Intel, who makes a smaller profit margin on Atom CPUs than the Core 2 Duos found in competing notebooks; and the OEMs who similarly make a smaller profit margin on these netbooks versus full-sized notebooks.  Therein lies the rub: as netbooks gain in popularity, they threaten to undermine the traditional notebook market, which means less money for OEMs and Intel.  And MS isn’t too happy, either, because until Windows 7 comes out, they’ve got nothing to offer these netbooks.  Is it merely coincidence that Windows 7 was demonstrated on a netbook?

If you don’t believe me, you don’t need to take my word for it—last week Intel came out and said it themselves.  Oh, you definitely need to read between the lines, but you can see where this is going.  Intel essentially feels the need to convince consumers that netbooks, in their current incarnation, just aren’t good enough.  If they were just a little bit bigger or more powerful, Intel posits, then they would be just right.  There’s a problem: if you go outside the specs I listed above (as Intel is advocating), then you can no longer license the machine with XP—you must instead use Vista, which has much higher hardware requirements.  Thus, all of a sudden you can’t get by with an Atom processor anymore—you need a Pentium Dual Core or a Core 2 Duo, which is exactly what Intel wants.  The consequences?  Increased overall price, increased power requirements, decreased battery life, larger form factor, greater weight, and a general dissolution of what I call the “Golden Specs” that have thus far made netbooks so great.  In effect, if Intel gets its way, the netbook will cease to exist, and will instead become little more than the latest addition to the ultraportable category—and will fade into obscurity almost as rapidly as it appeared.

But it gets better (or worse).  Apparently, Apple wants to enter the netbook market.  When you stop laughing at the thought of Apple releasing something that isn’t grossly overpriced for its feature set, you can see just how much of a threat this is. (Interestingly, the same guy who wrote the previous article tried to argue the exact opposite point, to amusing and justified pwn-age.)  One quote by Steve Jobs particularly amuses me, “We don’t know how to make a $500 computer that’s not a piece of junk, and our DNA will not let us ship that.”  It’s nice to see you have so much confidence in your own product line, Steve (look to the far left).

Kidding aside (I love Apple, really), here’s the point: as noted, Apple is dead-set against releasing anything in the cost range of current netbooks.  Also, Apple has an astounding ability to market unexceptional hardware configurations for astronomical prices.  Call it “trendiness,” call it “superiority,” or attribute it to the possession of a pointy red tail and a proficency at playing the fiddle—Apple is rather good at this sort of thing.  I estimate that their “netbook” will come in somewhere in the neighborhood of $750-$800—but it will be the trendiest, thinnest, most gotta-have-it netbook ever made.

Oh, and it will offer one more thing: a processor and screen size (and/or resolution) just slightly better than the current crop of machines.  And which microprocessor company powers Apple’s products?  Why Intel, of course!  An Intel who would like to see the netbook in its current incarnation just die.  And who will now be competing with this new Apple “netbook?”  OEMs who are already not enthusiastic about cutting into their own notebook sales with netbooks.  And so, in order to “keep up with the Joneses,” the OEMs will quietly over-spec their machines, ditch XP and the Atom processor, and thus integrate the netbook back into the ultraportable category, where it can better compete with Apple.  And, come 2010 when Windows 7 rolls out, these new “netbooks” will complete their transformation: they will cease to exist as we know them today.

.

Consumer pep-talk and conclusion

That is, unless we as consumers take on the obligation of convincing OEMs, microprocessor manufactuers, and purveyors of trendiness to leave the Golden Specs alone!  And how can we do this?  By buying these things in droves!  Get one for yourself!  Get one for a family member or friend!  I know the economy is pretty bad right now (another discussion we will NOT touch), but we need to make a statement.  The netbook is just fine the way it is, thank you very much.  Apple: mitts off!  Intel: sorry, but “just good ’nuff” is winning out right now.  Microsoft: we give you our gratitude, though of course you didn’t intend for any of this to happen.  OEMs: come up with an intelligent way to economize on the netbook category.  Like, for example, why don’t you give us package deals on a netbook along with a midrange desktop?  If we’ve got $1,700 to spend, we might be willing to buy a $1,300 desktop and a $400 netbook, as opposed to a $1,000 desktop and a $700 notebook.  By the way, Intel benefits here too because they get a double sale (C2D desktop and Atom netbook), and they are more competitive than AMD in the higher price ranges.  Oh, and ASUS: thank you so much for jumpstarting a category of computer that didn’t even exist a little over a year ago.

Let’s just hope it survives another year unscathed.