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

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.


"There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere." -- Isaac Asimov














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