Comments on: Netbook Screens Continue to Grow as does the Market

By: Netbook Guru

Netbook Guru — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 13:27:55 +0000

Just wait until the Nokia Netbook comes out…now that is going to be an awesome piece of kit

By: Netbook Marc

Netbook Marc — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:54:12 +0000

I think that laptops will start creating smaller screens, but maintain their processing power.

By: Yikes

Yikes — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 01:38:04 +0000

Oh wait, you were asking about 2009, not 2008. We know that 10 million netbooks account for 7% of notebook sales. Thus the entire notebook segment amounted to 142.85 million units in 2008. If it keeps growing at the same 20% pace, and if netbook sales double from 10 to 20 million as predicted by IDC, netbooks will account for half of the notebook growth next year and will reach a 12% share of the entire notebook market.

By: Yikes

Yikes — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 00:58:27 +0000

“I’ll be very interested to see what percentage of netbooks make up the entire notebook market at the end of this year. My gut says near 25%. What do you think?”

Netbooks account for nearly 7% of the notebook market, according to IDC (Jan. 14, 2009).

http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp;jsessionid=HEQTUPRNMNW3OCQJAFICFFAKBEAUMIWD?containerId=prUS21627609

“Mini notebook volume is estimated at near 5 million units in the fourth quarter, bringing the total for 2008 to about 10 million, accounting for nearly 7% of total portables, with shipments expected to double in 2009.”

By: backspaces

backspaces — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 04:33:29 +0000

It seems to me the key for netbook equilibrium (i.e. finding their unique place in the ecology) is staying small and morphing into what a small critter is good for and a big notebook is bad for.

One thing would be a book-reader. This would require a swivel touch screen. That and an Amazon deal that made it Kindle compatible.

The netbook migration to a low end notebook is really weird and shows just how lame the manufacturers are.

I’d far rather have a touch/swivel device that was small w/ great battery life and had functions that would be awkward on my 17″ laptop than the almost-notebook that the netbooks are apparently trying to be.

By: Netbook Insider Forum

Netbook Insider Forum — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:16:52 +0000

The major selling point (IMO) of netbooks has been their low pricing, not their size. If any of the manufacturers can maintain a low price for a larger device then it will be a huge benefit for us consumers. Whether we call it a 12″ netbook or something else the price is why buyers are even looking at netbooks.

By: Hans Fairchild

Hans Fairchild — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:47:51 +0000

Small Cheap Computing: The best computer (like the best camera) is the one you use. I don’t want to take something with me that weighs 6 pounds, runs for 1.5 hours on a charge, and takes $1000 dollars with it when its lost or stolen. I’ll leave all of that at home thank you very much.

$299 2 pound laptop? That’s a no brainer. Mobile phones cost more than that.

Hans

By: Rick Limpert

Rick Limpert — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:18:58 +0000

I think the perfect screen size for netbooks is in the 9-10 inch range. Anything bigger, I might as well lug around my 15.4 screen like I used to do in the past. I love my Asus 900, it is quick, lets me complete what I need to do, has decent battery life and is a nifty at websurfing. What more could I as for? Kudos to ASUS!

By: turn.self.off

turn.self.off — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:01:23 +0000

different gear for different needs, people.

sadly, that kind of specialization is bad for the profits, and therefor bad for the share price.

so the companies will try to move things around to see where they can find the biggest overlap at the least production expense.

there is a reason why it was asus and not dell or hp that rolled out the eeepc. profit margins. i suspect these netbooks in their most bare form have a razor thin profit margin. compared to the 12″ ultraportable sold at a business-grade premium…

By: Brian Goodwin

Brian Goodwin — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 05:46:33 +0000

I currently have a 10 inch netbook (HP Mini 1000). I love it….but I would not mind having just a bit more screen IF it can be done within 3 pounds and cost under $500. If 11 inches is the limit to meet that spec then that is limit of “netbook” in my world.

By: Montevale

Montevale — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 05:46:27 +0000

Today’s Netbooks are toys and there is no competition for business use here. I can’t effectively run a whole bunch of programs I usually do on my X61, heck I can’t even effectively see the MS Outlook on the netbook’s not just physically small but some even low rez screens ( of the 800×600 variety).
Yet the toys are fun and cool shiny pieces of glitter we all love. Without toys and fun there is no need for SLI graphics chipsets in order to proprly address Crysis’ demands.
We measure all these devices by fun… look my iPod can run …DooM :)

Netbooks brought FUN back into computing without costing an arm and a leg or perhaps because of that.

By: HG

HG — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 05:45:48 +0000

To me I think that for Netbooks the max screen size should 11.1″ thats just me. This should keep the price down for consumers to buy without giving it a second thought. Maybe if the price for these netbooks stay around the 199 to 299 price tag, manualfactures might want to you buy these netbooks as disposable computers. :) You buy one and use it for 6 months buy another. But the real thing is as long as these devices do what most people do on computers like email, internet, Office, etc… they will sell. Kevin has a good point that towards the end of the year netbooks, will have a good percentage of the market.

By: Luscious

Luscious — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 02:31:18 +0000

Kevin, I agree that $299 cannot compare with a $1000+ device. But what a lot of people don’t immediately realize is that the more expensive device can offer much more features and functionality. There is a difference between what people perceive for a toy versus a no-compromise business device.

I don’t want to get into the argument between the eee and the P1120, but for many users the eee simply wouldn’t have cut it for serious business use. With the P1120 I was able to run multiple Windows-based web-enabled business apps on what other folks at that time needed to lug around 12″ and larger laptops – machines that at the time also came in at over $1000.

Hence my wording, full function PC. Business users would have severely been hampered with a non-windows OS, lack of storage and limited expandability of the first eee PC. Today, the situation is much improved as more sophisticated netbook models have come to market that can finally meet and beat the average notebook.

I also agree that use is key, be it as a secondary notebook, casual home use or mobile work use. My mention of the P1120 was made simply because I had ample experience with this device so early on, at a time when everyone else would lug around a 10 lb laptop bag alongside a briefcase.

But going back to your original blog post (sorry for the long rant) I would put the limit for netbooks at 10″. 12″ is clearly in notebook realm where you can accommodate more powerful hardware thanks to space. 12″ is also the point where it becomes just too heavy to carry around all day in one hand, even the slim dv2 at 3.8 lbs won’t match a 10″ 2140 at just 2.6 lbs.

By: Kevin C. Tofel

Kevin C. Tofel — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 02:26:25 +0000

Robert, we saw an Asus netbook with optical drive at CES last week: http://jkontherun.com/2009/01/09/asus-booth-tour-eee-pc-heaven/ Looks like a new trend? ;) Personally, I’d rather see the space/weight used with additional battery capacity. I use the battery every day. An optical drive not so much.

By: Nate

Nate — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:56:27 +0000

I think we’re getting a little too wrapped up in the naming

By: Robert Kawaratani

Robert Kawaratani — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:49:24 +0000

With regards to creeping featuritis, a netbook with a DVD drive was announced yesterday in Japan. Obviously the “netbook” class seems to be stretching in various directions.

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2009/0113/mouse.htm