IDC Says Netbook Stagnates: Have they Reached their Peak?

  • Share
  • Share

By
28 Apr, 2010 6:00 pm

3 Comments

31/365 (It Gets Dark Too Early)

IDC will release figures last week that indicate that the Netbook phenomenon may have peaked. The figures from market researcher IDC show a decline in Atom processor shipments as a percentage of Intel mobile processors a sharp reversal of previous trends that had the Atom chip, quarter by quarter, taking a larger percentage of mobile chip shipments.

“Atom in Netbooks is plateauing,” Shane Rau, an analyst at IDC, said in a phone interview. “With the market recovery, I think end users are going to be looking for more value than just low-cost devices. This is an opportunity for higher-end mobile PCs, for example, that have better performance, bigger screens, bigger hard drives,” he said.

In the first quarter of this year, Atom processors as a percentage of Intel mobile processors fell to 20.3 percent, compared with 24.3 percent in the fourth quarter of last year and 23.5 percent in the third quarter.

And Intel doesn’t seem to disagree. In an Intel earnings conference call earlier this month, CEO Paul Otellini said this: “I think we suggested that Netbooks seem to be settling out at about 20 percent of the mobile form factors and on an annual basis that looks to be about right,” he said.

So does all this mean the end to netbooks? No, quite the opposite, because it is really only confirms the fact that netbooks have established stable and makes up 20% of the “Mobile Computing” sales. Otellini even says that netbooks are “settling out at about 20%” 1/5th of mobile computing sales isn’t too shabby in my books.

Via NetbookNews.de


Related Posts

  • ProDigit

    Mainly has to do with the fact that the Intel 'upgrade' from the Atom N280 to the N450 was rather disappointing!

    Many like myself are waiting out until the upgrades arrive that have the promised performance gains and battery life gains.
    ever since november 2007, when the first Asus eeePC 701 (4G) came out, I've been waiting for the 'perfect' netbook. The EeePc 901 was the closest to that, but all products after it where severely crippled, and overpriced!

    Instead of going at once to a SOC, Intel decided to continue the sales of their N260/N270 processor with another bridge, until they finally decided to upgrade the bridge and CPU together.
    But the performance gain was actually negative. In many occasions the N450 underperformed against the N280 with the intel GMA.
    The only field they did better is in battery life, but that's not all due to integrating graphics and CPU together, they severely crippled the graphics processor from the previous gen, gave it some extra DX functionality, and gave it direct access to the RAM.
    The graphics card directly accessing the RAM made it perform better, but still just below previous setup, but booting up programs, and program latencies where limited due to the CPU not having direct access to the RAM (had to go via FSB).

    I did not bu a N450 netbook because by the time they finally brought it on the market, my requirements for netbooks changed. I needed a slightly more powerful device, (especially latency wise), powered with a (preferrably 16GB) SSD, with CPU having direct access to RAM.
    DDR3 RAM would be nice too.
    This will allow me to run the netbook as an audio sampler, steered by a midi controller.
    CPU accessing RAM directly will translate in much faster program booting, and response time.
    I had hoped they would have fixed that in the N450, and equipped it with a regular GMA graphics processor, that accessed the ram via FSB.
    Yes, then 3D games would run slower, but hardly anyone wants a netbook for 3D games.
    increasing the graphics potential of a netbook, only looks better for most common benchmarks, but still leaves it severely underpowered for gaming.
    Instead they should have focused on making the CPU access the RAM directly, and cripple the graphics card somewhat.
    In any case a netbook would be able to run 720p video (larger is not needed as it's screen is often between 1024×600 to 1366×768, and there won't be a noticeable detail increase on the internal LCD when running higher than 720p videos anyways).
    So if it can run 720p video, it's main performance increase would be in superpi, booting OS and apps, computing (like eg compression of files), and loading plenty of smaller files (like from large webpages).

    On top of that many are waiting for PiQi (Pixel Qi) to come out with their products!

    My ultimate netbook would be one that runs windows XP, has a PiQi screen, a 6 cell 5200 to 7700mAh battery, and has a 16GB SSD, and would perform better than an Atom N280 platform (both in performance and battery life; which will make me wait until 2011 when intel will decide to switch over to 32nm).

    I'm not willing to invest 300 in a machine that can not have these simple demands; for any product not meeting these simple demands are just simply not worth the upgrade from my EeePc701 (which runs OC'ed at 1GHZ btw…).

  • Joy

    Totally agree with ProDigit, but here is another side. I'm using eeePC 701 (4G) over 2 years AS DESKTOP – with external 17'' monitor, keyboard and mouse. And according to other people experience, my 4 Gb SSD will die soon. Second, 4 Gb is really not enough – I ever can't allow myself to install .NET Framework – with all versions and updates it takes over 700 Mb of hard space. And I can't ever to check health status of my SSD, because “Intel SSD Toolbox” requires .NET

  • Joy

    Totally agree with ProDigit, but here is another side. I'm using eeePC 701 (4G) over 2 years AS DESKTOP – with external 17'' monitor, keyboard and mouse. And according to other people experience, my 4 Gb SSD will die soon. Second, 4 Gb is really not enough – I ever can't allow myself to install .NET Framework – with all versions and updates it takes over 700 Mb of hard space. And I can't ever to check health status of my SSD, because “Intel SSD Toolbox” requires .NET