backtop


Print 55 comment(s) - last by retrospooty.. on May 4 at 8:51 AM

Corporate accounts are buying into the ultrabook big time

So far, the Intel-based ultrabook market has been very small and few consumers have jumped on the “thin and light” bandwagon. While the market as a whole isn’t exactly setting sales records, Dell is bragging that XPS 13 ultrabook sales have been higher than its initial projections. The XPS 13 is made using aluminum and carbon fiber for strength and reduced weight.
 
Dell says that demand has been about three times what it expected for the machines.
 
"We can't build enough of them at the moment," said Sam Burd, vice president of Dell's Consumer and SMB product group. "A little bit less than 3X the expected demand," he said.
 
Dell won't provide specific numbers on the units it's selling, but greater than expected demand is a good sign for ultrabook makers overall. One of the main things that have been holding ultrabooks back from adoption by mainstream users has been the price of entry. The ultrabook was originally expected at around $600 and many of the first units to hit the market were significantly more than that amount.

 
Analyst Stephen Baker from NPD Group says that he's optimistic about ultrabooks in the long run. He also notes the computer makers need to focus on fewer models and more profitability for each product they do offer. "Look at the iPad. People are willing to pay $600 or $700 for something that gives them a great experience. Something that looks good and makes them feel comfortable and confident.”
 
The XPS 13 isn't cheap ultrabook with prices starting at $999. Most of the sales that are driving the machine's success are coming out of large corporate accounts according to Burd.
 
The ultrabook market is expected to benefit significantly from Intel's Ivy Bridge processors.

Source: CNET



Comments     Threshold


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

By Reclaimer77 on 5/1/2012 12:34:25 PM , Rating: 2
Because OSX sucks and nobody wants to use it outside of a tiny minority? Certainly nobody using this for business.

So tack on BootCamp and Windows 7 or 8 onto the $1,599 of the MBA 13", yeah umm, almost the same you say? I think not.


By Cloudie on 5/1/2012 2:39:57 PM , Rating: 2
OS X is so rubbish that Anand Shimpi, amongst other Anandtech staff, use the OS on their primary machine full time.


By Pneumothorax on 5/1/2012 3:08:58 PM , Rating: 2
I do have to concede though to reclaimer that OSX hasn't really penetrated the business space. It may never as Apple is currently seems to be putting the majority of their resources to iOS instead of OSX.

But on the hardware side, the MBA 13 has everything over the Dell XPS 13 ultra book other than the USB 3.0 port which should be corrected with ivy bridge refresh. They're both non-expandable machines. I currently use my MBA 13 on win7 the majority of the time and it makes a great, but expensive ultra book. You would think with the drivel here about Apple's 'OBSCENE' profits with their computers that Dell would come out with a superior machine spec wise for the same price or at least a machine on par in the $600-700 range.


By Cloudie on 5/1/2012 3:17:54 PM , Rating: 2
I also admit you need Win 7 for business.

But the the thing is though (and I have read every Anandtech Ultrabook/MBA review as well as some on other sites), the Macbook Air might be at the expensive end of the Ultrabook range but it is not the most expensive. Furthermore, every cheaper Ultrabook has some kind of hardware compromise that the MBA doesn't have; some of which are mentioned above in the case of the XPS 13.


By retrospooty on 5/1/2012 4:47:46 PM , Rating: 2
"I do have to concede though to reclaimer that OSX hasn't really penetrated the business space"

Or the consumer space. A 6% marketshare isnt exactly anything to jump for joy about. At best comparison it is equal to Windows 7, but less compatible, less software, less options and more expensive = fail.


By TakinYourPoints on 5/1/2012 11:10:41 PM , Rating: 1
Mac market share is actually closer to 15% in the US. In business, Macs have a foothold in the web development, back-end, and creative communities. The rest (which is a rapidly increasing number) falls to consumers.

An interesting statistic is that Apple is the #1 seller of computers over $1000. Most Windows machines out there sold by Dell/HP/etc are data entry/Office econoboxes. Not much money to be made even in the high volumes they move. Microsoft is a different story, they're the only ones that make bank in that relationship. It is why HP's profits mainly come from services and not hardware, and its why Dell is shifting away from direct sales to consumers. IBM's business model (services for enterprise) makes way more sense.

Anyway, ultrabook profit margins are a huge reason why every PC maker out there is jumping on that bandwagon, they want a piece of that higher-margin pie.


By retrospooty on 5/2/2012 12:04:10 PM , Rating: 2
"Mac market share is actually closer to 15% in the US. "

A skewed statistic. Its 15% of US consumer. A useless statistic. Its 6% worldwide. That's a real stat.


By TakinYourPoints on 5/3/2012 1:19:42 AM , Rating: 2
No, that is 15% total . Take Windows enterprise out of the equation and the percentage is even higher.

As for global, yes, it is obvious that the US and Europe are the primary markets for Apple. That doesn't make it a bad or incapable platform, far from it. People in those other regions aren't buying expensive PCs either.


By retrospooty on 5/3/2012 8:12:59 AM , Rating: 2
No, it isnt 15% of total, that is another Apple RDF "factish" they like to throw around to you gullible sheeple.


By Reclaimer77 on 5/1/2012 4:06:50 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
OS X is so rubbish that Anand Shimpi, amongst other Anandtech staff, use the OS on their primary machine full time.


This is your reply? ONE person using OS X and a few staff members somehow disproves the massive market share disparity in business?

Fuks sakes I thought this argument would have been put to bed years, if not decades ago. Get with the times, seriously.


By Cloudie on 5/1/2012 4:37:44 PM , Rating: 2
Higher market share = better? Ok, if you took the market share of the graphics market I'm pretty sure you'd find Intel Integrated graphics would have the highest market share. Is that the best graphics I wonder?


By Reclaimer77 on 5/1/2012 4:47:35 PM , Rating: 1
Okay now you're, once again, just being silly and making straw men.

Get back to me when you can debate this with at least one foot standing on reality. Dell is making a product, people are buying it despite the existence of MBA's. So there must be some value in it, even if YOU personally don't see it.


By Cloudie on 5/1/2012 4:48:35 PM , Rating: 2
By that logic, there must be some value in OS X, even if YOU personally don't see it.


By Reclaimer77 on 5/1/2012 4:57:31 PM , Rating: 2
This isn't about OSX. This is about the OP going "why buy this and not a MBA". I merely pointed out that, honestly, most people would have to factor in a copy of Windows 7 into the cost of a Macbook Air. OSX is only a fully functioning OS in the Apple universe. Once you have to live in the real world, it just doesn't cut it. And we all know this to be true. If it wasn't, BootCamp wouldn't exist.

But apparently the MBA is the greatest thing ever EVER, and I'm supposed to nod my head in agreement.


By Cloudie on 5/1/2012 5:06:51 PM , Rating: 2
Mate, the only arguments I'm disagreeing with are 'OS X sucks' and 'MBA is vastly overpriced compared to XPS 13'.

MBA isn't perfect and the machine I'm using right now has both OS X and Win7 partitions.

I do actually like the XPS 13 and I hope they improve on its weaknesses in a new revision.


By corduroygt on 5/1/2012 9:54:01 PM , Rating: 2
OS X is perfectly adequate to use in the real world, I don't know where you've got the impression that it isn't. It's got office and pretty much all the apps that a Macbook Air customer would use.


By Reclaimer77 on 5/2/2012 12:39:21 AM , Rating: 2
You're joking right? The insanely limited selection of third party hardware/driver support of OSX is enough to disqualify it for "real world" use.


By corduroygt on 5/2/2012 1:49:17 AM , Rating: 2
What do you mean by third party hardware/driver support? What do you plug into your laptop besides a printer that needs drivers????

You obviously have not used OS X and just crapping on it. There's MS Office on it, and specialized apps without a mac version not only can be run in a VM, but such apps are not what a OS X user typically uses anyway.


By TakinYourPoints on 5/2/2012 6:49:17 AM , Rating: 2
The only limitation I've run into are a few games, and I mean "a few" given that Valve and Blizzard both have native OS X version of their games, plus what is available on both Steam and the App Store.

Hell, my favorite FTP application is OS X only, I wouldn't mind seeing a Windows port for my desktop.

Limited hardware compatibility is also a BS argument, what has a USB plug or Wifi connectivity and doesn't work with OS X these days?


By Reclaimer77 on 5/2/2012 10:05:47 AM , Rating: 2
Yes because we know everything out there runs off USB lol. It's NOT a BS argument. We're talking about OS X, not just OS X as it pertains to laptops. For you to sit here and try to claim OS X has anywhere NEAR the hardware support that Windows does is a lie. You sir are lying.

Gaming? Okay you're using myopic arguments again to make your point. The biggest game of the year in 2011, Elder Scrolls Skyrim, doesn't even have an official Mac version. Still. Yes more and more games on Steam have OS X versions, but there's always that very good chance a huge title could pass you by, with your only resort being to Boot Camp into Windows if you want to play it.

OS X lost Takin. The war is already over. Give the Reality Distortion field a rest.


By TakinYourPoints on 5/2/2012 6:53:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yes because we know everything out there runs off USB lol. It's NOT a BS argument. We're talking about OS X, not just OS X as it pertains to laptops. For you to sit here and try to claim OS X has anywhere NEAR the hardware support that Windows does is a lie. You sir are lying.


What external hardware can't my Macs interface with due to driver incompatabilities? Just curious, I have a hard time coming up with any.

As for software compatibility, OS X Quick Look natively reads more files than a default Windows installation without any additional software installed. OS X is highly compatible with other file formats.

Your argument that OS X can't interface with the outside world is incredibly ignorant.

quote:
Gaming? Okay you're using myopic arguments again to make your point.


It is the one point that is actually relevant to me, given that my PC is a game machine first and foremost. It is the only tangible difference between the two operating systems, and I prefer almost everything else about OS X (note that I also think Windows 7 is great).

quote:
The biggest game of the year in 2011, Elder Scrolls Skyrim, doesn't even have an official Mac version. Still. Yes more and more games on Steam have OS X versions, but there's always that very good chance a huge title could pass you by, with your only resort being to Boot Camp into Windows if you want to play it.


Yup, and that's fine, I know what I'm getting into. The tradeoff of having an excellent laptop and missing something like Skyrim without dual-booting is fine by me. Enough games that actually matter to me (Blizzard and Valve namely) are native to the platform anyway, so I'm all good.

(Skyrim is boring anyway, /ducks)

quote:
OS X lost Takin. The war is already over. Give the Reality Distortion field a rest.


OS X continues to grow marketshare in a declining market. So long as the operating system and the hardware is top-notch, I'm a-ok with it. I'm sorry if the higher price tag shuts out more people than it needs to, but you get what you pay for.

It is almost the same with PC gaming rigs. My desktop PC is well out of the price range than most people can afford and makes up an even smaller percentage of machines out there than Macs, but that doesn't make it bad.


By TakinYourPoints on 5/2/2012 8:02:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
OS X lost


This quote says quite a lot about your mindset.

Ignoring how wrong it is, the fact that OS X marketshare continues to grow as overall desktop/laptop sales decline, and the fact that Apple is the #1 seller of computers over $1000, there's something else going on.

How many people use a platform doesn't really matter to me so long as it is still well supported and works great. OS X isn't lacking in applications and they have some of the best hardware out there. If install numbers actually mattered to me then I'd have completely dumped my PC for a console years ago, but screw that. The PC gaming market may be diminished compared to how it was ten years ago, but that doesn't mean that I'm just going to jump ship to something I feel that the more popular platform is inferior.

You continue to see things in a very black and white manner that has nothing to do with utility or practicality. It is the same irrational fanboy mentality that people use with sports teams or religion.

Anyway, your one-dimensional mindset is pretty funny.


By retrospooty on 5/2/2012 12:51:49 PM , Rating: 2
"The only limitation I've run into are a few games, and I mean "a few" given that Valve and Blizzard both have native OS X version of their games, plus what is available on both Steam and the App Store. Hell, my favorite FTP application is OS X only, I wouldn't mind seeing a Windows port for my desktop."

LOL... An argument for OS X not having limitations in the same post with a note about an app he wishes couldbe used on his Windows desktop. Let me ask you this? If OS X is anywhere near equal in overall (pick any subject) support, why are you using Windows?


By TakinYourPoints on 5/2/2012 6:41:34 PM , Rating: 2
I use Windows for games, plain and simple. OS X is my work/productivity machine while my PC is a very expensive game console.


By retrospooty on 5/3/2012 8:18:10 AM , Rating: 2
"I use Windows for games, plain and simple. OS X is my work/productivity machine while my PC is a very expensive game console."

Yet above you mention the higher price tag for Mac's and claim "you get what you pay for". So, for your Mac, you paid more and got less. Ask yourself this... Buy a PC and a Mac with comparable hardware specs. What can you do on the PC that you cant do on the Mac? What can you do on the Mac that you cant do on the PC.

The answer is that Mac's are perfectly comparable systems with the major exceptions of Gaming and enterprise apps/business network support. Why is that Mac more expensive again?


By TakinYourPoints on 5/3/2012 9:19:27 PM , Rating: 2
I pay for much better notebook hardware (display, keyboard, trackpad with multitouch gestures, battery life) and OS specific applications I need (things like Final Cut Pro 7). I also prefer working in the OS X environment, things like organizing assets, managing multiple virtual desktops, window management, using multitouch gestures, the list goes on. Working is much faster and more fluid than it is in Windows. As I said, my productivity OS.

As for price, I disagree. Get a PC up to the standards of a Mac and you're right up there. For example, my 24" LCD is a NEC 2490WUXi, it cost me about $1000 back in 2007. That same IPS panel was in the 2007 iMac, and it made up over half the price of that hardware. Over half the price of a 27" iMac is the same 27" IPS monitor that costs $1000 (used to be $1100) from Dell, and it still uses Core i5 and i7 processors. Fantastic deal, especially compared to other all-in-ones out there.

Spec a business class notebook up to MBP standards with a comparable display and you're paying as much as or more. Ultrabooks with comparable specs cost about as much as a Macbook Air, except that you're still dealing with inferior trackpads and displays.

You can buy PC hardware for less, certainly, but you're skimping on things like the display, the keyboard, the trackpad, chassis size, weight, etc. You can get a great PC notebook but it'll cost at least as much.

I know both Windows and OS X like the back of my hand, and I've used MS operating systems for about 15 years longer than I have OS X. My decision with both the hardware and the software is a very informed one, thanks.


By retrospooty on 5/4/2012 8:51:51 AM , Rating: 2
Sounds like your Mac does alot of good stuff. All that , and you still needed to buy a PC to game on. What a great argument... ;)


By TakinYourPoints on 5/3/2012 9:22:17 PM , Rating: 2
Also, the aside about business/enterprise support is BS. It has Office, loads of offices here use it. As for other things, I dunno, maybe businesses outside of California don't feel *nix is that important. Nearly every web and backend developer I know here uses a Mac. My Googler friends all work on Macs, but maybe that's not a real business...


By retrospooty on 5/4/2012 8:39:27 AM , Rating: 2
"Also, the aside about business/enterprise support is BS. It has Office, loads of offices here use it. As for other things"

I'll give you some of the points you made in the post above as personal opinion/preference but, LOL... MS Office? You don't even know what business is. It's enterprise and all systems that run with it. Call me when the plants that build Mac's and iPhones can do it without PC's and the Win based servers the world runs on. Call me when they come out with the accounting, procurement, logistics, reverse logistics, inventory, shop floor, CRM software etc. comes out on any other platform and integrates it all in to one working ecosystem, AND supports it... No one else is even close, no one else has even started to try it.


By ritualm on 5/2/2012 2:29:56 PM , Rating: 1
Ever tried a Hackintosh? No? How about a nice warm cup of STFU.

You're just yelling for attention. Nobody cares about your anti-Apple drivel.


By TakinYourPoints on 5/2/2012 6:59:41 PM , Rating: 1
Reclaimer is highly and willfully ignorant when it comes to OS X. He actually tried to argue that all OS X applications have to go through the same screening that applications do on iOS.

http://www.dailytech.com/Apples+iMac+Accounts+for+...

Find his second comment here, hilarious and shockingly wrong in every way. You'd figure that if you're going to talk badly about something, you'd at least have a newbie's understanding of the platform.


By corduroygt on 5/1/2012 3:12:09 PM , Rating: 2
The Macbook Air has a FAR better screen though, so even at the hardware level, it's a good deal.

I also prefer OS X to Win 7. I don't like to be forced to use libraries (when I delete them I get problems on some updates) and a decent mail client which can simultaneously handle exchange and IMAP accounts. Outlook is TERRIBLE at IMAP, and it's the only mail client that supports exchange.


By Reclaimer77 on 5/1/2012 4:01:04 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry but that screen isn't $400 better lol. The XPS is plenty good enough for a mobile device.

Anyway the OP seems to be trolling. Because basically he could apply the "why not get a MBA" to almost any device. I guess everyone should just give up and let Apple be the only provider.

As far as picking OSX over Win7 solely because of email clients...I don't even know what to say to that. WOW.


By Pneumothorax on 5/1/2012 4:12:36 PM , Rating: 2
How am I trolling exactly? There isn't a huge disparity in price between the two. I would willingly get a win7 ultra book if some damn windows manufacturer would make one that matches or exceeds the MBA hardware-wise with no compromises: same or better battery, 1440x900 or better screen with over 250 nits, excellent backlit keyboard, and big/smart touchpad that doesn't delete sentences while I'm typing (that means you HP) at the same or lower price. (Sony makes a ultra book VIAO that's better, but it's $2000!) The dell makes you compromise on the main thing you lok at The MBA and every other ultra book are admittedly limited devices. I have a HP 17 notebook that has a 256gb crucial SSD, 1tb WD HD, and a blu-ray player. Apple doesn't make a machine of that caliber. My beef with it is that the touchpad and keyboard aren't the best.


By Cloudie on 5/1/2012 4:35:30 PM , Rating: 2
'Sorry but that screen isn't $400 better lol'

In the UK, the XPS 13 base model comes with a 1.6ghz core i5. The base MBA 13" comes with 1.7"ghz i5. The MBA also has a card reader, FAR better (16:10, higher res, higher contrast ratio) screen, FAR better trackpad, and no heating/throttling issues.

I would pay that sort of premium simply for the screen if I'm honest never mind the rest.

'The XPS is plenty good enough for a mobile device'

It's not for me (because of the screen :p).

'Anyway the OP seems to be trolling. Because basically he could apply the "why not get a MBA" to almost any device. I guess everyone should just give up and let Apple be the only provider.'

I love competition but I just believe the MBA is a better notebook. If Dell sorts out some of things I've mentioned on the XPS 13, I think it'd be a great notebook.

'As far as picking OSX over Win7 solely because of email clients...I don't even know what to say to that. WOW.'

Did he say that was the sole reason? I'm pretty sure he mentioned 2 reasons (and just because he mentioned 2 reasons, it doesn't mean they're the only 2). P.S. Apple Mail is awesome.


By corduroygt on 5/1/2012 9:57:03 PM , Rating: 2
Have you ever used OS X?
I have used it and Windows 7 both for over a year.
OS X has better file management, no stupid registry crap, a good e-mail client (Outlook is junk for IMAP), better search. E-mail is a vital part of what you do on a computer and it's crucial to get that right.

I will be getting a Mac because most people do their "real world work" on a VM, or connected to some server. That includes me.

Also, the better case materials, the screen, the keyboard, and the touchpad are worth it to me.


By kmmatney on 5/2/2012 2:41:04 AM , Rating: 2
I've been a windows programmer (for the same company) for 20 years. Since I have to support several generations of products, in different version of Windows, I do most everything in VMs. I'm looking at getting a 17" MacBook Pro, since it's the only laptop that provides a 16:10 screen these days - just have to convince my boss.

More than anything, I'm shocked that NO WinTel laptop maker has the balls to make a laptop with a 16:10 screen. It seems like such an obvious way to stand out from the crowd.


By ritualm on 5/2/2012 2:34:06 PM , Rating: 2
If your argument is that 768p screen on the XPS 13 is better, I have a bridge in Alaska I'd like to sell you.

How worthless are those panels? Simple: the moment I see that and it's not a 11" laptop, I close the tab.

You're an idiot.


By TakinYourPoints on 5/2/2012 7:02:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If your argument is that 768p screen on the XPS 13 is better, I have a bridge in Alaska I'd like to sell you.


His argument is that it is better because the laptop with the inferior display doesn't have a fruit shaped logo on it.

quote:
You're an idiot.


Sums up Reclaimer very well.


By Capt Caveman on 5/1/2012 3:21:44 PM , Rating: 2
Huh?

All of our developers use MBA or MB Pros. If anything, you don't need to use the emulators that you need to use with Windows. I currently work at a large Internet infrastructure company.

Go to the Pharma industry, the only people using Windows are the Finance folks.


By Reclaimer77 on 5/1/2012 4:20:44 PM , Rating: 2
I think you people need to look up the term "myopic". Seriously.


By TakinYourPoints on 5/1/2012 10:59:26 PM , Rating: 2
Nearly everyone I know who does back-end web dev/server/security work does it in OS X. This is all outside of the standard creative fields that professionals also use Macs for. There is a huge advantage to having a well supported *nix operating system, it natively interfaces with so much of the back-end out there. Run Windows in a VM to test comparability if you need it and you're set, easy.


By TakinYourPoints on 5/3/2012 1:15:52 AM , Rating: 2
I guess my friends at Google are myopic; all of them have Macs and develop on OS X and Linux.

Oh noes, they don't use Windows, obviously it won't work in the "real world".

/rolls eyes


"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer

Related Articles













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