Lately, I have been in search of a netbook for school and writing. I am primarily a Mac user, but I've found that my 15" MacBook Pro is ill-suited for class use, given the small, rinky-dinky desks tuition fees provide. It's also not ideal for informal recumbent typing, given the large heavy screen.
Unfortunately, Apple gives me no choices in this area. It's either a 13.3 MacBook or up. And I've deemed the smaller 12.1" iBooks of yesteryear far too dated for today, especially after the Intel-switch. Not to mention many iBooks of that era were plagued with video and/or motherboard problems I dare not inhereit. (Although to be fair, a used G3 iBook I bought for $200 from a fellow Mac user a few years ago was probably the most rock-solid and stable Mac I've ever had, not to mention the best in value for the buck).
It's not just the screen size, though. A brand-new MacBook can be had for about $1,000. That is too much for a secondary "writing" notebook. I hope to spend less than half that amount. Apple offers me nothing, as Apple only goes for market segments were thick, juciy profit margins are to be had, and this netbooks do not offer. So, my options are clear. I need to look outside of Apple hardware for a PC netbook. It's disappointing my favorite operating system can't come along for the ride, simply because it does not fit into Apple's business model.
However, I am definitely not stuck to Mac OS X, and I am not desperate enough to try to hack it to run on non-Apple blessed hardware. I wouldn't want to. My first and foremost concern is reliability, and easy updateability for the OS. This is hindered both by Apple's attempts and by the natural consequence of this OS not being optimized for such a platform, which means it lacks many device drivers and other essentials.
However, I am definitely not stuck to Mac OS X, and I am not desperate enough to try to hack it to run on non-Apple blessed hardware. I wouldn't want to. My first and foremost concern is reliability, and easy updateability for the OS. This is hindered both by Apple's attempts and by the natural consequence of this OS not being optimized for such a platform, which means it lacks many device drivers and other essentials.
Another priority for me is low-power usage. This will be a netbook for writing and doing school work often outside the range of a conveniently located power outlet, after all. Of course, it goes without saying that Windows is not on my list of alternative operating system choices. That will clearly fall to some Linux distribution which I am comfortable with.
A Linux-powered netbook sounds great to me. On the OS front, I get to choose from the plethora (and yes, I do often think there are too many) of Linux distributions out there. There are several netbook-specific ones. There is even a specific Ubuntu distro for the popular Asus Eee PC netbooks. On the hardware front, well-- if there is any consolation from being away from Apple hardware is the enourmous choice before me! No longer confined to Apple specifications, I get to pick from one of the surely at least thousands of configurations available from the myriad of netbook manufacterers out there.
Stifling Specifications
Oh, but what's this?: 10.2" display, 1024 x 600 resolution and a ~ 1.60 Ghz Intel Atom CPU w/integrated Intel graphics
Those are the overwhelmingly predominant specs for netbooks as of this writing. Some differ slightly, but more often than not this is it, and what is given additionally in one area is cruelly taken away from another. Why? Well, it's the price point, you say. Perhaps, this is just the manufacter "sweet spot" for a $250 - $400 netbook, give or take a few features here and there. Just the free market system at work, right? No, it is not so simple or so innocent an explination.
It turns out niether Intel nor Microsoft are content to merely create and sell thier wares. Instead, they have gone into the business of dictating to those manufacters who actually make something out of that hardware and software what they should be making.
Well, surely if a company makes something it should have some control over where it goes right? I mean, we wouldn't want Intel hardware to make its way to a Chinese missle headed our way (for "scientific reasons", of course!). Or have Microsoft software be the basis of Iran's nuclear facility (for the noble purpose of providing its citizen's with cheap and safe electricity, of course!). Surely we don't. But there is something wrong with this argument.
First off, it is highly unlikely that neither Microsoft nor even Intel would be able to stop thier software or hardware from being used in some secret, nefarious and illicit purpose. So it makes little sense seen from that standpoint. In fact, I would think either company would be more than happy to sell anyone their products as long as there is a big, fat check for them. Which brings me to my next and most important point.
The entire idea behind this "specs-fixing" is maintaing and increasing profitability by artificially manipulating the market. Intel thinks that making netbooks too powerful will cannibalize full-fledged notebook sales. Microsoft is afraid that the proliferation of netbooks will cut into it's profits, as netbooks are not powerful enough to use Windows Vista, which Microsoft can sell for more than Windows XP. Even worse, Microsoft is afraid big, bad open source will come and completely swipe some netbook OS sales away from Microsoft entirely.
So this is a case of Microsoft and Intel protecting their interests in maximum profits by conspiring to artificially limit the netbooks. So what's wrong with this? One should ask what's right in this, if anything. Can anyone think of anything more detrimental to the free market system than some big boy companies dictating and shaping an industry for their own selfish interests? It is clearly unethical. One might wonder if it is not illegal, and if not, why so?
Are there no other options, you ask? Why yes, of course there are. There are always options. But pressure and coercion from business' big/main supplier goes a long way towards eliminating those options. Let me illustrate.
Specifically Daring
Famed Asus dared to make a netbook with a larger 11.6 (the 1101HA), instead of the usual mandatory 10.1" display. Clearly they broke they mold. In fact, Asus was the pioneer of the commercial netbook, taking over what the XO-1 laptop began. So what happened?
It turns out Asus had to go with the slower 1.33 Ghz Intel Atom Z520 instead of the usual ~ 1.60 Ghz N270 or N280 CPU. In a time when most every other general-purpose computer has gone dual-core or better, even the latter is considered slow. This makes the Asus 1101HA even slower. Asus offers the user a way to overclock the CPU, thus making it faster, but this is far from an ideal solution and it is a tacit acknowledgment by Asus that the netbook is too slow-- even for a netbook. Asus is not the only manufacturer affected. Acer and other netbook-making companies have had to make similar concessions to Intel and Microsoft.
Asus started out offering many netbooks with Linux as an alternative to Microsoft Windows. Now none but select models and configurations (usually the low-end ones with just as high or higher price-tags) are offered with Linux. Is it too difficult to imagine Microsoft had something to do with this? Microsoft is known for its aggressive (and often illegal) anticompetitive lock-in strategies. Trouble is, these agreements between public companies remain "secret", so we can only make educated guesses at what stipulations were made. But I think it is safe to say that Linux options has suffered for it, and most customers have been made to pay the Windows tax, which is difficult to avoid, whether they want a Windows netbook or not.
Some manufacturers have chosen the less travelled route, and gone with a different chipset. That is, they still use Intel CPUs, but not in an Intel motherboard. Such is the case of the Nvidia Ion platform, one which promised a considerable boost in graphics capabilities for a netbook-category computer. This opens up more possibilities for high definition video playback and gaming on netbooks.
It also competes with Intel's own integrated graphics and chipset interests. So Intel slapped Nvidia with a lawsuit, pertaining to its licensing of Intel technology necessary to make Nvidia's Ion work with Intel's Atom CPU. Although Nvidia's ION 2 is still slated to debut this year, the Intel lawsuit has essentially put the entire Nvidia Ion platform's future in question.
The Net Effect
It is clear to me that Intel and Microsoft have both conspired to shape and limit the netbook segment to cater to their own business interests. Now, the technology landscape is always changing, and already new netbook models with larger displays and faster processors have been announced. Intel and Microsoft have both modified their "requirements" to allow for some of these. With the debut of Windows 7, for instance, Microsoft is a little more lax on its requirements, as most netbooks can run it. And Intel plans to release beefier Atom processors next year.
Neither Intel nor Microsoft can stop the progress of technology nor the evolution of the free market system, which can ultimately make old market segments obsolete and sprout new ones. But that is not to say that they cannot slow it down, nor that we the end users do not suffer, nor that injustice has not been done unto many as a consequence.
Some manufacturers have gone the most radical route and bypasses Intel altogether, fitting their netbooks with CPUs from AMD or VIA. But these are the exceptions, and they have their own drawbacks, naturally. It is possible that in time these may force Intel and Microsoft to drop their anti-competitive lock-in strategies. But both have considerable influence on the market, and it will not occur overnight.
Ask yourselves why we should allow these two mega-corporations to dictate products to the rest of the industry. Intel and Microsoft should not be entitled to control and dictate the end products that manufacturers build based upon the demands of the end users and natural market conditions. This does nothing more than stifle creativity, limit choices and create artificial gaps where niche segments would have healthily existed. Personally, I'm waiting a bit more to get my netbook. It seems my choices are a bit limited these days.
Ask yourselves why we should allow these two mega-corporations to dictate products to the rest of the industry. Intel and Microsoft should not be entitled to control and dictate the end products that manufacturers build based upon the demands of the end users and natural market conditions. This does nothing more than stifle creativity, limit choices and create artificial gaps where niche segments would have healthily existed. Personally, I'm waiting a bit more to get my netbook. It seems my choices are a bit limited these days.
