I sort of disagree, I think netbooks took over for good. The first issue is that Microsoft fought tooth and nail against these systems because they didn't carry Windows. So they force manufacturers to switch to windows even if the hardware was slow, also other manufacturers jump into schools with the XO and the Intel proposition. Finally the hybrid computers started coming out, and right now they still have the surface and most tablets still have the netbook stage of a tablet being used like a netbook. Even the DEX from phones also feel like a netbook idea inspiration.
Even the Google Chromebook was also an interation of the netbook idea and the Intel NUC which eventually became Smart TVs as computers.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
It depends on how you define netbook i guess but to me to be considered a "netbook" it has to have the following features:
The surface is too expensive. The largest phones are a bit too small and dont have a physical keyboard. Tablets and phones traditioanlly run a more cut down and locked down OS and the keyboard would be a separate thing.
The smaller chromebooks are are the closest modern day equivalents. Chrome OS almost disqualifies them but i believe you can install another OS if you want. Unless they've started locking them down... I haven't used one recently.
My definition of netbook is closer to what was the idea of the 'web appliance'. Inexpensive accesible devices that focus on get you online. It reminded me of this device which only do email (see picture). Hence the name (inter)net-book. Or what now we have as Google Nest or Amazon Dot. So running a proper OS is sort of ok only because Linux made it possible. But like I said, Windows wasn't part of the plan, Microsoft just threw money and threats to the manufacturers to get the specs up to where windows was possible. Because trying to push Windows Mobile (from their pocket pc line) resulted in a disaster.