Tag Archives | Netbooks

Palm’s Foleo: Back From the Dead?

Posted by Harry McCracken on May 1, 2009 at 1:56 pm

I was one of the few tech journalists who didn’t mock Palm’s Foleo device when founder Jeff Hawkins unveiled it at D two years ago–see my fuzzy photo to the left–and who chose not to tapdance on its grave when Palm decided not to release it after all. (Um, actually I may have been the only pundit who treated the Foleo, which was a sort of browser-in-a-subnotebook-that-talked-to-your-wireless-phone, with a shred of respect.)

So I like today’s rumor that the Foleo was not dead, but just resting: Analyst Trip Chowdry says that Palm has some iPod veterans working on a new version. If he’s correct, I don’t expect the blogosphere to formally retract all the nasty things it said in 2007. But it’s undeniable that the notion of a cheap, small computer that’s designed mostly to run Web apps rather than client software is no longer deserving of contempt: We now know the concept as the netbook, and it seems to be doing just fine in the market.

In other words, Jeff Hawkins wasn’t dumb, he was just ahead of his time–something which anybody who’s followed Hawkins’ career should have been able to figure out in the first place.

There’s actually every reason to think that Palm is indeed working on a new Foleo–because when CEO Ed Colligan killed the first one, he said it would be back, and it would be based on the platform which we now know is called WebOS:

Jeff Hawkins and I still believe that the market category defined by Foleo has enormous potential. When we do Foleo II it will be based on our new platform, and we think it will deliver on the promise of this new category. We’re not going to speculate now on timing for a next Foleo, we just know we need to get our core platform and smartphones done first.

Which doesn’t mean that I’m assuming Chowdry is right. He’s the same guy who said he believed that Costco would be selling $149 iPhones last January, and who saw Google losing its technical edge to search startup Powerset a couple of years ago. But in this case, I’m guessing that Chowdry, like Hawkins, has the right instincts–and the only question is whether he got the timing right,

19 comments

5Words for April 27th, 2009

Posted by Harry McCracken on April 27, 2009 at 8:42 am

5words Lotsa Android-related news today:

Second Android phone finally arrives.

Samsung announces an Android phone.

Here’s the first Android netbook.

Mouse Factory ready to Hulu.

Countdown to Kumo (Bing, Hook)?

So long, tax-free Internet.

Flip HD videocam with HDMI.

IBM computer to play Jeopardy.

Sling: “optimistic” about iPhone SlingPlayer.

Rumor: Apple, Verizon talk iPhone.

No comments

Two Possible Apple Responses to the Netbook

Posted by Harry McCracken on April 23, 2009 at 10:15 am

Mac NetBook In normal times, it’s standard operating procedure for Apple watchers to listen to Steve Jobs dismiss a product category, then come to the conclusion that his negativity simply means that Apple isn’t ready to enter it yet. At the moment, it’s acting CEO Tim Cook whose comments get parsed. As Jason Snell notes over at Macworld, Cook was pretty darn harsh about the downsides of netbooks during yesterday’s Apple financial conference call:

For us, it’s about doing great products. And when I look at what is being sold in the netbook space today, I see cramped keyboards, terrible software, junky hardware, very small screens, and just not a consumer experience… that we would put the Mac brand on, quite frankly. And so it’s not a space, as it exists today, that we’re interested in, nor do we believe that customers in the long term would be interested in.

But Cook didn’t say that Apple wouldn’t make a netbook, or something sort of like a netbook. Actually, he said that it might well do so:

That said, we do look at the space and are interested to see how customers respond to it. People that want a small computer (so to speak) that does browsing and e-mail might want to buy an iPod touch or an iPhone. So we have other products to accomplish some of what people buy netbooks for. So in that way we play in an indirect basis.

And if we can find a way to deliver an innovative product that really makes a contribution, then we’ll do that. We have some interesting ideas in this space. The product pipeline is fantastic for the Mac. If you look at the past, in 17 of the last 18 quarters we’ve exceeded the market rate of growth, and to exceed it in this horrendous economy is quite an accomplishment, especially if you look at these very low-cost netbooks that I think is a stretch to call it a personal computer, that are really propping up unit numbers as a whole.

Deconstructing all this, Cook seems to be saying that Apple won’t make a product with:

1) a cramped keyboard

2) terrible software

3) junky hardware

4) a very small screen

That would seem to rule out anything that’s an exact counterpart to today’s netbooks. But it does leave room for two other products that Apple could make:

1) The widely-rumored tablet--which, I’m thinking, would more logically run the iPhone OS than the Mac OS. No keyboard, and an interface tailored to work well on a small screen. (I like my Asus Eee PC 1000HE, but there’s no question that Windows XP is a poor match for its screen resolution–I’m reminded of that every time I press the Start button and get a warning that it can’t display all the times.)

2) A computer which I still think there’s a good chance Apple will introduce–a replacement for today’s $999 white MacBook that’s a pretty traditional Mac notebook that costs more than a netbook ($800, maybe?) but is also posher than one, with a 13-inch screen and a full-sized keyboard.

Of course, there’s no reason why Apple couldn’t release both of these products, since they’d be complementary more than competitive.

I have no inside info; I try to steer clear of assuming that Apple will make products because they seem logical to me; I know that the fact that the company’s public statements suggest that it might go in a particular direction doesn’t mean it will. But if Apple were to make either or both of these products, I think it would at least be consistent with both Cook’s comments yesterday and the company’s overall philosophies.

3 comments

Resolved: Netbooks are Notebooks. Period.

Posted by Harry McCracken on April 21, 2009 at 1:28 pm

Netbooks aren’t just changing the world’s perceptions of how powerful a computer must be to be useful–they’re also having a major impact on Microsoft’s business model. They’re one reason why Windows XP refuses to die–even though the Wall Street Journal reported that Microsoft makes less than $15 per copy of XP installed on a netbook, versus $50 to $60 for a copy of Windows Vista.

Things will only get more complicated when Windows 7 arrives. It’s designed to do what Windows Vista can’t: perform reasonably well on a modestly-equipped netbook. Microsoft surely hopes that its arrival will help nudge XP into overdue, well-earned retirement. But netbook manufacturers can’t make economic sense of putting a $50 copy of Windows 7 onto a $300 netbook. And Microsoft, understandably, has no desire to sell them a $15 copy of full-blown Windows 7, thereby destroying its ability to sell a $50 one for use on fancier, pricier computers.

Enter Windows 7 Starter Edition, the version that Microsoft plans to pitch for use on low-cost netbooks. It’s got one limitation, but it’s a doozy: It only runs three applications at a time. Which sounds like it would make it useful only for clueless newbies and other folks whose needs are really, really undemanding.

Over at ZDNet, Ed Bott has a revealing post up based on having spent three weeks using Starter Edition, an experience that left him relatively positive about the product. He points out that there are multiple exceptions to the three-app limit: Windows Explorer windows, Gadgets, anti-virus apps that run as separate services, Control Panel utilities, and other items don’t count. Neither do multiple windows and multiple tabs opened up from a single application, such as your Web browser. The bottom line: Depending on what the items in question are, you may be able to have a lot more than three of them open without running into a message telling you that you must save your work and close an app before you can launch another one.

“In short, when I used this system as a netbook, it worked just fine,” Ed writes. “On a netbook, most of the tasks you’re likely to tackle are going to take place in a browser window anyway…If I tried to use this system as a conventional notebook, running multiple Microsoft Office or OpenOffice aps, playing music in iTunes or Windows Media Player, and using third-party IM programs, I would probably be incredibly frustrated with the limitations of Starter Edition.”

Which brings up an interesting question: Are netbooks really netbooks? By which I mean, are they designed primarily to let you use Web-based apps, and are they a distinct class of computer from traditional notebooks?

As of this very moment, you can make the case that the answer to both questions is yes. I’m thinking that the distinctions are going to vanish rapidly, though. A netbook is just a notebook that happens to be small and cheap–and the definitions of both “small” and “cheap” are blurring. Dell, for instance, sells a Mini netbook with a not-tiny 12-inch screen. And the existence of cheap netbooks is driving down the cost of notebooks, period: Best Buy, for instance, already sells multiple traditional notebooks in the netbook-like neighborhood of $400 or so. I don’t think every notebook will look like today’s netbooks, but I think the trend will be towards smaller, lighter models (especially as features like optical drives go away) that cost less than a thousand bucks.

Do people use netbooks mostly for Web-based apps? I may try to find out via a survey, but for the moment I can speak only for myself: I do a lot of Web stuff on my Asus Eee PC 1000HE, but I also use old-fashioned software–Web browsers, Skype, Paint.NET, Adobe Acrobat, and more. I suspect I’d run afoul of Windows 7 Starter Edition’s limitations…well, not constantly, but frequently. Then again, I’d be willing to pay for an upgrade to a version of Windows 7 without the three-app limit–and I’m already curious about how much such an upgrade might cost.

All of which leaves me thinking that Microsoft is still in a tough spot that will only get tougher over time: As notebooks get dirt cheap, it’s going to be incredibly difficult for it to maintain the profit margins that Windows has enjoyed for the past couple of decades. And if it doesn’t come up with a low-cost version of Windows that a reasonable person won’t find to be unreasonably crippled, it gives Linux a great big opportunity to grab the market share that so far has eluded it.

Of course, anything anyone says right now about Windows 7 Starter Edition the future of netbooks is speculation. When Windows 7 ships in a few months–on netbooks that will deliver more power at a given price point than today’s models–we’ll get to see what real people think about all this.

17 comments

Windows Expensive to Put on Netbooks? Not Really

Posted by Ed Oswald on April 20, 2009 at 9:10 am

In what is definitely a defensive move, sources for the Wall Street Journal indicate that the company has only been asking for $15 per copy of XP intended to be installed on netbook computers. That is as little as 25% of its typical fee for notebooks and desktops.

With Linux a popular choice for those looking to avoid Microsoft’s high royalty fees, Redmond apparently felt the window of opportunity closing. Thus it has begun an agressive push to remain dominant in this space as well, and it meant taking a hit on profit margins for its Windows software.

Netbooks may have conribute to the 8 percent decline in revenues in the division, although to be fair that may include customers deciding to pass over Vista and deciding to wait it out for Windows 7.

Speaking of Win 7, how will that handle netbooks? Microsoft is considering a policy of only allowing three concurrent applications. While it may seem unreasonable for them to do so, consider the fact that these devices for the most part do not contain top-of-the-line hardware.

3 comments

AT&T's Fifty-Buck Laptop

Posted by Harry McCracken on April 1, 2009 at 7:06 pm

att_header_logo What do you do after everybody in the country has already signed up for a two-year contract to get a cheap cell phone? Looks like AT&T thinks that signing them up for a two-year contract to get a cheap netbook might be the next step. The company has announced that it’s experimenting in company-owned stores in Atlanta and Philadelphia with various package deals for mobile broadband and DSL service, some of which involve subsidized netbooks (or “mini laptops” in AT&Tspeak). Sign up for both mobile broadband and DSL for two years, and the cheapest of AT&T’s netbooks goes for $49.99.

The deal reduces the cost of the computer to half of what RadioShack charges for its discounted netbook. Of course, since AT&T’s offer requires both mobile and home data plans, the monthly cost is a lot higher.

The most interesting thing about AT&T’s test–other than the prospect of buying a computer for less than the price of a high-end steak–is that it’s not limited to one model from one company: It’s selling an Acer Aspire, two Dell Minis, and the LG Xenia, as well as Lenovo’s ThinkPad X200 (a full-sized ultraportable laptop). If it likes what it learns in Atlanta and Philly and rolls the offers out nationwide, your local AT&T store could end up devoting a meaningful amount of its floor space to computers. I’m still wary about committing to contracts to get cheap hardware–especially cheap hardware in categories that are evolving as rapidly as netbooks are–but I’ll be interested to see if these offers make sense to enough consumers to make them worth AT&T’s while.

No comments

Android May Start Appearing on Netbooks

Posted by Ed Oswald on April 1, 2009 at 8:00 am

The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday that HP and other manufacturers are considering using Google’s Android on netbooks. HP has confirmed the report, saying it is considering using the OS, however has made no final decisions on the matter. Asustek and Dell are also said to be considering similiar moves.

Using Android on netbooks does not come without pitfalls. While Linux graced early models, manufacturers turned to Windows to allow the devices to run popular programs, and in turn make them more marketable.

However, at the same time, Windows is expensive to put on the netbook. As these devices sell at prices typically well below $500, a non-Windows model could viably sell for under $200, say analysts.

There is no charge to use Android at the moment, a move by Google to spur quick adoption of its product.

Will it work? I’m guessing it probably won’t, unless Google can figure out how to overcome the software hurdle. While these PCs are cheap, consumers have shown a preference for the familiar, and putting Windows on these netbooks have proven to be the kick in the pants netbooks needed.

Heck, I’m a Mac guy and I have seriously been considering an Acer Aspire One everytime I walk by it at Wal-Mart. The price is attractive, and that would be great for conferences.

3 comments

The Giant iPod Touch Theory: I Don't Know if I Buy It, But I Like It

Posted by Harry McCracken on March 20, 2009 at 6:24 pm

iHammock Is Apple getting ready to release a tablet that’s essentially an oversized iPod Touch? I don’t know, and neither do you. And neither does media blogger Rex Hammock. But he’d sure like to see such a gadget–and he has a fun post up theorizing that it might show up in the next 45 days. He’s not an analyst and doesn’t run an Apple rumor site, so he’s not declaring it to be fact. It’s just a theory–he calls this piece a “guessay.” But it’s nicely fleshed out, with details like the price point ($500), the size (about the size of a letter-size piece of paper), the primary target audience (college students, who’ll use the device to read interactive textbooks, as well as for fun stuff), and even the launch event (read the post!).

I have no idea if Rex’s guessay will turn into reality, but it would be nice if it did. I do think there’s at least a reasonably decent possibility (how’s that for intentionally vague wording?) that Apple will release something in the coming months that competes with netbooks, at a slightly higher price than a typical netbook, without being a netbook. And I think it’s something close to a dead certainty that there will eventually be devices based on the iPhone OS that are at least a little more like traditional PCs in size and purpose than today’s iPhones and iPod Touches (or is that iPods Touch)?

My biggest question about the device I’m now thinking of as the iHammock (I can’t call it the iRex–there’s already an e-reader by that name) is simple: Is there any way to build one as thin as Apple would make it, and still deliver adequate battery life?

11 comments

Reuters: Apple Ordering 10-inch Touchscreens

Posted by Ed Oswald on March 11, 2009 at 8:43 am

The drumbeat in the media claiming Apple is developing some type of netbook or tablet PC for later this year is growing louder. Reuters says souces in Taiwan report that the Cupertino company has placed an order for 10-inch touchscreens with supplier Wintek.

That firm has received orders for these screens, and Apple is a client of the company. However, it would not comment on the report, and Reuters’ source declined to offer any more information.

Either way, delivery of these devices is expected in the third-quarter. Reuters’ story also marks the third news outlet to report something about these touchscreen devices from Apple.

A Chinese business daily reported the original news earlier this week, and a Taiwanese government listed Apple and Sony as customers of Quanta, a contract laptop manufacturer, in 2009 (this was last year).

So despite a lot of analyst predictions that Cupertino would slow down as a result of the slowdown, it now appears the company is still going full steam ahead.