backtop


Print 46 comment(s) - last by testerguy.. on Jan 9 at 4:25 AM


  (Source: geekandhype.com)
Lenovo is expected to surpass Apple in 2012

While Apple seems to be doing well in the mobile department with its iPhone and iPad devices, a recent report shows that the tech giant is also seeing some successful sales numbers with its all-in-one iMac desktop.

According to DisplaySearch, a California-based research firm, Apple is ahead of the all-in-one PC game accounting for 32.9 percent of shipments in the third quarter. Lenovo followed with 22.7 percent of all-in-one sales in the third quarter, and Hewlett-Packard (HP) fell in third place with 21.4 percent.

The all-in-one PC market grew 39 percent to 14.5 million units globally last year. According to Chris Connery of DisplaySearch, all-in-ones are an area of the desktop market that will continue growing, and tech companies should focus on them.

DisplaySearch said the all-in-one market could grow to 23.3 million units by 2014.

While Apple's iMac has nearly a third of the all-in-one market, this isn't expected to last long. According to DigiTimes, 2012 will put Lenovo in first place while Apple slides to second. Apple's share is expected to fall to 24 percent with 3.8 million iMac sales while Lenovo is expected to sell 4 million all-in-one units this year.

HP is also looking to do some catching up by releasing some new members to its all-in-one family. For instance, HP will sell the HP Omni all-in-one PC starting January 8. The HP Omni starts at $1,200 and offers a 27-inch screen, Beats Audio technology, HDMI HD TV connection, optional Blu-ray disc drive and more.

According to Cult of Mac, Apple is also looking to revamp its all-in-one iMac this year with a 22-nanometer Ivy Bridge platform.

Sources: Bloomberg, Cult of Mac



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Makes sense
By Dorkyman on 1/5/2012 10:27:52 AM , Rating: 4
The technically-illiterate people I know are attracted to a Mac's simplicity, and an all-in-one makes things even simpler.

This is not a knock on Apple or those users. We all have our particular interests and unique strengths and weaknesses. Don't ask me to paint a decent watercolor but I can whip a balky Windows machine into shape in no time.

I guess, if anything, I'm surprised that PC all-in-ones command 2/3 of segment sales.




RE: Makes sense
By kleinma on 1/5/2012 10:37:01 AM , Rating: 4
The biggest reason I don't like the all in ones (apple or other brand) is that when something breaks, you are looking at a hefty repair.

If my LCD monitor shits the bed, I go get a nice new 27" LCD for like 250 bucks. If an iMac screen goes on you, you can't use your computer until you get a replacement screen, and the repair will cost you over 500 bucks. Apple is worse in once area of all in ones though, which is providing access to the internals. At least the hard drive should be accessible from the back of the machine. For some reason, Apple decided this somewhat commonly replaced part should go inside a closed box with no access unless you take off the front glass (and try not to break it), remove the LCD panel from the system, and then finally access the drive.

Sure they look pretty, but if you need to repair them, it sucks.


RE: Makes sense
By mcnabney on 1/5/2012 10:53:37 AM , Rating: 2
What is worse is that when the iMac hardware is obsolete in 2-4 years you have to discard a perfectly good IPS screen as well. The EPITOME of American wastefullness.


RE: Makes sense
By SurreDeth on 1/5/2012 11:07:11 AM , Rating: 4
Nah, you can use iMacs as external monitor for another computer.


RE: Makes sense
By mcnabney on 1/6/2012 10:23:11 AM , Rating: 3
A functional iMac can be used as an external display if both computers have a Thunderbolt connection. If anything goes wrong with the computer portion of the iMac, this won't work. This also means dead iMacs generally take a fully functional 2560x1440 IPS display to their grave with them.


RE: Makes sense
By TakinYourPoints on 1/6/2012 7:35:50 PM , Rating: 2
Depends. The 2011 iMacs require a Thunderbolt connection to display an external signal, older ones don't. I use one as the main display for my PC. Easy switch between work and games on a really excellent display.

Your argument seems to hinge quite a bit on iMacs dropping dead. You might as well worry about being hit by a car as an excuse not to cross the street.


RE: Makes sense
By TakinYourPoints on 1/6/2012 7:35:50 PM , Rating: 2
Depends. The 2011 iMacs require a Thunderbolt connection to display an external signal, older ones don't. I use one as the main display for my PC. Easy switch between work and games on a really excellent display.

Your argument seems to hinge quite a bit on iMacs dropping dead. You might as well worry about being hit by a car as an excuse not to cross the street.


RE: Makes sense
By BZDTemp on 1/6/2012 4:31:49 PM , Rating: 2
Sort of and ONLY by running the iMac as a whole. It's not like you can turn on just the TFT part of the thing (I checked this out since if you could the 27" model was a pretty good deal compared to getting a Dell u2711).


RE: Makes sense
By messele on 1/5/12, Rating: 0
RE: Makes sense
By name99 on 1/5/12, Rating: -1
RE: Makes sense
By FaaR on 1/6/2012 7:15:17 AM , Rating: 2
Modern computers don't go obsolete in 2, or even 4 years. They might not be fun for a gamer to use in that timespan (but if that's the case, why are you buying Macs? Lol. ;)), there's still many people that would find such a computer a very useful tool.

The screen you so prominently mention will still be very good, for example. Donate the computer to charity, in a third-world country that "obsolete" Mac would be immensely powerful and valuable.


RE: Makes sense
By mcnabney on 1/6/2012 10:16:05 AM , Rating: 2
You missed my point.

A monitor is useful for a much longer period of time than the computer itself. If the components were SEPARATE or detachable than the display could be retained when a new computer is purchased - saving several hundred dollars. Remember, the iMacs have expensive IPS screens.

And most of the replies are typically American - donate it, sell it.... How about not repurchase what you already have?


RE: Makes sense
By name99 on 1/6/2012 4:08:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A monitor is useful for a much longer period of time than the computer itself. If the components were SEPARATE or detachable than the display could be retained when a new computer is purchased - saving several hundred dollars. Remember, the iMacs have expensive IPS screens.


This was true in the 1990s. In case you haven't noticed, the pace of computer innovation, and the need for ever increasing speed, has slowed in the past few years.
YOU might think a four year old computer is no longer useful, but most of the world (and that includes most of the Western world) disagrees with you.


RE: Makes sense
By steven975 on 1/5/12, Rating: -1
RE: Makes sense
By TakinYourPoints on 1/5/12, Rating: 0
RE: Makes sense
By TakinYourPoints on 1/5/2012 9:28:12 PM , Rating: 2
Resale value is a big plus for iMacs. I stopped getting Powermacs for my Final Cut workstation when the Core 2 iMacs were released. Great performance, I didn't need Xeons in the Mac Pros, and a great IPS monitor is included.

I made about 60% on my 24" iMac when I upgraded to a 27" i7-860 iMac two years later. The process was very easy, just put it in the original box and ship it out. Selling my old PC parts is a headache in comparison since it's all piecemeal and I make much less money from the parts. I expect to be making less than 50% on my SLI GPUs when I upgrade to Kepler this year.

Another plus: The 27" iMac is an awesome display for my PC as well. I basically got a fast FCP workstation with a $1000 monitor built in. The Mac Pros are an awful value since they use Xeons (very few people actually need them) and haven't been upgraded in forever (I won't be surprised if they're discontinued), and the Mini is a bad value since all the cash goes towards the little form factor. Add a monitor comparable to the iMac's and it costs more, but with slower CPU/GPU and less internal storage. The iMacs are really good though, probably their best value outside of the Macbook Air.


RE: Makes sense
By palladium on 1/6/2012 1:43:25 AM , Rating: 2
I disagree.

I think Mac Pros are the best value of the whole Apple line up. Sure, not many people need Xeons, but try configuring a similar WS from Dell, and you get at least twice the price tag. Plus, it is the only Mac with PCIe slots, so it means I can upgrade my graphics card, or add in a PCIe SSD later on. For double the price of an iMac you get > 2x the CPU performance with the right workload plus future upgradability.

The iMacs from the C2D days were extremely poor value, essentially they were overpriced laptops packaged into an all-in-one. With Sandy Bridge the performance gap between mobile and desktop parts narrowed significantly, and that improves the iMac value by a lot.


RE: Makes sense
By TakinYourPoints on 1/6/2012 7:05:42 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, a comparable workstation from Dell or HP will cost roughly the same. That said, Xeons are a poor value for pretty much anyone.

It isn't worth getting PCI slots over IMHO. Better to get a fast computer with a great monitor, and then if you want to upgrade you can just sell the whole thing and get a good amount back from the sale.

As it stands, most people (ie - normals) don't really need to upgrade. Hell, I use an iMac for work and I don't know when I'll be replacing it. It is an i7-860 from late 2009 and I can see myself hanging onto it for another two years or so. The main thing that'll have me upgrade is an updated monitor.


RE: Makes sense
By TakinYourPoints on 1/6/2012 7:30:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It isn't worth getting PCI slots over IMHO. Better to get a fast computer with a great monitor, and then if you want to upgrade you can just sell the whole thing and get a good amount back from the sale.


I forgot to add the obvious option: Get (or build) a normal desktop with PCI expansion and consumer level CPUs instead of XEONs, ECC RAM, server grade motherboard, etc etc.

If these are normals we're talking about then any of the above (iMac, good desktop) are better options than any machine with Xeons, even if it has PCI expansion.


RE: Makes sense
By Bostlabs on 1/5/2012 10:41:29 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed!

The All-in-Ones (Apple or any other vendor) would be far too limiting for me. Having to replace or upgrade any parts on these puppies would be a major PITA.


RE: Makes sense
By steven975 on 1/5/2012 11:07:01 AM , Rating: 2
Now, and all-in-one is an impractical form factor due to its wastefulness and impossbility of repair, and I would never buy one nor recommend others buy them.

Still, among the pack of these machines, the iMac is the best one. They're really not even that horridly overpriced, esp when you factor they have a very good screen and an attractive, solid design.

These were the reasons that I got a MacBook Air when I was in the laptop market. Among other ultrabooks, it's priced well, and has a great design (great 1440*900 screen, great trackpad, SB i5, 4GB, and 128GB SSD, small size for $1299). AND, there's a store that's not bestbuy to take it to for repair, if needed. Yes, I run windows on it as OSX really doesn't support my other devices well (connection to my main PC is hit or miss) but for web browsing, their implementation of the touchpad makes it a pleasure...even in Windows it's a gem.


RE: Makes sense
By Iaiken on 1/5/2012 11:33:33 AM , Rating: 2
The only thing that I lament about when I think about replacing my wife's iMac is the screen. It's a great screen and it seems like a total waste to pitch it just because some other pricey part kicked the bucket.


RE: Makes sense
By TakinYourPoints on 1/6/2012 10:31:29 PM , Rating: 2
It's a waste only if you decide to replace the iMac with something else that isn't an iMac, and in that case you just buy a separate (hopefully IPS) monitor again. When I sold my 24" and upgraded to a 27", not only did I get a good amount for the old iMac but the display upgrade was huge. I also use it as the primary display for my PC, it is fantastic.


RE: Makes sense
By Reclaimer77 on 1/5/2012 8:07:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Still, among the pack of these machines, the iMac is the best one.


Only because of Bootcamp. If everyone was still locked away in the OSX walled garden, I think iMac sales would be quite different. And by different I mean lower.


RE: Makes sense
By TakinYourPoints on 1/5/2012 9:16:59 PM , Rating: 2
How is OS X a walled garden? You can buy and install applications straight from any developer. You can install applications from third party storefronts like Steam. You can easily run other operating systems in a VM. If you're so inclined you get loads of low-level OS control via the command line.


RE: Makes sense
By Reclaimer77 on 1/6/2012 9:22:47 AM , Rating: 2
You're joking right? I can't believe you're willing to go THAT far to support Apple as to now claim that they don't tightly control every aspect of the OSX side of things.

quote:
You can buy and install applications straight from any developer.


*Any developer that Apple has approved of*

The Mac App Store uses the exact same walled garden platform as the iOS one Takin, and you know this. What are you trying to pull here? Not just anyone can write apps for OSX and sell them, as is the case with Windows.

quote:
You can install applications from third party storefronts like Steam.


How does that refute the plain fact that Apple has always tightly controlled the Mac platform? And hello! Steam wasn't made available for Mac until 2010!

And what about peripherals! Why can't I go out and buy ANY video card, ANY optical drive, anything and have it work with my Mac? Because Apple said so, that's why. I have to choose between a few "supported" devices. It would be a simple matter of writing a driver to support these devices, but nope. That's not how Apple does things. You will use what they want, when they want, how they want.

And the biggest most obvious travesty and proof of the tyrant like nature behind everything, Steve Jobs himself. For example when asked why billions of Mac customers can't enjoy Blu-Ray DVD's on their overpriced "high end" machines, he responded with a bunch of ridiculous prophet-like nonsense.

And just like that, because of the opinion of one man, millions of customers couldn't watch the standard HD format. Come to think of it, just how many standards like Blu-Ray has Apple decided to not support? I've lost count. Not only would Mac's not ship with Blu-Ray until mid-2011 (way late to the party as usual), but you couldn't even use an external one because, yup you guessed it, Apple wouldn't support them!

You know what? Bill Gates had lots of opinions about technologies and formats. But it never once impacted my ability to view or purchase them. I was never boxed in.

"Streaming movies will continue to grow, pretty clear now that Bluray is in the past"
-Steve Jobs-

LOL good call there Steve...

Anyway go ahead and counter with your little comment about me being a hick or whatever while ignoring the fact that I've soundly made my point. Saying OSX isn't walled off is the most absurd position I've ever seen someone take.


RE: Makes sense
By TakinYourPoints on 1/6/2012 7:26:43 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
*Any developer that Apple has approved of*

The Mac App Store uses the exact same walled garden platform as the iOS one Takin, and you know this. What are you trying to pull here? Not just anyone can write apps for OSX and sell them, as is the case with Windows.


Yes, you can download and install applications from ANY OS X DEVELOPER, just like Windows. The OS X App store is only one single method to download and install software, but there are no restrictions to get applications from anywhere else. The main thing the App Store provides is convenience (auto updates, single storefront) and security, just like with Steam, but there's nothing to keep you from buying software from publishers and developers themselves either.

Hell, you don't even need a web browser to download an application, if you really want to nerd out you can just go in the terminal and type "sudo port install irssi" or whatever (not that I expect you to know UNIX commands).

You REALLY think Apple manages everything that can and can't be installed on OS X? Unbelievable!

quote:
How does that refute the plain fact that Apple has always tightly controlled the Mac platform? And hello! Steam wasn't made available for Mac until 2010!


That's because Valve didn't make OS X ports of their games until then, they weren't waiting on Apple's approval for Steam. Hell, Steam on OS X was released BEFORE the OS X App Store even existed.

quote:
And what about peripherals! Why can't I go out and buy ANY video card, ANY optical drive, anything and have it work with my Mac? Because Apple said so, that's why.


Video cards have to do with hardware compatibility. Macs use the newer EFI (which is finally making its way into a few newer motherboards like the high end Asus Sandy Bridge Rev 3 boards), not the traditional BIOS, which means that video card manufacturers need to make separate cards that support EFI. Given that so few people use Mac Pros, and that they're almost all professionals, there is a very tiny market for that sort of thing.

Mainstream devices like optical drives, printers, keyboards, mice, cameras, musical instruments, all that stuff works easy.

quote:
I've lost count. Not only would Mac's not ship with Blu-Ray until mid-2011 (way late to the party as usual), but you couldn't even use an external one because, yup you guessed it, Apple wouldn't support them!


Amazingly, you're wrong on both counts: Macs never shipped with Blu-Ray and external ones have worked with Macs since the beginning.

Maybe it's not so amazing, I dunno, everything you've said here hasn't been wrong in an obtuse way that can be argued around, it's been wrong in a really obvious way that even someone with marginal technical knowledge can debunk.


RE: Makes sense
By TakinYourPoints on 1/6/2012 10:39:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Only because of Bootcamp. If everyone was still locked away in the OSX walled garden, I think iMac sales would be quite different. And by different I mean lower


Aside from OS X not being a walled garden as you claim, there's also hardware. iMacs have the best displays and fastest internal hardware of any of the AIOs out there. There was a time when Dell sold 24" XPS One to compete with the 24" iMac. Not only was the Dell more expensive, it had a worse MVA display, slower CPU, integrated GPU instead of dedicated, half the RAM, and half the hard drive storage.

It was discontinued once Apple released the 27", now other AIOs don't bother competing on specs and instead try and get as cheap as possible.

So yeah, people also get iMacs for the hardware and OS integration. The only people I know who Boot Camp do it on their Mac laptops. I don't know anyone who Boot Camps an iMac, people who'd do that are way more likely just to have a PC desktop. I don't bother with Boot Camp since I just plug my PC into mine.


RE: Makes sense
By Iaiken on 1/5/2012 11:24:56 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
I guess, if anything, I'm surprised that PC all-in-ones command 2/3 of segment sales.


I am actually surprised by this too, but given the long list of problems that have plagued the various iMacs over time, I can sort of understand it.

My wife was a die-hard Apple lover, but that changed over the course of her 24" Core 2 Duo iMac ownership.

- Yellow screen
- Recurring DVD drive issues ($200)
- GPU replaced ($490)
- Motherboard replaced ($680)

Thankfully those were all taken care of under the extended AppleCare she purchased before we met, but the next part that breaks is going to send that iMac to the junk heap. Then there were the upgrades that I wound up doing because the Apple prices constitute highway robbery.

- 500GB HDD, Apple: $300 Newegg: $129
- 4GB DDR2 PC6400, Apple: $400 Newegg: $54

All prices above were for the exact same part according to the support documents that one of my friends (an Apple tech) provided me. When I saw that and started combing over the other upgrade prices vs retail prices and I am surprised more people don't do this for a living. Even with a 100% markup on parts, I still severely undercut Apple.


RE: Makes sense
By daveinternets on 1/5/2012 12:07:09 PM , Rating: 2
Ya, I hear ya.

All the Mac folks I know only buy the iMac. I don't think they have purchased a classic desktop Mac in years.

I wonder what the unit sales are comparing iMacs to their desktop line


RE: Makes sense
By MonkeyPaw on 1/5/2012 3:24:50 PM , Rating: 2
The iMac is sort of the standard desktop for Apple, as the mini isn't as appealing, and the MacPro sets you back a hefty sum.

Like others, I am surprised that iMacs are only 1/3 of the all in one market. I guess there are a lot more options than I previously thought.


RE: Makes sense
By SoCalBoomer on 1/5/2012 12:56:51 PM , Rating: 1
That's actually the thing I was most surprised with.

The iMac is really the only "real" Mac available. The Mini is a tiny little thing, the Pro is WAY too expensive - the iMac is Apple's only mainstream computer.

So why is it "only" 1/3 of the all-in-one sales? Nobody else really makes or advertises them. . . Yes they make them but they're a side prodcut. . . not mainstream.

So why is Apple struggling in this? They're 33% of a marginalized, undermarketed, sideline market in which they should DOMINATE. Their screens are HUGE, beautiful; the engineering of the iMacs is impeccable; they're not overly expensive. . . so why are they 33% of a market the "big" guys don't care about?

That's my surprise.


RE: Makes sense
By name99 on 1/5/12, Rating: -1
RE: Makes sense
By Solandri on 1/5/2012 4:55:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I guess, if anything, I'm surprised that PC all-in-ones command 2/3 of segment sales.

The PC all-in-ones are popular among businesses as a kiosk-type PC. I've seen them used for promotional displays (don't have the bulk of a tower or cables like a PC), at internet cafes, photo printing stations at Costco, hotel business centers, etc. Any time you just want a simple PC without having to deal with the mess of cables between the monitor and tower, the all-in-one makes sense. A lot of thin clients can also be replaced by all-in-ones.


suprised is actually that low
By mm2587 on 1/5/2012 11:03:58 AM , Rating: 3
Its been years since the last time I saw an all in one that wasn't an imac. I know they exist and some of them aren't bad looking but I thought Apple was the only real player in that market.

Who's buying these other all in ones? Its hard to miss noticing 2/3 of the market




RE: suprised is actually that low
By Integral9 on 1/5/2012 11:22:38 AM , Rating: 1
it's not 2/3 of the PC market. The article said Apple has 2/3 of the All-in-One PC market.

Personally, I don't get why someone would buy a laptop that doesn't close up and you can't haul around? And frankly, I think the article is misleading as I would consider a laptop and net-books to be "All-in-One PCs" as well.


RE: suprised is actually that low
By tammlam on 1/5/2012 11:57:05 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The article said Apple has 2/3 of the All-in-One PC market.


I believe 33% is only 1/3. I agree that a notebook is a more versatile all-in-one.


By Solandri on 1/5/2012 4:59:09 PM , Rating: 2
Generally I steer people towards notebooks instead of all-in-ones. But if it's not going to go on the road and you want a screen bigger than 17", a notebook + monitor is actually more unwieldy than an all-in-one.


Domestic/International
By aliasfox on 1/5/2012 1:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
I'd like to see a breakdown of domestic vs international - Apple is very strong among personal purchases in the US (some reports suggest 10% overall non-corporate purchases, if not somewhat higher), but weak internationally. It's highly probable that companies like Sony and Toshiba have much of the Japanese market, for example.

I wouldn't mind an iMac in my studio apartment. They're decently powerful (quad core, reasonable dedicated graphics) as it's been pointed out, the 27" 2560 x 1440 IPS display is $800+ by itself from any vendor - but two things bother me about it:

- Apple implements their HDD temperature sensor in a way that's non-standard. If your original HDD fails, you can plug a generic one in, but the internal fans will always be at maximum speed. Or you can get an Apple modified one for 3x the price.

- The newest implementation of the mini-DP/Thunderbolt port means that only Thunderbolt equipped machines can output video to the 27" IPS display - right now, that's a very, very slim list of machines.




RE: Domestic/International
By mellomonk on 1/5/2012 2:13:44 PM , Rating: 2
You need to do a google search when swapping the HDD. In previous gens of iMacs it was a matter of swapping the temp sensor leads or jumpering them. The other solution is to use the SMCfancontrol software. A minor pain, but not a deal breaker.

Apple is seeing great growth PC-wise overseas, though the numbers do still lag behind the domestic numbers somewhat. And it is overseas where you see the majority of all-in-ones. I've seen entire offices full of them in Shanghai. I think they are probably a little more realistic in what a given employee needs PC wise. I've also seen offices full of laptops, not a desktop in site.

The all-in-one will likely be the form factor of the future. Just like TVs and other commodity electronics they will be built to be cheap and disposable, or at least recyclable. The pace of 'effective' hardware innovation is slowing and hence useful life is extending. The laptop is already surpassing the desktop in sales and generations of folks are growing up with the concept of scrapping or re-purposing and buying new. The vast majority of 'upgrades' nowadays are just RAM or HDD. There will always be a tiny market of enthusiast boards and discrete graphics, but it will be a tiny fraction at best and be pricey compared to the commodity mainstream. Sure there are negatives, but the handwriting is on the wall. When is the last time you swapped a tube out on your TV? Or even called a TV repairman?


RE: Domestic/International
By aliasfox on 1/5/2012 3:01:52 PM , Rating: 2
Hey, don't get me wrong - I believe the all-in-one is the best 'everyman' computer. We have laptops at work that don't really go anywhere (we can take them home, but there generally isn't that expectation), and considering most people don't replace anything on their own anyway, it's not a big deal in most corporate/home settings.

As for the iMac HDD, I've done the research, and everything I've found sounded kludgy. I just find it annoying given that if one component were to fail, it would be the HDD. I was considering a refurbed 2010 iMac 27" earlier this year... the hard drive was the sticking point, as well as only one DP port - I would've wanted two (one to output to the TV, one to input from the old tower). That, and I finally decided that I really didn't do anything at home that warranted a new computer. And if you're wondering, I'm running a dual processor Power Mac G4. From 2002. With original HDD (+ two more)...


Irrelevant!
By Magnus909 on 1/5/2012 1:23:30 PM , Rating: 2
In other news, Samsung is the best selling all-in-one TV, a.k.a tv;s with a built in digital tuner.

"All-in-one PC", a very stupid name as if the other types of PC;s are specialized (like with photoprinters vs the all-in-ones printers/scanners/copymachines). Silly!

Choose/name a niche to make you look good...

This is just a way for apple to look like they have any kind of market share when it comes to Pc;s, when in fact they have a very small overall market share worldwide.

This seems to be something that is missed by many living in USA, where Apple is doing relatively well, 10-15% compared to just a few percent in the rest of the world.




RE: Irrelevant!
By testerguy on 1/9/2012 4:25:16 AM , Rating: 2
There is a clear distinction to be made between a desktop computer which has the technology (the actual computer element) actually built in to an embedded monitor, and one which doesn't. This distinction isn't one of Apples creation either, it's one of the markets, or more fundamentally, basic logic.

In very much the same way that a laptop can be distinguished from a desktop PC - the form means they can serve purposes which a normal desktop PC can't. One very basic example, is wall mounting - you often find them utilised in hotels.


Wait a minute
By Shuxclams on 1/5/2012 12:21:05 PM , Rating: 1
Apple pioneered the 'all-in-one' computer, they for years were the only player in the field and they now account for 33% of the market? that is success? That means 66% are Windows based units. Sounds like another misstep on Apples part to me. Same with the iPhone, pioneered that as well and now are second fiddle to Android devices.

I'll never understand how a company with such great innovation strives for marginalization.

SHUX




RE: Wait a minute
By name99 on 1/5/2012 4:51:04 PM , Rating: 2
I'll be sure to relay your concerns to Apple at the next general meeting, when they report another blowout quarter.

(Meanwhile HP, Dell and the other members of that 66% market share last reported a blowout quarter when exactly?)


bad idea
By Motoman on 1/5/2012 12:45:46 PM , Rating: 2
All-in-ones are a terrible idea - like a laptop, when they break, you pretty much throw them away. They're not easily and cheaply repairable like a desktop...or even a mini-sized little ITX box if you think you're really that cramped for room.

No one should ever buy such things. Worst possible decision you can make.




"It's okay. The scenarios aren't that clear. But it's good looking. [Steve Jobs] does good design, and [the iPad] is absolutely a good example of that." -- Bill Gates on the Apple iPad














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki