"PC" is not just for Windows. It was popularized by IBM, that's what they called their desktop computers first released in 1981. IBM established the open-source (could be built from parts made by anyone) form we use today for almost all home, and other, microcomputers. The term "personal computer" existed before IBM's PC, and before Windows existed.
However, Apple has made a point of telling everyone in world-wide campaigns that their computers are NOT PCs, they are Macs, so, as pretty much everyone has said, they don't make PCs. Never mind that they are made exactly like PCs, except for the proprietary chips that prevent you from running OS X on anything but Apple products (unless you hack it).
I'll tell you the truth here; I think Apple is paying some people in the media to hype their products and try to make them look more popular than they are. I think that some of the media types that got hooked on Macs when they were better suited for graphics related media are such fanboys they will lie to pump up their favorite product. I think the confusion about tablets being PCs is intentional, not just stupidity.
I'll tell you this, too; it pisses me off, it makes me feel more anti-Apple than I already do, and more scornful of media types in general. They are willfully stupid people, and these days not only are they clueless, but they can't even spell, spell-check, or use a minimal level of grammar quality.
Not all of them are willfully stupid (that means they choose to be stupid, for those not familiar with the phrase) of course, but almost all of them don't care, including the ones in Tomshardware. How do I know? Because they never call out the bad ones, that's how. They seem to have some kind of "code amongst thieves" for journalism.
Modern journalists, especially those in television, are hand-in-hand with politicians responsible for the "dumbing down" effect on the world. They both intentionally report hazy and incorrect information to paint emotion-driven stories for sensationalist purposes. Politicians do it so you'll vote for the most popular, not the best, and journalists do it because they can, and because it's far easier than finding the real facts. "That's what sells". Bull.
The average modern journalist is no better than the ones that wrote stories about cowboys and Indians in the 1800's. They are pulp-fiction writers that pass off their excrement as factual stories. Actually, they aren't even that close to most pulp-fiction writers, who do know how to spell.
I'm sick of this crap. Can you tell?