Comments on: Netbooks are notebooks

Smaller, cheaper notebooks are indeed a welcome trend. That doesn't make them a unique category.

[fjpoblam]

Right! Netbooks are just a flavor of notebook. Just a flavor of laptop. Just a flavor of PC! "Netbook" is a word, a verbal shortcut that has evolved to summarize a perceived set of characteristics of that flavor. It is my perhaps very unexpert opinion that it is priggish not to allow some folks the freedom to use a simple word to describe what they perceive as a flavor of notebook: a "netbook". To claim a "netbook" does not exist is as absurd is to claim a word does not exist.

[ghaff]

I'm not objecting to anyone using the word "netbook." I'm saying that it isn't a fundamentally different type of device--a point you seem to agree with.

[USAF_22]

I really hope they do call the new netbooks fred. It would just be really funny if nothing else.

[gerrrg]

The distinction is pretty strong if you consider the performance hit you take using a single processor CPU running at half the speed of desktops, and about 2/3 of most mobile processors.

I can only see the single-processor being useful for browsing the net, doing simple tasks, watching movies and listening to music, but not all at the same time.

[ewelch]

Do people know what you mean when you say netbook? DO they know you're not talking about a super-speedy Dell or Mac? Then the term serves a purpose, and to deny it is like language Nazis who say you should never end a sentence with a preposition.

[handydan918]

Ending a sentence with a preposition is a situation up with which I shall not put!

[zafo01]

The term netbook was proper when they first came out. They were small, cheap, light, 7"/9" screens, linux-based, small solid-state hard drives and relied on good connectivity with the net for many functions. The current generation with 10" displays, 92% of full size keyboards and 160 GB disks are really sub-notebooks. If people want to call them netbooks, then they will be known as netbooks (editorials and blogs notwithstanding).

[Kanttila]

I don't see a problem here, they are evolving, but there are still loads of products available that can be defined as netbooks even by the most hardcore netbook fan. In my opiniong most important thing is that the consumer finds suitable machine for his needs, no matter what it's called.

I am a heretic and own 10.1" Compaq. It was cheap, has enough hdd to store all work related stuff I might need and 3G WAN. It runs XP, so combined with other features, it might not be real netbook. I don't really care what it's called when it fulfills my needs for a machine that has almost laptop capabilities and is still small enough to throw in a messenger bag with beach gear if necessary..

Funny enough, in Finnish there was no translation to netbook, they were called "mini-laptops" from the beginning. So no need to argue abotu the definition in finnish. ;)

[alexander turner]

All this seems to miss the point. Technology moves and so it is impossible to define any category of computer via its technical abilities.

The point of a netbook is relative cost. Before the netbook, smaller laptops were _more_ expensive than bigger ones. Smaller cost money. Asus realised that small processors and screen technology had hit a point where the opposite could happen. Smaller machine could be cheaper.

Ultr-portable -> More expensive than full spec 15" laptop
Netbook -> Less expensive than full spec 15" laptop

Simple!

I love my netbook - it does just enough, does not weigh much, takes up a very small amount of space and works of around 6 hours on the battery. It has made me more productive - which is what I bought it for.