To stay competitive in the commodity market the wintel vendors are in price lowering spiral. The only way Gateway is gaining marketshare but by making near zero profit.
HP has done quite well, though, with a mix of good marketing, multi-tiered distribution, and somewhat better machine look and feel.
Dell computers at least in my opinion are extremely overprices. They attempted to get into the gaming nitch but gamers arent into buying Dells, being one myself your almost always going to go custom.
Also there are only so many people that need computers and only so many upgrades that are going to happen each year. The average user just doesnt need to upgrade that often.
Dell and HP still pretty much have a hold on hardware sales. Buy todays standard and the fact that the computer has become a house tool to think of spending 3500.00 gaming Dell system just seems insane to me. If microsoft and other OEM programmers could actually code software corretly you wouldnt need all those crazy hardware specs. Most of the coding is junk.
Like you said though, the XPS is solely a niche product and as such, the line only accounts for very small portion of Dell's overall business. For component/spec costs, Dell prices its products very aggressively (high volume, lower margins) so much so that Dell deals are tempting enough to make many consumers WANT to upgrade often.
I just pulled this deal from GotApex.
DellSB - Dimension 9150 Desktop with 2.8Ghz Pentium D 820 Dual Core, 512MB DDR2 SDRAM, 160GB S-ATA, 48x CD-RW/DVD Combo, 128MB ATI Radeon X300 SE for $689 with FREE Shipping plus Dell 1907FP UltraSharp 19" LCD
Granted, Pentium D will be phased out soon but I imagine that Dell can produce Core Duo 2 computers at similar prices within similar options.
The comparison is moot if the question is "What runs OS X the best?" That's fine - it's a valid point, etc. But given Dell's core competency within supply chain management, I imagine that those who say Dell will be doomed is only reminiscent of those naysayers who repeated "forecasted" for Apple's death several years ago. Dell will be around for many more years doing what they do best - higher volume lower cost computers for smaller margins.
I am sure Dell's answer to this is cut cost and make the boxes cheaper.
Off Topic:
Business Week this week said that the gamers make up 1% of Dell's cutomer base.
That means that approximately 3% of the total PC market are gamers. That clears up a lot of why Apple doesn't make the ultimate gaming machine threads.
That's because sometimes gamers grow up. The other 3% waste their lives on games.
Business Week this week said that the gamers make up 1% of Dell's cutomer base.
That means that approximately 3% of the total PC market are gamers. That clears up a lot of why Apple doesn't make the ultimate gaming machine threads.
How on earth are you counting? If we're extrapolating Dell's 1% of gamers, you still have one percent gamers in the whole market, not three.
That is, if I am capable of thinking correctly tonight.
How on earth are you counting? If we're extrapolating Dell's 1% of gamers, you still have one percent gamers in the whole market, not three.
That is, if I am capable of thinking correctly tonight.
I think he is going on the fact that dell marketshare is 33% (a third of the total market) therefore 1% is one third of the total gamer market. Therefore 3%
I think he is going on the fact that dell marketshare is 33% (a third of the total market) therefore 1% is one third of the total gamer market. Therefore 3%
I think he is going on the fact that dell marketshare is 33% (a third of the total market) therefore 1% is one third of the total gamer market. Therefore 3%
Hmm.. Yeah that's making a lot of assumptions on the 66% of the total PC market.
Actually, if Dell has only 33% of the market, then the 1% of that 33% are gamers, the [Dell gamers] as a percentage of total PCs sold is actually going to be less than 1% = 0.3% or so?
All the other providers and gamers that build their own systems would bring up the percentage to I don't know, maybe 1% then of total PCs sold?
But you have to reconcile this with the fact that discrete nVidia and ATI solutions can reach as high as 30%-50% of total PCs sold.
So try and correlate discrete graphics card buyers with "gamers" percentage, hmmm........
Not to mention any gamer worth his salt is using an AMD solution, eg: FX64X2 or whatever (did I just invent an AMD chip name?) and last I checked, Dell's desktops are Intel P4 garbage.
Not to mention any gamer worth his salt is using an AMD solution, eg: FX64X2 or whatever (did I just invent an AMD chip name?) and last I checked, Dell's desktops are Intel P4 garbage.
Yup, you made stuff up. There is the Athlon64 FX line and Athlon64 X2 line.
X2 is all Dual-Core, the top one being
AMD Athlon? 64 X2 Dual-Core 5000+ 2600Mhz
2 x 512kb of L2 cache, 89W
FX started out at single core, premium line "for gamers and hard enthusiasts", they added some dual core to the top end. The top FX is now the
AMD Athlon? 64 FX-62 2800Mhz (Dual Core)
2 x 1MB of L2 cache, 125W
Any gamer worth his salt (or worth his water in the Dune universe) will be on AthlonFXs or X2s
Anyway, in the past year and a half, even a single-core Athlon64-Venice 3000+ 1.8ghz 512kb cache is enough to this date for smooth game playing. It's the GPUs that matter - nVidia 7600GT or SLI'd 7900GTs or 7900GTX, ATI x1600 pro, X1800, X1900s or whatever, that's where you'll get the framerates. Throw in a SATA 10k or 15k drive and you'll have snappy load times. 1GB ram minimum now, 2GB sweet.
But yes, AMD is the king in gaming for the past 2 years at least while the Pentium4 Netbursts floundered, dragged along and pushed hard out the door thanks to idiots like Dell. With dualcore the big thing though, Netburst dualcores are cheap as anything, cheaper than AMD X2's (FX dualcores are top end expensive stuff). Then we have Conroes which spell the reversal of the King of Gaming CPUs, which now goes to, Conroe.
Ironically, any real gamer worth his salt now will be researching and prepping for a Conroe rig
Gee my Dell is working fine as I post from it. My MacBook sits in Memphis waiting for Apple to find a working Logic Board to put in it. I have had literally 10 Apple Laptops and 5 Dells yet my Apples fail much more often. Of the 10 Macs I have owned 6 had hardware issues. Of the 5 Dells, 1. The MacBook is a huge peice of shit. The Dell is a peice of shit too but that is not due to hardware failures.
Comments
Originally posted by TenoBell
To stay competitive in the commodity market the wintel vendors are in price lowering spiral. The only way Gateway is gaining marketshare but by making near zero profit.
HP has done quite well, though, with a mix of good marketing, multi-tiered distribution, and somewhat better machine look and feel.
Originally posted by extremeskater
Dell computers at least in my opinion are extremely overprices. They attempted to get into the gaming nitch but gamers arent into buying Dells, being one myself your almost always going to go custom.
Also there are only so many people that need computers and only so many upgrades that are going to happen each year. The average user just doesnt need to upgrade that often.
Dell and HP still pretty much have a hold on hardware sales. Buy todays standard and the fact that the computer has become a house tool to think of spending 3500.00 gaming Dell system just seems insane to me. If microsoft and other OEM programmers could actually code software corretly you wouldnt need all those crazy hardware specs. Most of the coding is junk.
Like you said though, the XPS is solely a niche product and as such, the line only accounts for very small portion of Dell's overall business. For component/spec costs, Dell prices its products very aggressively (high volume, lower margins) so much so that Dell deals are tempting enough to make many consumers WANT to upgrade often.
I just pulled this deal from GotApex.
DellSB - Dimension 9150 Desktop with 2.8Ghz Pentium D 820 Dual Core, 512MB DDR2 SDRAM, 160GB S-ATA, 48x CD-RW/DVD Combo, 128MB ATI Radeon X300 SE for $689 with FREE Shipping plus Dell 1907FP UltraSharp 19" LCD
Granted, Pentium D will be phased out soon but I imagine that Dell can produce Core Duo 2 computers at similar prices within similar options.
The comparison is moot if the question is "What runs OS X the best?" That's fine - it's a valid point, etc. But given Dell's core competency within supply chain management, I imagine that those who say Dell will be doomed is only reminiscent of those naysayers who repeated "forecasted" for Apple's death several years ago. Dell will be around for many more years doing what they do best - higher volume lower cost computers for smaller margins.
Originally posted by aplnub
I am sure Dell's answer to this is cut cost and make the boxes cheaper.
Off Topic:
Business Week this week said that the gamers make up 1% of Dell's cutomer base.
That means that approximately 3% of the total PC market are gamers. That clears up a lot of why Apple doesn't make the ultimate gaming machine threads.
That's because sometimes gamers grow up. The other 3% waste their lives on games.
Originally posted by SpamSandwich
That's because sometimes gamers grow up. The other 3% waste their lives on games.
Indeed.
Originally posted by aplnub
I
Off Topic:
Business Week this week said that the gamers make up 1% of Dell's cutomer base.
That means that approximately 3% of the total PC market are gamers. That clears up a lot of why Apple doesn't make the ultimate gaming machine threads.
How on earth are you counting? If we're extrapolating Dell's 1% of gamers, you still have one percent gamers in the whole market, not three.
That is, if I am capable of thinking correctly tonight.
Originally posted by Zandros
How on earth are you counting? If we're extrapolating Dell's 1% of gamers, you still have one percent gamers in the whole market, not three.
That is, if I am capable of thinking correctly tonight.
I think he is going on the fact that dell marketshare is 33% (a third of the total market) therefore 1% is one third of the total gamer market. Therefore 3%
Originally posted by stustanley
I think he is going on the fact that dell marketshare is 33% (a third of the total market) therefore 1% is one third of the total gamer market. Therefore 3%
Haha. That must be the new math.
Originally posted by BRussell
Haha. That must be the new math.
You got me. I goofed.
I think he is going on the fact that dell marketshare is 33% (a third of the total market) therefore 1% is one third of the total gamer market. Therefore 3%
Hmm.. Yeah that's making a lot of assumptions on the 66% of the total PC market.
Actually, if Dell has only 33% of the market, then the 1% of that 33% are gamers, the [Dell gamers] as a percentage of total PCs sold is actually going to be less than 1% = 0.3% or so?
All the other providers and gamers that build their own systems would bring up the percentage to I don't know, maybe 1% then of total PCs sold?
But you have to reconcile this with the fact that discrete nVidia and ATI solutions can reach as high as 30%-50% of total PCs sold.
So try and correlate discrete graphics card buyers with "gamers" percentage, hmmm........
Keep in mind even 1% of the PC Industry is a whole lotta millions of users.
Not to mention any gamer worth his salt is using an AMD solution, eg: FX64X2 or whatever (did I just invent an AMD chip name?) and last I checked, Dell's desktops are Intel P4 garbage.
Yup, you made stuff up. There is the Athlon64 FX line and Athlon64 X2 line.
X2 is all Dual-Core, the top one being
AMD Athlon? 64 X2 Dual-Core 5000+ 2600Mhz
2 x 512kb of L2 cache, 89W
FX started out at single core, premium line "for gamers and hard enthusiasts", they added some dual core to the top end. The top FX is now the
AMD Athlon? 64 FX-62 2800Mhz (Dual Core)
2 x 1MB of L2 cache, 125W
Any gamer worth his salt (or worth his water in the Dune universe) will be on AthlonFXs or X2s
Anyway, in the past year and a half, even a single-core Athlon64-Venice 3000+ 1.8ghz 512kb cache is enough to this date for smooth game playing. It's the GPUs that matter - nVidia 7600GT or SLI'd 7900GTs or 7900GTX, ATI x1600 pro, X1800, X1900s or whatever, that's where you'll get the framerates. Throw in a SATA 10k or 15k drive and you'll have snappy load times. 1GB ram minimum now, 2GB sweet.
But yes, AMD is the king in gaming for the past 2 years at least while the Pentium4 Netbursts floundered, dragged along and pushed hard out the door thanks to idiots like Dell. With dualcore the big thing though, Netburst dualcores are cheap as anything, cheaper than AMD X2's (FX dualcores are top end expensive stuff). Then we have Conroes which spell the reversal of the King of Gaming CPUs, which now goes to, Conroe.
Ironically, any real gamer worth his salt now will be researching and prepping for a Conroe rig