What are the advantages of an Android netbook?
Netbooks have to be cheap. That can’t be stated emphatically enough. There are many low-cost notebooks these days and for netbooks to get away with using slightly under-powered components such as the Atom processor, they must be very cheap.
That low cost requirement has many looking at foregoing Linux or Windows XP and putting Android on netbooks. There’s a lot that can be said about doing this but it leads to the need for a serious discussion as to what might be gained by doing so. There’s certainly a big interest in an Android netbook.
Certainly Android is pretty powerful and could handle the netbook format. It’s almost like a miniature version of Windows with all of those icons and the ability to handle keyboards. It’s open source so it could easily be a cheap alternative for netbooks to help produce them cheaply enough to be competitive.
Perhaps an Android netbook could be instant on and have great battery life. That would be a powerful argument for using Android. There must be a lot of good reasons to make an Android netbook a viable product so let’s kick off a discussion. What do you think? Would you consider buying an Android netbook? What would it need to get you to do so? We’re looking to have a meaningful exchange of ideas. OEMs visit here frequently so your idea may get them going, stranger things have happened.
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
With the thousands of apps available, I’d much rather have a WinMo netbook than an Android one. I loved my old Casiopeas and I’d love to see a new version f the Windows Mobile Clamshell Design.
Gordon
I think in approaching a Android netbook, makers have to design this netbook from the ground up with Android in mind. That means you cannot make this machine run Windows XP at all costs. XP is what made current netbooks with linux fail because the consumer was given a choice. If the makers are forced to make an Android netbook with a contract, then they will have an incentive create a better OS in the Android and they can make the netbook at a pricepoint lower than XP netbook. A advantage of Android over Windows could be the lower system requirements and less disk usage, so it can run on 1GB of ram and SSD and this will make the hardware that much cheaper.
Android device cannot be “instant on”, cause it has to load at least Linux kernel and Dalvik virtual machine in order to boot. Nevertheless, Android netbooks may have several advantages over current proposals:
1) Android works on lower-end hardware than either Linux distros or Windows XP, and works fast for common netbook tasks – an opportunity to make even cheaper netbooks ($100 netbook, perhaps)
2) Android AppStore: should it succeed to create developer ecosystem like that around iPhone OS X, it would be tempting to use Android on netbooks just for it’s applications.
3) Longer battery life is possible, cause Android was designed for devices with small battery capacity.
I think the comment about building a netbook from the ground up with Android in mind is key here as has been mentioned previously. I think taking a whole new approach by using something like nVIDIA Tegra paired with Android would be amazing. Or even look past the ARM11 used by nVIDIA and go with a Cortex A8. You could end up with a thinner, lighter machine that could still do 1080p video and has plenty of power for most of the tasks that are typically associated with netbooks. Plus you get the advantage of longer battery life. Especially if paired with an efficient LCD like the ones that Pixel Qi are comint out with (assuming they can deliver what they’re saying).
My quick list of advantages for Android on a netbook:
- free initially; free upgrades
- open source (easily tailored for netbook, no vendor lock-in)
- fast boot & run time
- long battery life
- simple to learn, easy to use
- touch oriented interface (if touchscreen equipped)
- low/no OS maintenance
- mobile phone call support (if GSM/3G equipped)
- lower operating cost (electricity)
- easy application installation (Android Market)
- CPU flexibility (ARM/X86); small SSD
- scalable to VERY low cost netbooks
An Android device would be instant-on in the sense that you’d usually just be putting it to sleep, rather than turning it off. The battery use in sleep mode would be so minimal, and the time it takes to go in and out of sleep mode is so minimal, that this would be the normal operating procedure.
The benefit of an Android netbook to a Windows Mobile one would be stability and speed of the operating system. I have one of the highest spec’d Windows Mobile devices available atm (HTC Advantage) and it still grinds to a halt with minimal to moderate multitasking, or just because it wants to, and has a tendency to refuse to wake from its slumber. It has gotten along on its feature list alone for far too long and I’m quite sick of putting up with waiting on baited breath for a new update to come around and finally fix the ills it has long had, only for minimal features to be added in a ROM update that, even if I *could* get it, would require wiping all the data from my device. Microsoft really needs to wake up when it comes to Windows Mobile, they are falling hilariously far behind, with only grandfathered Outlook functionality and third-party apps to use as a crutch.
The greatest benefit of a line of Android netbooks, IMO, would be the improved chance for powerful applications being designed for them and trickling down to smartphones. I’m just now realizing the recently announced QuickOffice is for viewing Office documents only, a netbook might push someone to making an editor.
“Netbooks have to be cheap. That can’t be stated emphatically enough.”
You already lost me. All that requirement will do is ensure we get nothing but “me too” products.
I think the defining criteria of a netbook is that it needs a much smaller footprint than a cheap laptop (“grab and go”, so to speak), but why must it have to cost $400? As far as I’m concerned, the dirt cheap price explains the EXPLOSION of netbook sales, but it does not define the CATEGORY.
If someone used an 11″ screen at 1280 x 800, a full-size keyboard (which I think could eke into a machine with an 11″ screen), and otherwise kept the footprint small and the machine light, wouldn’t that be worth something to you? If such a machine existed and sold for, say, $650, you wouldn’t consider it a netbook?
It would still be very small and very light, and likely still under-powered (thermal considerations), with no optical disc. It’s not a netbook?
There are already a number of $650 notebooks available today, you don’t have to wait. They’re not netbooks in most people’s mind as they run full notebook components. Netbooks tend to run Atom processors and thus cost much less.
James,
“There are already a number of $650 notebooks available today, you don’t have to wait. ”
But those are just cheap laptops. I’m not talking about one of those.
The machine I described is like today’s netbook, but with an 11″ screen (1280 x 800), full keyboard, and presumably slightly larger trackpad as well. Still no optical drive, still likely an Atom processor, etc. But it would be more expensive due to the much better screen/keyboard. Why would such a machine not be a netbook? It’s certainly not a cheap laptop, which are big, bulky, and heavy.
I’m waiting for someone (and it ought to be ASUS, in my opinion) to re-think the netbook and improve it. Stop all the cookie-cutter stuff everyone else is doing. Take it up a notch, as it were.
You can call it whatever you like but it cannot be considered a true netbook because netbooks are purposefully crippled so that they do not eat into sales of ultraportables. Also Microsoft put a restriction on the size of the screen and also the resolution of netbooks that XP can be sold with.
Would you call HP’s DV2 a netbook? Most people would say no even though it has a low $700 starting price and it’s small at 12″(They could have easily made it 11″ for arguments sake).
Fraggo,
Netbooks don’t eat into ultraportable sales mostly because they’re dirt cheap, not because they’re crippled.
As for Microsoft and screen restrictions, that was to stave off Linux inroads while at the same time trying to curb too many other XP licenses. MS will be begging for Win 7 to be put on anything (hence Starter). Besides, at the $650 price point these things can afford a full license just like a cheap laptop can. There would be zero reason for MS not to want this.
Actually, the DV2 is still too big. It starts at nearly 4 pounds, and “depending on configuration” will exceed that. It’s also somewhat powerful, hence only 3-4 hours battery. Better to call it a smaller (inferior) MacBook than a larger netbook.
But the DV2 brings up another way I can express the point I’m trying to make:
I don’t want a PC maker to take a laptop (any laptop) and think it DOWN. Rather, I want them to take a netbook and think it UP. Still low power, still quite small, still long battery life, just a little bit “roomier”.
There’s just no way I’d consider a 11 or 12″ screen a netbook. At that size they’re just crap notebooks.
It wont be long until all the 7″, 8.9″ and 10″ screens are gone in favour of larger Atom powered laptops and we’ll be right back where we started.
Gordon
Well… in the real life world I don’t have many tech friends… maybe 1 or 2. So this is a perspective of someone with a lot experience around non-tech users. Netbooks are indeed becoming a lot more prominent, mostly due to best Buy. Unfortunately, I’m starting to see an issue thats becoming a trend, that being namely these “average” consumers that see these netbooks expect them to be laptop replacements and do everything that a laptop does. Ironically, a netbook from Best Buy does all that (Run Microsoft Office(and not open office) play games, use AIM and skype), fo if Android-based netbooks do get released into the mainstream, they’ll have to have some huge advantages over Windows netbooks.
Some essentials, IMO, for them to truly succeed in the mainstream and not just get ran over by Windows netbooks would be:
-price
-a really nice interface, nothing too radical
-very thin(like 3/4th of an inch) and nice external design
-”good” battery life
-media storage and palyback, and compatibility with devices like iPods.
just my 2c
The problem is that nobody actually wants a non-Windows powered netbook other than tech geeks.
What’s the statistic? Something like 80% of Linux netbooks get returned to Best Buy?
Its because people can’t use the software which they’re used to. And, an ARM processor means that a LOT of software that people are used to won’t be able to be run.
Sure, there are equivalents in Android for many things, but those who need to be buying a product for it to be considered a success aren’t really the types of people to actually spend their time looking for them.
Android can succeed where Linux failed as long as Google is backing it, that is key IMO. Android is simple yet it has potential with Apps, whereas Linux had no room for growth; it may have sacrifice some features compared to Windows but then again we are dealing with something that will be priced lower than existing netbooks.
what fraggo says about linux is simply NOT true. There is no other existing system (besides windows) with MORE apps ready to be used right from the shelf than linux. but you have to know how to access them easily. example: go to the debian website and search for the .deb libraries. these are the easy to install program packages for mister everybody – not the console stuff, all these maybe gurus brag all the time about. installing a .deb package is a 3 click thing in a filemanager. that simple. so what is lacking is an apps store (like eg for the iphone) throw the .deb’s into one and there you will go.
and i almost forgot this: oh yeah – all for free! not only the google thing android.
Yes Linux in a broad sense has near limitless capabilities, but IIRC the Linux distros on netbooks in most cases were a dead end for the average user. You could use it for internet, email, office apps but the average user didn’t have simple way to add new applications, which is why people switched to XP so quickly. What Linux on the netbook was, was like the iPhone without an app store. Now I won’t go and guarantee that Android will be a huge success but I do believe it will fare way better than Linux just because it has a much easier way to add apps.
But my point is that anything not Windows or Mac is going to be a dead-end for the average user. Like I said, we all know that there’s tons of applications available to do anything you’d need to, but most people don’t know and don’t care to learn.
Oh, and also, considering you can’t get Abiword, OpenOffice, Gnumeric, or anything like that on Android then you’re limiting yourself even more.
Don’t get me wrong, I realize that many people with netbooks have limited needs, but I think word processing, spreadsheets, and Powerpoint are in general one of those needs.
You are looking at it from the wrong perspective.
The best OS out there will be Windows7. It will be optimized for (multi) touch and it will carry with it the king … ohh you don’t know the king?! The king is content!
It may sell for a lot of money, but this is one thing you will not be able to convince the mass buyers to forgo. No way – you are just tech geeks and that is understandable. Moreover, once MS will feel any danger with the netbook alternative OS prices, they will reduce the win7 price for netbooks. I can guaranty that to you.
In fact why don’t you ask the opposite question? Windows7 for smartphones on platforms such as the future Atom platform is not science fiction anymore. The challenge is running with a small user interface, and I am even willing to bet that Win-Phone is going to be replaced down the road with this idea eventually.
Perhaps a “netbook” running Android could be called a “smartbook”, since it is really a “smartphone” with a netbook style keyboard & display.
In reality, the current generation of “netbooks” are small, low power, low cost “notebooks”, especially if they are running a full desktop OS. Other than supporting 3G, which notebooks can also, they don’t live up to the “net” in the name. Android, which is almost completely “net”-oriented, does.
I’m sure the terminology will evolve as the new device categories mature.
Re. Windows 7 on a smartphone, I really doubt that will happen. It is big, expensive, not designed for small touchscreens, doesn’t currently support ARM, etc. It would be like trying to put an elephant in a shoebox.