Microsoft Surface Estimated to Have Sold Only 1.7 Million Units Since Launch

[spinedoc77]

Not really. Microsoft could have built a tablet OS around lightweight mobile software that could have shrunk the size of their tablets considerably. But they chose to use Windows.



No. But I do think a lightweight tablet based on a mobile OS could have been built in 2002. Along the lines of a 7" Palm device. The Newton was released in the early 90s.

Maybe. I agree though that MUCH of what held MS back was legacy desktop, no argument there. But MS has a loooooong history of doing stupid things. They had windows mobile for a long time and basically ignored it instead of creating a true smartphone like Apple did.

In any case those technological hurdles are gone and having windows destkop, from a hardware point of view, does not entail any trade offs anymore. Software and OS are still up for debate, of course, but I mean strictly from a hardware point of view.

 

[BaldiMac]

Fax is not outdated... how is it outdated?

It still uses a dial up modem.

It's a good thing you never have to receive faxes in your line of work, I'm jealous.

I use it often... but only to receive documents from people that are using outdated tech.

Have you ever tried to exchange documents with an international client?

Yep. Scan and email. Or more commonly, simply email the original file.

Fax may be outdated for you, but for some of my wifes international clients it's their only means of document exchange, heck even some clients here in the US rely on fax. It's easier to be secure because it's an encrypted transmission, you can do the same with emails but it's more technical work that my wife and her clients don't need to deal with, it's much simpler.

A lot of people still listen to vinyl. I do, and it's great. But it's still outdated.

As for incompatible, with what? Incompatible with an ipad? That's about the norm for windows only programs.

Exactly. That was my point.

 

[panzer06]

With the Surface RT, that's pretty much what I said. The first Android tablets stuck themselves in the same price range as the iPad and failed. They eventually succeeded by dropping the price to $200, created a budget space, and then building their way back up to the premium $500.

With the Pro, it's not the same thing as the iPad. It's a converged tablet Ultrabook and what MS marketing should've done is come up with a new word to designate a new product space - like people use the word phablet to describe the Note. Instead they called it a tablet and let people argue about whether or not it was a tablet or an Ultrabook for the next 4 months. Marketing failure

Here's a link to the whole touchscreen thing

Yeah the fans are not going away anytime soon. I think you need to hit something like a 4W TDP to get rid of active cooling. Haswell is at 11.

But the main benefits of Haswell for the Pro are the battery increase via dropped TDP and sleep states and the integrated graphics improvement. 30% makes a big difference for casual tablet use. For ultrabook use with fans going 100%, that's basically another hour.

In my opinion, Microsoft would be better served pushing Atom-based tablets and getting Intel to beef up the chip for better performance. Keeping the price point low and getting the huge number of people who bought low end crappy Android tablets or don't have one at all to see that Windows is a better fit could be much more effective.

Not sure about the actual Microsoft Surface Pro or any of the other really high end Windows tablets. The thickness and need for a fan really turns off people capable of paying so much for a device. I own an iPad 3 and only bought this Windows device because it was inexpensive. Now I use it more than the iPad. There are only a few dedicated iOS apps that I prefer on the iPad so it languishes unused much of the time.

I still have my Macbook Pro (also runs Windows 7 for work) but I carry an Android phone. I haven't been a fan of Apple's direction and closed nature of late so I do hope the Windows camp polishes up their offerings and becomes a really viable competitor, even if it's on at the low and mid-range devices.

Apple's done an awesome job creating brilliant hardware and an extensive dedicated iOS App environment. They effectively created a market where none existed. I'm not sure Microsoft can go head to head trying to create the equivalent to iOS and building an App store from scratch. I really feel they are better trying to hold onto all those millions upon millions of Windows customers who would never consider a Mac, can't afford an iPad and want more than a Kindle Fire HD or some other low cost Android tablet. Plus for the most part they'll already know how to use it.

As an aside, Microsoft could have short circuited all the Windows 8 on non-touch desktops by just offering a boot to desktop mode during initial setup on any non-touch device.

Cheers,

----------

It's a good thing you never have to receive faxes in your line of work, I'm jealous. Have you ever tried to exchange documents with an international client? Fax may be outdated for you, but for some of my wifes international clients it's their only means of document exchange, heck even some clients here in the US rely on fax.

As for incompatible, with what? Incompatible with an ipad? That's about the norm for windows only programs.

Ah but in that alternative universe some of these folks exist in anything not compatible with Apple's product set is "incompatible" period.

Cheers,

 

[zephonic]

It's a good thing you never have to receive faxes in your line of work, I'm jealous. Have you ever tried to exchange documents with an international client? Fax may be outdated for you, but for some of my wifes international clients it's their only means of document exchange, heck even some clients here in the US rely on fax.

As for incompatible, with what? Incompatible with an ipad? That's about the norm for windows only programs.

Out of curiosity, what sort of business are you in that you still rely on fax? Seriously, I haven't seen a fax in more than 10 years, I believe. We still have a company fax number in our Las Vegas office, but I seriously doubt there is paper in that machine.

As for Windows-only banking software, what bank is still using client software rather than web apps? I only deal with two different banks, but they both have comprehensive web applications thar let me handle just about any transaction (the US bank won't let me do international transactions online, but everything else is go).

 

[Michael Goff]

It still uses a dial up modem.



I use it often... but only to receive documents from people that are using outdated tech.



Yep. Scan and email. Or more commonly, simply email the original file.



A lot of people still listen to vinyl. I do, and it's great. But it's still outdated.



Exactly. That was my point.

Since it's outdated for using a phone modem, I suggest that you be the first to make the replacement. Make a fax that doesn't rely on the phone modem at all, you'll make a bundle from it.

 

[spinedoc77]

It still uses a dial up modem.



I use it often... but only to receive documents from people that are using outdated tech.



Yep. Scan and email. Or more commonly, simply email the original file.



A lot of people still listen to vinyl. I do, and it's great. But it's still outdated.



Exactly. That was my point.

Oh I see, it's a miscommunication here. It's an online fax service, the documents are scanned then sent. Technically they are not "faxed", but since it has that capability and I use it like that often I just use the word fax. Still, the term outdated depends on who you are talking about, a rural international area with no internet but with phone lines might have fax as their only source of transmitting documents.

As for vinyl, meh, overrated and outdated for sure, sounds the same to me as digital, incompatible too.

----------

In my opinion, Microsoft would be better served pushing Atom-based tablets and getting Intel to beef up the chip for better performance. Keeping the price point low and getting the huge number of people who bought low end crappy Android tablets or don't have one at all to see that Windows is a better fit could be much more effective.

Not sure about the actual Microsoft Surface Pro or any of the other really high end Windows tablets. The thickness and need for a fan really turns off people capable of paying so much for a device. I own an iPad 3 and only bought this Windows device because it was inexpensive. Now I use it more than the iPad. There are only a few dedicated iOS apps that I prefer on the iPad so it languishes unused much of the time.

I still have my Macbook Pro (also runs Windows 7 for work) but I carry an Android phone. I haven't been a fan of Apple's direction and closed nature of late so I do hope the Windows camp polishes up their offerings and becomes a really viable competitor, even if it's on at the low and mid-range devices.

Apple's done an awesome job creating brilliant hardware and an extensive dedicated iOS App environment. They effectively created a market where none existed. I'm not sure Microsoft can go head to head trying to create the equivalent to iOS and building an App store from scratch. I really feel they are better trying to hold onto all those millions upon millions of Windows customers who would never consider a Mac, can't afford an iPad and want more than a Kindle Fire HD or some other low cost Android tablet. Plus for the most part they'll already know how to use it.

As an aside, Microsoft could have short circuited all the Windows 8 on non-touch desktops by just offering a boot to desktop mode during initial setup on any non-touch device.

Cheers,

----------



Ah but in that alternative universe some of these folks exist in anything not compatible with Apple's product set is "incompatible" period.

Cheers,

Lol, yeah I had trouble understanding his point as well, I still do.

----------

Out of curiosity, what sort of business are you in that you still rely on fax? Seriously, I haven't seen a fax in more than 10 years, I believe. We still have a company fax number in our Las Vegas office, but I seriously doubt there is paper in that machine.

As for Windows-only banking software, what bank is still using client software rather than web apps? I only deal with two different banks, but they both have comprehensive web applications thar let me handle just about any transaction (the US bank won't let me do international transactions online, but everything else is go).

My wife travels internationally to some very remote places, the specifics I do not know why. She is often disconnected from her banking network and she has to deal with finances on a physical basis. I have no idea what software she uses or how she gets business done. I do believe she has restrictions on the international business and what platform she uses, but once again I don't work her job so I'm not sure. I know she said they were looking at satellite solutions, but they haven't got to that point yet.

 

[BaldiMac]

Since it's outdated for using a phone modem, I suggest that you be the first to make the replacement. Make a fax that doesn't rely on the phone modem at all, you'll make a bundle from it.

Are you unaware of scanners, email and the internet?

Oh I see, it's a miscommunication here. It's an online fax service, the documents are scanned then sent. Technically they are not "faxed", but since it has that capability and I use it like that often I just use the word fax. Still, the term outdated depends on who you are talking about, a rural international area with no internet but with phone lines might have fax as their only source of transmitting documents.

I agree that "outdated" is subjective, but we seem to have been distracted by the semantics from the point I was trying to make.

You presented an anecdote that you claimed could have been made easier through more choice. I simply pointed out the the same scenarios could have been made easier through less choice.

 

[Black Magic]

Ah but in that alternative universe some of these folks exist in anything not compatible with Apple's product set is "incompatible" period.

Cheers,

Fax is outdated tech. With that said, faxing alternatives and solutions are available on iOS. SpineDoc could get his wife up and going easily fax wise on their iPad but if he already has it nicely configured on Windows systems he chooses not to bother. Also, if your technically inclined spouse is heavily leaning towards a particular brand, support for another brand in that house will be sparse.

 

[spinedoc77]

Are you unaware of scanners and email?



I agree that "outdated" is subjective, but we seem to have been distracted by the semantics from the point I was trying to make.

You presented an anecdote that you claimed could have been made easier through more choice. I simply pointed out the the same scenarios could have been made easier through less choice.

I don't understand, how would it be easier, and which non choices are you talking about? I received the "fax" electronically, I opened it in Adobe PDF and had her sign it, saved it and "faxed" it back electronically, I can't see it getting much easier than that, but please enlighten me.

 

[Michael Goff]

Are you unaware of scanners, email and the internet?



I agree that "outdated" is subjective, but we seem to have been distracted by the semantics from the point I was trying to make.

You presented an anecdote that you claimed could have been made easier through more choice. I simply pointed out the the same scenarios could have been made easier through less choice.

Not everywhere has the internet.

But I suppose those places shouldn't have businesses?

 

[SockRolid]

re: Google making more from iOS than from Android

Do you have a recent source for this?

Hard to find iOS vs. Android revenue data. Google doesn't want the world to know how bad the situation is.
And talk of ad revenue tends to induce narcolepsy among consumers and tech geeks alike, so it's not a
very good click-bait meme. But anyway, as requested, here's a source hot off the presses:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2013/07/23/mobile-advertising-revenue-and-clicks-continue-to-favor-ios-over-android/


There. Do I now qualify as a tech analyst? Can I now publish my own tech blog?
Because I just did more fact-checking than many tech analysts and tech (re-)bloggers.

I'm sure that if the situation ever changes (don't hold your breath folks !!!) we'll be hearing
about it ad nauseam. Because if Google ever does make more money from Android than from iOS, the
Android Apologists will be flooding MacRumors and all other Apple-related sites with their usual shrill
spamtroll comment-noise. And they'd suddenly have two things to talk about: the same old meaningless
"market share" rant plus an all-new "Google's Android revenue beats iOS revenue" rant.

And hey, it could happen. Shutting out Google from the default iOS Maps app will hurt Google's revenue.
Cutting back on Google search by using Wolfram Alpha and Yelp, for starters, will also hurt Google's revenue.
So, some day, maybe Google will eventually earn more from Android than from iOS.
But, again, don't hold your breath folks!

---
P.S. There are a ton of stories, all around the web circa 2012 claiming Google earns more from iOS than Android.
Here's the search URL for people following along at home:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=2013+google+more+revenue+from+ios+than+from+android

And here are a few choice search results:
http://www.android-advice.com/2012/does-google-makes-more-money-from-ios-than-android/
http://www.androidapps.com/finance/articles/11625-google-makes-more-money-from-ios-than-android
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/mar/29/google-earns-more-iphone-android
http://www.pcworld.com/article/253335/ios_more_profitable_for_google_than_android.html
http://www.ibtimes.com/ios-devices-earn-google-4-times-more-revenue-android-devices-report-431986


---
P.P.S. And Apple and Microsoft could end up earning 6X as much from Android than Google does:

http://venturebeat.com/2012/11/13/in-2013-apple-and-microsoft-could-make-600-more-from-android-than-google/



---
P.P.P.S. Oh, and iOS app developers continue to earn far more than Android app developers:


http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/01/android-apple-google-play-apps
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/05/31/top-ios-apps-earn-46x-more-than-android-but-google-play-is-gaining-ground
http://www.webpronews.com/google-play-is-making-more-money-but-ios-still-makes-more-2013-01"]http://www.webpronews.com/google-play-is-making-more-money-but-ios-still-makes-more-2013-01[/URL]
https://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/googles-plan-make-android-developers-rich

 

[BaldiMac]

I don't understand, how would it be easier, and which non choices are you talking about? I received the "fax" electronically, I opened it in Adobe PDF and had her sign it, saved it and "faxed" it back electronically, I can't see it getting much easier than that, but please enlighten me.

To be fair, I made the comment when I thought you were talking about an actual fax. But the (admittedly idealistic) point was that if there was only one way to send documents or only one SDK for a bank to target software to, the problems you described would have also been solved.

I'm not in any way trying to argue for a lack of competition, but just trying to highlight the fact that sometimes a lack of choice is as good or a better solution than more choice. That's why we have standards, for example.

Not everywhere has the internet.

But I suppose those places shouldn't have businesses?

I never said anything like that. There are lots of old fashioned things that are still useful.

----------

Ah but in that alternative universe some of these folks exist in anything not compatible with Apple's product set is "incompatible" period.

Well, since the problem that he described was that his wife couldn't run her banking software on her iPad, then, yes, the problem was that the software was incompatible with the iPad. No alternative universe necessary.

 

[spinedoc77]

To be fair, I made the comment when I thought you were talking about an actual fax. But the (admittedly idealistic) point was that if there was only one way to send documents or only one SDK for a bank to target software to, the problems you described would have also been solved.

I'm not in any way trying to argue for a lack of competition, but just trying to highlight the fact that sometimes a lack of choice is as good or a better solution than more choice. That's why we have standards, for example.



I never said anything like that. There are lots of old fashioned things that are still useful.

----------



Well, since the problem that he described was that his wife couldn't run her banking software on her iPad, then, yes, the problem was that the software was incompatible with the iPad. No alternative universe necessary.

Well I was talking about lack of choice in terms of hardware, things like USB, stylus, keyboard, etc. I'm not sure why you transferred that over to a SDK. Everything I used was pretty standardized, really all I used was the .PDF format, which is about as standardized as you can get.

I don't disagree though, in terms of software. Standards should be standards and adhered to, in this case yes less choice is better, but it completely has nothing to do with my point.

 

[Renzatic]

Same reason that I think legacy Windows app support is a bad idea for a tablet. Most developers are lazy or don't want to make hard decisions. If they can assume that most people have the keyboard or the stylus or they can fallback to desktop mode, then the touch UI will suffer.

That's assuming there's something inherently easier about programming an app to use a stylus and/or a keyboard over touch. There really isn't. Plus people already have certain expectations when it comes to using their iPad. If a developer were to take the easy way out and do a straight port of a desktop app to the iPad, people would hate it, and they'd probably get lambasted by their customers on the App Store and by reviewers on all the various app websites.

Though there is always a possibility it could happen. What Apple could do is set new standards in the App Store to keep developers from doing this, and sell their accessories separately from the iPad. This is pretty much what they're doing with the keyboard now, and probably what they're gonna do with the controller. If the stylus is sold apart from the device itself, developers can't rely on everyone having one on hand. That would mean they'd have to build their app around a touch based UI so everyone could use it, and add stylus support on top of it.

 

[BaldiMac]

That's assuming there's something inherently easier about programming an app to use a stylus and/or a keyboard over
touch. There really isn't.

I disagree. Smaller targets and keyboard shortcuts mean less hard choices.

Plus people already have certain expectations when it comes to using their iPad. If a developer were to take the easy way out and do a straight port of a desktop app to the iPad, people would hate it, and they'd probably get lambasted by their customers on the App Store and by reviewers on all the various app websites.

Though there is always a possibility it could happen. What Apple could do is set new standards in the App Store to keep developers from doing this, and sell their accessories separately from the iPad. This is pretty much what they're doing with the keyboard now, and probably what they're gonna do with the controller. If the stylus is sold apart from the device itself, developers can't rely on everyone having one on hand. That would mean they'd have to build their app around a touch based UI so everyone could use it, and add stylus support on top of it.

I agree with most of that for a well established tablet with a huge, active app store like the iPad. But the same reasoning does not apply to a device like the Surface.

 

[spinedoc77]

The way I see this transition is similar to DOS to windows. DOS became less and less relevant with each Windows release. I see the desktop as the same, currently it runs side by side with Metro. Next windows release it may just be a menu item like the command prompt is now.

Microsoft really needs to push developers to program for the future, but at the same time they can't alienate their current users who rely on legacy programs to survive. Many of these legacy programs are not even being developed anymore so just as there was a need for a DOS window for some time, I'm sure we will need a desktop option as well. As long as we are moving away from the desktop, at least in the mobile space.

It's a different approach to someone like Apple who completely separated their desktop and mobile OS. MS tried to do this with RT, but doing that they lost most of their appeal. The market dictates methods at times and it seems the market is dictating that MS keep it's desktop and mobile OS together. But who knows, look at the Xbox, MS threw a hell of a lot of money at it and look at it today, even though when it first came out people said the same exact things about how it was going to fail.

 

[BaldiMac]

but at the same time they can't alienate their current users who rely on legacy programs to survive.

Why not? They have a userbase that stayed on Windows XP for a decade despite the pains that Microsoft went through to maintain compatibility. Tear off the bandaid! Maintain support for Windows 7/8 for another decade. Create something new with a real value proposition that's more appealing than "You can run 10 year old software."

Tell companies to code to web standards if they want long term support, but code to this super new OS with these specific advantages if they want to stay on the cutting edge.

 

[zephonic]

Breaking away from legacy obligations has been Apple's MO for as long as I can remember.

Staying compatible with legacy obligations has been Microsoft's MO for as long as I can remember.

Unfortunately, if they had started from scratch with Windows for mobile, they would have removed their one unique selling point from the equation; why bother getting a Windows mobile device if it is not backwards-compatible? At the same time, maintaining legacy compatibility doesn't really win over anybody either, as legacy apps (not optimized for touch/mobile) wouldn't work well anyway.

Now that is a rock and a hard place, and I am inclined to think that their lack of success is not entirely their own fault. I don't think the results would have been substantially better if they had done things differently.

 

[spinedoc77]

Why not? They have a userbase that stayed on Windows XP for a decade despite the pains that Microsoft went through to maintain compatibility. Tear off the bandaid! Maintain support for Windows 7/8 for another decade. Create something new with a real value proposition that's more appealing than "You can run 10 year old software."

Tell companies to code to web standards if they want long term support, but code to this super new OS with these specific advantages if they want to stay on the cutting edge.

I just don't see the need. Using a windows tablet with both Metro and the desktop has been exhilirating, no compromises. I understand your stance and I don't wholly disagree with it, just force the developers to program for Metro. But the flaw in that, IMO, is that the desktop continues to live on actual desktops and laptops, so realistically developers would have to code for both mobile and desktop interfaces. Yes I know this feeds into your theory that lazy developers will just program for the desktop version and lazily avoid the mobile version, it's an excellent point and I don't have an answer for it other than MS needs to develop the SDK/tools to allow for easy conversion between desktop and mobile version of programs.

It's an interesting discussion and not one that has an easy answer IMO. I do know that I highly enjoy having my desktop with me on the road and it's probably the number one reason I choose a windows tablet over an ipad, among many reasons. I don't pretend to believe that consumers will feel the same way, but obviously ditching the desktop didn't work either as seen by RT sales.

----------

Breaking away from legacy obligations has been Apple's MO for as long as I can remember.

Staying compatible with legacy obligations has been Microsoft's MO for as long as I can remember.

Unfortunately, if they had started from scratch with Windows for mobile, they would have removed their one unique selling point from the equation; why bother getting a Windows mobile device if it is not backwards-compatible? At the same time, maintaining legacy compatibility doesn't really win over anybody either, as legacy apps (not optimized for touch/mobile) wouldn't work well anyway.

Now that is a rock and a hard place, and I am inclined to think that their lack of success is not entirely their own fault. I don't think the results would have been substantially better if they had done things differently.

Yep that's what I'm saying, it's an extremely tough situation. In light of that I think MS, from the point of view of the OS and especially the 8.1 update, is handling it much better than people give them credit for. I think just too many complainers don't have real world experience using a windows tablet from day to day and base their complaints of hearsay or on the complaints of the poster above them.

 

[LordVic]

Breaking away from legacy obligations has been Apple's MO for as long as I can remember.

Staying compatible with legacy obligations has been Microsoft's MO for as long as I can remember.

Unfortunately, if they had started from scratch with Windows for mobile, they would have removed their one unique selling point from the equation; why bother getting a Windows mobile device if it is not backwards-compatible? At the same time, maintaining legacy compatibility doesn't really win over anybody either, as legacy apps (not optimized for touch/mobile) wouldn't work well anyway.

Now that is a rock and a hard place, and I am inclined to think that their lack of success is not entirely their own fault. I don't think the results would have been substantially better if they had done things differently.

this is a huge reason for Microsoft's continued success at least in the PC business.

something Apple has never done well, and has always been a significant barrier to its involvement in corporate culture. (and pricing).

In corporate world, especially admin, and financial. Software Turnover is often slow and archaic process. We're not talking months beteween revisions, but Years. Often companies are using such large scale back ends that are built around 10 year old platforms, that have no analogues in modern computing platform. This forces backwards compaitibility of the OS and hardware to be a very real on going concern.

Turning around after 2 or 3 years and cutting support of hardware and software at that point is a huge detriment, especially when dealing with these old large scale lumbering dinosaurs.

I work for a financial software development house, and 3 year "lifespan" of OS support is extremely short term compared to the length of time that these institutions often hold onto their back end systems for.

Systems they need constant ongoing support and maintenance on.

There is a very good reason why XP is still officially getting support and patches from Microsoft.

For Microsoft to turn around on the consumer level and drop the legacy support and expect a full scale, all or nothing rapid turnover like Apple, they would effectively be slitting their throats.

 

[BaldiMac]

this is a huge reason for Microsoft's continued success at least in the PC business.

something Apple has never done well, and has always been a significant barrier to its involvement in corporate culture. (and pricing).

In corporate world, especially admin, and financial. Software Turnover is often slow and archaic process. We're not talking months beteween revisions, but Years. Often companies are using such large scale back ends that are built around 10 year old platforms, that have no analogues in modern computing platform. This forces backwards compaitibility of the OS and hardware to be a very real on going concern.

Turning around after 2 or 3 years and cutting support of hardware and software at that point is a huge detriment, especially when dealing with these old large scale lumbering dinosaurs.

I work for a financial software development house, and 3 year "lifespan" of OS support is extremely short term compared to the length of time that these institutions often hold onto their back end systems for.

Systems they need constant ongoing support and maintenance on.

There is a very good reason why XP is still officially getting support and patches from Microsoft.

For Microsoft to turn around on the consumer level and drop the legacy support and expect a full scale, all or nothing rapid turnover like Apple, they would effectively be slitting their throats.

Absolutely! Which is why I suggested that Microsoft needs to work to push the responsibility for long term support to web standards which are inherently slow moving and backwards compatible. Give up the monopoly for the chance to do something great!

 

[Anuba]

Dear Microsoft,

1) Be first.
2) Failing 1, be very superior.
3) Failing 1 and 2, be very very cheap.

You failed on all three.
That is all.

 

[whiteboytrash]

Dear Microsoft,

1) Be first.
2) Failing 1, be very superior.
3) Failing 1 and 2, be very very cheap.

You failed on all three.
That is all.

Problem is their tactic is deflectionary. They release products as a protection of the Windows franchise. The Surface really was built to stop the proliferation of iOS and the way it was cutting into Windows PC sales. Zune because they where worried about the iTunes cross over from PC to Mac. Everything they do is not to necessarily release a great product but to stop the opposition from offering a windows alternative.

 

[TallManNY]

So, in this "post PC world" full of small screened tablets, who will be creating the operating systems for those machines? The games for those machines? Who will create and maintain the servers that those cloud machines run on?

I understand this is an Apple site so obviously there is a bias in most users, but you represent part of a market and not the whole. PC gaming is gaining year on year, more graphic and game design studios are opening up.
If anything we're just seeing a polarising group and the rise of the "non-user"; the people who would never have bothered with a PC and now rely on simpler devices, instead of the death of computers.

I'm not saying death of computers. But I am thinking computers become more like a couch in that you don't buy another one until your current one gets shabby.

The folks that you suggest who need real computing power are a minute percentage of humanity. And even coders you use as an example are going to get to the point where their phones can compile code fast enough for their workflow.

I'm not saying that folks won't have PCs. But I am suggesting that PC replacements are heading toward a longer and longer replacement cycle. For the standard office worker the PC runs maybe four programs: Outlook, Word, Excel and a Browser. Desktops from five years ago still run all those programs fine. I've worked in offices where our laptops were leased and we got a new one every two years. I suspect that sort of corporate buy is a huge part of the PC market. But how long before corporate realizes that this really should be a three year cycle or even a four year cycle? And at the home of the average consumer, if they are not a gamer, what is the reason to upgrade? The last major improvement is still coming in PCs and that is "retina" level screens. Our older PCs can't run that. But once those screens can be handled, sales of PCs into the home is going to stagnate in a huge way.

Tablets on the other hand have gimped processors, only so so battery life and are too heavy. There are several cycles to go before a three-year old tablet doesn't look kind of weak compared to current offerings.

 

[whiteboytrash]

I'm not saying death of computers. But I am thinking computers become more like a couch in that you don't buy another one until your current one gets shabby.

The folks that you suggest who need real computing power are a minute percentage of humanity. And even coders you use as an example are going to get to the point where their phones can compile code fast enough for their workflow.

I'm not saying that folks won't have PCs. But I am suggesting that PC replacements are heading toward a longer and longer replacement cycle. For the standard office worker the PC runs maybe four programs: Outlook, Word, Excel and a Browser. Desktops from five years ago still run all those programs fine. I've worked in offices where our laptops were leased and we got a new one every two years. I suspect that sort of corporate buy is a huge part of the PC market. But how long before corporate realizes that this really should be a three year cycle or even a four year cycle? And at the home of the average consumer, if they are not a gamer, what is the reason to upgrade? The last major improvement is still coming in PCs and that is "retina" level screens. Our older PCs can't run that. But once those screens can be handled, sales of PCs into the home is going to stagnate in a huge way.

Tablets on the other hand have gimped processors, only so so battery life and are too heavy. There are several cycles to go before a three-year old tablet doesn't look kind of weak compared to current offerings.

Agree 100%.

Jobs in the late 80's, early 90's had the vision for the $500 computer. He wanted it to be an appliance. Not something that could be cracked open and tinkered with. He wanted to build first mass market machine. In some ways this was what the original Mac was suppose to be. Looking back the iPad became this vision.

This forum is not indicative of what the broad appeal of iPad and tablets are. Tech guys who want to tinker are not why people buy tablets. Regular people use them as throw away devices. Quick check of the Internet, email, maps etc.

They are extremely good devices when used in this manner and like you say have a long life span in this context.