Is Jobs wrong about the netbook?
We get it: Apple's not in this world to create cheap computers for everyone. Instead, Apple places itself somewhere in the middle and offers the user (far!) more. But Apple might be fast asleep and losing out to the netbook crowd. Steve Jobs said something along the lines of the iPhone being something like a netbook. Well: It is, and it isn't.
The argument for it being
a netbook goes: You want a cheaper-than-notebook device that you can use to quickly get on the 'net. And that the iPhone certainly does. It lets you check mail, update your facebook status and get the latest news anywhere on the planet as long as you get a decent 3G signal.
The argument against it, though, is quite important right now. That's *not* what all these netbooks are sold for, Stevo! These netbooks sell so bloody well because they're actually small notebooks that are inexpensive. Parents buy them for kids, youngsters buy them for themselves and adults buy them as their secondary or third computer. They're dirt-cheap and still manage to run a full office suite. Their keyboards may not be ideal (don't tell me the iPhone's keyboard's ideal compared to them, though), but I can write up a first draft for anything on such a machine.
An even worse argument however goes like this: Apple could *rock* the netbook world. Most of the netbooks have all the same mistakes the entire notebook world has had for years. You *don't* need VGA out on those. You don't need two or more USB ports. Give it the measly one USB port of the MacBook Air *without* the MiniDisplayPort. That's all it needs. A decent keyboard? Apple can certainly do that. (Most companies can't, it seems.) And make it slim with good battery life. Apple can do that, others can't. (Just look at how HP's 2133 becomes inCREDIBLY fat with the battery it needs to be considered anything, really.)
So please, Apple: Reconsider.