HP Surpasses Apple in PC Sales Thanks to iPad Shipment Dip

[erunion]

"So far, only Samsung has shown it can routinely ship more than a million pads a quarter."

Seriously, there's at least one person in the world that thinks "pad" is interchangeable with "tablet"? I weep for humanity.

 

[blakbird24]

[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]My Android has a physical keyboard ATTACHED TO IT BECAUSE IT COMES WITH ONE. It's a sliding keyboard, but it is still a keyboard with keys that I can press that include the full 26 letter English alphabet, numbers, symbols, a few shortcut keys plus a backspace/delete key, shift, function, control, space bar, enter, and even arrow keys. The keyboard is a little under 2 inches wide and around 4 inches long.It's a Samsung Transform Android with Android 2.2.2 and it also has some virtual keys on the screen such as the home, menu, go back/exit, and search keys.[/citation]

So then you consider a phone a PC. Which COMPLETELY changes the game, and i'm not even going to get into that aspect because it's one huge can of huge worms.

When you buy a desktop PC, you don't specify that you also want a keyboard with it. It comes with one. That's understood. Sure you can order a computer explicitly without a keyboard, but that's an exception, not a rule. When you buy a tablet, it is understood that you are NOT getting a keyboard, unless you explicitly spec one or purchase one separately. Also, "slide-out" keyboards on mobile devices don't count, as they are "mini-keyboards".

 

[Guest]

Hey guys

As a matter of your concepts. You are all right.
The definition of a P.C. is what you consider it to be.
There is no written law defining exactly what a P.C. is, so the definition is defined by you..

The word P.C. in my view is a Generic term for a computer.. so if I think it is a computer .. it is a PC. so .. add them up yourself.. you are all right.

 

[erunion]

[citation][nom]jumpupanddown[/nom]There is no written law defining exactly what a P.C.[/citation]

Nor is there a law defining what a cat is. So by your argument, the iPad is a cat. Meow.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]blakbird24[/nom]So then you consider a phone a PC. Which COMPLETELY changes the game, and i'm not even going to get into that aspect because it's one huge can of huge worms.When you buy a desktop PC, you don't specify that you also want a keyboard with it. It comes with one. That's understood. Sure you can order a computer explicitly without a keyboard, but that's an exception, not a rule. When you buy a tablet, it is understood that you are NOT getting a keyboard, unless you explicitly spec one or purchase one separately. Also, "slide-out" keyboards on mobile devices don't count, as they are "mini-keyboards".[/citation]

So, my keyboard on my phone does not count as a keyboard just because it is small? That's ridiculous. The phone fits the criteria that you asked for, coming with a keyboard and a pointing device (IE, the touch screen). It's a computer. It's personal. Therefor, if we go by the literal meaning of PC (Personal Computer), then yes, it is a PC. If we go by your criteria, then yes, it is a PC. Sorry, but I don't care how small the keyboard is. It is a full-featured keyboard and that is exactly what I will call it.

[citation][nom]erunion[/nom]"So far, only Samsung has shown it can routinely ship more than a million pads a quarter."Seriously, there's at least one person in the world that thinks "pad" is interchangeable with "tablet"? I weep for humanity.[/citation]

The iPad is a tablet computer. The Samsung Galaxy Tab is a tablet computer. They are both tablets. iPad is just a name, such as Galaxy Tab. I'm pretty sure that even Apple calls it a tablet.

 

[ojas]

Long, long debate as usual. I'll re-post the link i posted earlier.

IBM invented the IBM-PC, and whatever we call a PC should be IBM-PC compatible, or at least similar. Rather it should be derived from the same layout. And no, neither tablets or smartphones are PCs. Yes, they're computers, and yes, they're personal, but are they PCs? No.

From what i've been reading, an IBM PC compatible machine is one that can be built from certain distinct off-the-shelf parts and those parts follow established design standards. It should at least look like an IBM-PC, after all it was a form factor in a way.

Basically it should resemble this:

That's no iPad ;-)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_compatible

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]Long, long debate as usual. I'll re-post the link i posted earlier.IBM invented the IBM-PC, and whatever we call a PC should be IBM-PC compatible, or at least similar. Rather it should be derived from the same layout. And no, neither tablets or smartphones are PCs. Yes, they're computers, and yes, they're personal, but are they PCs? No.From what i've been reading, an IBM PC compatible machine is one that can be built from certain distinct off-the-shelf parts and those parts follow established design standards. It should at least look like an IBM-PC, after all it was a form factor in a way. Basically it should resemble this:That's no iPad ;-)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_compatible[/citation]

Now that is a valid argument. I wasn't saying that my phone is a PC, only that it fit the criteria that other people try to use for something to be a PC.

The only problem is that a lot of *PCs* today have very limited compatibility with that, so then not much today could count as a PC.

 

[rosen380]

Forgetting the debate about what is a PC and what isn't, Canalys has some definition that they used for this report.

Now I don't see where the Apple and HP ##s of the 107M total are spelled out, but the gap between the two was listed as 40,000. That is, whatever percent each was of the total, the difference was 0.037%. If I run a mile in 6 minutes and you are 0.037% quicker, obviously you are faster than me-- but it still means that your time is just over one tenth of a second faster.

I don't think too many people would look at the 6 minute time and the 5:59.87 time and really consider that to mean anything but that we are about the same speed. Are Canalys' coutns even accurate enough to claim that an extra 40k even necessarily means anything?

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]rosen380[/nom]Forgetting the debate about what is a PC and what isn't, Canalys has some definition that they used for this report.Now I don't see where the Apple and HP ##s of the 107M total are spelled out, but the gap between the two was listed as 40,000. That is, whatever percent each was of the total, the difference was 0.037%. If I run a mile in 6 minutes and you are 0.037% quicker, obviously you are faster than me-- but it still means that your time is just over one tenth of a second faster. I don't think too many people would look at the 6 minute time and the 5:59.87 time and really consider that to mean anything but that we are about the same speed. Are Canalys' coutns even accurate enough to claim that an extra 40k even necessarily means anything?[/citation]

I don't think the point of this was anything other than giving HP bragging rights. I don't think that it was supposed to mean anything or have any major effect on the market other than bragging rights. I didn't see an implication of it meaning anything important for the market when I read the article.

 

[rosen380]

But it's barely bragging rights when you run your 5:59.87 mile are you going to rub it in my face since I was six minutes even?

the two are so indistinguishable that you might as well call them even, especially if the margin of error [whatever that might be in the case] could push it back the other way.

I can't find actual percentages or figures from last quarter, but the quarter before had Apple at 15% and HP at 16%, which suggests a difference around a million units, though with only rounded off figures, they could very well have been 15.46% vs 15.5% which would be a similar gap to this past quarter...

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]rosen380[/nom]But it's barely bragging rights when you run your 5:59.87 mile are you going to rub it in my face since I was six minutes even?the two are so indistinguishable that you might as well call them even, especially if the margin of error [whatever that might be in the case] could push it back the other way.I can't find actual percentages or figures from last quarter, but the quarter before had Apple at 15% and HP at 16%, which suggests a difference around a million units, though with only rounded off figures, they could very well have been 15.46% vs 15.5% which would be a similar gap to this past quarter...[/citation]

It might practically be only just barely bragging rights, but that doesn't matter. Generally, coming in second place means you're in second, regardless of how close you were to the first place finisher. Basically, regardless of how close Apple came to winning that, they still lost because HP was a fraction of a percent higher.

I don't really care at all either way, but that seems to be the reasoning behind it, at least that is what it looks like to me.