Actually Clarice, for #1, it was more than that. Microsoft had announced that they didn't want to support so many environments that required a level of emulation (it was vague; that was my interpretation) and that they specifically were going to not support some of the Atom generations. I am not sure how much of a role that played in Intel's decision, but they decided to not support the NM10 graphics engines (or the disastrous mess in the N2800) -- but Microsoft ended up including support for these Atom generations, extending their life.
Your #2 statement is certainly true. Fact is, once they hit the Bay Trail generation, performance had risen enough that they started using versions of the Atom designs for many* Pentium and Celeron editions. I personally don't 'feel' much difference between the performance of these Pentiums and the Core i3. Yea, there really is, but I just don't really 'feel' it at the Windows GUI. My frame of reference is skewed (read: I am spoiled) by all the time I spend with Core i7's and Core i9's, so the Core i3 and Pentium and Celeron designs 'feel' just as pokey to me.
Back when Netbooks first came out, I purchased one of the Asus Eee PC models. I used it, mostly because I didn't want the weight of my work laptop on my back during non-work trips, but after a year or two, it was just too pokey (having only one HT core). I still have it after all this time (pack rat that I am), but its battery won't hold a charge any longer so I am definitely discarding it my next electronics recycling.
...S
* Those whose model number starts with 'N'.
