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.
So then if BMW sells bicycles, should they class them together with their cars for market-share numbers.. Because it would seem that many here believe the iPad and Mac should be tallied together as one product category for market share purposes..
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.
I think a PC or a type of PC, is ever-changing. The desktop and laptop have been around for a long time and there wasn't a need to differentiate the 2 since their monickers distinguished their category. More recently, smartphones (in larger numbers), netbooks and tablets have entered the scene that now requires a revisit of what constitutes a PC. I think smartphones, and eReaders too, should not be included in the PC generic category but then again as they become more powerful, maybe they should as well. The key to me is setting up categories for each type of PC (desktop, notebook, netbook, tablet, smartphone maybe, eReader maybe and future others) and then report the sales numbers under the appropriate category. That should not be difficult to do and would eliminate the swirl of confusion.
I think a PC or a type of PC, is ever-changing. The desktop and laptop have been around for a long time and there wasn't a need to differentiate the 2 since their monickers distinguished their category. More recently, smartphones (in larger numbers), netbooks and tablets have entered the scene that now requires a revisit of what constitutes a PC. I think smartphones, and eReaders too, should not be included in the PC generic category but then again as they become more powerful, maybe they should as well. The key to me is setting up categories for each type of PC (desktop, notebook, netbook, tablet, smartphone maybe, eReader maybe and future others) and then report the sales numbers under the appropriate category. That should not be difficult to do and would eliminate the swirl of confusion.
I agree with this, there being different categories for PC's....that makes sense.
But they ARE PC's.
Remember processing power has nothing to do with it, considering where PC's were just 10 years ago.
Still waiting for a decent argument from someone with a brain between their ears, to explain to me how its not significant that an iPad cannot be TURNED ON, or updated, without an actual PC?
Some people are just unimaginably arrogant. Do you read before posting a response? It's very clear to me that the iPad is BETTER than most pcs that have ever existed, and many that exist now. This is not a debatable subject. It's frigging GOOD. Hell I'm using one right now.
But if i didn't also own an iMac, which is a PC, it would still be sitting here with the connect to iTunes screen. This isn't some arbitrary inconvenience, it's the essence of a stand alone device vs. an accessory device CATEGORY.
Well then it must be gospel because he also says blu-ray is bag of hurt, promised white iPhones would be available July 2010, says Apple would never make a netbook and on and on and on- infinitum.
The only way to install software is to use a host. And yet, clearly it is a personal computer.
I really hate it when people display poor reading comprehension. First of all, you are completely wrong. Secondly I said UPDATES. 3rd, no the MacBook air ships with a thumb drive containing the restore disc, and 4th it has always been able to use the super drive accessory.
And, it ships activated. Complete and total fail on your part. Next.
This is an example of a totally ludicrous and false definition of what a computer is.
I mean it literally is incorrect in every way.
That ipad is more capable than the majority of computers to have ever been in existence.
The iPad obviously is a "computer".
And it obviously is a computer that is designed primarily for "personal" usage.
Along the same lines, a four-function pocket electronic calculator indisputably is also a "computer".
And four-function pocket calculators indisputably are designed primarily for personal use.
And yet, when you take the word "personal" and put it together with the word "computer", you end up with the loaded term "Personal Computer" (capitalization added intentionally), abbreviated as "PC", whose definition (by common consensus) seems to contain some extra connotation beyond what is understood by the two words taken separately.
a four-function pocket calculator would not fit anybody's modern definition of the loaded term "PC". No more than a microwave oven would. Or an iPod shuffle. Or an inkjet printer. Even though they all are computational devices (computers) which are primarily designed for personal use, they are not "Personal Computers" in their own right.
The iPad approaches the area where the lines get very blurry indeed. To some, it would appear as an appliance -- an accessory that goes along with another device which is their primary PC. To others, the iPad appears to be a PC in its own right.
To me personally, the iPad (and other iOS devices in general) has more in common with inkjet printers and iPod shuffles (PC accessories), rather than being a PC in its own right. But I can understand the justification for both peoples' opinions on the matter, even if I don't necessarily agree with them.
So then if BMW sells bicycles, should they class them together with their cars for market-share numbers.. Because it would seem that many here believe the iPad and Mac should be tallied together as one product category for market share purposes..
It depends on what market you are talking about. If you are interested in the personal transportation market, then the answer is yes. If you are interested in the bicycle market, the answer is no.
Similarly, if you are interested in the personal computer market, your choice of sub-categories would be different from another researcher interested in, say, the market for palmtop computers like the iPod Touch.
Still waiting for a decent argument from someone with a brain between their ears, to explain to me how its not significant that an iPad cannot be TURNED ON, or updated, without an actual PC?
Some people are just unimaginably arrogant. Do you read before posting a response? It's very clear to me that the iPad is BETTER than most pcs that have ever existed, and many that exist now. This is not a debatable subject. It's frigging GOOD. Hell I'm using one right now.
But if i didn't also own an iMac, which is a PC, it would still be sitting here with the connect to iTunes screen. This isn't some arbitrary inconvenience, it's the essence of a stand alone device vs. an accessory device CATEGORY.
I don't think anyone disagrees that it needs to initially connected to a host to be activated.. However, that is an Apple imposed restriction, not a technological one. Furthermore, doing so does not disqualify it from being a computer, it is a computer, the question is should it be classified as a traditional PC for market share purposes..
It depends on what market you are talking about. If you are interested in the personal transportation market, then the answer is yes. If you are interested in the bicycle market, the answer is no.
Similarly, if you are interested in the personal computer market, your choice of sub-categories would be different from another researcher interested in, say, the market for palmtop computers like the iPod Touch.
Well basically, you've proved my point, that while the iPad is *technically* a computer it is a very different product than a traditional Desktop or laptop PC and should be counted as a separate product category for market share purposes.
I don't think anyone disagrees that it needs to initially connected to a host to be activated.. However, that is an Apple imposed restriction, not a technological one. Furthermore, doing so does not disqualify it from being a computer, it is a computer, the question is should it be classified as a traditional PC for market share purposes..
My opinion is no.
This is of course, correct. No one in their right mind could possibly disagree. It is in fact a "computer", and it does in fact not belong with traditional PC sales numbers.
Still waiting for a decent argument from someone with a brain between their ears, to explain to me how its not significant that an iPad cannot be TURNED ON, or updated, without an actual PC?
Some people are just unimaginably arrogant. Do you read before posting a response? It's very clear to me that the iPad is BETTER than most pcs that have ever existed, and many that exist now. This is not a debatable subject. It's frigging GOOD. Hell I'm using one right now.
But if i didn't also own an iMac, which is a PC, it would still be sitting here with the connect to iTunes screen. This isn't some arbitrary inconvenience, it's the essence of a stand alone device vs. an accessory device CATEGORY.
If you bought it at an apple store, it could be turned on there, and you don't NEED to update it.
Still waiting for a decent argument from someone with a brain between their ears, to explain to me how its not significant that an iPad cannot be TURNED ON, or updated, without an actual PC?[
Some people are just unimaginably arrogant...
You just implied that anyone that disgrees with your definition of ?PC? is an idiot yet they are the arrogant ones?
Quote:
But if i didn't also own an iMac, which is a PC, it would still be sitting here with the connect to iTunes screen. This isn't some arbitrary inconvenience, it's the essence of a stand alone device vs. an accessory device CATEGORY.
Apple also marketing the Mac as not being a PC. They did this for a reason, just like they choose to make the iPad a satellite PC reliant on a primary PC. This was a a design choice, not an engineering limitation.
You are right that it?s not an arbitrary inconvenience. While it?s certainly an inconvenience in many ways it serves a clear and decided purpose. I think you are missing Apple?s intention for marketing and selling the device. You can?t be a market leader by advertising how you just like everything else.
The bottom line is all of these devices can be defined as ?personal' and ?computers', so saying others are stupid because they see the bigger picture outside of Windows-based pigeonhole simply isn?t fair on your part.
One day I can see Apple lifting that tethering restriction. Will you call it a PC then or will the goal posts move to disallow it a computing device. If they allow initial activation and OTA updates on other iDevices will see them as personal computers?
Why does the definition have to be so limited? Why can?t there be multiple definitions, like grocers putting tomatoes and mushrooms in with vegetables when they aren?t. Do biologists get upset that tomatoes aren?t with other fruits in a grocery store? Not the sane ones. Why can?t we have traditional PCs, handheld PCs, tablet PCs, pocketable PCs, etc?
I agree with this, there being different categories for PC's....that makes sense.
But they ARE PC's.
Remember processing power has nothing to do with it, considering where PC's were just 10 years ago.
I agree with you regarding processing power. It was manufacturers though who used processing power, amount of memory, screen size and resolution to distinguish netbooks from notebooks. I must admit that distinction has recently blurred as netbooks became increasingly powerful and bigger in size. Other than netbooks, categorizing all the other devices should be done relatively easy, without the need to specify processing speed, memory etc., because there physical characteristics should be enough to identify the specific PC sub-category they belong in.
If you bought it at an apple store, it could be turned on there, and you don't NEED to update it.
After all the crap you needed to vent, this is the first point you've made that approaches,
1. Discussion
2. Relevancy.
Good point. It can be activated in the store. What happens when it's not? Like every single online purchase? Gift?
What happens then when it crashes/locks up? Back to the Apple store?
You're definitely right that it never needs to be updated. Of course, that was no where remotely near my point. My point was how the software can be updated. As far I know, there exists no PC on the market that requires ANOTHER PC for basic software updates. That would seem to stand out as...significant.
Comments
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.
So then if BMW sells bicycles, should they class them together with their cars for market-share numbers.. Because it would seem that many here believe the iPad and Mac should be tallied together as one product category for market share purposes..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saILJHAD6YU
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.
I think a PC or a type of PC, is ever-changing. The desktop and laptop have been around for a long time and there wasn't a need to differentiate the 2 since their monickers distinguished their category. More recently, smartphones (in larger numbers), netbooks and tablets have entered the scene that now requires a revisit of what constitutes a PC. I think smartphones, and eReaders too, should not be included in the PC generic category but then again as they become more powerful, maybe they should as well. The key to me is setting up categories for each type of PC (desktop, notebook, netbook, tablet, smartphone maybe, eReader maybe and future others) and then report the sales numbers under the appropriate category. That should not be difficult to do and would eliminate the swirl of confusion.
Another interesting PC question: are there any PCs on the market that have to be plugged into another PC to receive software updates?
MacBook Air!
The only way to install software is to use a host. And yet, clearly it is a personal computer.
I think a PC or a type of PC, is ever-changing. The desktop and laptop have been around for a long time and there wasn't a need to differentiate the 2 since their monickers distinguished their category. More recently, smartphones (in larger numbers), netbooks and tablets have entered the scene that now requires a revisit of what constitutes a PC. I think smartphones, and eReaders too, should not be included in the PC generic category but then again as they become more powerful, maybe they should as well. The key to me is setting up categories for each type of PC (desktop, notebook, netbook, tablet, smartphone maybe, eReader maybe and future others) and then report the sales numbers under the appropriate category. That should not be difficult to do and would eliminate the swirl of confusion.
I agree with this, there being different categories for PC's....that makes sense.
But they ARE PC's.
Remember processing power has nothing to do with it, considering where PC's were just 10 years ago.
MacBook Air!
The only way to install software is to use a host. And yet, clearly it is a personal computer.
Or... buy from the App Store or plug in a DVD drive...
Some people are just unimaginably arrogant. Do you read before posting a response? It's very clear to me that the iPad is BETTER than most pcs that have ever existed, and many that exist now. This is not a debatable subject. It's frigging GOOD. Hell I'm using one right now.
But if i didn't also own an iMac, which is a PC, it would still be sitting here with the connect to iTunes screen. This isn't some arbitrary inconvenience, it's the essence of a stand alone device vs. an accessory device CATEGORY.
Steve Jobs agrees this is a separate category of machine:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saILJHAD6YU
Well then it must be gospel because he also says blu-ray is bag of hurt, promised white iPhones would be available July 2010, says Apple would never make a netbook and on and on and on- infinitum.
MacBook Air!
The only way to install software is to use a host. And yet, clearly it is a personal computer.
I really hate it when people display poor reading comprehension. First of all, you are completely wrong. Secondly I said UPDATES. 3rd, no the MacBook air ships with a thumb drive containing the restore disc, and 4th it has always been able to use the super drive accessory.
And, it ships activated. Complete and total fail on your part. Next.
MacBook Air!
The only way to install software is to use a host. And yet, clearly it is a personal computer.
You can install software on the MBA via USB thumb drive, the Mac App store or with the optional superdrive., a host is not required...
This is why I can get worked up over this.
This is an example of a totally ludicrous and false definition of what a computer is.
I mean it literally is incorrect in every way.
That ipad is more capable than the majority of computers to have ever been in existence.
The iPad obviously is a "computer".
And it obviously is a computer that is designed primarily for "personal" usage.
Along the same lines, a four-function pocket electronic calculator indisputably is also a "computer".
And four-function pocket calculators indisputably are designed primarily for personal use.
And yet, when you take the word "personal" and put it together with the word "computer", you end up with the loaded term "Personal Computer" (capitalization added intentionally), abbreviated as "PC", whose definition (by common consensus) seems to contain some extra connotation beyond what is understood by the two words taken separately.
a four-function pocket calculator would not fit anybody's modern definition of the loaded term "PC". No more than a microwave oven would. Or an iPod shuffle. Or an inkjet printer. Even though they all are computational devices (computers) which are primarily designed for personal use, they are not "Personal Computers" in their own right.
The iPad approaches the area where the lines get very blurry indeed. To some, it would appear as an appliance -- an accessory that goes along with another device which is their primary PC. To others, the iPad appears to be a PC in its own right.
To me personally, the iPad (and other iOS devices in general) has more in common with inkjet printers and iPod shuffles (PC accessories), rather than being a PC in its own right. But I can understand the justification for both peoples' opinions on the matter, even if I don't necessarily agree with them.
So then if BMW sells bicycles, should they class them together with their cars for market-share numbers.. Because it would seem that many here believe the iPad and Mac should be tallied together as one product category for market share purposes..
It depends on what market you are talking about. If you are interested in the personal transportation market, then the answer is yes. If you are interested in the bicycle market, the answer is no.
Similarly, if you are interested in the personal computer market, your choice of sub-categories would be different from another researcher interested in, say, the market for palmtop computers like the iPod Touch.
Still waiting for a decent argument from someone with a brain between their ears, to explain to me how its not significant that an iPad cannot be TURNED ON, or updated, without an actual PC?
Some people are just unimaginably arrogant. Do you read before posting a response? It's very clear to me that the iPad is BETTER than most pcs that have ever existed, and many that exist now. This is not a debatable subject. It's frigging GOOD. Hell I'm using one right now.
But if i didn't also own an iMac, which is a PC, it would still be sitting here with the connect to iTunes screen. This isn't some arbitrary inconvenience, it's the essence of a stand alone device vs. an accessory device CATEGORY.
I don't think anyone disagrees that it needs to initially connected to a host to be activated.. However, that is an Apple imposed restriction, not a technological one. Furthermore, doing so does not disqualify it from being a computer, it is a computer, the question is should it be classified as a traditional PC for market share purposes..
My opinion is no.
It depends on what market you are talking about. If you are interested in the personal transportation market, then the answer is yes. If you are interested in the bicycle market, the answer is no.
Similarly, if you are interested in the personal computer market, your choice of sub-categories would be different from another researcher interested in, say, the market for palmtop computers like the iPod Touch.
Well basically, you've proved my point, that while the iPad is *technically* a computer it is a very different product than a traditional Desktop or laptop PC and should be counted as a separate product category for market share purposes.
I don't think anyone disagrees that it needs to initially connected to a host to be activated.. However, that is an Apple imposed restriction, not a technological one. Furthermore, doing so does not disqualify it from being a computer, it is a computer, the question is should it be classified as a traditional PC for market share purposes..
My opinion is no.
This is of course, correct. No one in their right mind could possibly disagree. It is in fact a "computer", and it does in fact not belong with traditional PC sales numbers.
It belongs with category iPad numbers.
Still waiting for a decent argument from someone with a brain between their ears, to explain to me how its not significant that an iPad cannot be TURNED ON, or updated, without an actual PC?
Some people are just unimaginably arrogant. Do you read before posting a response? It's very clear to me that the iPad is BETTER than most pcs that have ever existed, and many that exist now. This is not a debatable subject. It's frigging GOOD. Hell I'm using one right now.
But if i didn't also own an iMac, which is a PC, it would still be sitting here with the connect to iTunes screen. This isn't some arbitrary inconvenience, it's the essence of a stand alone device vs. an accessory device CATEGORY.
If you bought it at an apple store, it could be turned on there, and you don't NEED to update it.
Still waiting for a decent argument from someone with a brain between their ears, to explain to me how its not significant that an iPad cannot be TURNED ON, or updated, without an actual PC?[
Some people are just unimaginably arrogant...
You just implied that anyone that disgrees with your definition of ?PC? is an idiot yet they are the arrogant ones?
But if i didn't also own an iMac, which is a PC, it would still be sitting here with the connect to iTunes screen. This isn't some arbitrary inconvenience, it's the essence of a stand alone device vs. an accessory device CATEGORY.
Apple also marketing the Mac as not being a PC. They did this for a reason, just like they choose to make the iPad a satellite PC reliant on a primary PC. This was a a design choice, not an engineering limitation.
You are right that it?s not an arbitrary inconvenience. While it?s certainly an inconvenience in many ways it serves a clear and decided purpose. I think you are missing Apple?s intention for marketing and selling the device. You can?t be a market leader by advertising how you just like everything else.
The bottom line is all of these devices can be defined as ?personal' and ?computers', so saying others are stupid because they see the bigger picture outside of Windows-based pigeonhole simply isn?t fair on your part.
One day I can see Apple lifting that tethering restriction. Will you call it a PC then or will the goal posts move to disallow it a computing device. If they allow initial activation and OTA updates on other iDevices will see them as personal computers?
Why does the definition have to be so limited? Why can?t there be multiple definitions, like grocers putting tomatoes and mushrooms in with vegetables when they aren?t. Do biologists get upset that tomatoes aren?t with other fruits in a grocery store? Not the sane ones. Why can?t we have traditional PCs, handheld PCs, tablet PCs, pocketable PCs, etc?
I agree with this, there being different categories for PC's....that makes sense.
But they ARE PC's.
Remember processing power has nothing to do with it, considering where PC's were just 10 years ago.
I agree with you regarding processing power. It was manufacturers though who used processing power, amount of memory, screen size and resolution to distinguish netbooks from notebooks. I must admit that distinction has recently blurred as netbooks became increasingly powerful and bigger in size. Other than netbooks, categorizing all the other devices should be done relatively easy, without the need to specify processing speed, memory etc., because there physical characteristics should be enough to identify the specific PC sub-category they belong in.
If you bought it at an apple store, it could be turned on there, and you don't NEED to update it.
After all the crap you needed to vent, this is the first point you've made that approaches,
1. Discussion
2. Relevancy.
Good point. It can be activated in the store. What happens when it's not? Like every single online purchase? Gift?
What happens then when it crashes/locks up? Back to the Apple store?
You're definitely right that it never needs to be updated. Of course, that was no where remotely near my point. My point was how the software can be updated. As far I know, there exists no PC on the market that requires ANOTHER PC for basic software updates. That would seem to stand out as...significant.
So a screen size of 7" or higher makes a tablet a PC now? Who makes up these arbitrary figures?
Hell, you might as well call a iPod touch a PC as well -- it has the same processing power (and actually more RAM I think) in a smaller form-factor.
Every definition of 'computer' I've seen has been arbitrary. Definitions of computer are generally self serving in order to make some point or other.
IMHO its obviously a computer, just one that looks as different from a desktop PC as the desktop does from a UNIVAC.