Netbooks are hard to get into business

The whole IT world is swirling around with the swirl of netbooks but this product line is not easy to jump into the enterprise market .

For over a year, mini-laptops (netbooks) with low cost, small size and low power consumption have been praised by the media. Not only did it create a 'fever' or 'phenomenon of the year', in the last few months of 2009, netbooks became a savior for the computer market 'struggling' because of the global economic crisis. . These are completely undeniable facts, but for business customers, netbooks are still just a toy and cannot (or cannot) be enough to replace bulky, expensive computers. their money.

Unlike the early days of launch, netbooks now have much more powerful CPUs, more comfortable storage, more fully-equipped connectivity standards and cheaper prices. Along with the trend of virtualization and the development of cloud computing technology, there are IT experts who believe that netbooks will be the main driving force for the IT revolution in the enterprise sector. This has not been possible and according to experts there are 3 main reasons.

Microsoft and Intel 'block the nose'

Netbooks are hard to get into business Picture 1 Despite improved features, the netbook is still the second laptop with entrepreneurs. If you stand on the manufacturers' perspective, the people who benefit the most from the netbook fever are the top two IT industry leaders: Microsoft and Intel. Recently, Microsoft software company said, more than 90% of netbooks worldwide are using their Windows XP operating system and the world's largest computer chip manufacturer, Intel, does not hide the fact that The revenue of Atom (specialized netbook) products has saved for a difficult year of business. However, these two giants are the most powerful hindrances to the "evolution" of netbooks.

While the whole world expects more powerful CPUs, it is enough to carry out the massive workloads of desktop and laptop computers that are working towards completely replacing gong products. bulky, heavy and energy-intensive, Intel remains loyal to the low-cost and weak Atom chip. Intel is able to produce much more powerful and faster Atom processors for use in netbooks but they have not. Why? Simply, Intel does not want to have a 'netbook' world and make their other product lines disappear. Both Microsoft and Intel are "implicit" that the agreement will only let netbooks forever exist with the concept: Small and cheap to continue to maintain market share of other lucrative, lucrative products.

Weak and unsafe

The consequence of the dominance of Microsoft and Intel is that netbooks are still 'lacking' compared to the requirement of a user who considers netbooks to be the primary tool and too weak compared to the requirements of business customers .

Netbooks have attracted many customers by their compact size, but for IT managers in businesses, this is not necessarily an advantage. Many information directors have said that netbooks are small and convenient for mobile businessmen, but they lack the ability to encrypt, protect data, and the compactness becomes accidental. . The smaller the netbook is, the more likely it is to be stolen or lost, and one can imagine how bad a business will be if their important data goes out. Therefore, although there have been many netbook entrepreneurs, they only consider it a backup device for desktops or laptops.

' I am not sure about the future of netbooks but now I can assure you that no business wants to replace what they have with netbooks, ' Stephen Laughlin, IT Director of the Institute of Television and Arts American students said, ' Only when netbooks are more powerful, faster CPUs, hard drives, keyboards and larger screens . can they really consider stepping into the business '? .

Chris Rapp, assistant director of technology at Sovereign, also praised that view and considered performance and security as "deadly" weaknesses that prevented netbooks from going further. " We will still have to spend thousands of dollars to buy high-end laptops for these two reasons ," Rapp concluded.