I think that they did the right thing there. All these Mobile Devices include laptops (Macbooks) and tablets (iPhone and Ipod Touch) and smartphones (iPhone 4 and Iphone 3GS), and Apple is clearly a Mobile Device Company now.
But what are these mobile devices? They are all computers. They have a boatload more computing power than desktop computers had a few years ago. Their I/O is way more advanced too. Especially with WiFi and BlueTooth coming in, and wireless printing and Retina Screens for output. Yesterdays computers pale in comparison to the Ipad and the Touch.
I think that it is time for the iPod Touch, the iPad, and the rest of the mobile computers to finally get their due. They really are the most advanced computing devices available, each in their own way.
Exactly. Computers have undergone very steep evolution in the last 10 years, which is what you've got here.
Because MOST everything you would consider a full fledged computer, has limitations.
Has programs and games that it does not have the capability to run.
So who exactly defnied the minimum for this full fledged computer you speak of?
I'm not sure I used the technically precise words. Here's something pretty close to what I had in mind from Wikipedia:
"A personal computer (PC) is any general-purpose computer whose size, capabilities, and original sales price make it useful for individuals, and which is intended to be operated directly by an end-user with no intervening computer operator. PCs include any type of computer that is used in a "personal" manner. This is in contrast to the batch processing or time-sharing models which allowed large expensive mainframe systems to be used by many people, usually at the same time, or large data processing systems which required a full-time staff to operate efficiently. It is also in contrast with the more recent trend of controlling software availability through an intervening third party such as the Apple App Store.[1][2]
A personal computer may be a desktop computer, a laptop, a tablet PC, or a handheld PC"
So that's pretty close to what I meant by "full fledged computer". HTH.
The issue here is what is a precise definition of a PC? Does it need to include a physical keyboard? Probably not. Does it need a minimum size screen to differentiate the category from smartphones? Maybe. Does the device need a minimum processing speed and minimum memory to qualify as a PC? Perhaps.
Anyway, presently it doesn't make sense to me that netbooks are classified as PC's but tablets, including the iPad, are not. I think many would agree that the iPad, and many other tablets, can do just about everything a netbook can do, but do it faster.
The analysts, who report on the numbers, need to reexamine and redefine what characteristics are required to be considered a PC. Personally, I would consider netbooks and tablets both to be PC's. I think a breakdown of the major lines compromising PC's is necessary to clear-up the present confusion, such as desktops, notebooks, netbooks and tablets. Then place the reporting numbers in the appropriate sub-category. I guess you might call that - comparing Apples to Apples.
It can't be defined by input method, as this has changed over the course of its history.
It can't be defined by processing power or ability, because then WTF would you call computers 30 years ago?
People here are picking whichever lines they feel applies to themselves personally to define what a PC is, which is inherently flawed.
Explain to me how a netbook or laptop is a personal computer (which by actual definition is a programmable machine), and an iPad is not
Calm yourself down. Why on earth you need to act like this such a big deal, I can't even begin to imagine.
As far as I'm concerned, until the iPad and iPod touch do not rely on a PC for activation, backup, etc. it's still an accessory device. It's not a host machine, despite being fully capable of replacing some people's needs for a host machine.
I'm not arguing that it's not "good enough" to be called a PC. It's just not a PC.
When you bring a Mac home, you don't need to already have a Mac to turn it on. Yea, as sad as that is, thats the dividing line.
Explain to me how a netbook or laptop is a personal computer (which by actual definition is a programmable machine), and an iPad is not
I would say that the definition of "full-fledged" would be "You don't have to plug it into another computer to make the thing not be an expensive brick."
At least Daryl Chiam gets it. Still, I don’t foresee “media tablets” being added to the total number of PC sales. I’m betting on them making a separate category for this new device type.
In the long run it won't even mater. In the last week I have met over a dozen PC users asking me advice on iPad purchasing decisions or post purchase help* (*three were sold Netgear routers with no WiFi by Best Buy to go with their iPad!) . They had all simply decided replacing the PC yet again was dumb when all they can use it for is mail and internet anyway and even then it is a nightmare. The iPad made a better replacement.
In the majority of cases the 'replacement' of the PC was recommended by the place they take them to clean up all the virus and malware problems (at least once a year). It was cheaper to buy a new one than pay the tech costs they were told.
If these PC tech shops have half a brain they will be trying to get agreements with resellers get a commission to sell iPads! Their days of scamming old folks and non techies are rapidly coming to an end. That in itself will be a huge drop in PC sales ... the sale to replace one that is simply crapped up at the OS level.
Explain to me how a netbook or laptop is a personal computer (which by actual definition is a programmable machine), and an iPad is not
I posted the definition from Wikipedia. To the extent that the Wikipedia definition is reasonable, your POV seems correct, and both the iPad and the iPod touch should be included in the statistics for personal computer sales.
I'm not sure I used the technically precise words. Here's something pretty close to what I had in mind from Wikipedia:
"A personal computer (PC) is any general-purpose computer whose size, capabilities, and original sales price make it useful for individuals, and which is intended to be operated directly by an end-user with no intervening computer operator. PCs include any type of computer that is used in a "personal" manner. This is in contrast to the batch processing or time-sharing models which allowed large expensive mainframe systems to be used by many people, usually at the same time, or large data processing systems which required a full-time staff to operate efficiently. It is also in contrast with the more recent trend of controlling software availability through an intervening third party such as the Apple App Store.[1][2]
A personal computer may be a desktop computer, a laptop, a tablet PC, or a handheld PC"
So that's pretty close to what I meant by "full fledged computer". HTH.
Thats a bullshit definition as well.
Exactly WTF does the origin of software for the device have to do with defining it as a PC?
There are several statements there that simply make no sense what so ever.
Where have I heard that argument before? Oh yeah, the last 25 years.
It's really not appropriate to include [Mac] in PC sales numbers. Not at all. It?s a [Mac], not a [PC}.
Demarkation lines for what should or should not be included aren?t exactly arbitrary, but there is plenty of wiggle room for vendors and analysts without lying about their stats.
Wouldn't you say we are totally at the point where the lines are completely arbitrary? I'd say so.
The only thing that stands in my way of calling both the iPad and iPod touch a definitive PC, is that you can use the damn thing unless you already have one of the devices we traditionally call a "PC". Get rid of that issue, and it becomes impossible to deny that they're "PCs"...whatever that means
"Pads gave consumers increased product choice over the holiday season," Canalys analyst Tim Coulling said. "While they do not appeal to first-time buyers or low-income households, they are proving extremely popular as additional computing devices."
Last week, Apple revealed record sales of Macs and iPads in its quarterly earnings report. The company reported 4.13 million Mac sales, a 23 percent increase over the same period a year prior.
Apple also sold 7.33 million iPads in the holiday quarter -- the first such sales period for the touchscreen tablet, which launched in April 2010. But since its debut, the iPad, with a starting price of $499, outsold the Mac, leading one Wall Street analyst to refer to the device as Apple's "Mac of the masses."
Emphasis mine.
"While they do not appeal to first-time buyers or low-income households, they are proving extremely popular as additional computing devices."
When Apple ships the iPad with an iOS reinstall drive:
And a combined Charger/Airport Express:
and comes with MobileMe Backup/Sync/Mobile Extensions tied into iTunes stores
Then the iPad will be a superior solution to first-time buyers and the iPad will be the Apple of the masses.
I don't see why an iPad can't be classed as a PC. How you use a computing device defines what it is; not some arbitrary measure of screen size or Flash playing capability.
And just because an iPad benefits from an occasional linking to a 'mother' computer does not make its use or capabilities any less. My work laptop needs to be connected to my work servers more often than my iPad needs hooking up to iTunes. Does that make it 'not a proper computer'?
Arbitrary measures also do not define a PC.
My lawnmower has 4 wheels and an engine, but I doubt you'll find anyone arguing it's a car. For the same reason, an iPod Touch might have a screen and more memory than an iPad, but it's not a PC -- its use cases are just different.
Calm yourself down. Why on earth you need to act like this such a big deal, I can't even begin to imagine.
As far as I'm concerned, until the iPad and iPod touch do not rely on a PC for activation, backup, etc. it's still an accessory device. It's not a host machine, despite being fully capable of replacing some people's needs for a host machine.
I'm not arguing that it's not "good enough" to be called a PC. It's just not a PC.
When you bring a Mac home, you don't need to already have a Mac to turn it on. Yea, as sad as that is, thats the dividing line.
Agreed. It's silly to lump the capabilities of an iPad and a Mac Pro (book) and consider them the same device.. Why are some so up in arms over classifying them differently? they are very different devices.. Sure they share some common ground, but for the most part Macs(Pc's) are expandable, able to be connected to (scanners, printers, routers,) and are much more capable of being used to create content, iPads for the most part are not (yet.)
I posted the definition from Wikipedia. To the extent that the Wikipedia definition is reasonable, your POV seems correct, and both the iPad and the iPod touch should be included in the statistics for personal computer sales.
I don't think it does, its seems to indicate it should be treated different due to software controls by the apple store, am I reading that incorrectly?
BTW, I honestly have no care in the world for the sales numbers.
It just irks me that people think these devices are not computers, when I feel by definition, they clearly are.
Exactly WTF does the origin of software for the device have to do with defining it as a PC?
There are several statements there that simply make no sense what so ever.
Again, you really really need to calm down. Step outside, get a coffee, anything. Whatever is going on with you that you need to act like this over something you have no stake in, stop it.
It's really not appropriate to include iPad in Apple PC sales numbers. Not at all. It's an iPad, not a Mac.
Thank you. Only those who can't think, are strictly voyeurs with an occasional limited tinkering on specially hindered Apps would think a Mac-dependent iPad is a computer.
I would say that the definition of "full-fledged" would be "You don't have to plug it into another computer to make the thing not be an expensive brick."
I tend to agree that the requirement to need another computer is the only thing that prevents a full PC label as per pundit's and blogs go. I seriously wonder if Apple will drop this as it would eat Mac sales as well as PC sales. Keeping the requirement is likely to spur more Mac sales once those new to Apple products get one in their hands. I am sure Apple could make the iPad stand alone but as I say this may well be part of a larger plan. I doubt Apple care what columnists categorize their products as other than mind blowingly successful. However, I do predict one day iPad will be stand alone, just not for a while.
Agreed. It's silly to lump the capabilities of an iPad and a Mac Pro (book) and consider them the same device.. Why are some so up in arms over classifying them differently? they are very different devices.. Sure they share some common ground, but for the most part Macs(Pc's) are expandable, able to be connected to (scanners, printers, routers,) and are much more capable of being used to create content, iPads for the most part are not (yet.)
Actually no I'd not agree. None of that is relevant. You need to be able to turn it on and use it, without owning a box that's running windows xxxx or Mac OS X.
I would say that the definition of "full-fledged" would be "You don't have to plug it into another computer to make the thing not be an expensive brick."
And yet that is totally inapplicable to what a PC actually is.
Actually I'd say that any argument that a pad IS a PC is simply out of sync.. I love my iPad, but it is largely a consumption device. Calling it a PC is like calling a bicycle a car because they both have wheels.. Until the iPad can run Mac/PC class software and be used for creating and not mainly consuming, it should continue to be classified as a different product category.
I disagree. Calling a bicycle a car is incorrect. Both, however, are personal transport.
Calling a tablet a notebook or a desktop would similarly be incorrect. It would be similarly correct, however, to call each of them a personal computer.
Actually no I'd not agree. None of that is relevant. You need to be able to turn it on and use it, without owning a box that's running windows xxxx or Mac OS X.
Under what definition has that ever been a factor beside the one you've drummed up for yourself?
Comments
I think that they did the right thing there. All these Mobile Devices include laptops (Macbooks) and tablets (iPhone and Ipod Touch) and smartphones (iPhone 4 and Iphone 3GS), and Apple is clearly a Mobile Device Company now.
But what are these mobile devices? They are all computers. They have a boatload more computing power than desktop computers had a few years ago. Their I/O is way more advanced too. Especially with WiFi and BlueTooth coming in, and wireless printing and Retina Screens for output. Yesterdays computers pale in comparison to the Ipad and the Touch.
I think that it is time for the iPod Touch, the iPad, and the rest of the mobile computers to finally get their due. They really are the most advanced computing devices available, each in their own way.
Exactly. Computers have undergone very steep evolution in the last 10 years, which is what you've got here.
This is seriously funny to me.
What, pray tell, is a "full fledged computer"?
Because MOST everything you would consider a full fledged computer, has limitations.
Has programs and games that it does not have the capability to run.
So who exactly defnied the minimum for this full fledged computer you speak of?
I'm not sure I used the technically precise words. Here's something pretty close to what I had in mind from Wikipedia:
"A personal computer (PC) is any general-purpose computer whose size, capabilities, and original sales price make it useful for individuals, and which is intended to be operated directly by an end-user with no intervening computer operator. PCs include any type of computer that is used in a "personal" manner. This is in contrast to the batch processing or time-sharing models which allowed large expensive mainframe systems to be used by many people, usually at the same time, or large data processing systems which required a full-time staff to operate efficiently. It is also in contrast with the more recent trend of controlling software availability through an intervening third party such as the Apple App Store.[1][2]
A personal computer may be a desktop computer, a laptop, a tablet PC, or a handheld PC"
So that's pretty close to what I meant by "full fledged computer". HTH.
The issue here is what is a precise definition of a PC? Does it need to include a physical keyboard? Probably not. Does it need a minimum size screen to differentiate the category from smartphones? Maybe. Does the device need a minimum processing speed and minimum memory to qualify as a PC? Perhaps.
Anyway, presently it doesn't make sense to me that netbooks are classified as PC's but tablets, including the iPad, are not. I think many would agree that the iPad, and many other tablets, can do just about everything a netbook can do, but do it faster.
The analysts, who report on the numbers, need to reexamine and redefine what characteristics are required to be considered a PC. Personally, I would consider netbooks and tablets both to be PC's. I think a breakdown of the major lines compromising PC's is necessary to clear-up the present confusion, such as desktops, notebooks, netbooks and tablets. Then place the reporting numbers in the appropriate sub-category. I guess you might call that - comparing Apples to Apples.
It can't be defined by input method, as this has changed over the course of its history.
It can't be defined by processing power or ability, because then WTF would you call computers 30 years ago?
People here are picking whichever lines they feel applies to themselves personally to define what a PC is, which is inherently flawed.
Explain to me how a netbook or laptop is a personal computer (which by actual definition is a programmable machine), and an iPad is not
Calm yourself down. Why on earth you need to act like this such a big deal, I can't even begin to imagine.
As far as I'm concerned, until the iPad and iPod touch do not rely on a PC for activation, backup, etc. it's still an accessory device. It's not a host machine, despite being fully capable of replacing some people's needs for a host machine.
I'm not arguing that it's not "good enough" to be called a PC. It's just not a PC.
When you bring a Mac home, you don't need to already have a Mac to turn it on. Yea, as sad as that is, thats the dividing line.
What, pray tell, is a "full fledged computer"?
Explain to me how a netbook or laptop is a personal computer (which by actual definition is a programmable machine), and an iPad is not
I would say that the definition of "full-fledged" would be "You don't have to plug it into another computer to make the thing not be an expensive brick."
At least Daryl Chiam gets it. Still, I don’t foresee “media tablets” being added to the total number of PC sales. I’m betting on them making a separate category for this new device type.
In the long run it won't even mater. In the last week I have met over a dozen PC users asking me advice on iPad purchasing decisions or post purchase help* (*three were sold Netgear routers with no WiFi by Best Buy to go with their iPad!) . They had all simply decided replacing the PC yet again was dumb when all they can use it for is mail and internet anyway and even then it is a nightmare. The iPad made a better replacement.
In the majority of cases the 'replacement' of the PC was recommended by the place they take them to clean up all the virus and malware problems (at least once a year). It was cheaper to buy a new one than pay the tech costs they were told.
If these PC tech shops have half a brain they will be trying to get agreements with resellers get a commission to sell iPads! Their days of scamming old folks and non techies are rapidly coming to an end. That in itself will be a huge drop in PC sales ... the sale to replace one that is simply crapped up at the OS level.
Explain to me how a netbook or laptop is a personal computer (which by actual definition is a programmable machine), and an iPad is not
I posted the definition from Wikipedia. To the extent that the Wikipedia definition is reasonable, your POV seems correct, and both the iPad and the iPod touch should be included in the statistics for personal computer sales.
I'm not sure I used the technically precise words. Here's something pretty close to what I had in mind from Wikipedia:
"A personal computer (PC) is any general-purpose computer whose size, capabilities, and original sales price make it useful for individuals, and which is intended to be operated directly by an end-user with no intervening computer operator. PCs include any type of computer that is used in a "personal" manner. This is in contrast to the batch processing or time-sharing models which allowed large expensive mainframe systems to be used by many people, usually at the same time, or large data processing systems which required a full-time staff to operate efficiently. It is also in contrast with the more recent trend of controlling software availability through an intervening third party such as the Apple App Store.[1][2]
A personal computer may be a desktop computer, a laptop, a tablet PC, or a handheld PC"
So that's pretty close to what I meant by "full fledged computer". HTH.
Thats a bullshit definition as well.
Exactly WTF does the origin of software for the device have to do with defining it as a PC?
There are several statements there that simply make no sense what so ever.
Where have I heard that argument before? Oh yeah, the last 25 years.Demarkation lines for what should or should not be included aren?t exactly arbitrary, but there is plenty of wiggle room for vendors and analysts without lying about their stats.
Wouldn't you say we are totally at the point where the lines are completely arbitrary? I'd say so.
The only thing that stands in my way of calling both the iPad and iPod touch a definitive PC, is that you can use the damn thing unless you already have one of the devices we traditionally call a "PC". Get rid of that issue, and it becomes impossible to deny that they're "PCs"...whatever that means
"Pads gave consumers increased product choice over the holiday season," Canalys analyst Tim Coulling said. "While they do not appeal to first-time buyers or low-income households, they are proving extremely popular as additional computing devices."
Last week, Apple revealed record sales of Macs and iPads in its quarterly earnings report. The company reported 4.13 million Mac sales, a 23 percent increase over the same period a year prior.
Apple also sold 7.33 million iPads in the holiday quarter -- the first such sales period for the touchscreen tablet, which launched in April 2010. But since its debut, the iPad, with a starting price of $499, outsold the Mac, leading one Wall Street analyst to refer to the device as Apple's "Mac of the masses."
Emphasis mine.
"While they do not appeal to first-time buyers or low-income households, they are proving extremely popular as additional computing devices."
When Apple ships the iPad with an iOS reinstall drive:
And a combined Charger/Airport Express:
and comes with MobileMe Backup/Sync/Mobile Extensions tied into iTunes stores
Then the iPad will be a superior solution to first-time buyers and the iPad will be the Apple of the masses.
And just because an iPad benefits from an occasional linking to a 'mother' computer does not make its use or capabilities any less. My work laptop needs to be connected to my work servers more often than my iPad needs hooking up to iTunes. Does that make it 'not a proper computer'?
Arbitrary measures also do not define a PC.
My lawnmower has 4 wheels and an engine, but I doubt you'll find anyone arguing it's a car. For the same reason, an iPod Touch might have a screen and more memory than an iPad, but it's not a PC -- its use cases are just different.
Calm yourself down. Why on earth you need to act like this such a big deal, I can't even begin to imagine.
As far as I'm concerned, until the iPad and iPod touch do not rely on a PC for activation, backup, etc. it's still an accessory device. It's not a host machine, despite being fully capable of replacing some people's needs for a host machine.
I'm not arguing that it's not "good enough" to be called a PC. It's just not a PC.
When you bring a Mac home, you don't need to already have a Mac to turn it on. Yea, as sad as that is, thats the dividing line.
Agreed. It's silly to lump the capabilities of an iPad and a Mac Pro (book) and consider them the same device.. Why are some so up in arms over classifying them differently? they are very different devices.. Sure they share some common ground, but for the most part Macs(Pc's) are expandable, able to be connected to (scanners, printers, routers,) and are much more capable of being used to create content, iPads for the most part are not (yet.)
I posted the definition from Wikipedia. To the extent that the Wikipedia definition is reasonable, your POV seems correct, and both the iPad and the iPod touch should be included in the statistics for personal computer sales.
I don't think it does, its seems to indicate it should be treated different due to software controls by the apple store, am I reading that incorrectly?
BTW, I honestly have no care in the world for the sales numbers.
It just irks me that people think these devices are not computers, when I feel by definition, they clearly are.
Not about apples sales number at all
Thats a bullshit definition as well.
Exactly WTF does the origin of software for the device have to do with defining it as a PC?
There are several statements there that simply make no sense what so ever.
Again, you really really need to calm down. Step outside, get a coffee, anything. Whatever is going on with you that you need to act like this over something you have no stake in, stop it.
It's really not appropriate to include iPad in Apple PC sales numbers. Not at all. It's an iPad, not a Mac.
Thank you. Only those who can't think, are strictly voyeurs with an occasional limited tinkering on specially hindered Apps would think a Mac-dependent iPad is a computer.
I would say that the definition of "full-fledged" would be "You don't have to plug it into another computer to make the thing not be an expensive brick."
I tend to agree that the requirement to need another computer is the only thing that prevents a full PC label as per pundit's and blogs go. I seriously wonder if Apple will drop this as it would eat Mac sales as well as PC sales. Keeping the requirement is likely to spur more Mac sales once those new to Apple products get one in their hands. I am sure Apple could make the iPad stand alone but as I say this may well be part of a larger plan. I doubt Apple care what columnists categorize their products as other than mind blowingly successful.
Agreed. It's silly to lump the capabilities of an iPad and a Mac Pro (book) and consider them the same device.. Why are some so up in arms over classifying them differently? they are very different devices.. Sure they share some common ground, but for the most part Macs(Pc's) are expandable, able to be connected to (scanners, printers, routers,) and are much more capable of being used to create content, iPads for the most part are not (yet.)
Actually no I'd not agree. None of that is relevant. You need to be able to turn it on and use it, without owning a box that's running windows xxxx or Mac OS X.
I would say that the definition of "full-fledged" would be "You don't have to plug it into another computer to make the thing not be an expensive brick."
And yet that is totally inapplicable to what a PC actually is.
Actually I'd say that any argument that a pad IS a PC is simply out of sync.. I love my iPad, but it is largely a consumption device. Calling it a PC is like calling a bicycle a car because they both have wheels.. Until the iPad can run Mac/PC class software and be used for creating and not mainly consuming, it should continue to be classified as a different product category.
I disagree. Calling a bicycle a car is incorrect. Both, however, are personal transport.
Calling a tablet a notebook or a desktop would similarly be incorrect. It would be similarly correct, however, to call each of them a personal computer.
Actually no I'd not agree. None of that is relevant. You need to be able to turn it on and use it, without owning a box that's running windows xxxx or Mac OS X.
Under what definition has that ever been a factor beside the one you've drummed up for yourself?