Slashdot Mirror
Is There Anyone Left To Buy PCs?
Gilligan writes: "This article on MSNBC talks about how slowing PC sales might be the result of the industry reaching its saturation point. One expert even suggested there will be zero growth of PC sales within two years." This reminds me of the famous prediction by IBM that the entire world would only need 10 computers. The article does not address worldwide trends, only American -- maybe PC sales really are near their peak here, but most people all over the world have never even touched a computer, never mind owned one, because everyday needs take priority.
Hardware manufacturers should embrace Linux + Gnome. Runs slow enough to force everyone to upgrade.
There will always be people buying new PCs, unless the webpad thing really takes off, and I ain't holding my breath.
The "luxuries" hardly require a Pentium with an absurd amount of RAM. Neither does one end up with the equivalent of a C64 if you choose to say no to bloatware.
These are two great lies perpetuated by windows-centric computing culture.
Infact, scaling things back will likely simplify things to the point where some of the novices can actually get a handle on things. Featuritus also adds complexity. When you add a jillion more options, it simply becomes inevitable.
PC sales _GROWTH_, not PC SALES.
Of course not - how else can you get 'first post'?
And Dell's response? Blame Europe!
You're assuming I own this computer...
Mod points happen more for the first few posts.
/. could get better headlines.
So People react to the headline. In this case the head line asks "is there is anyone left to sell computers to." That's what many posts are reacting to, hoping for the early mod point rush.
We could get a better mod system (lots of work)
or
Or we could hope the nature of the average poster/moderator would change, but well you know
... hot grits.
-Peace
Dave
Free as in "the Truth shall set you..."
It's not as bad as that in other rural areas. I just got back from spending a weekend in rural Saskatchewan visiting my grandparents. Both sets of them live in the same small town, and they've both bought PCs in the past couple of years and have Internet access. According to a guy I know at the Radio Shack in that town, they've been selling computers to seniors briskly for a while now.
So, given this and the fact that everyone in my extended family has at least one computer and an email address, I can believe that the growth in computer sales is flattening.
From 1977, according to fortune(1):
"There is is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home."
-- Ken Olsen (President of Digital Equipment Corporation),
Convention of the World Future Society, in Boston, 1977
Quite how he came to that conclusion in 1977 is another matter, since the Altair was outstripping demand and the Apple II had just launch (IIRC)...
"don't fall into the fallacy of believing that Perl can solve social problems. Maybe Perl 6 can, but that's a ways off"
"There is is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home."
There is still no real NEED to have one in your home. There may be plenty of reasons why you WANT one, but how many people actually work at home?
And how many people do that? One in every thousand? One in ten thousand perhaps? Or even a hundred thousand?
Why do I even bother to reply to an AC
The reason why I removed my email from the user info page several years ago, is because it turns out users with something meaningful to say post, while people like you, who like to begin a discussion with words like 'fuckwit', find it necessary to mail you things in a similar theme, and subscribe you to a few dozen mailing lists to add to the point.
As an AC no-one can look at your previous posts, your account can't be blocked if you contribute nothing but flaming and trolling.
You might really be someone who knows about the vital importance of telecommuting in the USA. I only know it plays an insignificant role here in Europe. On the other hand, you might be a teenager who has never had a job, let alone a tele-commuting one, and who uses words like 'fuck' in an attempt to hide the fact that that is something he has never done, and never will do.
I believe you may have confused the IBM quote with a quote from Prof. Frink from The Simpsons. Presenting the Frinkiac-7, he remarked that it looked impressive, "But I predict that within a hundred years, computers will be twice as powerful, 10,000 times larger, and so expensive that only the five richest kings of Europe will own them."
Cannot find keyboard. Press F1 to continue.
My other account has a 3-digit UID.
I don't see a problem here. I enjoy using computers but I wouldn't want to live in a world where everyone was plugged in and online almost all of the time. If you think today's society is often impersonal...
Actully, if a 40s computer fell on their head, they'd be dead, my friend, and so they wouldn't be in a position to recognise it
  - from Jaymz with love!
Commodore 64, Loading up the dance floor!
Sure it is! At least, it is on Windows... The little flying piece of paper icon takes more memory than a CGA framebuffer had. Updating it would cost about the same as full-screen animation did way back when... ;-)
--Joe--
Program Intellivision!
Uhm, no. As the person you responded to stated, if there are more people next year than there are this year, and if everyone bought one computer, then there will be more computers sold next year than this year. Thus, the market has grown.
--Joe--
Program Intellivision!
I run GNOME on my P133 laptop without any trouble whatsoever. I can even run GIMP as long as I'm prepared to get slowed down by swapping. I think many people look at the speed of GNOME or KDE on their P9/20.000Mhz, and interpolate down to older stuff, then conclude that it must be unusable.
For _really_ old stuff (like 486:s or 386:s), try running wxwindows for basic graphics apps, though I ran X on a 486/12Mb quite happily for two years.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Would you be so kind and tell me how to do that?
Alright. Mu laptop is a p133/32M, just like yours. I've installed RedHat6.2, using the custom install (so I only get the stuff I want). With Helix GNOME, all developer tools (gcc, libs etc.), vim (not emacs), netscape, LaTeX, documentation etc. it's at 610Mb. The first thing I did after install was go through the machine and delete a lot of stuff I don't really need, like icons, backgrounds, text for other languages and such.
As for speed, I have Xfree3.3.6, sawfish and GNOME, using a minimal theme for sawfish, no theme for GTK, single-color background, rxvt for a terminal, no pager (but four pages), only one applet (a clock), and all unneeded services permanently removed. At startup, and with only one terminal, the swapspace is still unused, and it takes netscape about ten to fifteen seconds to start.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Isn't going to fly until IPV6. Most (read: ALL) popular VPN tunnels won't work over a NAT which is what your house firewall is going to give.F /...
... and I know this is slashdot but why does it have to run Linux? Im assuming you meant "unix clone" in place of Linux.
---
Solaris/FreeBSD/Openstep/NeXTSTEP/Linux/ultrix/OS
--- I do not moderate.
I have 5, one from my employer (a Dell Inspiron 7000), two apples (an iMac and a G4), a thinkpad 560 (for my suse linux fanaticism), and an unused Lexmark subnotebook from 1995. Oh wait. If forgot my AST Ascentia 810N (with transplanted 3,8 Gb hard drive), that my wife uses on occasion.
I find them all *absolutely* essential to my daily living.
The power company also thinks that they are important.
:)
ELITISM: It's always lonely at the top. Uninvited company is rarely welcome.
God I hate statisticians.
--
Delphis
Right now I'm working on a PIII/700.
I was running a script to test if a benchmark I'm trying to add to a benchmark suite (it's an Ogg-Vorbis encoder, btw) is portable enough yet (nope).
I would have liked to see the output of the later tests. However, the script was already 2 hrs. in and had only done the simplest of 2 out of 5 compiles. When I fix the problems causing the early errors, I'll have to wait about 5 hours to find out that I still need to tweak the code a bit, and then run it again.
The professor I'm working has a different benchmark (prototype MPEG-4 encoder) that he's been itching to try out. He can't find a machine with enough ram/swap to do it. I configured his machine with 2 gig of swap (1/2 gig physical memory), and the benchmark will eat all of it about 3 hours in.
Now, it's true that a home consumer doesn't need a big monster of a machine. But any sort of engineering (cad/cam, flow simulations, circuit simulation, etc) can easily eat any current CPU you throw at it. If you give me a faster CPU, then, yes, I'll be very happy that I don't have to wait 15 min. to do a simple compile. I'll also be very happy that I can do thing foo in a bigass overnight run, that before would have taken too long. Or the guy down the hall will be happy he can go from a design change to a verification simulation in 2 weeks instead of 3, letting him get 33% more done.
There is a very large market for fast workstations in industry and in academia. If you give me a machine that is 50% faster, I can probably promise 33% more productivity, and I can do things that before I wouldn't do, simply because it would take too long. So I get the fastest machine that the department can afford, and next year's equipment budget will go to as much of the same as can be gotten.
I Agree!! How much is Glass worth? lol.
---
Sig Return: 204 No Content
My computer keeps my room warm during the winter.
==============================================
"my room" ??
What are you? A child, a dormitory dweller, or the denizen of an asylum? You have only one room???
Of course he has only one room!
You see, with the pace of change in the computer world he only needs one computer and he has been using the same computer for years!
He only needs one room because his computer occupies all the others in his house.
His computer is ENIAC.
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
But that growth alone won't sustain the computer industry. As of 1997 (the latest year I've seen numbers for) the yearly population growth in the U.S. was 0.88%. Even if we estimate that 60% of those new births will eventually become computer buyers, that translates to new market growth of slightly more than 0.5% yearly. Divide that growth among all of the major computer companies, not to mention the mom-n-pop shops, and you'll see that depending on an increasing population for sales growth would be suicidal for any company.
There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
Reminds me of the Cisco 'saying'. Only survey out the amount of equipment that your customer can afford. That is, the customer may not need a lot of computers etc... But make it expandable.
Ignore the Anonymous Pissant trolls !!!
Please, Kiss my M$ hating A$$.
Ignore the Anonymous Pissant trolls !!!
Please ask me who cares?
Ignore the Anonymous Pissant trolls !!!
Maybe you need to pick up a book or 2 and learn somthing.
Ignore the Anonymous Pissant trolls !!!
actually i think i would notice if a '40s computer fell on my head
my other penis is a vagina
Most people that live in urban and suburban areas have PC's but out side that the number of computers drops sharply.
I live in a semi-rural area of Kansas and there are a lot of people 30 minutes south of here don't have computers. My company has spoken with a number of people in out business dealings that would buy a computer only if they could get decent internet (anything better than 28.8), but no one will start ISP's in these areas because no one has computers.
There is a serious class segregation between the urban 'haves' and the rural 'have nots' in the information age. My company has participated in a number of subcommittees in the Kansas legislature. During which we were told not in so many words that a bunch of farmer would never have any thing to say on the Internet and that farmers probably were not even smart enough to get on the Internet.
Eventually some one will figure out that not every one lives in a city and rural areas will see their communications infrastructure brought up to a more acceptable level. We've spent 5 years trying so we're not holding our breathes.
At the time, considering what they did and what they cost, I think IBM was right. When costs go down and computational power increases, new uses appear which were formerly unthinkable. We snicker, but maybe it will help us to not fall into the same trap.
What do you mean... can you EVER have enough computers!?
-brain
Sure, and it doesn't collapse as long as economic growth doesn't exceed the birth rate...
I'm sorry, but you're wrong. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. Bill Gates never said that; it's just used by people jealous of his success.
For more information, click here.
"Hey you! What's that in your coat pocket?"
"Um... definitely not an electrical substation!"
"Okay then, move along..."
I was actually thinking the exact same thing. I'm glad you could put it into words better than I could have.
cheese logs keep my wang warm at night.
on the other hand, how far away are we from people having enough processing power to not want/need to upgrade anymore?
We've been right on the cusp of that for 20 years.
Or the jokes about EMACS: "Eventually munges all core storage".
Bloat is extremely relative. While I certainly did WIMP style computing on my old C64, if it had done everything I wanted, I wouldn't have upgraded to an Amiga.
Still, it's amazing to look at how much RAM a "desktop" Linux configuration requires, when I did serious development on a Sun box with 16 megs of RAM....
--
Clear, Dark Skies
... or at least a statistic I read in Nicholas Negroponte's book, Being Digital, that is, that one half of the people on earth have never used a telephone. It really made me think a bit about how different my life might be if I had been born in some other part of the world...
The real point of marvel about this quote, which most people miss, is not the fact that they could have undeestimated the potential market so much, but the fact that they invested in developing a product anyway.
I had a DELL desktop.
Added CDR
Replaced 24x CD-ROM with a 6x DVD-ROM
Added 64MB of RAM
Replaced Graphics card with a Riva TNT (new at that time)
Added 17GB HDD
Replaced Processor, Motherboard.
Replaced Sound Card with Aureal Vortex2
Replaced Case with a bigger one
Replaced HD setup with dual 20GB drives in RAID 0.
Replaced motherboard again, now to dual PIII 700MHz's
Replaced CDR with an 8x.
So I went from:
PII 300MHz w/ 64MB of RAM, 6.4GB HDD, crap sound, crap video, and crap case...
To:
Dual PIII 700MHz, 256MB of RAM, 40 GB of RAID, Aureal Vortex2, GF2 GTS (recently), and a big case.
Lesson? I never bought a new computer... really. I bought components one by one, all chosen by me. I didn't go by any packaged deal after the DELL.
People don't replace their computer when part of it is running slow, they replace the bottleneck. There always is ONE. They replace that, and something else becomes the bottleneck. And thus, the cycle continues.
well this is real disturbing. part of the problem is that a lot of the people who COULD use computers CAN'T because they don't have any juice (electricity) to run them on.
:-) They are supposed to sell for what, about $10k each? And 7kw would probably be a great start for a village that never had electricity before.
Well, this might be another place where the GE fuel cells would be appropriate
Of course, the next problem would be propane delivery and storage, but one problem at a time...
A dingo ate my sig...
hey, it's funny, and even slightly on topic:
"640K ought to be enough for anybody."
Bill Gates
here's a $200 firewall box. dunno if it GNU/Runs GNU/Linux or GNU/Not.
"...but most people all over the world have never even touched a computer, never mind owned one, because everyday needs take priority."
Sorry, this touched a nerve. The "rest" of the world is not living in grass huts and hunting their food for a living. True, much of the world is not as wired as the US, Europe, and some parts of Asia, but this view that they are still living in the dark ages is pretty pathetic. I've been to Ecuador and met cab drivers who make less than $1000 US per year, and many of them have surfed the web -- they may not own a computer, but they're by no means in awe of the things. I'm presently in Singapore, and in many ways this place is more wired than America. Even in Malaysia they've got a huge problem with software piracty -- that doesn't happen when people don't have access to computers. I'm sure it was unintentional, but this elitist view of things is still pretty sad.
JAMWiki Java-based Wiki engine
It is this very idea, that PC sales are reaching some type of saturation point, that is causing companies like Dell to be punished on Wall Street for the first time in quite a few years. All because they didn't quite make that 100% or 200% growth estimate... I don't know that this is it for the growth of PC sales, but it certainly has to slow down eventually.
Russian Russian Russian RussianDollSig DollSig DollSig DollSig
The problem is that the apps that are out there do not need the latest and greatest CPU any more.
.au/wav files into musical scores, a useful version of office assistant and the like - all the AI stuff. It will be a while I think.
Once upon a time every time you upgraded you would get heaps more done - I remember when I upgraded to an 11mhz AT - INCREDIBLE!!! You even had to upgrade often just to run something at all. For a long time more CPU was needed to make GUI fast enough - but even unaccelerated X is fast enough on a 333mhz Celeron X.
There are a few exceptions, but even speech recognition does not really benefit enough to pay through the nose for 1ghz.
I can compile GCC in 18 minutes from scratch - that's fast enough.
This hurts MSFT too because a lot of their sales are bundled with new PCs.
At some point there will be a killer app that needs 2.9ghz or whatever. But there is no killer app that needs 1ghz right now. There are lots of things that are not there due to lack of CPU, but they need heaps more than 1ghz - good speech recognition in a noisy office; decoding music
Also we are more bandwidth constrained than anything, rather than CPU bound.
<Humor>
So that's why I can't connect our mainframe today
</Humor>
---
You were a moderator with 5 points. You should have read the moderator guidelines before you did any moderating
I know this is a troll, I'm taking that bait, hook ,line and sinker.
If not for the despotism, lack of natural resources, and CIA interventions, the third world nations would have passed us up long ago while we were too busy hyping the latest useless product to even take notice.
At the end of the day it comes down to this: Third world countries rather buy weapons than food. Saying 'third world nations would have passed us up long ago' is just trolling, a lack of commercialism didn't help the Soviet Union. If you take away competition you take away reasons to excell, you push mediocracy and 'getting by' as opposed to 'doing your best'. But that's a whole different discussion.
IBM claimed there was a need for about 10 computers in the world. I've come to realize that they were right. What IBM forgot to take into account is the number of products you can sell to people who don't need them
<sarcasm>
Sure, you don't need a computer. All you do is troll on Slashdot, right? I, along with millions of other people don't need it, it's only our worktool. Small companies don't need them because all they do is increase efficency and let them be more competitive.
</sarcasm>
None of us *need* the cinema but it's alive and kicking. The same goes for cars, motorcycles, televisions, sports equipment, audio equipment, etc, etc. And I don't understand why that's such a problem.
jedrek
-- polish ccs mirror
For the moment at least, hardware power has caught up with the software, and for most purposes, you don't wish you had a faster computer all the time.
And that people haven't learned how to use the features they already have, so why would they feel the need for more?
Gamers are the ones pushing the envelope, todays machines are plenty fast enough for office automation.
Gee, most people have cars in this country, so have we reached the saturation point in cars sales? Everyone sell your stock in GM and Ford! What about TVs? Almost every man, woman, and child has their own TV. They don't ever even need to be upgraded! (unless you want HDTV) So sell your Sony stock! It's going down! Even if the majority of households had computers, many families are becoming multi-computer homes. And people always want to upgrade and stuff. Bah, it's all just BS. How come an industry can be doing great for years and suddenly there's a bad earnings quarter (which is historically a bad quarter anyway) and everyone freaks out?
Macintosh humor! MacComedy.com
Look, the PC industry is best likened to the auto industry. Even if -- and I doubt this greatly -- we truly are nearing the tight and skinny end of Moore's Law, how many real innovations have shaken the automobile industry lately? Although it is indeed very likely that PC sales will drop considerably as we near market saturation, people will continue to buy new PCs for the same reasons that they continue to buy new cars: the old one gets a little too slow, gets worn around the edges, or just isn't as hip and flashy as the new models. As a result, the PC makers will begin to reflect sales similar to those of the auto industry: slow curves between periods of demand and periods of lulled sales. While the explosive growth period may indeed be slowing, it's ridiculous to think that we'll stop buying PCs altogether. (Especially those of us who depend on laptops.)
--
Geoffrey Long
Editor-in-Chief, Dreamsbay Magazine
www.dreamsbay.com/dmlmag/v oic e/totq
Go ahead, wire Africa. I dare you.
Per capita GDP in Rwanda is $720. That means the scrap value of the copper in that wire is worth the effort to steal. How long do you think it will stay wired?
I notice that there are electricity substations, pylons, and other such structures all across the USA worth many times the per capita GDP of the average US citizen. Is there a problem with keeping the USA wired?
I know there are more issues involved but your oversimplification borders on the racist.
Cindy Hall and Gary Visgaitis, "PC Homes by Income", USA Today, Oct. 20, 1998, p. D.1
About 42% of adults overall say there is a personal computer in their home. 74% of these have a modem, 65% have Internet access. Homes with a PC by household income:
Under $10,000: 5%
$10,000 - $14,999: 20%
$15,000 - $24,999: 26%
$25,000 - $34,999: 40%
$35,000 - $49,999: 55%
$50,000 - $74,999: 57%
$75,000 and up: 75%
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Seriously though, demand for new computers will be driven by NEED for new computers ... Need for new computers will be driven by uber cool applications :) How many computers did doom sell? How many videocards did quake3 sell? ... mp3 for awhile was a killer app that a 486 couldn't run ... we all got pentiums.
Free Techno/Jazz/DNB/MI Music by guys obsessed with monkeys!
I have seen some ideas around.. I think we'll see the first workable solutions within a few years. How it's gonna turn out, I don't know.. We'll probably wear some sort of 3D glasses and gloves.
How it's gonna work, I'm not sure.. However, I have a strong feeling the (initial) Linux implementation will be based upon X and OpenGL. That's what i vaguely remember seeing a good while ago - here on slashdot.
Anyhow, I can't wait to literally pick up those core dumps and throw them into that wastebasket!
My point is that once that gets going, a P4 will look somewhat weak - unless we stick two GeForces in..
Stop the brainwash
here's an IMO for you...
The general purpose PC is frankly much too tempermental and difficult a beast to ever get that much penetration into non-techie households.
On the other hand, think about how many PS2s will be sold in the 12 months following this Christmas.
On another front, I just replaced my finicky NT based NAT translator with a little dedicated box from one of the NIC makers. Its works great and is a lot less hassle then keeping the NT server up was.
As computers become cheaper and cheaper it is mreo and more feasible to ship needs-tailored dvices. The general PC is indeed likely to fall back to being purely a professional and hobbiest device. (My wife, for instance, would KILL for a reliable box that woudl do fast email, word processing, and web browsing. She'd trade in her PC in a second.)
This MIGHT be GOODnews thouigh for Linux hackers as Linux seems to be findign some traction in the embedded/special purpose computer market. (That NAT firewall box I mentioned IS an embedded Linux device.)
You are right about that. But since Apple is a hardware company I can't blame them. The truth is that to run OS X, you also need to be able to run their classic OS 9 emulation environment which requires xs RAM and CPU for decent performance. OS X itself requires more than many other OS's but then you gain quartz and aqua which IMO are worth it. So the minimum requirements for the Public Beta are a 233 MHZ PPC 750 and 128M of RAM. In reality you only need 64M of RAM unless you also want to emulate OS9. I'll be willing to bet that Apple builds in support for Macs with upgrade cards to allow legacy Macs to run OS X.
By the way, OS X is great, if you get the chance to make it your hobby OS for a couple of weeks I think you will be impressed.
Posted from OS X PB
no sig.
Except for a few intense activities (MPEG-4 encoding, kernel compilation, 3DStudio, etc.), A Pentium 200Mhz is quite adequate for your daily internet activity (assuming a piddly 56k), which is *the* killer app for PC sales.
Assuming adequate processor speed, bandwidth is, of course, the key factor in determining usability of the internet, and not until cable modem/DSL access points are readily available in mass quantity (and there is strong competition!), there will not be another big wave of purchases of PC's.
I'd like to know if there's any correlation between the arrival of cheap 56k access and bossted PC sales...
Of course, if there were a new killer app (not network bound) perhaps PC sales will rise again. I doubt marketing can do anything to persuade consumers otherwise, until then.
(still sitting happy with my ~400Mhz laptop for the past year or so)
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Um, I never mentioned "10 years ago". If that's all the criticism you can mount...
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
--Henry Kissinger
You're just soooo wrong. Try to get your hands on a Unix book from 25 years ago, and watch them describe vi as bloated and unnecessarily luxurious.
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
--Henry Kissinger
Not quite, but almost. Back then, line-oriented editors were the norm, and punched cards and paper tape was still being used.
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
--Henry Kissinger
Actually, the biggest boon to computer makers in the late 1990's has been Microsoft. By constantly increasing the bloat and hardware requirements of their OS, they have driven the hardware replacement cycle to 2 years.
Recently, there hasn't been much upgrading, with most consumers seeing no reason to go to ME, and most companies seeing no reason to go to win2000. Additionally, there haven't really been any killer end-user apps which require an expensive computer.
The only consumers upgrading these days are 3d gamers and graphics/video folks. Linux users tend to be on an even longer upgrade cycle (My pentium 166 works just fine) than "equivalent" windows users.
On the other hand, there is still plenty of demand for processing power and additional machines on the server side.
Consumer computer sales will pick up again when there are killer apps which require it. On the Mac side, OS X should bring about a lot of upgrades, since many Mac users have been waiting for a while. The PC side is a bit different since the PC has become a commodity--no one is going to make much money selling the same thing everyone else sells.
Wow, I'm so awed to be in the presence of one of the 10 people in the world who truly, honestly need a computer. What a wonderful, exciting, stimulating life you must have.
Or is this a case of "it takes one to know one?" You know that all but 10 buyers of computers are idiots because you yourself are an idiot? I dearly hope that this is an intentional troll posted by someone blessed with eternally high karma due to his sub-1000 slashdot ID, because this is definately one of the stupidest posts I've seen in quite some time, and I hope that someone knocks this post back down the moderation chain quick.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
OK this is getting off subject, but penguins are expert swimmers and fishers. Just because a bird uses it's wings as fins and not methods of airial(sp?) propulsion does not make it backward, also since there is little need for a large brain in their particular ecological niche it would be a waste of resources to develop one. Any question of whether or not the penguin is a backward creature can be answered by looking at the large number of speices of penguin -lots existing in a relativly wide set of environments. Whilst the duck-billed platypus is a one off freak of a creature existing in a very narrow niche. Which one would you say is backward? rant in protection of penguins end
J-aims
--
Yo, whatever happened to peas? Join T( H)GS
I think everyone should look at the automobile industry for clues into these trends. Remember there were just cars, then trucks, then vans. Within the past twenty years we've seen the explosion of brand new markets of vehicles and genre's of transportation. The mini-van, SUV, Extended cabs, hybrid, electric, wired vehicles... what's growth like for the plain-old-car market? What's growth like for the SUV, hybrid, and wired markets. It appears to me that the SUV/mini-van market has started saturation and are beginning to look into innovation, while the hybrid and wired markets are just beginning their run.
One thing to notice in the auto market is generic vs. customization. Some vehicles are marketed toward the generic "I just need transportation" people, other vehicles are very specifically targeted towards the "I haul lumber", "I like leather", "I don't want to polute" groups. In the PC market very little of that is being done. I personally haven't seen much difference in the systems that are available they are all basic generic work horses that do the same tasks equally well. I'm waiting to see companies market "LeEt HaXor BoXEn" or "The Investors Buddy" or "MCLMFGM (Mushroom Cloud Laying M***F*** Gaming Machine)" or even the "Sesame Street PC". Now some companies have come out with branded machines like the Barbie PC or the RugRats PC but these aren't anything but the basic generic machines with some special software and stickers. What I'm talking about is specifically chosen hardware that is put together to perform a certain task. People who use their PC's for Games typically do it for only that and likewise with people who use their PC to surf the net. I guess this thought is what's driving the Net appliance and console market, but I think it can be done in the PC market also.
Just my $.02
"Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
Think about the very mature US car market. Although it has not been growing very fast for a long time, still the growth over the last 20 years or so, far outpaced the population growth.
Computers are not anywhere close to cars in terms of market maturity.
Well, the fact that there is demand in developing countries implies that there is a market in those countries. If computer manufacturers and (re)sellers wish to continue their growth, then they are going to supply that demand. Of course, profits will be slim, but if local investments are made to produce components in those developing countries, production costs will be lower too. It would also help if manufacturers used their previous generation fabbing technologies to produce chips more cheaply in those markets. Heck, why not just ship your old tech to a plant in a developing country to get more useful production capacity out of it??
Circa 1960 - "Cars get us from point A to point B - almost everyone has an automobile who has one - nobody's going to buy a new one!" Whatever.
These comments and opinions are mine and mine alone, although they shouldn't be.
the BETA OSX u mean?
Natural language and speech processing will be among the compelling reasons to upgrade to what today seems like overkill processing power... if Moore's law holds out, that is.
PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools
Why bother? someone else has already read it, and will inform me of any misunderstandings on my part :)
you are wrong...they were talking about the growth rate of the MARKET! the market already has a sales/per-unit-time basis to it....
it makes sense, becasue if you assume like 4 people per houshold, and if one in five people own a pc, then statistically a good a mjority of all households should have compputers
Just like an issue previously discussed on /. about cellular phones, the trick will not be convincing people to buy computers, but rather that their old one is inadequate and it is time to buy another.
Good luck at that!
back when they edited files by hand with magnets?
---
Desperation is a stinky cologne
Look at the car market; everybody and their dog has one, and they usually stay useful longer than a typical PC. But the auto industry is huge.
I'd say the greater concern for PC sales is the move to other models, like palms or appliances rather than a full power (read: expensive and big) computer. But that's not a bad thing, just a change.
My mom is not a Karma whore!
My opinion of this is that for normal purposes, the newest computers aren't necessary. Sure, if you want to play games with tons of glitzy graphics and the likes it might require a really new computer but there haven't been that many huge computer updates lately, except for ZIP and DVD drives, which can be bought separately. Back in the days of Win 3.1, when Win95 came out it was revolutionary (and I'm not advocating Windoze, but honestly, it is a rather popular product and a lot of people use it). It was a must have update and also required more processor power than ever before and newer computers. For the average Joe that likes to browse the web and use Email and write documents, however, an older computer on Win95 is sufficient for this, and nothing since it has come out and has been as important an update. I'm writing this post on a 200 MHz pentium that is somewhat outdated, but is perfectly sufficient for writing documents, browsing the web, and using all the software programs that I want to. My only complaint is memory constraints, but with RAM and HD updates I'm going to soon be getting in the mail, a whole new computer just isn't necessary. Computers are expensive items and once someone buys a nice new computer, they won't be needing upgrades in a while for the simple, everyday tasks that they do. A faster processor might be nice but my rusty old pentium still does the trick, and it does it quite well.
"I have not failed. I've simply found 10,000 ways that won't work." --Thomas Edison
Market saturation is easy for you and I to understand, being the ones who genenrally shell out the money for the newest, latest and greatest gadget. But for people who don't (read: Marketing idiots and Accountants) the concept makes them blow capacitors like its going out of style.
Amazigly, one of the things that causes this whole trend is good products, if everything was sub-standard, we would NEED to buy a new computer or cell phone every year. But, since manufacturers have been basically forced by the consumer to build things that work, we have stuff that doesnt break like it did even 5 years ago.
Just my 0000 0010 cents worth.
"See, we plan ahead! That way, we never have to do anything now."
I really have seen a lot less occurences of PC games that when you look at the minimum system requirements inspire you to get a new computer
The auto market seems to be a great example of where the PC sellers are heading
Just the other day reading that Transmeta article I began to see the auto market and remember the difference between a european, japanese and american car. Although the market is saturated there will still be growth in certian markets(like whatever manufacturer has the best ad campain on mtv this week).
For the Luddites of the world who resist computers, consider using computers to resist.
I didn't say that the birth rate was above replacement level, I said that the population was growing. That includes immigration. Of course, that's just the US. There are countries in Europe, for example, that have zero or even negative population growth.
Care about freedom?
I'd rather be lucky than good.
We have finally reached the point where the power of the hardware has outstripped the capacity of software to make use of it. Not in all cases, of course, but for what your "average" user needs their software to do today's hardware is more than up to the task.
Developers and gamers will probably continue to have use for cutting edge tech as it becomes available. Your typical "you've got mail" luser has more than enough already and they don't really need to upgrade. Heck, my boss has a Pentium Pro machine at home with 30 MB RAM and 2 GB hard disk and he's happy as a pig in doody. An extreme case, perhaps. The logical next step is a new round of price cuts/wars as manufacturers try to lure new buyers into the market and convince existing owners that the time is right to upgrade.
www.linuxnewbie.org is a great resource for new users of linux. There are a lot of helpful people there who will try to solve your problems and answer your questions quickly. :)
Just make sure to fully explain your problems/questions with lots of details
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
PIV's will hit 2Ghz next year...
AMD will probably get their sooner.
So it looks like that PIII 500 will be upgraded fairly soon if you still go by that 4x equation.
Unless Microsoft can bloat their software in accordance with Moore's law, you won't need a 2Ghz machine though.
Up your FSB a bit and you should hit 650 mhz easily, which should be enough for most games for a while.
The basic mistake this article makes is assuming that once u have 1 PC u dont need another. My personal experience has led me to think of Computers as consummables rather than assets. I have had to change computers every 3 years and so when I consider buying a computer I just divide its cost by 36 and think of it as a monthly consumption item like toilet paper!
**Life is too short to be serious**
I mean after all assuming everyone has a computer people will still need to upgrade every 3 years and new PC sales will always be there.
**Life is too short to be serious**
I believe what might hurt PC Sales more than saturation is the advent of new Non PC computing devices like Palms and intelligent Household appliances. Most people dont need a PC. The only advantage of a PC is that it can do everything but if the same jobs get divided between a palm,a mp3 player , a Net TV Box(which allows u to use yr TV and a wireless keyboard to surf the net) people wont have a need for new PCs. This is also the reason I believe the thinking that "even if the US is saturated the other countries need PCs " reasoning is flawed. For unlike the PC which came to the States first and then went to the rest of the world , these new generation devices are coming up all over the world simultaneously in fact the Scandinavians and Japanese are much more ahead than the Americans in this field. So what might happen in a lot of 3rd world countries is that they may never go through the PC era and instead go from the Govt owning a few workstations to everyone owning a Palm without the phase where almost everyone wastes money on a PC
**Life is too short to be serious**
"how far away are we from people having enough processing power to not want/need to upgrade anymore?"
heh... funny thing. I thought the same thing back in '90. The answer is, Never. When computers eventually become voice controllable, we'll need the extra power. Sure, voice control is available today, but it can't screen out background noise, and my experience is that I have to say everything twice just so it can understand me. Also, what about 3d displays, and true 3d sound (like A3d) and 5.1 dolby digital sound... dvd's really made people want to upgrade as well... so did Windows 98. I'm sure Windows ME will also get people to upgrade. Once your computer starts breaking down, and parts that used to cost $20 start costing $200 you'll upgrade, whether you like it or not. I dunno, maybe I missed your point...
witty sig goes here
Want to see the latest craze about to storm Slashdot? Click here.
---Technology will liberate us if it doesn't enslave us first.
Nuts. I only have six. Four more and I can take over the world!!!!
We are lightyears ahead of where we thought we'd be 10 years ago. The current slowdown might be attributable to the fact that most people do have enough power for now (see this week's The Onion for one hilarious take on this concept). And the IT/EE community's been so busy (and well-paid) catering to the needs of the clamoring newbie masses that meeting deadlines and shipping applications more often than not trumps writing good code and realizing creative solutions.
I've often joked (well, to my geek friends that get such humor) that if I were emperor, I would declare a moratorium on new hardware. Software has a long way to catch up. We've been so busy building the Web that the Next Great Thing hasn't gotten built. Yet. But it will in time. And then another great surge of processing power will be required, which will push us until we reach Joy's observed saturation limit.
I look forward to that day when computers are cheap, plentiful, and so powerful that we'll be sated with bits, pixels and bandwidth. Then, with no more "up", we'll have to build out sideways, and wire the world.
Let's just hope fuel cells get perfected before then so the whole kit and caboodle runs on something other than dead trees.
"Luck is the residue of design" --Branch Rickey
Actually, I think a home computer from 10 years ago would hit %100 cpu utilization and choke on current DSL or cable bandwidth.
---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
"Where shall the word be found, where will the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence." -T.S. Eliot
Whoa... When I thought "10 years ago", I was thinking XT and C64... but that was further back than 1990. I feel old. :-P
---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
"Where shall the word be found, where will the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence." -T.S. Eliot
What do we actually NEED?
Air, water, nourishment and maybe clothes & shelter for those of us living in climates that require protection from the elements.
Practically everything we have, we don't need... but this higher quality of life sure beats trying to eke out an existance living in caves.
I'd have to agree that many products ARE rediculous luxuries, but I find this particular box of metal, plastic and silicon to be a useful tool.
---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
"Where shall the word be found, where will the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence." -T.S. Eliot
Well, here in Sweden - everyone and their mother has a computer. Fine ones too - you see, a few years back, the Swedish government cut taxes on all computers bought through the company you were hired at, and made the cost a small monthly pay cut. Bottom line, computers got VERY cheap, and "everyone" bought one. Now, broadband is coming very fast - the government put of about 1.2 BILLION $ to make sure everyone have access to broadband in 2001. That instantly turned me into a socialist. GPRS is coming any day now, here in Sweden too, BTW.
We europe guys CAN click with the mouse, you know - and Linux WAS invented by a finnish guy.
anyone who's "everyday needs" are taking precedent over buying a computer likely does not have the $1000-$3000 neccessary to buy a computer that a company can actually make money from selling.
Sure, there are billions of people out there who are working their butts off making our GAP clothes and Nike shoes and don't have a computer. However, until Dell et al can find a way to make a computer cost $10US there's no way many of these people could ever afford it.
Man, I hope he is right about the "zero growth in PCs" part. I hope PCs continue to decrease in size. I would hate for my tower case to get bigger every night...I would have to move my laundry basket and possibly a few magazines!
------
Let me give you the lowdown
Growth != sales
I totally agree. Slashdot WAS good. End of story.
Still trying
Ever seen Fight Club? Check it out.
If this is true, then I'm not surprised that companies like Dell are reporting lower than expected earnings.
Your reality is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. - Baron Munchausen
Think that's it's far easier to sell, buy, use, say, a mobile phone or a palm computer or a wearable ;-) than a desktop PC.
The time has come for the emergence of a new industry. The old time's supercomputers, ENIAC-like, followed by mainframes, followed by "mini-computers" are all gone to the prehistoric cemetery... Now for the "micro-computers" to follow.
Here comes the age of "nano-computers", embedded in our everydy life. We already know them, use them, without a thought. They are here.
-- javaDragon is an instance of JavaDragon.
Text mode porn? And I thought text mode quake was bad...
--I assume full responsibility for my actions, except the ones that are someone else's fault.
Actually, I suspect that a P133 with 16MB would run X just fine as well. You'll need to watch those memory requirements by using a non-memory-hog window manager (not Enlightenment or WindowMaker, and no KDE or GNOME). Hell, with 32MB it'll run KDE or GNOME or WindowMaker (and yes, I have done this, and it does barely work).
A P133 also runs older versions of Windows (like 95) just fine too, if you're into that sort of thing. The memory requirements will be a bit tighter, but it'll do for its purpose.
initially, we were told that pc's should be treated as an expense and as disposable. however things have changed: we took to upgrading. sellers were pushing the "upgradability" of their systems for a few years now. It is more economical to upgrade than to buy new. This is begining to haunt the PC sellers.
then again, with all the news of what's about to be released ... and the knowledge that prices will keep dropping, people like myself are just plain waiting ...
I doubt a 0% growth rate is realistic, 3-5% might be more on the mark. Unfortunately, many shareholders have been betting on continued 15-20%. The reason for the slowdown is that there is a limit to consumer spending power, and the amount of money that can reasonably be spent on computer hardware and software. Consider market capitalization...
In the auto industry GM has a market capitalization around 30 billion, ford maybe 50B before the firestone incedent.
Compare this to the PC industry before the earnings warnings. Intel had around 400 billion, Microsoft well over 300, dell about 140, gateway 20, Compaq over 50, IBM over 200, HP over 120 and so on...
Cars also tend to cost ten times what computers do, and the expanding markets (lower income) will be far more interested in $500 PC's than in a $2500 P4 dell.
These are all companies that will do well in the future, but their current stock prices reflect the best possible future coming true with 100% certainty. This is probably the result of momentum investing, idiotically taking a concept of newtonian physics and applying it to an area where there is certainly no such thing as momentum. I'll buy that stock, it's been doubling for years, its got momentum, it cant go down...
Economically, there is not enough consumer spending power to justify the prices of these companies. However, investors are so intoxicated with the last few years that they fail to see any way things could go wrong. Most people think they are market geniuses because of 70%-80% returns last year, even though they failed to beat the market. How could they be wrong now?
Growth will certainly continue, and the companies will do well in the future. However, I pity the shareholders, as price is a quantitative measure, and just how well is the real question. I dont think anyone is questioning moderate growth, but the exponential growth model is beginning to fail.
Hell, that is happening in Russia as well.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
Now, I guessed that all on my own, really. :-)
It would have been more helpful if you could point me out to a site where a newbie like me can get help to install a lightweight Linux installation that is fully X-capable. (read: a replacement for Windows)
Loading Netscape was only that slow when not connected to the internet, so it could be some connection-timeout setting. Besides, I missed Eudora...
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Now that AC can learn a lot about informativeness from you :-) Thanks...
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Would you be so kind and tell me how to do that? I have an old laptop (P120/32RAM) on which I tried to do exactly that.
Linux needed about 900Meg of harddisk space (on a 1.3Gig that is insane) and X-Windows ran slooooow. (I admit, I used KDE) Just loading Netscape took 5 minutes.
Because of painfully slow performance I had to switch back to Windows 95, which runs acceptably if well tweaked.
Note that I'm pretty new to Linux and have no clue how to teak it.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
---
---
Slashdot: News For Zealots. Stuff That's Hypocritical.
Expand your mind. It's not as simple as a farmer building a web-page and all of a suddent turning big profits. It's about the fact that a 12-year old reads about a new chemical process on the web, and his fresh young mind comes up with a way to slightly improve that. Then make that happen a few million times. Things get cheaper to do. Things get easier to do. Life gets more complicated, but on the whole the world becomes a better place. Right now everyone is excited about the internet for its own sake. It is mostly used to feed itself. But as time goes on (I'm talking decades or centuries), this will help the world for real. History teaches that the improvement of standards of living is indirectly but positively related to the speed and effectiveness of communication. I firmly believe that the telegraph was the greatest invention of all time - even ahead of the plow...
--
'A lie if repeated often enough, becomes the truth.' - Goebbels
The same sort of people that laugh about AlGore inventing the internet
Actually there's nothing there inconsistent with communism, wherein chickens and cows are shared among the chicken and cow producers; that is called division of labour.
The essence of capitalism is that I have lots of chickens, too many to breed myself, and in return for you breeding my chickens, I give you some of the chickens you bred. But I get to keep the rest.
I am a capitalist, and the chickens I keep out of your labour are what Marx called surplus value. This is what distinguishes capitalism from a system wherein we all work and all get the rewards. Advocates of capitalism claim that my actions are beneficial because I increase the total stock of chickens in the world by allowing them to breed more freely, and my surplus chickens are what encourages me to do this.
Communists claim it would be better if we all bred chickens and shared the results. However, no one has found a way to make anything like as many chickens this way, so the capitalist system persists.
If you're a jock, inflict some pain / If you're a nerd then use your brain - DAPHNE AND CELESTE
People do ned to upgrade and people still need new computers. Computers aren't just something that you buy and forget about. Hardware vendors play little games and deceive people so that they can get more sales.
Respond to s
perhaps?
Respond to s
I mean even the best upgrade schedule will have to at some point realize that upgrading system components is far better and in the long run cheaper than replacing the whole box. Of course yoy may be burning out those computers really, really fast but that's just not that easy to do in my mind.
Respond to s
A 10 year old computer will work just fine for all those tasks it's the bandwidth that is the only limiting factor.
Respond to s
Then all that money drys up. Why should I spend $5,000 just to play a game when I can do the same for $100?
Respond to s
Software from microsoft and the like prevents the fear of loosing hardware sales. I will also submit that linux has betrayed people in the regard nicely. Trying to run GNOME, KDE, or E on anything less than a well equiped Pentium class computer will leave you in the cold really fast. Think your modem is good enough? Well we will just ram the web with graphics and things like quake 3 until your old modem isn't good enough anymore. See it's about duplicity in the game and making it work for them.
Respond to s
Many other things are more important than internet speeds for a PC
Respond to s
Computers cannot be treated like frivilous things and taken for granted. The nice new ones cost a mint and you have to justify the cost
Respond to s
X was never meant to be an art contest nor some elaborate screen saver it was for graphics apps.
Respond to s
Downloading an mpeg isn't CPU intensive.
Respond to s
You can go through a great variety of means to get the data after you have it. You could just transfer it to another PC. Usually when I think of porn I think of good old fashioned .jpg,.gif, etc and .txt as well. The downloading itself itns't hard at all. Viewing takes slightly more but usually not much more. I don't think spending $5k on a computer is justifiable for porn viewing.
Respond to s
Yes, the developing world will take over the growth of the saturated market in the developed world when all of a sudden they come to their senses and realize that a Windows PC is much more important to them than basics such as food, water or electricity.
If you are modding me down because you disagree with me, use the "Flamebait" category, not the "Troll" one.
I love how they put the negative spin on the Cube rebate when just a few weeks ago, every news item about
Apple cited it's high cost. Apple makes an adjustment and they get slammed. Again.
It talks of the "gloomy market" and that Apple's down 65%
but articles like these contributed the most to fuel the irrational drop.
Maybe somebody wants to knock the stock price down a couple more bucks on monday morning?
It's all tied in with the "troubles" in the Middle East, giving al-Waleed bin Talal
(the billionaire Saudi Arabian prince with a big block of AAPL) another swift, multi-million-dollar kick in the nuts.
They also equate the slowdown with "Consumers..buying cheaper models".
The paragraph makes no sense in the context of # of units shipped, which may effect profit levels
but should increase the units shipped, 'cuz they're more affordable.
This article is less about being "informative" and more about delivering a negative payload.
--
presearch
I like running hardware 2 years old or older. If I would have purchased it new, it would have been expensive. The big advantage is the bugs are mostly worked out and newer drivers are downloadable. I think a $400.00 investment today would buy what would have cost $2800.00 3 years ago and now has fewer bugs. The money saved bought my test equiptment (digital scope). Unfortunately, sometimes it is hard to get a newer full copy of the operating system with it. $207.00 for a full copy is a little steep for a $400.00 system just cause the wife needs office.
The truth shall set you free!
How can it be possible to have zero growth? Once we have a computer (for arguements sake a Pentium 1) we don't need another because it does everything we want it to? Even in this day and age of IT? The mind boggles.
/.ers upgrade their computer on a regular basis (I'm guilty too ;) and even normal users would always like something better...
I'm sure that many
*ZERO* growth? Naa, don't think so...
I lost me sig.
Maybe I just finally got that hardware monkey off my back, but I haven't had the urge to go buy upgrades for quite a while. 17" monitor, 128M ram, 2x450Mhz Celerons, AGP TNT, and about 15 gigs of disk space. That's pretty old hardware, by today's standards, but I don't really feel like it's slowing me down (except when I recompile glibc.... yeesh...)
It is not pretty old hardware, I would guess probably about 2 years old. I mean, I have just replaced a 486/66 MHz running Windows 3.1 with a Celeron 500. That is old hardware (about 5-6 years), and you cannot run today's applications on this kind of thing. (I know that MHz numbers don't give you the whole thing, but it's quite reliable to estimate the other components.)
Come on sir, you probably still have that hardware monkey on your back. 2x450 MHz Celeron? I run fine with a 366 MHz Celeron, and that's more than most of my friends have.
More than 4 GB harddisk? What for? All my serious application fit in 2 GB, I have about 400 MB of personal data, that's it.
But if you want to play seriously with mp3s (ripping them from CDs), produce DIVX ;-) videos, use today's games, your computer just can't be fast enough.
--
michael at slashdot.org: The real answer is that a couple of the slashdot authors are sick.
And it reminds me of the assumption that computer users would only need 640K of RAM. And that the general public would have no use whatsoever for a computer. And that households would never have more than one television set. And that the mouse would be nothing more than a toy. And that men would never reach the moon. And...
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
There are easier ways for USians to make money.
Stealing cable is much more involved than dealing crack or having a zillion sprogs and freeloading off the government.
IIRC, cable-stealing *does* happen in Amerika, just not very often.
Richard
----
Deepthroat my submarine, swallow my seamen.
Okay, new money may not go to traditional computer hardware (ie Desktops). My household, like most in the US, already has one. I don't need to replace it every year, only every few years. (I don't personally know anyone that replaces their car every year either.)
However, this in no way means computer sales growth will level out very soon! I, like most US adults, do not have a PIM yet. It would be interesting to know how many US households do not have a cell phone yet. Watch what the convergence of cell phone + PIM does for computer sales growth. (Yes, I consider a PIM, e.g., Palm, a computer. And yes, I consider a combination PIM + cell phone still a computer.)
--- -- - -
Give me LIBERTY, or give me a check.
What also should be considered, not necessarily for the growth rate, but for the overall picture is the cost of computers over time. A computer that you can buy commerically today for $2000 would have cost 10 times that, if not more, 5 years ago.
Will IBM, Dell, Gateway, etc. stop selling computers? Of course not. They break, people want to upgrade, new businesses start, new customers enter the fold. But I tend to think, at least here in the States, that sales growth for home users, is going to decline seriously over the next decade or so. Business growth? That's different. Businesses, especially the big ones, can often afford to buy new computers for new branches, operations, or just to impress the new VP.
What the computer companies will be looking into is improving their sales in emerging markets, like 2nd world nations, and in 3rd world nations. Also, I have no doubt that the range of possible styles of peripherals, as well as the number of different peripherals will continue to grow. We have opt-mouses, DVD drives, ZIP drives, and other neat toys all commercially available within the last few years. Who knows what will be created in the next few, making what we have obsolete?
Kierthos
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
Since when do everyday needs take priority?? ;]
TV's are still selling, and their market isn't nearly as fast paced as the PC market. And if people whose basic needs are not being fullfilled, why don't PC manufacturers try to help those people meet their basic needs?? They have the money to... and then try and sell them some PC's :)
Question is do we want to have a PC that is not up to date. we keep on upgrading till we have the max spec out there. Buth this will stop as we reach our max. We are now waiting for one ore two years now for a fiber optic computer buth it's still not out. Remember your 1st 8088 ? and how much dit it kost you and now you have your own PIII 800Mhz ;-) for about the same price
-=[ MivaBe ]=-
As far as the general public is concerned, most people are using the computers they've been using since 96-97, it's a lot harder to sell a family a computer, than a company.
Kris Felscher
Kris Felscher
We've got enough youth, how about a fountain of "smart"?
Evolutionarily, they are backward (what flightless bird isn't?).
They're just adapted to a different environment: the water. Sure they look pathetic out of it, but in the water, they do quite well indeed.
This is a good point... Try to keep the customer by *allowing* him to upgrade... and upgrade at *his* own leisure according to *his* needs as the technology changes.
There's no doubt that growth in the market is declining. You'll still have the same people who have purchased computers before, but you'll have to try to keep them for their business in the future... without the tricks and games that are played today.
People's attitudes will change, as well. People hate being treated like cattle, yet they still buy from large PC companies and expect to get great service. They go for Billy Bob's Discount PC-O-Rama because they can save a whole $20 on a 1GHz machine and wonder why the parts are bad and they can't get help. Then they wonder why the S&H charges are astronomical.
Old habits die hard. People are still using old boxen with Linux and still buying new Windows PCs when those wear out... and then complaining of a global conspiracy by PC manufacturers and their upgrade-itis and proprietary stuff. People expect to be screwed, so they go the same vendors because they at least know *how* they're going to be screwed.
Why not just do it in reverse: instead of buying a Windows PC, buy your next PC as a *free software* box from someone (or an entity) that makes free software boxen. Then, use Windows with vmware. Finally, stir gently and let simmer. :)
At any rate, it seems the era of pushing boxes upon hapless consumers is fading. Indeed, they're getting smarter, more demanding -- and this requires a better strategy than what has been used lately.
What I have been trying to do with the Blackbird is to try to build a free software platform that can be upgraded over time. Open design, open communication. Try to have as few things "built in" (dirty) as possible. Sell components at near-OEM prices (e.g., what I buy them for + a thin margin) to existing customers so that they can upgrade theirs over time. Most people will be content with a 1GHz Blackbird for a long time, but they will probably upgrade storage, video, and stuff like that. Giving people the *freedom* NOT to buy component upgrades from the company they bought the machine from seems to build a certain degree of trust, since "upgrades" sold by vendors today are often proprietary and machine-specific.
The strategy seems to work in theory. The hardest part is attracting the people needed to make it work: the intelligent computer crowd. People who *understand* how to upgrade a mobo or a processor...
... and that is what will be *INCREASING* in the next two years.
Lucas
Why?
Because every year the CPU speed and disk space double, and a new version of Windows comes out.
Well, except for Apple and their sys reqs for OS X.
> famous prediction by IBM that the
> entire world would only need 10 computers.
At the time that statement was made, a "computer" defined to be a mechanical device to calculate and print trig tables: sines, cosines, logarithms, etc. From that perspective, the statement was correct. Back then, there was no concept of a general-purpose "computer".
> How many times do we have to snicker at some IBM execs quote about the computers that is almost 60 years old.
IBM's comments are totally true, when viewed in context. The context is that, back then, a "computer" was a device to calculate and print a table of sines, cosines and logarithms (to be used for aiming artillery). After printing the trig tables, the single-purpose "computer" would be decommissioned. In that context, the world would not need more than 10 of these single-use devices.
Which is true.
The concept of a general-purpose computer came much later.
On the contrary, penguins are really rather advanced, and extremely well suited to their niche - ie underwater flight. Just like ostriches are extremely well suited to running very quickly and kicking the stuffing out of anything they don't like. Structurally we are more primive than penguins, being a generalist design, whereas a penguin's design is very focussed. Penguins are actually quite smart, probably up to the level of a starling, which is considerably better than chickens (ick) or pigeons (double ick)
But, the population of say the US is continuously growing. And since the population will be most likely growing forever, the market for computers will most likely grow forever.
But, the population is declining, and demand isn't declining, its growth is just slowing slowing. The computer retailers will still sell enough computers to sustain themselves. However instead of selling 3M one year and 6M the next year, they'll be selling 3M one year and 3,050,000 the next year. As long as the companies are currently profitable they'll stay profitable.
I dont understand this both Intel and AMD failed to produce enough chips for their demand. PEOPLE ARE ORDERING MORE CHIPS FROM INTEL AND AMD THAN THEY CAN PRODUCE!!!! The notion that PC sales were declining was an excuse made up by intel when they lost market share to intel and failed to meet analysists expectations. Both intel and AMD are working on increacing increacing their productivity. Dont belive the lies that intel is telling their stock holders.
You could have hit the bulls eye. We all seem in such a rush to post our comments before the others, that we don't waste time reading the articles or even waiting to understand it before we press the reply button.
There's always sufficient, but not always at the right place nor for the right folks.
To keep coming up with new gagets that people want to upgrade to. Flat-screens, DVD players, and the like are things that your average consumer didn't even think about having with their computers even just a few years ago--if the industry keeps coming up with stuff like that people will feel obligated to continuing buying and sales won't ever really decrease. I don't think there's any danger of there being a "saturation point" that forces any decent PC company out of business. But the truth is--it will mostly have to be the american market (plus the rest of what we consider to be the "western world") to keep it going, new markets may appear in other parts of the world some day, but probably not soon enough or quickly enough for it to be much of a factor at this point.
To a certain extent yes, but keep in mind what exactly the rest of the world is composed of. Do you think there will be overwhelming demand in Africa, China or the Eastern Bloc countries (Russia, it's satellites and former parts of Russia that are now independent) which are now Third World nations? IMO, the demand will be high (ie: everyone wants one), but few can afford one. The rest of the world is primarly composted of Second and Third World nations.
/w, got that?
Tell me, where are you from? Because you're forgetting to mention either the USA(which is most likely where you're from), or Europe. Please, be aware of the fact that we barbaric hordes in the western part of Europe have computers as well. Yes, and we actually know how to operate them. We don't need no Americans to tell us how to type dir
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Recently, there hasn't been much upgrading, with most consumers seeing no reason to go to ME
I don't know about you, but over here people are massively turning to ME. This might have something to do with the fact that I tell them that this IMO is the most stable end-user oriented version of windows ever, but that's besides the point.
The only consumers upgrading these days are 3d gamers and graphics/video folks
You seem to be forgetting the barbaric hordes we usually refer to as lusers. You know, those people that buy a newer computer because the neighbour has one as well? Or because I/you/we tell them to?
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Assuming, of course, that none of those 40s computers earned a place in heaven/hell/purgatory/walhalla/whatever else you happen to believe in, that is.
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Even better! Africa could leapfrog us by directly going to fiber. Soon, they'll have gigabits on their doorstep while we're still waiting for the ADSL installation persons to show up.
What Would the Fab Five Do?
-
Just because you can, does not mean you should.
No more TV's can be sold because everyone already has a TV. So all these TV stores will just vanish I guess because we all already have TVs.
Actually, many of the former satellites are much better than "3rd World".
For example, the Czech Republic has a per capita GDP of $11,700, while U.S. territory of Puerto Rico has a per capita GDP of $9,800, EU member Greece is at $13,900, and South Korea is $13,300.
To compare, Russia is at $4,200, the Dominican Republic is at $5,400, Turkey is $6,200, and China is $3,800.
There's no "we" in team, only "me"
I disagree. (Not that I'm working at one of these big computer manufacturers and thus have a stake in computer sales rising consistently.) All this increasingly powerful hardware that is being manufactured finally translates into better applications reaching more number of people. And for this they have to have this improved hardware. Why ? Well, it's finally all a question of choice. Man constantly endevours to reduce the noice in his life to concentrate on the signal. The everyday mundane tasks being the noice and what he really wants to do the signal. As for the developing countries, you should see the dramatic changes in the lives of the common people the very useful applications on computers, being deployed are bringing about.(I'm from India.) For eg., farmers. The internet is being used to connect then directly with whole sale dealers, eliminating the middleman. That gives them far better prices and better market info, quicker. This sure improves their living condition.
S
As the PC in the home becomes almost as common place as a television, it is reasonable for one to expect the rate of demand to decrease. Indeed perhaps to a certain extent it will, however I do believe that with technologies still rapidly improving, the need to replace and update them will escalate significantly. The most common use of computers in the home is by the teenager who plays TFC repeatedly, whilst supposedly doing his English essay. Then you have the 7 year old child who plays educational Disney games, and finally you have the parents trying to be up with technology, perhaps keeping invoices and writing the occasional letter of complaint. An average family therefore can survive quite happily with a family computer, being several years old but still catering for their every need. In offices and businesses however the need to use a reasonably new system is somewhat more important. It is necessary to use up to date software, and for even a small business to appear relatively high-tech, even if the expense of the system does not prove cost effective.
...and is best for educational purposes.--
And then there is me. The 16yo geek who loves messing around with me ole sinclair, so long as there's the latest computer nicely set up next to it, with the fastest processor I can afford, new this that and the other, and generally nicely flashy looking. Computers can be likened (please don't cringe, I know they are vastly superior...) to cars. Almost every family has at least one car, the norm now being two. Now you go and look out on the road and see what types of cars there are: The old banger which falls apart and chugs along in the most delightful ancient manner; the 5 y/o Nissan which does its job justly and will be replaced with an equally sensible but still fairly decent car just as soon as the teenagers refuse to be seen in it any longer, ; and the new jaguar hot off the production line.
Now something tells me that the jaguar is more a status symbol and the driver really does not require it to be quite so wonderful, but nevertheless he still has it, he still gets a new one every year, and still pays out a fortune just to be seen in an up to the minute car. Computers are the same. The car industry is doing just fine. So computers will do the same. Why be pessimistic? Computers are wonderful, amazing, just gorgeous things. I think it will be a long time in the future before demand for them stops.
--APL is a natural extension of assembler language programming;
Email: waterbiscuit@nerd.co.uk
Shall we count up peripheral sales and divide by the number of said items it takes to make a "computer"?
I'd like to see the statistics on the average megahertz by country... We then anaylize the increase in software production and the dependancy relative to software requirement's. I'm sure we'll all find that computers are witches, and what do we do to witches?! WE BURN THEM!
Shall we count up peripheral sales and divide by the number of said items it takes to make a "computer"?
I'd like to see the statistics on the average megahertz by country... We then anaylize the increase in software production and the dependancy relative to software requirement's. I'm sure we'll all find that computers are witches, and what do we do to witches?! WE BURN THEM!
I'd bet the internet hype was one of the biggest factors in the pc industry's growth the last decade. Almost all the non-techie people I know use thier machines just to access the web. I think most of them realized that the internet isn't all it's cracked up to be. And you don't need a top of the line machine to watch porn. Seeing the machine you paid $2000 for last year on sale for $400 probably doesn't do much for consumer confidence either.
Yeah, go on, buy another PC or upgrade.
But remember to give away your old computer if you don't need it!
True hackers aren't raised on windows-clicking but rather by raw access to inner workings of the "holy shrine".
Every time I try to commit recursive suicide, my system hangs...
All we have to do is to colonize Mars!
Human extinction is on the way.
Is everything linked back to MS nowadays? Please tell me if I should first visist slashdot.org and then actually read something on MSNBC. Christ! I just abandoned them and then I see them mentioned on here! Also, why was slashdot down? www.microsoft.com has the best uptime compared to all Linux/Unix sites...and their download mechanisms actually work better than the rest.
500+ Mhz PIII/Athalon 128+ MB memory
IMHO, I think this has a lot to do with Intels recent troubles. Intel has had production problems and two recalls in recent memory. No matter what you think of AMD, they don't have the capacity to supply the market on their own. However, AMD does represent an alternative source of parts and slow adaption of AMD parts may have cut into many PC makers earnings and time to market. Wait until Intel get their act in order, we may see a quick upswing.
In general, most analysts think that what the big boys are doing now is indicative of the future. Give Wintel a six or seven months and we will see another upgrade cycle.
Women are the ruling class. Guys who don't like it should get a sex change. But I don't want to be a lesbian.
The life cycle of a PC used to be around 18 months before it was hoplessly obsolete. Now it seems that it is closer to 3 years or more.
Dare to question!
unless i am mistaken it was a world market for 5 computers not 10
Personal pc sales in this country are relatively insignificant to corporate purchases. That is what they are really talking about. Read benchmark tests in the mags. How much faster can Word get? So what if it opens in 10 seconds or 12 seconds. Once it is open it runs pretty much the same.
As long as my p166MMX notebook and p100 desktop do what I need them to do(mp3 playing, mpeg/mov playing, word processing, and internet, I don't plan on getting another machine. In fact...I probably wait until the 2 gighertz machines start comming out. By the way, 16 megs of RAM is inadequate to run win95 well.....runs great on 64. As for my third machine(AMD 486dx2/80) with 32 megs RAM, I don't plan on running GNOME or KDE...too slow...FVWM all the way...
As you say,
- Your having 12 machines on your LAN makes you a poor candidate for the "dumb Firewall box."
- Your having some clue that ipfwadm is anything other than mistyped gibberish makes you a poor candidate for the "dumb Firewall box."
You're probably not a good candidate for getting a "tiny embedded firewall;" your needs are decidedly more sophisticated, and you can easily enough build something acceptable yourself.I'd not be shocked if you would be prepared to burn a CD to boot up a customized version of Linux/*BSD that would provide a Remarkably Unhackable configuration.
But life is short; I could probably do much the same, but if I were to get a Cable Modem, it might be more economical of my time and limited space to pick up a LinkSys router.
And I'm not overly concerned about the Unix cognoscenti; y'all can take care of yourselves.
What I would like to see is a "cheap cable modem companion," something that would provide at least some protection for the people that aren't gurus, and (horrors!) might not even be using some form of *nix. That's where the massive vulnerabilities lie; that's where adding a firewall has most merit.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
But not to worry... They had not accounted for the fact that you might want to have more than one telephone. Personally, I have two telephones in my apartment, and connect to my ISP and to TiVo service using the one line as well. Add to that the "mobile telephony" equipment...
The parallels to computing should be blatantly obvious; families already have the issue of family members "disputing" over who gets to use the computer.
In the long run, it would make a whopping lot of sense for there to be a whole "horde" of computers in a home, between:
Whether firewall or "Internet Services Server," this option seems eminently likely.
What The World Really Needs is a $250 firewall box that runs Linux, and integrates in a cable modem and an Ethernet hub. No screen, by default; perhaps not even a hard drive.
To be sure, not all of these are practical applications at present, but the fact that it's easy to come up with additional such uses is pretty suggestive that those that think the markets are "saturated" probably haven't thought hard enough.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
Wow, I guess you're not going to be upgrading your PC until the year 2030, eh?
I think people will always need new computers just like they will always need new washing machines or televisions. Sales need to slow down as the recent boom has been ridiculous. I think people have grown tired of the numbers game where as soon as everybody has a xxxMhz computer they are told they need a yyyMhz computer. For a while we all felt the need to buy the latest number and dumped our "old" (probably only 6 months old) machine on the nearest newbie.
I, and a lot of my friends, have tired of this and my current machine is a 450 PIII which does me great even though there are plenty of newer numbers on the market.
To me, this is just a case of customers finally taking control of the market.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
Those 10 computers weren't going to cost $1000 each in their vision. ESA didn't think they would need to launch a hundred million satelites to make investment in the new Ariane profitable either.
My state-of-the-art Athlon box at home whomps the 2-year-old Dell P2-400 box (that was close to state of the art at the time) when it comes to Java development, Quake, and everything else that can make use of processor cycles. Screw the cost/benefit analysis, just gimme.
Personally, I can't wait for dual 1.5GHz Athlon boxes early next year...
Some of it is that I'm not playing games so much anymore (I really think games drive cutting edge PC hardware in the consumer space...) but I just haven't seen the need to upgrade.
Has hardware temporarily outpaced applications? 1.3Ghz processors, 60MB hard drives, video cards with outrigger power supplies... maybe I'm out of touch. Who needs it right now, in Q4 2000?
---
Just make sure the next version of MS-OS requires a 128bit, 9 stage pipelined, superscalar, 6 ops/click, 1Ghz or better, quarter or half Gig of memory, a new video design, a new HCL, new different board connectors, a 'better' bus design, a proprietary DSP interface, host processing everything and you will insure that people will buy new PC's - Afterall what kind of performance can you expect out of Word with only a Pentium2-266? Not much.
The cost of upgrading software in the corporate environ is at least 7-9x more than the cost of replacing hardware that is on a 3 year depreciation schedule. Mostly because of the labor involved. Even if you have a sophisticated ESD tool the work in packaging and testing the deployable bundles is quite high compared to the expense of writing off the old HW and shipping new. But that's not the problem. The problem is that many corps have SW maintenance agreements with VARs and resellers - not SW houses. What happens is that MS-Something gets deployed after much bloodshed. The next year the VAR comes back and 'suggests' that the customer now upgrade to MS-Something+1. Corp says yes because why else are they paying 15-18% year over year to maintain it if they're not going to upgrade and the VAR is probably telling the customer that if they wait another year they won't get the great price break they can ostensibly get now. After all they've paid for it already up front and the VAR won't be able to get favorable terms from MS a year after introduction and certainly can't skip a level in the MS mandated update cycle.
...Anyway.....
With each new turn of the crank comes a bundle of MS software that takes more and more hardware. More of everything. Office 2000 can't effectively run on a machine with <128MB RAM, 400MB of disk and at least a 500Mhz CPU. At least not with the performance expectation in a corporate environment that the customer has come to expect fomr the last version.
A couple-three iterations of this and you replacing the hardware faster than the depreciation schedule and so it goes. The hardware upgrade-replacement arms rae goes out of control.
Look at the new systems from Compaq, HP, and IBM. They are small, cheap, boxes. If it breaks, exchange it for a new box and throw it away. They are built more like a consumer appliance than a traditional computer.
Bottom of the line disk drives have more storage than most people will use.
Cheap video cards/chips have more than enough performance for anyone who isn't a Quake fanatic.
Intel has screwed up on the introduction of new and improved CPUs. I used to think about upgrading/replacing my computer when a new CPU ran 4x faster than my current CPU. It is going to be a while before there is something 4x faster than a 500 MHz Pentium III.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Make TV programs on your computer.
...
What? Steve Wozniak did this in 1977?
Next idea
"on the other hand, how far away are we from people having enough processing power to not want/need to upgrade anymore?"
... for *her*, not for me.
I used to be a total and devout speed addict, to the point of slowing down the refresh rate on my turbo-PCclones to squeeze an extra 2-3% out of them, running a program to determine the idea HD interleave factor *and* skew rate, and de-fragging the disk every night as I was leaving work.
Now, however, my partner has a K6-2 500, and I've got the 400. I'm looking at building a new machine
Seems I no longer really do much that needs that much speed. Even fancier new games leave me cold.
Sure, I probably will buy new stuff, eventually, but I'm no longer addicted to it. The growth *is* stopping.
Lemon curry?
I would have said that before experiencing it firsthand. Sounds lame, I know... but it's actually more difficult and costly to upgrade a piece at a time than it is to simply say 'this year, we're using XXX.
Why? Stuff breaks.. you end up with computers with different hardware.. support gets harder.... and it takes more time. Sure, you could get more employees.... low-level tech persons. But that's more money again.. more than you think, once you account for benefits, office space, etc...
Now, I'm not saying it's not cheaper.. but it's a lot more logistics for a small improvement in price.
"Trying to run GNOME, KDE, or E on anything less than a well equiped Pentium class computer
will leave you in the cold really fast"
So don't run Gnome or KDE.
If you don't want it - don't include it.
Its your operating system, its your choice.
There's several other wlightweight window managers out there.
Why did you want to run X again?
.
Well, not quite--although it can seem that way. Basically the weirdness boils down to this: I trade you three chickens for one cow. I am better off, my by own standards, because I have a cow; you are better off, by your standards, because you have three chickens. We're both better off an richer--we created value in our transaction. It's an odd thought, and one that took me quite some time to wrap my head around.
Pyramid schemes don't work because eventually value stops being pumped in at the lower levels. But in an economy it is constantly being pumped in. I work a certain amount each day because it is worth that much money to give up that much of my free time--I feel better off for it, and IBM feel better for utilising my labour. I then spend that money on various goods--I prefer the goods to the money, which I had preferred to my free time, yet the sellers prefer the money to their goods. They in turn use their money to purchase other goods. We all consume our goods (read books, eat food, hang art on the walls &c.) and, desiring more, repeat the cycle. We are all better off than before--no-one loses. It's not a zero-sum game.
But yes, it is really very odd until one grasps it. Can't say that I entirely have, myself.
If we're near saturation point for PC's then we must be super-saturated for stereos, TV's, VCR's, cameras, cars....
It's wonderful the way this stuff lasts forever, always stays in fashios, and magically updates itself to the latest capabilities, isn't it?!
> "Capitalism is the world's largest pyramid scheme"
I can see the next spam wave already..
"That's right, and the great thing about our UNIQUE system it is that it REALLY WORKS! THAT'S RIGHT! YOU TOO CAN EARN BUCKETS OF MONEY BY WORKING THE SYSTEM! BY DOING A FEW SIMPLE THINGS YOU TOO CAN EARN OVER 50,000$ A YEAR!"
"Apply now and we'll send you our FREE information pack, 'GET OFF YOUR FAT BUTT AND FIND A JOB', for only $29.95!"
Any technology which is distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced.
Actually, the birth rate in the USA is below replacement level. In other words, if it weren't for immigration, the population of the USA would be shrinking.
--
Clear, Dark Skies
makes me quite grateful I was born in the USA. :)
-------
CAIMLAS
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
... and most people see fit to simply replace them, rather than have somebody take a look at it and fix it. By the time a little-used machine of today goes caput, it will be so obsolete that it won't be worth trying to fix it.
So, sure, maybe people won't be so thrilled about buying new PCs. But when hard drives crash, CPU fans go out, power supplies bite the dust, and lightning strikes, a lot of people are going to find it worth their while to buy a new PC rather than trying to get their old one fixed, especially if it's a couple years down the road.
Are we going to stop buying cars too? We all know a personal computer is not an end-all investment. Of course, we could all go around surfing the web in our '78 Chevy Malibus if we want to.
Don't cars tend to follow a "Boom-Bust" cycle? At least they used to. The computer industry may be entering a similar phase. Most people buy a computer, keep it for a few years, and buy a new one a couple of years later. If everyone has a computer, they will be buying their machines at the same time and upgrading at the same time. This would lead to a boom-bust cycle for the computer industry with computer sales peaking and slumping every few years.
Does this
Start up companies buy plenty of PCs.
I bet if you asked, "Are you planning on buying a new computer in the next 6 months?" on a Slashdot poll the majority would say yes.
What about schools that need new PCs?
I think that companies that exclusively make PCs (ie. Dell, Compaq, Gateway) may be a little trouble. Lots of buyers buy custom built computers that are made part by part, instead of a nice new Compaq Presario desktop.
Interesting idea though, I think it'll be a little more valid in about 10, 15 years.
BTW, sorry for using "nice" and "Compaq" in the same sentence.
About a year ago at this time, I made a statement, in front of several witnessess...
(This actually led to an interesting argument over text-mode fonts, but that's beside the point.) I was completely serious. I didn't have Linux on my PC yet, I was just using it on my laptop, and X was, in my opinion, completely unnecessary for anything I wanted to do, not to mention the fact that it's incredibly slow to load when I'm using battery power (on airplanes, etc.). But then I found an X application that I couldn't live without.
kcribbage
Yes, the reason I ever started using X regularly was just so that I could play kcribbage. It's like some sort of... fiend in control of my brain. *sigh* I wish I was obsessed with a cool game.
no one ever said that sales would be zero... it said that *growth* would be zero.
This kind of slow down has happened before. It only takes a while for something else to come along.
It's about time for a change. PC's are essentially the same box they were when IBM made it's first; A box with a CRT on it. Granted, that box has gotten better, and so has the CRT, but the improvements have been less extreem and the need to upgrade has declined.
I'm looking for growth in clipboards and PDAs. You know, like the UPS dude lugs around. Those things can get rid of piles of paper. It's not a matter of power, but size and shape.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Can you tell my why sales for other items have not grown any faster than the population? Women's make up, panty hose, automobile sales? There comes a time when the only way to increase sales is to make your product break faster or dependent on another product. Even then your fix is temporary as others will steal your market. Nothing grows forever.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I saw a movie like this once too. All the billboards moved and talked and looked at you. It was cool, and they did it all with tubes and B&W TVs. In the end I think it was zero growth too. That's why they were at war all the time.
Someone told me that Bill Gate's house looked like this, but he used LCDs for his wallpaper. He would like to have such things in everyone's house and is working on a special OS for it. Content will be provided by MPAA, and RIAA, because he knows that we want more than we can think up ourselves. This will be good.
CPU production up 534%. LCD production up 10,000%.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Games are one of the driving forces that have pushed PC's from being monochrome text-based consoles to what we have today. So long as games companies keep demanding more state of the art machines for their games to run on, and so long as people keep wanting to play games (computer games industry was set to make more money than hollywood I believe this year) I think PC sales will still have some legs in 'em. Those folks up in Redmond don't mind jacking up the requirements for their OS to run either, so I can see that as a driving force behind continuing PC sales (for a couple of years more at least :)).
People seem to think that evolution is an intelligent process - that things are evolving towards some abstract ideal rather than adapting to a particular environment. But I'm as clueless as you as to why this should be the case. People seem to follow a sort of reverse Occam's Razor - if something appears to operate in a directed fashion, then it's the product of some sort of intelligent agent. The idea that random effects constrained by a few simple principles can result in highly directed behavior seems incomprehensible to many.
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
I think that articles like this have no purpose but for the authors to play with the stock market.
Perhaps you're right on this one. I just got finished reading about how foolish it is to buy Dell stock right now. From Dell's IPO up until it's peak at in 2000, their stock has gone up 8000%. Do you think they can repeat that? No way. If people are looking for a repeat of 8000% growth, they need their head examined.
However, abroad, there is a massive need for computers.
To a certain extent yes, but keep in mind what exactly the rest of the world is composed of. Do you think there will be overwhelming demand in Africa, China or the Eastern Bloc countries (Russia, it's satellites and former parts of Russia that are now independent) which are now Third World nations? IMO, the demand will be high (ie: everyone wants one), but few can afford one. The rest of the world is primarly composted of Second and Third World nations.
The only part of the world I cannot give an opinion on is Europe. Does anyone have any statistics as to what percentage of people own computers in Europe?
I think that articles like this have no purpose but for the authors to play with the stock market.
Of course in the US sales are declining. As computers stop being ooh-cool-shiny-new-toy objects, and become work tools, they decrease in sales. Their glamour has decreased. However, abroad, there is a massive need for computers. Perhaps the decreases here will decrease prices, as basic economic rules predict, and will make them more attractive to foreign customers.
|/usr/games/fortune
Well, I think the point here is that there are no new people buying computers, since everyone who is going to get one has one. That's not to say that people aren't going to continue to buy new ones, just that there won't be any new customers. Thus 0 market growth. Companies can still sell PC's, but the upward trend will have a finite limit.
Sales aren't decreasing. The rate of GROWTH of sales is decreasing. Big difference. Aside form having no juice to run them, as one post suggests, there are a shitload of folks out there in the big world who have no use for these bloody contraptions. They're too busy planting rice or whatever, or dodging bullets from the local insurrection. I'm always amazed that computers and the net haven't widened horizons as regards the real world out there. The unwired one. The one that 99% of humanity hangs out in. The one that isn't attached to a keyboard and has nothing to do with writing code and trying to convince one of these contrary machines to do something it doesn't want to. Contrary to geek philosophy, the unwired world is a very exciting place to hang out. I'm not sure we do the folks who hang out there a favour by innundating them in beige boxes. What the hell would they do with them? We can afford to avoid reality by immersing ourselves in video games. Those folks miss a minute they starve. Get real.
Mostly, my personal anger over the inability of the market and the gov't to do with the various computing monopolies, of the hardware and software ilk, has led me to drastically curtail my PC purchasing.
I was upgrading or buying a faster PC every several months, but that's over til I see:
a) Microsoft broken up, and wider use of Linux on the desktop;
b) Higher AMD penetration/dual CPU mobos based on "other than intel" technology.
So, I guess it's fair to say that if there's a major setback for m-soft (perhaps accompanied with a major breakthrough for Linux), as well as some dual t-bird mobos, I'd probably chunk down for a $1500 upgrade or so.
But I'm kinda in wait-and-see mode for now, saving my money and investing, etc in case of a industry crash.
Have bought a few hardware-type things -- Linux compatable frame grabber and am in the process of researching a camcorder. Also a electric piano. But all PC related purchases are on hold til the market gains some sanity.
Treatment, not tyranny. End the drug war and free our American POWs.
See my user info for links.
No kidding. Of course PC sales will saturate. In fact, for some segments of the market they already have. I know one guy who is a lawyer. He only uses his PC for word processing. It's a 486 with Windows 3.1 on it. It's all he needs. It's all he'll ever need. He won't buy a new one until this one breaks.
This doesn't mean box makers are going to go out of business. It just means they will become more like ordinary companies. The business will "grow up" and become like RCA, Zenith, or any other TV-set manufacturer was during the 70s and 80s.
There will still be growth in game machines, where hot new graphics are coming out all the time, but even that will reach a saturation point. When the video card can do real-time raytracing at resolutions such that the human eye cannot see pixels, where do you go from there? You don't go anywhere. That's where the card has reached the saturation point. We've obviously got some ways to go there, but when we reach it then video cards become boring commodity products--like pots and pans. When was the last time a frying-pan company made stockholders rich?
So, if you wanna invest in a company with double-digit annual growth, start to think about looking someplace other than software and PC makers. I've got some ideas, but I'm not disclosing.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Computers are becoming faster and cheaper every day while applications that require top-of-the-line systems are few and far between. A computer bought today (or even last year) for $2500 will most likely remain useful for a good deal longer than a computer bought more than a few years ago for the same price.
Computer sales are slowing because of this. The reason people in the U.S. are buying less computers is because they don't need to. Overall system requirements for applications aren't rising at the same rate technology is.
The little startup I worked at bought several PCs each week. Nice, new PCs, for a nice, new company.
... let's face it, a lot of people just buy a computer to do email and surf the web ... and with still most online are navigating on a 28k connection (yeah, 56k modems but it is real rare to get a true connection above 33k ... at least in America ...) ... even when broadband options are available, only a small percentage of people sign up for service - until that happens, net usage on a small pipe really doesn't need all that CPU ...
And if we have to wait for some technician from Q-Worst, baby bells, etc. ... to physically visit each home to install broadband to customers who have no clue, well, it's going to be awhile ... and given the problems and delays that people have experienced with both @home and DSL, it might be a while before all the kinks are worked out ... and broadband includes a "broad" customer base ...
AZspot
Another factor to take into consideration are the people who don't have a concept of speed variation in computer. A computer is a computer to them...a 486 is just as good as a Pentium 800, right? I mean, it's a computer, it can do anything!
Well, some posts seem to grok what's happening, but not all at once.
It's simple, really:
1. What we need/want/desire is faster Internet connections. Once you're beyond 250MHz and have at least 128MB RAM, who cares about processor speed?
2. Games, games, games. Just bought me another Linux game at Pacific Place EBX. It's games that drive computer purchases. I don't need better, faster, more spiffy stuff right now and, even if I did, I'm not buying W2K games, only Mac and Linux games. OK, I did buy The Sims, but I'm weak. So, until they start making high hardware demand games and drivers for Linux, I have no reason to buy new boxen.
3. Linux. Yes, you heard me right, Linux. When I can take all my old boxen and turn them into new computers, why would I want to spend extra bux on new boxen? Besides, I've already got two dual-processor 450MHz PIIs, and I still have lots of space to cram more RAM into those babies.
4. George Wussy Bush. Yup. Look, he just reminds me that Texas (where I was born, at Lackland AFB, unlike the Wussman who didn't even show up to fly jets for two years as an AWOL draft dodger) is where they make all those chip things. And I'm not subsidizing him. Call me crazy, call me vengeful, but until that scary toad is kicked in the behind by the American public, ain't no money of mine going to Texas. Or any firm (like Seibel) that supports that SOB.
So, you probably agree with at least three of my points, right?
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
Yes, sales growth in the U.S. will start to trend toward zero compared to the '90s average of 15-20% oer year. After all, auto sales growth in the U.S. in the long run pegs pretty closely to per capita income increases and population growth; it's otherwise basically static.
No, we're not to that point in the U.S. We're looking at a era where sales growth will seriously decline in dollar terms, and growth in units decline somewhat. Sub-$300 computers (including monitor and printer, with no gimick rebates) are the future of sales growth in the remaining 41% of computerless households. (To switch analogies -- in the mid '80s VCRs were in the $1,500 range, and today they're $99.)
There's no "we" in team, only "me"
Er, it said there'd be a end to sales growth
Well, guess what? Average car sales growth is essentially zero after accounting for population increase and per capita income increase.
There's no "we" in team, only "me"
59% of households have computers. 100% of households would merely means a minnimum of 1 computer for every 3.4ish people (IIRC), because that's the size of the average household. 59% of 1/3.4 equals 17%.
So 20% of the population owns computers; 60% of the population lives in a household where somebody owns a computer.
There's no "we" in team, only "me"
hi all (george here)
well this is real disturbing. part of the problem is that a lot of the people who COULD use computers CAN'T because they don't have any juice (electricity) to run them on. but i look at africa and i see a HUGE untapped market because there are lots of people there but no computers. but see they CAN'T run computer's because they don't have electricity. this is why i believe that the united states should invest heavily in bringing electricity to africa. now don't say that you don't want your tax payer dollars going there, we could have private companies like COMPAQ foot most of the bill, after all they will get all that money back when tribes purchase presarios to track grain usage and other such tribal things.
but this whole computer thing is a REAL PROBLEM. i was watching fox news channel with my wife the other day and this man from the kato institute said that micro soft would go out of business in eight years if electricity was not brought to africa. and since africans generally dont fly kites i don't think they will discover it like ben franklin did (he got hit by lightning.) so we need to BRING it THERE. seriously if average africans got computers they're economy would be much better, and they could afford more food. we know that lots of computers gives a very good economy, look at us in america, we have the best economy ever. in the HISTORY of the planet. so if sally struthers wants to make the problem worse, let her, but we can do much better.
so let's have COMPAQ and IBM and DELL wire africa for electricity, it will be much better, and our high-tech companies won't go bankrupt, that would be bad since many 401 k programs invest in high tech companies and i (george) want to buy a boat when i retire.
-gbd
Who needs the latest GHz PC for this?
The slump in PC sales is a result of hardware performance getting waaaay ahead of software demand... at least for the basic stuff. Yes, I know the Quake freaks will shell out for a new system every 3 months if it gets them one extra FPS, but these are very few. Besides, if you're a Dad and don't want the kids monopolizing your PC with games, what better way than to have an od P133 with 16MB on your desktop? It serves you, not the gamerz d00dz. Heh heh heh. And runs (non-X) Linux just fine.
What a concept. Things that actually matter being given priority over having the next mobile portable wireless e-commerce-enabled global pocket-sized buzzword-integrating dot-com-partner-program-patented iGadget. If not for the despotism, lack of natural resources, and CIA interventions, the third world nations would have passed us up long ago while we were too busy hyping the latest useless product to even take notice.
IBM claimed there was a need for about 10 computers in the world. I've come to realize that they were right. What IBM forgot to take into account is the number of products you can sell to people who don't need them. In the case of the hype-saturated computer industry, that number is huge and constitutes essentially 100% of the business.
As long as there are stupid people, the peecee industry will continue to roll. Ain't no end in sight from where I stand.
The author of the article is NOT talking about SALES of computer going to 0. He is saying that PC SALES GROWTH may goto 0 in 2 years...
Doesn't ANYONE read the damn articles before they post????
What do they do? When the need or desire isn't there, they CREATE the need or desire. So the market is saturated? So what? The only difference is that instead of giving people what they already know that they want or need, you'll have to start convincing them that they need something that they actually don't.
This has been done for CENTURIES by salespeople. It's being done today in radio and TV ads (among other places). Growth in sales of items only stops in one of two conditions as far as I can tell:
#2 is never the case. And we know that #1 isn't the case either.
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
The ultimate computer-telecom revolution will be interactive video access to communications, entertainment and computing everywhere. Whether this is manifested as a computer screen in every room, office, & vehicle, portable video-com devices (ala Earth Final Conflict), or some combination of the two is unknown. There is still a considerable of computing, broadband, and software necessary to be developed.
Humans are basically visual and audio creatures. The current text-still graphics computer interfaces and audio communications devices are substandard.
Having been on the consumer end of the home-pc market for a long time.. I can say...
know how we've always mentioned, when new, faster boxes come out, that part of the reason we need them is becuase the software is getting more bloated? That's been happening at a faster and faster rate as well.
We're at the point where my few year old Cerelon 300A/450 still does me *fine*, and I'm a computer geek. Sure... A PIII is faster.. but for what.. some games? Because that's about it. Sure.. if I was doing renders or other compute intensive tasks, I would want a faster machine... but really. Now they talk P-IV? Gimme a break.
Oh.. and on the business side of things.
Sure, I have a cad guy who wouldn't mind a faster machine.. and some programmers that like instant compiles, but for the most part, nobody *needs* anything faster than the PII/PIII they have now. It will be a couple years before we buy new computers, unless they are application specific boxes, like servers.
Are you saying that everyday needs do not include downloading porn and refreshing slashdot? I don't think so.
--
RumorsDaily
There's a difference between sales growth and profit growth. If you sell 1000 units in both 1999 and 2000, but make a $10k profit in 1999 and $20k profit in 2000, have you grown?
Nor are these companies stupid. Gateway, Compaq, and Dell are all getting into different markets, because they *know* that sales growth of PCs will start to plateau. They've been selling PCs for nearly 20 years. They've grown enough where they can start to look into new markets (CPQ buys Digital, Dell gets into the server market, Gateway gets into the netapps).
While PC sales growth may not increase, don't think the companies are going to go under overnight, or that their stock prices will fall.
-- Ever notice that fast-burning fuse looks exactly the same as slow-burning fuse? I didn't... (Edgar Montrose)
Why would the CIA interveen where there are no natural reaources? Are you calling us stupid?
I'd also like to share some of the credit with others who deserve it. Our former mentors at M.I. 5 and 6, our rivals from the KGB, and some of the newer boys on the block from Cuba, Isreal, South Africa, and lots of other home grown tallent have helped out out all along. While most of these newer groups have concentrated their efforts on domestic affairs, some like Cuba have really shone bright. Think of where the world would be without nearly limitless quantities of cheap Soviet made weapons like the AK-47, munitions and landmines quality made to last for decades. Recognizing the accomplishments of these groups is a matter of profesional pride.
As for that 10 computer quip, do you have any idea how many machines Carnivore alone will take? While it's true that you do not need a computer, we need many. You obviously have no idea of what it takes to run a competent government, but that's OK. Just keep paying your taxes. The less you want the more we can take.
Agent X, masked as twitter for the sake of anonymity.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Sure. And why are you not using a C64 anymore? People get used to the luxuries and start to regard them as necessities. Try to tell you typical Joe Doe computer user to use a text-terminal based editor for his letters, instead of M$ Word. Pay good attential to the look of total incredulity on his/her face. That't exactly the same look you will receive in 10 years if you suggest that a mouse and 1024x768 X screen are perfectly sufficient to get the work done and people don't need VR sets and speech recognition.
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
--Henry Kissinger
Are we going to stop buying cars too? We all know a personal computer is not an end-all investment. Of course, we could all go around surfing the web in our '78 Chevy Malibus if we want to. :D
Slowing down, eventually stopping *growing*.
Although the article is trying to paint a picture of doom and gloom with comments like "No one was shopping for a new computer.",it is actually talking about the growth rate. No where did it mention a reduction in the numbers of computers being sold, rather a lower amount of an increase in the numbers of computer being sold.
Last time I recall seeing the stat's on computer ownership in the USA (which was a month or three ago) it was at around one fifth of the population, approximately 50mil people. Where do the writers of this article come up with the idea that "...the majority of households own personal computers..."? Then again, 50.1% is a majority so I guess it all depends on your interpretation.
-- David Smith
C:\ is the root of all evil
The dominant society's media continue to spew the illusion that everyone -- from the broker to the villager -- is going to make their fortune on the web. But, of course, the Wall Street broker was making money well-before the web became reality, and a Lakota villager is still poor even after a century of "benefiting" from Western technology.
In "Indian Country", I've seen the federal government bring computers into Native American schools. Those same schools lack the electricity to run the computers; the toilets don't flush, and the teacher know nothing about the hardware or software. While the media spews images of broadband access, the kids in those schools are still trying to get the toilet in their house connected to a sewer!
Under the current socio-economic system, there exists a definite limit on how many computers can be sold -- a limit set by the number of people who can actually benefit from the technology.
All about me
As an American, I feel obligated to go out and buy everything that my neighbors have.
..
So far, I own
5 SUVs, 3 hondas (Riced-Out), 10 computers (all Compaq, Acer, and Packard Bell), 2 bags of grass, 75 pellets of mescaline, 5 sheets of high-powered blotter acid, , a salt shaker half-full of cocaine and a whole galaxy of multicolored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers... also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether, and two dozen amyls... oh wait
--
you are not what you own
it's a sig, wtf?
My guess is that the supersaturation point has shifted but the curves remain roughly the same. The presumption of infinite geometric growth is central to most financial planning.
As one friend of mine most sucinctly put it:
"Capitalism is the world's largest pyramid scheme"
`ø,,ø`ø,,ø!
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
But the point is that the market can't grow forever. Even if everybody in the US buys a new computer every year for the rest of their lives, that's zero growth after the first year. It's common sense, of course, that the market can't grow forever. Yet the stock prices for all of these companies were based on the assumption that they would continue to grow for a bazillion years. Which is why Timothy's comment isn't really appropriate. No one is saying that no one else needs a computer. They're saying no one else is buying a computer in the countries these companies operate in.
While yes this is an issue (most people having PCs) -- I believe that (in my experience working in tech-sales and service both) most people will want to purchase more computers as new technologies come out -- people are simply slowing down waiting for more...
on the other hand, how far away are we from people having enough processing power to not want/need to upgrade anymore?
bemis
"dude -- what the fuck does LIL- mean again?!?"
How many times do we have to snicker at some IBM execs quote about the computers that is almost 60 years old. Think about it, IBM didn't say this in '79, but back in the 40's where no one here could even recognize a '40s computer if it fell on their head.
If you think this is funny, try some futurists's sites, you'll fall over in laughter. Or check out what Arthur C. Clarke has written in the past 5 years about the future.