backtop


Print 80 comment(s) - last by retrospooty.. on Nov 20 at 11:55 AM


  (Source: greenrightnow.com)
Dell's profit fell 47 percent to 39 cents per share while revenue dropped 11 percent to $13.7 billion

Dell's financial report for the third quarter seems to have missed the targets predicted by Wall Street on many levels due to sluggish PC sales.

For Q3 2012, Dell's profit fell 47 percent to 39 cents per share while revenue dropped 11 percent to $13.7 billion from a year previous (Wall Street expected $13.9 billion). Its net income fell from $893 million (49 cents per share) in Q3 2011 to $475 million (27 cents per share) in Q3 2012.

A large reason for Dell's financial tumble is the lack of demand for PC upgrades. Dell's PC shipments fell 8.3 percent in Q3 2012 from a year earlier.

“In a difficult global IT spending environment we saw solid proof points that demonstrate progress in our strategy,” said Brian Gladden, Dell CFO. “A highlight has been the strong progress of our newly introduced servers, with our server and networking business up 11 percent. We’re also encouraged by early interest in our new Windows 8 touch portfolio and the opportunities it creates for our commercial and consumer businesses.”

Looking forward, Dell predicts a fourth quarter revenue of $14 billion to $14.4 billion, which is a bit less than the $14.5 billion analysts were shooting for. In Q4 2011, revenue was $16 billion.

In response to all of this disappointing news, Dell stock dropped to $8.81 this morning, which is the lowest its been since March 12, 2009.

While Dell is looking to Windows 8 for some kind of revival, the new operating system hasn't provided any immediate boost for PC makers. In fact, Gladden said Windows 8 wouldn't affect Dell's financial results for the next two quarters.

"The client business continues to be challenging," said Gladden. "Commercial customers tend to be lagging adopters of a new operating system. They're going to wait."

To make matters worse, Microsoft doesn't solely depend on PC makers for hardware anymore. Last month, it released its first tablet hardware, Surface RT, which features the RT version of the Windows 8 mobile OS. Next year, Microsoft plans to release the Surface Pro, which will run Windows 8 Pro.


Source: Dell



Comments     Threshold


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

Windows 8 the savior ???
By max_payne on 11/17/2012 12:12:40 AM , Rating: 5
Does anyone was really thinking that Windows 8 will bring people in drove to update their pc/laptops ? Windows 8 is such a radical move and bring nothing enticing to that platform. Why change your machine if W7 does everything you want just fine.




RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By Philippine Mango on 11/17/2012 12:53:52 AM , Rating: 2
This is how I feel about Windows XP. If XP 64 was only more mainstream...


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By drycrust3 on 11/17/2012 12:12:19 PM , Rating: 2
There are 64 bit Linux distributions as well.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By Cypherdude1 on 11/18/2012 7:23:27 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Does anyone was really thinking that Windows 8 will bring people in drove to update their pc/laptops ? Windows 8 is such a radical move and bring nothing enticing to that platform. Why change your machine if W7 does everything you want just fine.
For non-touchscreen devices, Win8 Pro has a lot of extra code the user will never use. Win8 Pro has code for both touchscreens and the regular desktop with the start button. This is what I understand from viewing a review.

M$ is following a familiar pattern of producing an excellent O/S and then releasing a poor O/S: Win98SE, WinME, WinXP, WinVista, Win7, and now Win8 Pro. Intel has their tick-tock release policy, M$ has their's (a little PC humor there, heh, heh):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Tick-Tock

If you have Win7-64, there's no reason to upgrade to Win8 Pro unless you have a touchscreen. Most desktops and laptops don't have one. Others here have stated some (many?) programs will not work in Win8 Pro. I hope this is not true because, someday, I may buy a Win8 Pro quad-core, quad-speaker 15.6" tablet, upgrade it to 8 GB RAM, 256 GB mSATA and run some serious applications on it.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By StevoLincolnite on 11/19/2012 7:29:29 AM , Rating: 2
Except... The release didn't go 98 > ME > XP > Vista > 7.

You are forgetting Windows NT and most importantly, Windows 2000. - Which was pretty much released at a similar time to Windows ME if I remember rightly.
And worthy to note is that Windows 2000 had more in common with Windows XP than what Windows ME had, as XP was built on the NT kernel and not Win9x.
I remember people at the time claiming XP was just Windows 2000 with a pretty new skin as all the drivers and software pretty much worked in either OS, which was true for the time, until a few service packs later.

As for Vista, it did have a shaky release, most of the issues have been pretty much been fixed a long time ago, most of Vista's problems could be blamed on the hardware manufacturer's poor drivers.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By retrospooty on 11/19/2012 10:38:55 AM , Rating: 2
"The release didn't go 98 > ME > XP > Vista > 7."

From a consumer product perspective it did go 98 > ME > XP > Vista > 7. NT and 2000 were not consumer products. XP was the first one that got rid of the crappy Win95 kernel and used the stable NT kernel in a consumer based OS.

To that I totally agree. MS has a long history of "hit and miss". Win8 is the miss. Probably not as bad as Vista was a miss, but a miss. The UI is great for touchscreens and more irritating than useful for desktops and laptops.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By JPForums on 11/19/2012 9:55:53 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If you have Win7-64, there's no reason to upgrade to Win8 Pro unless you have a touchscreen.
There are reasons, they are just not UI related. Graphically showing download speed and the ability to switch network connections (wired to wireless and back) automatically and without stopping a current download are a couple that come to mind. That said, unless you just like the new interface, it is hard to say that the changes are worth the switch. I needed to get used to it so I could work on other peoples computers. I find the interface less efficient than Windows 7 for non touch screen devices. That said, once you learn the short cut keys, it isn't much of an issue. The under lying controls are still there, but, much like with Vista/7 vs XP, they are a little more obscured. Still, I don't see a reason to upgrade from 7 if you are happy with it. However, I also wouldn't avoid a new computer just because it comes with 8.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By crispbp04 on 11/17/2012 12:42:57 PM , Rating: 5
XP was good, but for the love of god, old dogs can learn a new trick. Please do so.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By B3an on 11/17/2012 3:25:54 PM , Rating: 4
XP was ****. Its a security risk and don't work with tons of new hardware. It even got many bad reviews on release. The ONLY reason people like it is because it was around for so long that they eventually got very used to it.

And this article is BS. Q3 results are for July, August and September. So this wont include Windows 8 sales.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By bigboxes on 11/18/2012 1:25:52 AM , Rating: 3
XP was great for it's time. After SP2, you had a very stable product. Now, I know you are going to beat your chest some more for Win8, but only time will tell. In the meantime, don't be such a fanboi.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By TakinYourPoints on 11/18/2012 5:05:26 PM , Rating: 1
B3an is a ridiculous MS fanboy, so its pretty funny to hear someone call him otherwise.

I'm surprised that he slams XP, but good on him for seeing reality. XP was a disaster from a security standpoint. Microsoft fixing those problems with Vista by adding Unix style user elevation of rights rather than the "every user is root/admin" style of XP (a disaster) did so much to fix the issue of malware on Windows.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By rdhood on 11/19/2012 10:22:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
XP was great for it's time. After SP2, you had a very stable product.


That was my experience. Pre-XP was a BSOD peppered 5 years. It meant praying/playing with IRQs, unstable hardware and software. Post-XP/SP2 was mostly stable and headache free.

I did not go to Vista, but went straight to Windows 7. There was a time, several years ago, when XP vs. 7 was a competitive choice. But $90 for a 6-core processor + motherboard and $40 for 8GB of DDR3 memory fixed any qualms I had about going to a new operating system with ever so slightly worse performance than XP. I upgraded my three systems at home to Win7 for under $100. There is no legitimate reason to stay on XP anymore.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By Cypherdude1 on 11/18/2012 6:23:13 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
XP was ****. Its a security risk and don't work with tons of new hardware.
I'm not sure what "security risks" you're talking about. M$ is still supporting XP SP3 with patches until April 2014. Also, if you connect a router and use Symantec Norton Internet Security 2013 or 360 2013 (both XP 32 bit only), you should not have any security holes.

As for hardware, it's difficult to gauge how much hardware no longer works with XP SP3 (I now use Win7 64).


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By martyrant on 11/18/2012 6:38:22 PM , Rating: 2
Did you really just suggest putting a symantec product on a computer?

To quote Roy from the I.T. Crowd, "Are you from the past?"

I'm sure corporate users will still be like "Backup Exec? bbqwtf???"...to that I say look outside your software circle.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By StevoLincolnite on 11/19/2012 7:37:16 AM , Rating: 2
Try Nod32. It's efficient, unobtrusive and effective, all 3 things that Norton isn't.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By TheJian on 11/18/2012 12:34:16 PM , Rating: 2
Name a piece of hardware that doesn't work with XP. Heck, if it's so easy to do so, name 10. :)

XP will have updates until 2014 as the OP stated. 32/64 both.

Enterprise my friend..LOL. Never heard of corp?

You're saying 50% of the businesses out there using it are complete idiots I guess? Whatever...I'm used to win7 but the file explorer is TERRIBLE. XP was far more usable. My mouse didn't jump down all the time either like it does on 2 pc's in my house both with different hardware. There are bugs they just won't fix and I'm not the only one with the issues. They don't even respond regarding this stuff on technet etc.

"Discovering files"...LOL. WHAT?
"calculating"...WHAT? FFS, just copy my damned files and shut up :) No rightclick-repair on network connections? WTF? Retarded. I could go on and on about win7 being a step backwards in many areas. But the Windows Explorer is the worst. XP was awesome in this.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By JPForums on 11/19/2012 10:11:18 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Name a piece of hardware that doesn't work with XP.
A whole slew of newer motherboards starting with the not so new 700 series (AMD) chipsets have at least one component that doesn't work with XP. Most of the time it is the audio card, though AHCI drivers for newer SATA controllers have also had issues. Some USB 3.0 chipsets are also unsupported. Quite a few newer wireless addon cards have issue. Clearly you haven't tried putting XP on a newer laptop as almost nothing works with many of them. Do I really need to get into printers/scanners.

The rest of your post I largely agree with.
quote:
Enterprise my friend.
Especially this.
quote:
XP will have updates until 2014
And this.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By TheJian on 11/18/2012 12:26:18 PM , Rating: 2
There are drivers for everything on XP64. All nics, Creative cards, Nvidia/AMD vid cards, Intel chipsets, what more you need? Some say server 2003, but they generally work fine (my edimax N card is an example). I don't have anything that isn't supported for xp64. It will get updates until mid 2014 too ;) XP64 is rock solid too. I've never had trouble with any games either. Only thing missing is DX11. But who cares for now. There's not enough of a graphical difference to be worth paying MS again for most people (though I have a lic anyway, but only because I'm on the cert treadmill).


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By kleinma on 11/19/2012 9:29:41 AM , Rating: 2
This is how I feel about Dos 6.22. If only Dos 32 bit was more mainstream.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By StevoLincolnite on 11/17/2012 1:12:07 AM , Rating: 3
Allot of people I know are still happy with their old Core 2 Duo's/Athlon X2's and integrated graphics with 2gb of ram.
They just don't see any need to upgrade as it handles all their facebook needs with ease.
Plus it doesn't help that the entire developed world minus a few countries like Australia had/having massive financial woes which makes the idea of spending hundreds on a new machine a tough pill to swallow for allot of people.

Heck, allot of gamers I noticed are still running with heavily overclocked Core 2 Quads because games just aren't that demanding with the majority being merely console ports.
Sure you might need a new GPU every few years...

Seriously, take a look at the Steam hardware survey, 50% of gamers are still using a Dual-Core processor, 40% are using Direct X 10 graphics cards still and the average Ram amount per machine is 4gb.
Which consequently other than a couple of demanding games like Battlefield 3 or Crysis will handle everything, albeit in some cases with some graphics options lowered.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By TakinYourPoints on 11/17/2012 2:48:16 AM , Rating: 3
I've been on an i7 860 for three years and I have very little pressure to upgrade, especially after getting a GTX 680. I'm going to go Haswell next year just for the heck of it, mainly because my gut tells me I'm supposed to upgrade every 18-24 months like how I always have...

The only reason I'm going GTX 680 is because I have a 1440p monitor, otherwise I'd have as little pressure to get better video like the examples you brought up.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By haukionkannel on 11/17/2012 5:58:59 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly! To most people computer have been fast enough for many years so there is not any reason for them to upgrade! That is allso reason for pads to become so popular because most things that people do can be done with pads.
For gaming and video editing etc there are not fast enough computers in the market, but Joe Average is just fine with core2 or even slover machine. And when economy is what it it at this moment... well the peoples starts buying new machines when the old brokes down... and they will buy small and cheap mobile computers.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By TakinYourPoints on 11/18/2012 12:31:55 AM , Rating: 2
Perhaps the next console generation will push for better PCs. Sadly, one reason why the need for faster hardware has stagnated is that consoles are the primary target platform, thus lowering the ceiling for required hardware.

That's only one thing, of course. Envelope pushing games don't really sell anymore, just look at Crysis. It isn't like 2000 where people would go out of their way to get faster hardware to play Quake 3 very well. The most successful companies like Valve and Blizzard target a very wide range of hardware now, and the most successful game at the moment, League Of Legends, runs on pretty much anything.

I dunno, maybe the next console generation will push the PC end forward, but there's still a lot to be said for PC games that target a very wide range of hardware. Developers want to make money and the model of initial $50-$60 purchases is falling aside as free-to-play/microtransaction and subscription models take over. Volume matters most in that case, which means not going after uber-hardware. We'll see.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By rdhood on 11/19/2012 12:23:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Seriously, take a look at the Steam hardware survey, 50% of gamers are still using a Dual-Core processor, 40% are using Direct X 10 graphics cards still and the average Ram amount per machine is 4gb.


That was/is me. I have one dual core intel processor (Core 2 Duo 4300) left still running (since 2006/2007). I replaced an E6300 about two months ago when the motherboard stopped booting. I replaced it with a 6 core AMD Phenom 1045 + mother board and 8 GB of memory.. all for under $135.

The Core2Duo processors were the first bunch of processors that I never upgraded just to upgrade. They are/were powerful enough to hang onto until the MB/Processor died in some way. Still, they are plenty powerful enough to run Windows 7, and their replacements (in my case, AMD Phenom 6 core processor) are 5x the performance for a very minimal upgrade cost.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By B3an on 11/17/2012 3:57:03 PM , Rating: 2
These don't include Windows 8 sales, regardless of what the stupid title says. Dells Q3 results are for July, August and September.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By JPForums on 11/19/2012 10:41:56 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
These don't include Windows 8 sales, regardless of what the stupid title says. Dells Q3 results are for July, August and September.
This is pretty much all that needs to be said regarding Win8.

Dell's Q3 was lower than expected.
Win8 may or may not help them out, but that won't be know until after the new year.


RE: Windows 8 the savior ???
By stimudent on 11/19/2012 8:56:37 AM , Rating: 2
There is no enthusiasm for Windows 8 that I've seen so far. Why rush to upgrade a PC when you don't use it as much as you once did, is the thinking.
Also, it seems that so far, corporate IT guys aren't taking Win8 seriously for a business OS.


"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive

Related Articles













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