My point is that they are still PC's in general. Just because you can't play BF3 on an iPad doesn't disqualify an iPad as a computer.
For many people, their computer use goes as far as using it for email and web surfing. If they were using a notebook in the past, then an iPad is a perfect replacement.
Many people have only a car or only a motorcycle, but I still have to pay the DMV to have my two distinctly different methods of transportation registered as "Motor Vehicles".
Smartphones get murky due to the phone capability, but even I still consider them to be microPC's simply because they can do essentially the same basic functions as a full-size PC with the exception of being limited to a small screen size. I actually use my iPhone more than my iPad.
No, they are not. They are tablets. Yes they can do some of PCs' work, or even all for some people. But they are still different category.
Motorcycles can do some of the things cars do, and for some people they can do everything required. But they are still not cars. Yes they might sell more units than cars, and people might select to buy a motorcycle instead of car... but that still doesn't make them cars.
So Kawasaki, even if they sell more bikes than (say) Ford sells cars, is still not the biggest car brand in the world.
Tablets are not PCs. At least not yet. In the future the lines between PC and tablet will blur but right now they are not. My phone does everything my iPad does, is it a PC? Anything to boost numbers. Are all the other manufactures having their tablets counted? They are pretty crappy but I would venture they sold enough to offset Mac sales. Heck, motorcycles cut into automobile sales but that doesnt make a motorcycle a car.
Blah blah blah. Nothing personal, but the longer I live, the less patience I have with this kind of hair-splitting overly analytical view of things. Bottom line: people who own tablets (including me--I'm posting this from my iPad right now) use them in place of time spent on laptops or PCs. End of story. I don't give a rip how you classify it all but don't fool yourself. The tablet has muscled its way into the computing market. You may not call it a PC but it's serving the same purpose.
I heard these similar arguments made about GUI- and mouse-based computers in the mid-80s. "They're good for a few things but they're not real computers." "They're cute little toys but you can't do any real work on them." Blah blah blah.
Good post. Yeah- to argue about it is pretty nerdy- because at the end of the day, who cares? But there is no doubt iPads consume the laptop market. My parents don't have two laptops like they used to- they now have a laptop and an iPad.
If we where to count the iPad as a PC then it completely blurs the lines. Would we not also include Microsofts Xbox 360 or Sony's PS3 then. As the PS3 does have internet access can use a full keyboard, and can go to google docs and do productivity work it has software built for it all of the components of a computer. Also the iPod touch is also a computer if we lump the the iPad in it. Lets let the PCs be defined by the OS not the function because that blurs the lines. Window's PCs have a huge difference then the iPad. They ran a full blown OS. iOS is a great MOBILE operating system don't get me wrong. But iOS is just what it is and it is great at that it is a mobile OS it is not meant to replace OS X or Windows or even Linux(laughed at that one my self). It is meant to compliment the full OSs.
End of the day the iPad in reality is a large iPhone. You MBA is still able to run more versatile software, more media software(Formats), better productivity software, more powerful to do real photo shop and related software.
That's how I feel...and people act as if we are saying the iPad is not a "PC" to somehow diminish it's value...but that's not why I'm doing it...in fact no one considered it a "PC" until some analyst did and they saw that including it in that category made Apple the largest PC manufacturer.
I always saw tablets, PCs, and recently smartphones as subcategories of the Computer.
Also the arguments that make the iPad a PC yet every smartphone not a PC make no sense as for the most part you can do everything and more on a smartphone that you can on an iPad...in fact over 50% of my posts are from my smartphone.
Servers can be considered PCs, and in fact can be used to do everything that can be done on a PC. But they are not typically counted in PC totals. So, there's nothing wrong with counting iPads in a separate category. There's also nothing wrong with including iPads as PCs. This argument is a total waste of time, space and energy.
1) Yes, your phone is technically a personal computer.
.
If this is true, then the article is inaccurate, as it only mentioned the iPad. For the sake of conistency, one should include both iPhone and iTouch numbers in the assessment, as they all run the same OS, and thus are able to run the same applications.
Thus, one does not need to wait for Apple's quarterly report to state that they are the number one computer maker based on the combined sales of Macs, iPads, iPhones, and iTouch.
You seem to be stubbornly refusing to see the significance of screen size. I have an iPod touch and iPad. The ultra portability of the iPod touch is useful but there is no question that there are many activities are much more feasible on an iPad rather than the iPod. Claiming there is no difference is simply disingenuous.
but they all run the same OS. Screen size is irrelevant, and based on an arbitrary judgment on your part. Your feasiblity argument is also arbitrary. Many activities are more feasible on a Desktop than on an iPad, regardless of screen size. Many activites are more relevant on a Desktop than on an iPad, precisely because of screen size. So, what is your point.
Your motorcycle analogy is total spin. I ride a motorcycle every day. A motorcycle (iPad) AND an automobile (desktop/laptop) are BOTH "motor vehicles" (PC's). Each one on their own can do some things better than the other, but neither can replace the other.
What can I do with a netbook that I can't do with an iPad<...>?
Connect securely to my bank with the USB card reader
Edit and compile Latex documents
Watch a DVD via the external drive
...just as an example of a few things I actually do with a netbook.
However, outside a few and becoming increasingly obsolete examples, modern tablets can do most things and should be considered a PC category.
As to netbooks, a lot of people dismiss them without knowing the reasons for their decline. As low-power, low footprint, long battery life and low cost laptop replacements, netbooks were a really great device category when they were first introduced. The problem is that Intel put artificial constraints on the amount of RAM and screen resolution that netbooks could have, to avoid canibalizing the notebook segment. As a result, netbooks were generally limited to 1 MB RAM and 600p screens, specs that quickly grew old and irrelevant. The rest is history. Informed people would agree though that without the purely artificial restrictions on hardware, netbooks would have gradually evolved to fill in the space that now Intel wants to reserve for smartbooks.
These sales figures go back 10 years, so the most blatant answer to the question of what is a PC is: Can it run Doom? Actually a secondary question needs to be is it for personal use, seeing as by definition PC stands for Personal Computer.
Tablets are not PCs. At least not yet. In the future the lines between PC and tablet will blur but right now they are not. My phone does everything my iPad does, is it a PC? Anything to boost numbers. Are all the other manufactures having their tablets counted? They are pretty crappy but I would venture they sold enough to offset Mac sales. Heck, motorcycles cut into automobile sales but that doesnt make a motorcycle a car.
I just read where 12% of enterprise workers have moved from Laptops to iPads. They must think of iPads as PC's or PC replacements.
Behind Hellacool's logic is not some standardized definition - but a personal use case. Which of course varies from individual to individual - and therefore is not a good standard to apply. For example - the keyboard differentiator, cited by Hellacool. I can use my bluetooth keyboard to type on my iPhone and iPad. In fact my iMac sleeps blissfully unaware that those devices have pirated the precious, self-defining keyboard for their own miniscule and nefarious purposes, further eroding the iMac's PC sense of self.
If you depend on the reduced functionality/size issue you run into problems with the underpowered netbooks and the fully clouded Chromebooks.
Earlier tablets were built on modified laptop technologies - which is why they were large, expensive, clunky and inconvenient - and why they never captured the publics' interest. So you may argue that running an spartan mobile OS (be it iOS, Android, QNX, or others) means that it falls out of the category of PC based on the OS. But Oses like iOS and QNX are built around robust cores that are not sharply differentiated from the more classical desktop/laptop OS cores. And what do you do when you have something like Microsoft claims Windows 8 to be - an OS for whatever platform you choose to put it on? So your OS argument goes out the window there too.
Consider this: if the vast majority of the consumer market does a small subset of a range of optional activities that can be accomplished on a "PC", and suddenly is able to do all of that and more besides on a "tablet", why does it make sense to isolate it as a sub-category outside of the classification, when other devices of similar nature (netbooks/chromebooks) are included as "PC"s? It doesn't.
But I also understand your struggle with disrupting the PC paradigm. Many tech people self-define based on their tech - this disruption threatens that and forces mental gynastics to vault around, over and through defining the concept of personal computer.
Seeing how Apple also does not include iPad sales as computer sales this is a mute point.
It would be an insult to OSX and MACs to include them with a toy like the ipad in the first place
Apple doesn't get to determine classification, but they can break up sales any way they chose, so the point is moot.*
Further, the classification in your argument of the iPad as a toy has been categorically refuted at a level that it can only be used by you as deliberately inflammatory.
*a moot point - in classical english it refers to an argument open to contention (from the use of a moot or assembly to discuss points of law), in the US, it is used to declare the question as irrelevant
and you telling me that the total number of ipads sold to date is enough to supply 12% of all Enterprise workers? hard to believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Why do you have an account here?
He actually brings up a good point. Not the "12% of enterprise workers that do what?" point- but the fact he says the number of iPads sold are enough to supply 12% of all enterprise workers. That does seem hard to believe- particularly the fact that the vast majority of iPads are for personal use (not that they can't be used for business- but 12% does seem crazy high).
and you telling me that the total number of ipads sold to date is enough to supply 12% of all Enterprise workers? hard to believe.
Sequitur misquoted the article. According to a survey done by IDG Connect of enterprise workers who had iPads, 12% of them reported that the iPad has completely replaced their laptop. Other numbers and statistics of interest captured in the article here:
So you are entirely justified in your scepticism about that 12% being of all enterprise workers since:
There are roughly 154.4 million employed in the US. of which
22 million are employed by the US government
58.7 million employed by large business/enterprise (outside of US Gov)
81.8 million are employed by small business
so if you (arguably) add together the US Gov and enterprise you get 80.7 million, of which 12% is 9.6 million.
As of September 2011 Apple reported 39.8 million iPads sold - so OBVIOUSLY there is NO WAY Apple could have supplied 9.6 million iPads to enterprise employees. Nope. [/sarc]
Comments
My point is that they are still PC's in general. Just because you can't play BF3 on an iPad doesn't disqualify an iPad as a computer.
For many people, their computer use goes as far as using it for email and web surfing. If they were using a notebook in the past, then an iPad is a perfect replacement.
Many people have only a car or only a motorcycle, but I still have to pay the DMV to have my two distinctly different methods of transportation registered as "Motor Vehicles".
Smartphones get murky due to the phone capability, but even I still consider them to be microPC's simply because they can do essentially the same basic functions as a full-size PC with the exception of being limited to a small screen size. I actually use my iPhone more than my iPad.
No, they are not. They are tablets. Yes they can do some of PCs' work, or even all for some people. But they are still different category.
Motorcycles can do some of the things cars do, and for some people they can do everything required. But they are still not cars. Yes they might sell more units than cars, and people might select to buy a motorcycle instead of car... but that still doesn't make them cars.
So Kawasaki, even if they sell more bikes than (say) Ford sells cars, is still not the biggest car brand in the world.
No, they are not. They are tablets. Yes they can do some of PCs' work, or even all for some people. But they are still different category.
Desktop PCs
Notebook PCs
Netbook PCs
Tablet PCs
How many categories do you need?
Tablets are not PCs. At least not yet. In the future the lines between PC and tablet will blur but right now they are not. My phone does everything my iPad does, is it a PC? Anything to boost numbers. Are all the other manufactures having their tablets counted? They are pretty crappy but I would venture they sold enough to offset Mac sales. Heck, motorcycles cut into automobile sales but that doesnt make a motorcycle a car.
Blah blah blah. Nothing personal, but the longer I live, the less patience I have with this kind of hair-splitting overly analytical view of things. Bottom line: people who own tablets (including me--I'm posting this from my iPad right now) use them in place of time spent on laptops or PCs. End of story. I don't give a rip how you classify it all but don't fool yourself. The tablet has muscled its way into the computing market. You may not call it a PC but it's serving the same purpose.
I heard these similar arguments made about GUI- and mouse-based computers in the mid-80s. "They're good for a few things but they're not real computers." "They're cute little toys but you can't do any real work on them." Blah blah blah.
Good post. Yeah- to argue about it is pretty nerdy- because at the end of the day, who cares? But there is no doubt iPads consume the laptop market. My parents don't have two laptops like they used to- they now have a laptop and an iPad.
IMO- an iMac + iPad is the best combo ever.
Which is definitely where I am headed.
If we where to count the iPad as a PC then it completely blurs the lines. Would we not also include Microsofts Xbox 360 or Sony's PS3 then. As the PS3 does have internet access can use a full keyboard, and can go to google docs and do productivity work it has software built for it all of the components of a computer. Also the iPod touch is also a computer if we lump the the iPad in it. Lets let the PCs be defined by the OS not the function because that blurs the lines. Window's PCs have a huge difference then the iPad. They ran a full blown OS. iOS is a great MOBILE operating system don't get me wrong. But iOS is just what it is and it is great at that it is a mobile OS it is not meant to replace OS X or Windows or even Linux(laughed at that one my self). It is meant to compliment the full OSs.
End of the day the iPad in reality is a large iPhone. You MBA is still able to run more versatile software, more media software(Formats), better productivity software, more powerful to do real photo shop and related software.
That's how I feel...and people act as if we are saying the iPad is not a "PC" to somehow diminish it's value...but that's not why I'm doing it...in fact no one considered it a "PC" until some analyst did and they saw that including it in that category made Apple the largest PC manufacturer.
I always saw tablets, PCs, and recently smartphones as subcategories of the Computer.
Also the arguments that make the iPad a PC yet every smartphone not a PC make no sense as for the most part you can do everything and more on a smartphone that you can on an iPad...in fact over 50% of my posts are from my smartphone.
1) Yes, your phone is technically a personal computer.
.
If this is true, then the article is inaccurate, as it only mentioned the iPad. For the sake of conistency, one should include both iPhone and iTouch numbers in the assessment, as they all run the same OS, and thus are able to run the same applications.
Thus, one does not need to wait for Apple's quarterly report to state that they are the number one computer maker based on the combined sales of Macs, iPads, iPhones, and iTouch.
You seem to be stubbornly refusing to see the significance of screen size. I have an iPod touch and iPad. The ultra portability of the iPod touch is useful but there is no question that there are many activities are much more feasible on an iPad rather than the iPod. Claiming there is no difference is simply disingenuous.
but they all run the same OS. Screen size is irrelevant, and based on an arbitrary judgment on your part. Your feasiblity argument is also arbitrary. Many activities are more feasible on a Desktop than on an iPad, regardless of screen size. Many activites are more relevant on a Desktop than on an iPad, precisely because of screen size. So, what is your point.
Your motorcycle analogy is total spin. I ride a motorcycle every day. A motorcycle (iPad) AND an automobile (desktop/laptop) are BOTH "motor vehicles" (PC's). Each one on their own can do some things better than the other, but neither can replace the other.
Are we paying attention now?
I thought the PC was a lorry, uh ?
What can I do with a netbook that I can't do with an iPad<...>?
- Connect securely to my bank with the USB card reader
- Edit and compile Latex documents
- Watch a DVD via the external drive
...just as an example of a few things I actually do with a netbook.However, outside a few and becoming increasingly obsolete examples, modern tablets can do most things and should be considered a PC category.
As to netbooks, a lot of people dismiss them without knowing the reasons for their decline. As low-power, low footprint, long battery life and low cost laptop replacements, netbooks were a really great device category when they were first introduced. The problem is that Intel put artificial constraints on the amount of RAM and screen resolution that netbooks could have, to avoid canibalizing the notebook segment. As a result, netbooks were generally limited to 1 MB RAM and 600p screens, specs that quickly grew old and irrelevant. The rest is history. Informed people would agree though that without the purely artificial restrictions on hardware, netbooks would have gradually evolved to fill in the space that now Intel wants to reserve for smartbooks.
Tablets are not PCs. At least not yet. In the future the lines between PC and tablet will blur but right now they are not. My phone does everything my iPad does, is it a PC? Anything to boost numbers. Are all the other manufactures having their tablets counted? They are pretty crappy but I would venture they sold enough to offset Mac sales. Heck, motorcycles cut into automobile sales but that doesnt make a motorcycle a car.
I just read where 12% of enterprise workers have moved from Laptops to iPads. They must think of iPads as PC's or PC replacements.
Seeing how Apple also does not include iPad sales as computer sales this is a mute point.
It would be an insult to OSX and MACs to include them with a toy like the ipad in the first place
idiotic
Seeing how Apple also does not include iPad sales as computer sales this is a mute point.
It would be an insult to OSX and MACs to include them with a toy like the ipad in the first place
I love these posts.
If you depend on the reduced functionality/size issue you run into problems with the underpowered netbooks and the fully clouded Chromebooks.
Earlier tablets were built on modified laptop technologies - which is why they were large, expensive, clunky and inconvenient - and why they never captured the publics' interest. So you may argue that running an spartan mobile OS (be it iOS, Android, QNX, or others) means that it falls out of the category of PC based on the OS. But Oses like iOS and QNX are built around robust cores that are not sharply differentiated from the more classical desktop/laptop OS cores. And what do you do when you have something like Microsoft claims Windows 8 to be - an OS for whatever platform you choose to put it on? So your OS argument goes out the window there too.
Consider this: if the vast majority of the consumer market does a small subset of a range of optional activities that can be accomplished on a "PC", and suddenly is able to do all of that and more besides on a "tablet", why does it make sense to isolate it as a sub-category outside of the classification, when other devices of similar nature (netbooks/chromebooks) are included as "PC"s? It doesn't.
But I also understand your struggle with disrupting the PC paradigm. Many tech people self-define based on their tech - this disruption threatens that and forces mental gynastics to vault around, over and through defining the concept of personal computer.
I just read where 12% of enterprise workers have moved from Laptops to iPads. They must think of iPads as PC's or PC replacements.
12% of enterprise workers that do what?
and you telling me that the total number of ipads sold to date is enough to supply 12% of all Enterprise workers? hard to believe.
idiotic
Seeing how Apple also does not include iPad sales as computer sales this is a mute point.
It would be an insult to OSX and MACs to include them with a toy like the ipad in the first place
Apple doesn't get to determine classification, but they can break up sales any way they chose, so the point is moot.*
Further, the classification in your argument of the iPad as a toy has been categorically refuted at a level that it can only be used by you as deliberately inflammatory.
*a moot point - in classical english it refers to an argument open to contention (from the use of a moot or assembly to discuss points of law), in the US, it is used to declare the question as irrelevant
idiotic
Seeing how Apple also does not include iPad sales as computer sales this is a mute point.
It would be an insult to OSX and MACs to include them with a toy like the ipad in the first place
Why do you have an account here?
12% of enterprise workers that do what?
and you telling me that the total number of ipads sold to date is enough to supply 12% of all Enterprise workers? hard to believe.
Why do you have an account here?
He actually brings up a good point. Not the "12% of enterprise workers that do what?" point- but the fact he says the number of iPads sold are enough to supply 12% of all enterprise workers. That does seem hard to believe- particularly the fact that the vast majority of iPads are for personal use (not that they can't be used for business- but 12% does seem crazy high).
12% of enterprise workers that do what?
and you telling me that the total number of ipads sold to date is enough to supply 12% of all Enterprise workers? hard to believe.
Sequitur misquoted the article. According to a survey done by IDG Connect of enterprise workers who had iPads, 12% of them reported that the iPad has completely replaced their laptop. Other numbers and statistics of interest captured in the article here:
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...r_laptop_.html
So you are entirely justified in your scepticism about that 12% being of all enterprise workers since:
There are roughly 154.4 million employed in the US. of which
22 million are employed by the US government
58.7 million employed by large business/enterprise (outside of US Gov)
81.8 million are employed by small business
so if you (arguably) add together the US Gov and enterprise you get 80.7 million, of which 12% is 9.6 million.
As of September 2011 Apple reported 39.8 million iPads sold - so OBVIOUSLY there is NO WAY Apple could have supplied 9.6 million iPads to enterprise employees. Nope. [/sarc]