Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Poised to Become World's Top-Selling PC Vendor with Tablets Included
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The iPad is not a PC replacement for people who need PCs.
It is rather a device for people who do not need PCs, but who had no other choice for a long time.
The fact that some people were buying PCs instead of iPads all these years, was simply because Jobs took so long to bring out the darned thing ....
LOL. That slacker.
----------
It's also of interest to those geeks that tie up their self worth in their computer. Whether it runs Windows or OSX. Oops, forgot: Or Linux.
You know exactly what I mean. You know exactly what Steve Jobs meant.
It's ok to try to be clever with wordplay and semantics, but that doesn't change the direction in which the wind is blowing.
You might not agree with the inclusion of the iPad in "PC" numbers - like a few others around here, but it's happening, and will continue to happen. The appropriateness of it is moot.
When you unhinge yourself from insisting on clear definitions and categories in order to help your mind make sense of everything (a strategy which isn't working out in this case), and just observe the direction of the market, the direction of tech discourse, and relate the iPad's successes in the traditional PC space to the conversation that is going on, things will become clear.
Sometimes there will be new or relatively novel situations which are poorly explained with current definitions and language. The understanding is there - it's intimated and implied. The words, not quite. As long as you can grasp the significance of the disruptive force that is the iPad, that's all that really matters.
I'll bet that a non-teche, Joe Average user would be in a far better position to explain the situation with complete lucidity.
Expertise can be a hindrance.
I don't expect and honest answer - but let's just suppose that the situation was that HP or Samsung wanted to include their tablet numbers and they dwarfed the iPads. Let's just say. Would you still be advocating the same. Really? I tend to think not. I tend that instead of being an advocate to drop all definitions - that you would just not comment at all.
Last edited:
They are computers. It's just that people who don't know any better use computer erroneously to refer to a subset of computers known as Desktops/Laptops.
Is there even a place on the internet where such a discussion would happen? Hardly seems worth asking.
It means you're wasting time looking for definitions.
Smartphones were probably not included because they aren't being used like the iPad, regardless of "capability." They have much smaller displays anyway. With the iPad, you're getting a big display, you just turn it on and you're up and running.
You're getting caught up in specs and definitions. I know people who don't use a computer at all and just use their iPhones. So for them - their iPhone is every bit a "PC"
See how that works.
For sufficiently capable smartphones, ones that can handle the customers actual personal computing needs, they should be. But for some people who need reading glasses, a smartphone display might be a bit too small for some very common personal computing applications.
The key is that fewer and fewer people need a "full" (as in big multi-drive-bay multi-slot windows desktop or tower) personal computer for their actual personal computing needs.
So are we saying screen size matters? Because as far as I can tell that is really the only difference between an iPad and an iPhone (iPod Touch), from an end user perspective.
It absolutely matters, at certain points. And specifically, between the iPad and iPhone, it matters because different types of apps are available for the larger screen.
To users? Or computer scientists? Or retailers? Or people making market definitions? Several completely different questions.
We really are off on tangents, even if it sounds like the same topic. The topic is about some research firm that is calling the iPad (and other large tablets) computers or PCs. But you keep wanting it to be individual posters making claims so you can debate us.
Anyway, the answer to your question is: It depends. Some POS devices were probably included in "computers" by such research firms, some may not have been. As I discussed with KnightWRX earlier. Apple Stores use all 3 (MBP, iPod, iPad) for various tasks, now. I'm not sure if there has been "replacing" going on or not.
Actually I find the debate both fruitless and useless.
Consumers don't care. I know I don't. I buy the right device for my use case. And at the end of the day - this kind of "rating" will be both good and bad for Apple because on one hand they have bragging rights - on the other - there's only one way to go and that's down.
Of course it matters. It tends to make for a much more comfortable computing experience, especially for the bulk of the market.
And this week I replaced my 1.5 Mbps AT&T DSL service with Comcast cable. The technician used his portable device to verify the line, assign my static IP addresses, etc.
Does that make his portable device a PC? (It was a smartphone - perhaps an Android, perhaps an Iphone - with the case on it wasn't obvious.)
Again, why is an Ipad a "PC" and a smartphone is not? It seems completely arbitrary and self-serving - the resolutions of the Iphone (960x640) and Ipad (1024x768) aren't really that different.
*LTD* is blind to contradictions.
Some posters here could use a review of what "post-PC" means:
When Jobs said we were in a post-PC era, he explained that he was comparing PCs to the farm trucks necessary for hauling goods back in the early part of the century. As families moved off farms, they could buy more cars, because they only had to haul other people.
Thus the country entered a post-truck era. Jobs' view was that with computers, we're likewise coming into an era where more people only need a car (iPad). Of course, we still needs trucks (PCs) to bring us goods (apps and media).
It's a compelling simile, but ironically fails in real life: trucks still outsell cars, and people even like to buy truck-like cars because they're more versatile.
When Jobs said we were in a post-PC era, he explained that he was comparing PCs to the farm trucks necessary for hauling goods back in the early part of the century. As families moved off farms, they could buy more cars, because they only had to haul other people.
Thus the country entered a post-truck era. Jobs' view was that with computers, we're likewise coming into an era where more people only need a car (iPad). Of course, we still needs trucks (PCs) to bring us goods (apps and media).
It's a compelling simile, but ironically fails in real life: trucks still outsell cars, and people even like to buy truck-like cars because they're more versatile.
arghh - auto analogies
...but this one is good.
And many people have both a "smart car" and an "F-150". (Or a Prius and a mini-van.) Just like most Ipad owners probably have a real PC.
The "smart car" (or Ipad) is good for the light duty stuff that's most of what you do - but the F-150 (or the PC) are necessary for the serious stuff like the trips to the lumber yard.
I really wonder what percentage of households have Ipads/Iphones but do not have real PCs.
If it's a big majority of households, then the "newthink" of calling a tablet a PC makes sense.
If it's a small minority of households, then the tablet/smartphone isn't really eliminating the PC - it's just an adjunct for lightweight tasks.
...but this one is good.
And many people have both a "smart car" and an "F-150". (Or a Prius and a mini-van.) Just like most Ipad owners probably have a real PC.
The "smart car" (or Ipad) is good for the light duty stuff that's most of what you do - but the F-150 (or the PC) are necessary for the serious stuff like the trips to the lumber yard.
I really wonder what percentage of households have Ipads/Iphones but do not have real PCs.
If it's a big majority of households, then the "newthink" of calling a tablet a PC makes sense.
If it's a small minority of households, then the tablet/smartphone isn't really eliminating the PC - it's just an adjunct for lightweight tasks.
