backtop


Print 122 comment(s) - last by Major HooHaa.. on Sep 14 at 11:42 AM

Acer and other PC makers lower forecasts for second half 2012 PC shipments

While many PC makers saw the coming of Windows 8 as an opportunity for growth and increased competition against Apple, those feelings are slowly fading.
 
Acer Inc., Quanta Computer Inc. and Compal Electronics Inc., three major PC makers, have all lost hope in Windows 8 being the savior of PC sales for the second half of fiscal year 2012. This opinion differs from those heard by the same PC makers earlier this year, who were happy to show off Windows 8 laptops, all-in-ones and ultrabooks at the Computex trade show in Taipei. Acer even said that Windows 8 PCs would bring growth to his company once again. 
 
But these opinions changed as PC makers see no customer enthusiasm for personal computers running the Windows 8 operating system. Another issue, according to analysts and the PC makers, is that Windows 8 laptops and ultrabooks will likely be much too expensive upon release. 
 
J.T. Wang, CEO of Acer, said he has grown unsure of the Windows 8 ecosystem. His company is lowering its expectations for PC sales upon Windows 8's release.
 
"Originally, we were expecting very high growth in the second half," said Wang. "We're still waiting for a sign of consumer enthusiasm."
 
Analysts are changing their sales forecasts as well, mainly due to the fact that some believe it'll take three to four financial quarters for consumers to get onboard with Windows 8. It won't take off right away. Rather, Microsoft will have to seek out developers for more applications in order to grab consumer interest.
 
While the PC turf isn't looking so hot, mobile devices may not be so disappointing. The price of touchscreens and tablets running Windows 8 may be an issue, especially because there are many cheaper alternatives, but consumers have shown greater enthusiasm for Microsoft's Surface tablet
 
Windows 8 has been a pretty controversial topic. The main issue seems to be the user interface, formerly called Metro. It features colorful tiles that represent different applications on the home screen. The change was a hopeful move to attract new users (perhaps those normally enticed by Apple's colorful and friendly-looking operating systems). However, Microsoft is looking to change the name of Metro after a recent discovery -- a German retailer called Metro AG threatened to sue. 
 
Windows 8 will be released to the public on October 26

Source: ETrade



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By falqon on 8/21/2012 1:49:08 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
I'm still running XP SP3 on a quad core, 16GB of RAM DDR3, and the 2GB HD6950...


You sir, are not very bright.


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By ritualm on 8/21/2012 2:33:32 PM , Rating: 2
Contrary to what you think, XP remains in widespread use in corporate environments.


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By headbox on 8/21/2012 2:41:32 PM , Rating: 2
very true- my wife's work just gave her a new Dell with Core i7, 4 GB RAM... and Windows XP. And she develops medical records software for the largest hospital in the state.


By muhahaaha on 8/22/2012 2:29:19 AM , Rating: 2
Tell us the name of the company please, because I don't want my medical records going public. No one needs to know that I smoke crack on a daily tech basis!


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By amanojaku on 8/21/2012 2:57:34 PM , Rating: 5
You're missing the point.
quote:
I'm still running XP SP3 on a quad core, 16GB of RAM DDR3, and the 2GB HD6950...
XP 32-bit doesn't use more than 4GiB of RAM. Unless this guy is running 64-bit Pro, has the appropriate drivers, and the right software, he's wasting hardware. And I'm pretty sure he's running 32-bit, because he said he's got SP3. There is no SP3 for 64-bit Pro.


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By xti on 8/21/2012 3:05:25 PM , Rating: 2
epic


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By woofersus on 8/21/2012 3:06:34 PM , Rating: 3
Not to mention horrible driver support for XP x64.

Also with a that video card, (2GB VRAM) hardware address space reservations mean his system is probably only seeing around 1.5GB.


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By Schmide on 8/21/2012 3:34:16 PM , Rating: 2
Not true. Video ram has a very small window and would probably not exceed 512mb. The 2gb is still addressable through banked access.

32bit programs on all platforms (xp, xp64 7, 7x64, etc) see similar environments, the biggest difference is x64 bit os(s) can optimize a lot of the buffers out of the 32bit address space. The 32bit environment is still limited, even in a 64 bit os.

PS you're posting from a 32bit environment.


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By woofersus on 8/21/2012 4:15:04 PM , Rating: 2
I stand corrected on the address space requirements of the video card.

I realize that the 32-bit version of firefox I'm using is limited, although my OS is definitely of the 64-bit variety, so it is making use of all of my RAM. Lots of software is still 32-bit only, so that should be no surprise. Of course if my firefox session were running up against the 32-bit memory address space limitations, that would be an indication that I have bigger problems. ;)

That's not the only issue, though. Regardless of xp's ability to recognize the memory, only 2GB is designated for user space. Without the registry hack xp won't utilize more then 2GB for actually running the OS.


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By lexluthermiester on 8/24/2012 2:10:48 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Without the registry hack xp won't utilize more then 2GB for actually running the OS.


Actually, that not correct. Ram is allocated on a per-instance basis[IE a per-executable basis]. So each executable can be allocated 2GB of RAM. Though the XP system exe's don't need that much to do it's job, the collective group of system executables could, in real world, take up more than 2GB of system ram, and without hacks.

And FYI, I have seen a 48bit memory manager running in WinXP that can recognize and use more than 4GB of system ram. It was an experiment that was seemingly successful. Not sure how it was made or implemented. But it seemed stable. This kinda proved to me that all of this "32bit 4GB limit" is a load of crap. MS just wanted to push more $h!t we don't need or want.

I've been forcing myself to try out Win8. And with each passing day I grow more weary of it. WinME could be tweaked to work right and stable. Vista was the same, but was still a resource hog. Win8 is not as pliable. On the mobile front, it may find success. But on the Desktop front, my guess is that it will be a disaster. Even if they gave it to me for free, I wouldn't use it. I'm sticking with WinXP and Win7.


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By 3ogdy on 8/25/2012 1:46:34 PM , Rating: 2
AMEN TO THAT!


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By 3ogdy on 8/25/2012 1:45:18 PM , Rating: 2
Look, I'm running XP x64 right now.
I'm using 8.07GB of RAM (a bit more than 50% of the total amount I have).
I have Firefox opened with a ton of tabs, Rockemelt, Chrome, folders , Photoshop, PowerISO, Winamp...etc.
I see Chrome alone using about 4.9GB of RAM after all tabs are loaded.
Yes, 4.9GB worth of RAM - that's why I have:
Chrome, Firefox,Rocketmelt,Maxthon,Opera. Because of the tabs.
So I see no issue with software using my RAM like that - as long as the RAM is there, the software can use it - please remember that software like Chrome actually use a process for each tab you open - I doubt you can make a Google Chrome tab use more than 4GB anyway....so if Chrome takes up 4.9GB of RAM alone, it's because there are a ton of tabs that take up RAM and if you put everything together...that's the amount of RAM Chrome, as a program, uses when it's run.


By TheJian on 9/7/2012 2:07:49 PM , Rating: 2
wrong...All cards supported, nics, vids (nvidia/amd update at the same time 32&64 drivers), creative Audigy 1-4, etc. While I don't have xfi in any family members PC, I'm guessing drivers are there for those too (if not under x64, then under server2003 x64 versions which work fine in almost ALL cases).

Prove what you say. I can't find anything in my house or any relatives house (all running 64 xp pro - some dualboot win7's) that are not supported with updated drivers. Of course I do check before I buy something, but I can always go into win7 when the day comes I purchase something that doesn't have xp64 drivers. But I still can't find that. :)


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By SPOOFE on 8/21/2012 3:19:43 PM , Rating: 2
That's the sort of thing that really makes his horrifically formatted rant seem like a reasonable source of accurate information! I totally trust his opinion on all matters computer.


By DJ Brandon on 8/21/2012 6:50:32 PM , Rating: 3
Actually it's more like 3.3/3.4 at max


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By DJ Brandon on 8/21/2012 7:00:33 PM , Rating: 2
I so got you beat.....

I am running a Windows ME SP1 w/
16 GB DDR3 Ram
3rd Gen Core i7 2.2 Ghz
8 Terabyte Solid State drive
USB 4.0


By Mitch101 on 8/21/2012 8:09:40 PM , Rating: 2
Im running Microsoft BOB.


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By 3ogdy on 8/25/2012 1:56:10 PM , Rating: 2
You got yourself beat, my friend...

When software has support for an OS and when alternatives aren't that great, I choose the best option for me.
So go ahead and brag about how you run a 4TH generation Core i9 9,8GHz deca-core CPU paired with a 9 exabyte single platter HDD connected via SATA 15 and running Windows ME SP0.1 ...
Believe it or not, my system is NOTHING to brag about - if you're a DailyTech reader, if you ever looked for benchmark results and all that...you'd know AMD is far from being awesome with their latest and greatest.
There are systems out there that really deserve to be called "gaming machines" or "extremely powerful computers"...but don't look at my computer like that....because it's nothing out of this world.Honestly - if I had a latest gen i7,SSDs in RAID0, 9TB of HDD space, quad-blu ray burners, 8x24" LED screens, quad-CFX HD7970(or quad-SLI for the GTX680) and stuff like that....maybe I would've had a right to brag about my computer being powerful. May I remind you my CPU was release 3 light years ago?
3 years is a lot when it comes to technology...


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By 3ogdy on 8/25/2012 1:30:25 PM , Rating: 2
It seems you are the one missing the point here, amanojaku.
I AM RUNNING Windows XP X64/64-bit Service Pack 3 - I can play GTA IV(which only runs on XP SP3 and no other version of XP, btw).
There is a hack in the registry that allows you to make XP look like SP3 although it's still SP2.
Read some documents before commenting - because you're missing the point.


By TheJian on 9/7/2012 2:02:42 PM , Rating: 2
I hope that was just a mistake on his part...LOL. No sp3 for x64, despite it being my favorite OS for actually getting something done.


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By Uncle on 8/21/2012 2:44:19 PM , Rating: 1
Its OK as long as he's not connected to the net except for gaming , and if he is , he doesn't go where he shouldn't. So its strictly a gaming machine, kudos for him. I wouldn't doubt he gets a few frames more then you running a newer OS. Its a tough call.


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By 3ogdy on 8/25/2012 2:03:04 PM , Rating: 2
Uncle,

I dual boot XP SP3 x64 AND 7 x64.(oh, I forgot - I formatted the Windows 7 partition to put Windows 8 on it so I've got XP and 8). And I know there can be a ton of exploits for XP that AV and Anti-Malware software won't be able to deal with...I've got avast! paired with Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware and I can say I'm pretty happy from a security standpoint although I could also give Kaspersky Internet Security another try too...
I'll reinstall 7 x64 and dual boot like that...like some manufacturers said "we'll skip Windows 8"...right now I'm 150% sure I will do that too (unless it will be here to stay just like XP was - or actually still is...)...but since M$ is so hungry for money - I doubt Windows 8 will be around for more than 4 years or so - but again...who knows...


By TheJian on 9/7/2012 2:18:36 PM , Rating: 2
Been connected on xp64 since the day it came out...

Updates come weekly/monthly just like win7 :) Corp anyway and will continue to do so all through 2014 (7/2014 I think? if memory serves)
You haven't heard of virus protection, firewalls or routers? I have the same protection you do including updated os patches. Who's not running corp xp? Even out of date, threatfire w/comodo suite and a router is all anyone needs. I'm a little miffed at threatfire for being incompatible with Daemontools but other than that this setup is great, albeit changing to alcohol for mounting images. No loss. I use imgburn etc for burning anyway. Zonealarm etc can be subbed for Comodo. I haven't had a virus in my entire life, well we're not talking colds/flus right?


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By JediJeb on 8/21/2012 2:48:49 PM , Rating: 2
My main box is still an AthlonXP2400M with 1.5GB with a RadeonX700 running XP. Does all I need it to do, why upgrade?


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By Uncle on 8/21/2012 3:01:38 PM , Rating: 2
Said that years ago, can the new machine make me type any faster.:)


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By RU482 on 8/21/2012 4:41:45 PM , Rating: 2
funny what some swollen capacitors will do to a statement like this


RE: Sounds there are many like me...
By bupkus on 8/22/2012 6:32:08 AM , Rating: 2
I wax nostalgic.


By TheJian on 9/7/2012 2:00:35 PM , Rating: 2
Umm...I have a dual boot running x64 XP Pro. See's all my mem, has all current drivers (get hit every month from my radeon 5850 updates from AMD), nic, wireless edimax, Creative Audigy4 etc. Nothing in my pc isn't supported by drivers in XP64. Meaning not that MS default crap. Actual drivers from the device maker supporting xp64. I've yet to run into something I can't run in xp64, though I default a lot to win7 x64 now just to pass the mcts next week or two (for giggles). I think many companies will now be planning win7 upgrades since they have had a good look at Win8 and will now realize they need to pass on this OS, so 7 will get more popular for anyone thinking Win8 would be their next move from XP. Not now. XP to Win7 because 8 just sucks for desktops/laptops.

As the other poster said, XP is running in a good 1/2 or more of the companies out there (I'd say more like 60+% but that's a guess based on last I checked being 70+ - I'm assuming some improvement). They see no point in win7 with a decent IT dept there is no need. NO training updates for your entire workforce either. Win8 will bomb on all but tables/phones (which oddly...LOL...Is what it's built for). Updates will be done through mid 2014 on xp in enterprise also. If companies don't freak again at that point and MS extends support even longer. Even in companies where win7 is in use, applocker, bitlocker etc are not usually used. Libraries just confuse users, hide data from techs etc (not as easy to get data that's all over the place). Win7 just ends up being a whole lot of training for everyone for, well...not much. It's not faster and takes more resources (jeez, Explorer is SLOW compared to xp, especially over networks), which is pretty much the only inspiration for companies to upgrade to ANY new os these days. Pretty doesn't cut it, FUNCTIONALITY does.


"This week I got an iPhone. This weekend I got four chargers so I can keep it charged everywhere I go and a land line so I can actually make phone calls." -- Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg














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