Print 101 comment(s) - last by Mint.. on Apr 16 at 6:39 AM

IDC blames smartphones and tablets for sharp PC decline

Research firm IDC has posted the numbers for worldwide PC shipments in Q1 of 2013, and they show the steepest decline ever in a single quarter since the company has been monitoring the industry. Global PC shipments during Q1 of 2013 totaled 76.3 million units. That number represents a decline of 13.9% compared to the same quarter in 2011.

The posted decline in Q1 of 2013 was nearly twice the expected decline of 7.7% according to IDC. IDC also notes that the poor showing in Q1 marks the fourth consecutive quarter of year-over-year shipment declines for the industry. Computer shipments in the U.S. declined by 12.7% year-over-year and declined 18.3% compared to Q4 2012.
IDC says that despite mild improvement in economic environment around the world and some new PC models with Windows 8 shipments were down significantly across all regions compared to the same quarter of 2012.

Declining mini notebook shipments took a big chunk out of the low-end market with tablets and smartphones also contributing to divert significant spending from the computer industry. IDC also reports that weak reception for Windows 8 has hurt the industry and computer makers continue to struggle to differentiate themselves from others on the market.

"At this point, unfortunately, it seems clear that the Windows 8 launch not only failed to provide a positive boost to the PC market, but appears to have slowed the market," said Bob O'Donnell, IDC Program Vice President, Clients and Displays. "While some consumers appreciate the new form factors and touch capabilities of Windows 8, the radical changes to the UI, removal of the familiar Start button, and the costs associated with touch have made PCs a less attractive alternative to dedicated tablets and other competitive devices. Microsoft will have to make some very tough decisions moving forward if it wants to help reinvigorate the PC market."

HP is still the top computer vendor but its worldwide shipments fell more than 23% year-over-year. Lenovo remained in second place and came close to closing the gap between it and HP. Lenovo posted double-digit, year-over-year growth in the U.S.

Source: IDC

Comments     Threshold

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

RE: Newsflash
By Motoman on 4/11/2013 1:32:26 PM , Rating: 2
Nope. Because it's not slower.

All the the average things that an average user does on a tablet happen just as quickly on a cheap Android tablet as they do on a big-dollar iPad or Surface.

I don't have to admit anything, because you've made a false statement in support of your "theory."

RE: Newsflash
By datdamonfoo on 4/12/2013 9:47:52 AM , Rating: 2
Again, you can't claim that people want plasma or LCDs and not CRTs due to the performance and feature gains (they'll still be watching the same content) and yet claim the opposite for computers. I'm not sure why you don't see this. And you really think that $200 Android tablets aren't slower than a $1000 tablet? Let's not be disingenuous here.

RE: Newsflash
By Motoman on 4/12/2013 11:52:47 AM , Rating: 4
You're still making false comparisons.

It's obvious that a modern widescreen HD 1080p LCD TV is a much better TV viewing experience than a 20-year old 4:3 13" CRT. There's obviously no comparison. Watching a movie side-by-side on those 2 TVs is night-and-day different.

Now, take off your dunce cap and set a 10" $100 Android tablet next to a 10" $800 Microsoft Surface and a 10" $600 iPad.

Have an average person browse the web on each one. No difference.

Have an average person post on Facebook on each one. No difference.

Have an average person check their email on each one. No difference.

Have an average person play Angry Birds on each one. No difference.

You, sir, are the one being disingenuous. It is 100% irrefutable that to a normal person doing normal things, there is 0% difference in their experience using an inexpensive Android tablet vs. very expensive Surface or iPad tablets.

Does the Surface have superior hardware? Sure. Does it make a difference to the average user doing average things? No.

Same thing if you compare my gaming rig to a $300 special PC at Walmart. My person rig has a 6-core CPU, 16Gb of RAM, a Radeon 7850 video card, a SSD, so on and so forth. Infinitely better specs than the $300 special. So if I had my mom check her email, do Facebook, browse the web and then play Words with Friends on my gaming rig, compared to the $300 special, do you think she would notice any difference?

Answer: no, she would not. The vastly better hardware in my gaming rig compared to the $300 special is utterly irrelevant. A total waste of money for the average user.

Get that through your thick head. You've not got the slightest clue what the real world is like.

RE: Newsflash
By datdamonfoo on 4/12/2013 12:43:28 PM , Rating: 2
Once again you're talking out of both sides of your mouth.
You put a LCD TV next to a CRT and they still will play the same TV shows. There is no difference in the content being played.

And yet for some reason you believe that features and performance matters with TVs but not computers. You're wrong about there being no difference between a $600 Surface (not $800 as you falsely state) and a $100 Android tablet. There are numerous performance gains and larger multitasking abilities that the Android tablet will simply not be able to handle. You pay for what you get. This is why people aren't buying netbooks anymore; Sure, they're cheap, but with that they're severely under-powered and frustrating.

Let's run this experiment, shall we?
Put a $100 Windows 7 netbook next to a $200 Android tablet.
Sure, they both run Angry birds. Sure they both allow you to check your email, both allow you to surf the web. But what do you think people are going to buy?

Let's see if you can be honest or if you will continue your argument that has been reduced to shambles long ago.

RE: Newsflash
By Motoman on 4/12/2013 1:33:02 PM , Rating: 2
If they want a netbook, they'll but the netbook. If they want a tablet, they'll buy the tablet.

Let's be clear: you have no point. My example is comparing 3 10" tablets side-by-side. Your example is comparing a 13" CRT to a modern widescreen LCD/Plasma TV.

Your assertions that there are "numerous performance gains etc." are worthless to the average user. The average user with a tablet behaves the way I have described. I guarantee this to be correct.

If you want to continue to insist that your comparisons are equivalent, I'm sorry...but you're a liar. And/or clinically insane. Possibly both.

My argument is irrefutable. You actually have made no argument at all. Please stop wasting space that could be better occupied by...nothing.

"Death Is Very Likely The Single Best Invention Of Life" -- Steve Jobs

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki