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 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.


"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs

Related Articles













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