Here are the types of PC's: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer#Types
Tablets are not there.
No there is not.....
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
Here are the types of PC's: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer#Types
Tablets are not there.
No there is not.....
Look again, not that wikipedia is any sort of authority on the matter. If you don't like it you can remove it yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer#Tablet_PC
Per Wikipedia
Tablet PC
A tablet PC is a notebook or slate-shaped mobile computer. Its touchscreen or graphics tablet/screen hybrid technology allows the user to operate the computer with a stylus or digital pen, or a fingertip, instead of a keyboard or mouse. The form factor offers a more mobile way to interact with a computer. Tablet PCs are often used where normal notebooks are impractical or unwieldy, or do not provide the needed functionality.
edit: Looks like Subsonix beat me to it.
Look again, not that wikipedia is any sort of authority on the matter. If you don't like it you can remove it yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer#Tablet_PC
Tablet PC≠Tablets that we have now. The Tablets like the iPad are different.
iPad is a Tablet Computer, not a Tablet PC, they're different because a Tablet PC has a keyboard and can be turned into a tablet like device or a laptop, whereas a tablet has no keyboard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tablet_computer
Why do you keep quoting wikipedia? You and I can make edits to it, don't you realize that? However they make the distinction between them based on wether they are based on the wintel architecture, which makes some historic sense if you use the PC acronym to mean an IBM PC clone, none of your distinctions is mentioned however, do add them to wikipedia yourself though!
Why do you keep quoting wikipedia? You and I can make edits to it, don't you realize that? However they make the distinction between them based on wether they are based on the wintel architecture, which makes some historic sense if you use the PC acronym to mean an IBM PC clone, none of your distinctions is mentioned however, do add them to wikipedia yourself though!
People can edit it, yes, but if it's not correct, then it gets removed. People can't just change a whole article to whatever they like and expect it to stay there.
Actually, many dumb terminals do have CPUs and storage. Local scrolling requires a CPU and storage.
"The VT100 was also the first of Digital's terminals to be based upon an industry-standard microprocessor (in this case, the Intel 8080). Options could be added to the terminal to support an external printer, additional graphic renditions, and more memory (the "AVO" 'Advanced' Video Option" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VT-100
Super. Dumb terminals have multiple definitions. You got me there.
I have no idea how any of this information makes the iPad a dumb terminal and not a PC.
Maybe if you post another picture of a 30 year old terminal everyone will realize that an iPad is basically the same thing and we can close this thread.
Reading comprehension.
PS3 is a media consumption device. Just because it can run linux doesnt change the fact that its a purpose built device that happens do other things too. My router runs linux, that doesnt mean its a PC.
If ipad is a PC, why do you need a PC to write iOS applications? If you need a PC to do everything on an ipad that a PC does then its not a PC.
Isn't iPad actually the most personal PC in the world?
It is one of the most used devices for the so called ubiquitous computing? It is more personal in a way that it is meant for a single user only. It is more personal in a way that it is easier to carry around than a netbook or a notebook.
People fall apart where they start to think that it should need a keyboard or Mac OS X to become a PC but that's not the classification. The classification should be based on use-cases rather than technical specifications. No denial, that traditional PCs can do much more than an iPad; but again a MacPro can do much more than a core duo macbook which cannot run most of the high end professional software.
In my opinion, iPad is the most personal PC as of now.
----------
Wonderful. That is exactly where people get lost. A PC is not by a technical specification but by a use-case.
Even if required, iPad does qualify all the technical specifications of a PC. A separate terminal or a keyboard is not a specification.
For some, it is a limitation; For some it is a specific use-case.
----------
If HP did, would you still be saying "No"? See this can work either way.
It is one of the most used devices for the so called ubiquitous computing? It is more personal in a way that it is meant for a single user only. It is more personal in a way that it is easier to carry around than a netbook or a notebook.
People fall apart where they start to think that it should need a keyboard or Mac OS X to become a PC but that's not the classification. The classification should be based on use-cases rather than technical specifications. No denial, that traditional PCs can do much more than an iPad; but again a MacPro can do much more than a core duo macbook which cannot run most of the high end professional software.
In my opinion, iPad is the most personal PC as of now.
----------
Wonderful. That is exactly where people get lost. A PC is not by a technical specification but by a use-case.
Even if required, iPad does qualify all the technical specifications of a PC. A separate terminal or a keyboard is not a specification.
For some, it is a limitation; For some it is a specific use-case.
----------
If HP did, would you still be saying "No"? See this can work either way.
Super. Dumb terminals have multiple definitions. You got me there.
I have no idea how any of this information makes the iPad a dumb terminal and not a PC.
Maybe if you post another picture of a 30 year old terminal everyone will realize that an iPad is basically the same thing and we can close this thread.
I think that "definitions" is the problem - if a 34-year old "dumb terminal" has a CPU, RAM and persistent storage - it could meet some dictionary's weak definition of a PC. My coffee maker has a CPU, a Linux OS, RAM and persistent storage.
This whole story is just a "page hit magnet" for MR and the others - sad but true.
Anyone can see that a tablet like the Ipad is closer to a smartphone than a PC - and can see that calling it either a smartphone or a PC is wrong.
It deserves its own category.
Stop being rational. It doesn't go over too well here. A tablet is a pc only if it benefits Apples sales numbers.
You are ignoring everything I've said. It does have it's own category. It's a tablet or a media tablet or whatever. It's also a PC. Just like an iPhone is a PC. And just like a smartphone it's not generally referred to as a PC.
As I said before, there are two things being discussed, and you keep confusing them.
1) By definition, an iPad is a PC. Only someone that can't read a dictionary would argue this fact.
2) Should an iPad be considered in an analysis of the PC market? This question has nothing to do with whether or not you'd like to call it a PC or some special subset of PCs. It can obviously be included in an analysis of the "media tablet" market or whatever you'd like to call it. However, that does not preclude it from being included in the analysis of the PC market. Whether or not it should be included is decided by whether or not it has a significant impact on the PC market. Multiple market analysts, including Canalys, have determined that the iPad is having an impact on the low end of the market, particularly netbooks. Because the market impact is still developing they are currently qualifying their statistics with "if the iPad is included" to give their customers a more complete view of potential market disruption.
If you want to argue against Canalys's analysis, go for it. I have no idea if they are correct. But it would require a well researched market analysis, not ridiculous comparisons/photos of a 30 year old terminal that has nothing more in common with an iPad than a laptop.
It's not a PC, it's a mobile computer.
User-programmability is what separates a personal computer from a content-consumption device. You wouldn't call a Wii a PC, or a Roku box a PC, so you shouldn't call a non-user-programmable tablet a PC.
I would say the the PC is a device that tailored toward the production of content and information. The tablet is tailored more towards the consumption of content and information. Certainly the tablet and the PC can do both production and consumption, but the PC is better and production than the tablet is.
Everything about the PC, from the capabilities of the processor to the layout of the hardware and software, is designed to make the user more productive. I can't imagine using a tablet to write software, or a novel or technical manual, or do CAD or design work on a tablet, or even just the day-to-day tasks of a 9-5 office worker.
The tablet, on while it might be great for short bursts of production (e-mails, notes, etc), is better at providing instant access to information. It is a device or viewing and using what people with PCs produce.
/thread
Last edited:
It really sounds like you're reaching using definitions you made up just now.
I'm staying out of this fight as I can see it from both sides.
The problem is that you just made up your own definition and eliminated all others. Here is another definition.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/personal+computer?show=0&t=1322113245
Definition of PERSONAL COMPUTER
: a general-purpose computer equipped with a microprocessor and designed to run especially commercial software (as a word processor or Internet browser) for an individual user
An iPad meets that definition. It isn't rocket science.
(And that ignores the fact that an iPad is user programmable. My guess is you are using the term incorrectly to mean that you can't compile an app on an iPad.)
(And you also ignore that none of what you said has anything to do with whether or not it competes in the PC market.)
That's not a clear meaning though since everything that you own that computes falls into that meaning. Which is why I don't really use the definition.
Tablets don't compete with PC's. They compete with other tablets in the tablet market.
Last edited:
But there are user programming languages for the iPad in the iOS App store, such as several Basic interpreters (the same user programming language that came with the original IBM PC and the Apple II+). Or a user could program and run Javascript in Safari on their iPad or iPhone.
But very few PC users actually know how to program. They usually just buy and install software applications. Desktop, laptop, or iPad.
I love the way Steve Wozniak described the iPad: It's the computer for normal people.
That's really all that needs to be said. Whether we call it a PC or Tablet or a Whakalulu, it really doesn't matter, at the end of the day.
That's really all that needs to be said. Whether we call it a PC or Tablet or a Whakalulu, it really doesn't matter, at the end of the day.