backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 355 comment(s) - last by Spivonious.. on Aug 13 at 2:16 PM

Amid the rush to the ultra-low end bargain PC market, its amazing how cheap a fuller functional Vista machine is

Many people are eying the ultra-portable bargain notebook market thanks to up-and-comers like Lenovo's IdeaPad S10 and the MSI Wind.  Chipmakers like Intel and VIA are struggling to keep up with demand for the bargain machines.  However, lost amid the ruckus is an equally significant trend in slightly higher-end model pricing.

Going to Best Buy, Circuit City, or even Target; a plethora of machines from manufacturers like Dell and HP assault the eyes.  Many of these Vista machines have impressive muscle for modest prices.  Take HP -- the average sale price (ASP) of a notebook with 14.1-inch display, 2GHz processor, 4GB of RAM and a 320GB hard drive is $699.   That kind of machine can not only replace a desktop, but also meet most users’ multimedia needs and even handle some less graphically intensive gaming.

Interestingly, prices seem to have hit a sweet spot and are quite low, though not moving up or down.  Stephen Baker, NPD's vice president of industry analysis, who yielded the HP ASP information had this to say of the trend, "We aren't seeing any particularly substantive moves down in price on the Windows side, either in desktops or notebooks."

While obviously it’s comparing apples and oranges, and the products appeal to different markets, it’s interesting to look at how Mac prices have changed versus PC prices.  Macs have gone from an average price of $1,432 and $1,574, for desktops and laptops respectively in June '06 to $1,543 and $1,515 respectively in June '08.  While much lower to start, PCs are now even lower in average sale price. The average PC notebook went from $877 to $700, while the average desktop dipped just barely from $559 to $550.

Vista PCs have reached a sweet point with pricing that is appealing not just to the high end crowd, but to the masses.  And while prices are staying constant, hardware features are increasing, which is good for the consumer.  As Mr. Baker puts it, "Of course there is feature creep—there always is."

Another trend along these lines is the push to support 64-bit Vista.  While numbers are still small, HP is leading the way, and its strong sales are certainly making an impact in spreading 64-bit.  DailyTech went into this trend in more detail.  Mr. Baker alludes to this stating, "Forty-eight percent of June Windows notebooks are 3GB systems.  But 4GB RAM Windows notebook systems are 11.6 percent of sales in June, up from nothing [at the] beginning of [the] year."

So what exactly do the latest NPD figures on Windows PCs show?  It can be interpreted in many ways, but one major observation is that Windows PCs are clearly the champion at lower prices.  It also shows that a full featured machine can be found for a very reasonable price.  This is good news for many -- and even better news when you consider holiday sales may momentarily sink prices even further.



Comments     Threshold


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

Nice
By pauldovi on 8/6/2008 10:15:53 AM , Rating: 5
This is a good article. One of the largest fallacy that Steve Jobs worshipers make when comparing OSX to Windows is that they use $2000 Apple and $700 PC hardware and then come to the conclusion that OSX is faster. Well... Isn't that something.




RE: Nice
By fibreoptik on 8/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Nice
By LorKha on 8/6/2008 10:26:42 AM , Rating: 5
Have you used Windows Vista?

Go ahead, complain about UAC and all the other crap that you don't know how to turn off in Windows Vista.


RE: Nice
By larson0699 on 8/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Nice
By zsdersw on 8/6/2008 10:44:03 AM , Rating: 5
Then keep using XP and kwitcherbitchin'.


RE: Nice
By fibreoptik on 8/6/08, Rating: 0
RE: Nice
By larson0699 on 8/6/08, Rating: 0
RE: Nice
By fibreoptik on 8/6/08, Rating: 0
RE: Nice
By KeypoX on 8/7/2008 7:30:33 PM , Rating: 1
your argument is almost valid about xp vs vista. Except it excludes the fact that vista is faster in loading programs and more secure then xp. Also vista doesnt slow down over time like xp does...

I use both 10.5.4 osx and vista. On my pc and laptop, and i gotta say osx is lacking in alot of areas. Such as dual monitor features. And many other places, osx is pretty much useless for power users. But fills it niche crowd well! It also has issues sometimes doing thins like office, web browsing and of course it has a tiny lineup of supported software.


RE: Nice
By kelmon on 8/8/2008 2:54:45 AM , Rating: 2
? What dual-monitor features is it missing? It's a lot easier to setup than Windows and I can't say I've ever found anything missing. Equally, I don't know what "power user" features you are lacking but can you explain further?

Seriously, if I thought OS X was lacking relative to Windows then I'd have switched back a couple of years ago and saved myself the money. The only reason why I have to run Windows as well is simply due to a number of IE-only web applications that my company runs. Aside from that I never found myself thinking "Gee, it was easier to do this under Windows". How much of an OS X power user do you consider yourself? I'm not trying to be insulting but there's usually a way of achieving pretty much anything on the Mac but how might not always be obvious if you are used to the Windows way of doing things.


RE: Nice
By FITCamaro on 8/6/2008 10:48:12 AM , Rating: 5
Uh....Vista IS more secure than XP. You may have your system set up right(as do I) but the average sheep doesn't know how. So for them it stays on the default settings. And in that regard Vista is FAR more secure. And for an experienced user it's even more secure than an XP computer in the hands of an experienced user.

And no, Vista won't run well on an old Athlon XP and little memory. But with an X2 costing as low as $60, 2GB of RAM costing around $50, and a quality motherboard with integrated graphics at around $75, hardware cost is hardly holding anyone back.

Nor is anyone here trying to convince you to upgrade anyway. An older PC running XP is just fine. We're saying that if you're building a new computer or buying a new computer, there's no reason NOT to use Vista.


RE: Nice
By fibreoptik on 8/6/08, Rating: 0
RE: Nice
By FITCamaro on 8/6/2008 10:57:44 AM , Rating: 5
Go away little troll. Don't you have some children to frighten while hiding under the bridge?


RE: Nice
By fibreoptik on 8/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Nice
By Chaser on 8/6/2008 11:31:50 AM , Rating: 2
Better than a Prius or bicycle.


RE: Nice
By anotherdude on 8/6/2008 11:32:31 AM , Rating: 5
you are so knee jerk anti-vista it is laughable. Vista simply isn't any slower than XP on a decent new system. This kind of mindless anti-vista bashing no longer plays. People know better. But keep screaming it anyway. A few uninformed sheep might still be listening. The tide has turned on Vista - suck it down.


RE: Nice
By FITCamaro on 8/6/2008 11:51:23 AM , Rating: 3
I already countered your blind criticism in plenty of other posts.

And I'm glad to know what car one drives is indicative of their intelligence. Nor do I drive a Camaro any longer (of course I hope to again in 2011).