Slashdot Mirror
IBM To Leave The Desktop?
Matey-O writes "John C. Dvorak's got an interesting article on IBM's behavior towards desktop PCs of late. In short, aside from the profitable laptop sales, their desktop sales lost the company roughly $1B in a serioulsy UP market. Showing no interest in the 20 year anniversary of the desktop, it looks like IBM wants to get out of the industry it effectively started. " Granted, the article is extreme conjecture, but it's still an interesting thought - the Thinkpad group, tho', rocks.
I really like the Thinkpads and some of their desktop machines. I think IBM PCs will always have that image problem that they are expensive and underperforming, regardless of their true merits.
:)
It's a Dell/Compaq world for PCs at the moment. They're cheap, come with Winprinters, winmodems, built in audio, built in ethernet, and crappy support with crappy drivers. Our company just bought ~100 Dell Optiplexes, and they are horrible, horrible performance, horrible price, and junky hardware.
Say what you want about IBM's products, but their support is awesome.
No matter what happens though, IBM keyboards are the best ever made.
The company has not been a leader with its desktop machines, and appears to lose money on them. Rumors persist that IBM will end this aspect of its business.
They've really never dominated the PC industry once the clones entered.
They make great servers, microcomputers, mainframes, and good desktops, but the stuff is expensive.
Personally, I don't like the NetVista line at all.
We had PC 300 GL's in school, they were great.
I've got 2 Netfinity servers here at work, can't complain about them, or IBM's service support one bit. I'd buy IBM desktops if we weren't currently entrenched in Dell. (which I have no problem with either)
They need to embrace Linux, even more than they do now. Maybe their own distro, one that works perfect with ThinkPads and a new line of PowerPC machines!
~~~~~
Salmon, mang!
Well, I'd say almost all the PC's on the market are really ugly. Dell has a few decent looking cases, so does Sony, but most of the crap out there looks too funny.
You'd figure a big company like Dell (IBM could, but they'd be the last) would hire an art department like the geniuses at Apple have.
I guess you can't have you cake and eat it too.
You're right - most cases look VERY stupid next to a nice G4 tower - but you have to consider the advantage that Apple has in that arena - they can redesign hardware around a case without too many difficulties. The reverse is also true - they can design new, interesting cases around their hardware. They can do these things because they control the entire manufacturing process (well, most of it). Compaq, HP, Dell, and the other PC vendors don't really have this advantage. Their goal is to make cheap PC's that look good. To keep them cheap, they can't do too much dicking around with the case, because they might end up having to redesign hardware. And then the additional cost comes in, immediately placing them behind the competition. Apple doesn't have this type of competition in the traditional sense. People who buy Apple desktops are looking to buy an Apple desktop - and only one vendor makes Apple desktops. PC buyers have a number of vendors to choose from, all of whom are trying to undercut the others' prices. So the best they can do is sell a slightly-glitzed-up ATX case that looks a little better to "most people." Anything more would be overkill (at least to their marketing departments).
IBM's key business focus is on services. When it got into the desktop PC market some 20 years ago, it got in by accident not knowing what the result would be.
In addition, many companies go down the drain simply because they keep beating on a dead horse (their product) hoping that it will come back to life and win the race. IBM doesn't see it like that -- it will let go of failing business and move on.
Karma stuck at 50? Add 2-5 inches.. err.. 2-5x Karmas Count to your pen1es.. err.. Karma all naturally and private
Say what you want about Dvorak, but his 'Inside Track' column was where I first heard about (among other things):
1) Touchpads
2) DVDs
3) GMR Hard Drives
4) Cheap laser LEDs
If it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.
I think IBM's biggest screw up was their proprietary desktops. The PS/2s, the Aptivas... weird hardware, high prices. Compaq/Gateway/Dell are desktop companies. They know how to make a buck in that market. Remember back in 1994 when you could buy an IBM desktop with OS/2 and Dell/Gateway/Compaq with Windows 95? They bundled a failing OS (OS/2 rocks, M$ marketdroids made it fail) into a proprietary box and charged more money. I'm not a genius, but it's pretty simple to see how IBM lost their desktop market.
Still, Netfinity servers, Thinkpad notebooks, and their midrange (AS/400, S/390) servers rock. IBM knows that's where their money is, and they do a great job at it.
There is no reasonable defense against an idiot with an agenda
:wq
How these columnists just wet themselves in the rush to declare something "dead?"
This is the same columnist who used to anchor the group of "Bob the office guy" columnists at PC Magazine with gems like "if you don't have a 21-inch monitor, then your PC is worthless."
Easy to say when all your hardware is comped there, Sparky. How about a column or two about something OTHER than how great it would be if we could just hook all these neat colorful high-tech little icons together and make a new enterprise application? Can't point and click your way through orbital mechanics, can you? Oops, there's another blue screen. Better upgrade Norton and Dr. Watson!
I always got the feeling that the constant pounding of the upgrade drum over there was really just so they could get a new "sleek" desktops of icons to click. This column is no different.
I'm sure IBM will close everything down now and go back to marketing something that columnists don't understand so they don't have to read "Is X dead yet?" "Time for X to go?" "X in 2002: What to expect" on every magazine cover.
X is dead, therefore you should buy Y. Same article, different nouns. Yawn.
If IBM would stop trying to sell PCs based soley on the name 'IBM' and start selling based on the performance of the PC itself, maybe more people would buy one.
In Vancouver BC, Canada, an IBM Netvista with a CELERON 800 (?), 128MB of SDRAM, 20GB HD, ONBOARD Video (eeew) and several useless "features" like a V.90 modem, can cost around $1999.00 CAD! (That's like $999 USD)
Meanwhile, a "clone" PC at any local outlet: PIII 1100, 256MB SDRAM, 40GB HD, 150W 2.1 Sound, 10/100 NIC, 32MB DDR Video Card, etc... costs $780 CAD ($390 USD).
It's not like the IBM PC is any more reliable, after all, BOTH PCs come with WinXP installed?
I don't care if they invented the PC, doesn't mean anyone with half a noodle would pay $1999 for a freaking CELERON!
"You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake."...Tyler Durden
Why is IBM getting out of the PC business?
No one said they are. It's just speculation about profits and the lack there of.
In the business of building computers, people more often look at the price than what hardware/software it comes with.
Some look for Mhz of processor (debate AMD vs. Intel clock speeds in your mind), some look for price, and I sware some look at the day of the week, flip a coin, add in the ASCII value of the first letter of their mother's maden name and pick that to be the system at the store they select (counting from the first system they see of course).
Of course you can sell a decent PC for , but don't expect a hardware modem, or non-hard wired video and sound.
It's just a quality vs. price debate and with people possibly starting to get the idea of a throw away (donate away, whatever) PC that lasts a little while who needs the support IBM provides?
With IBM's recent interest in Linux, I don't think it would make sense for them to back out of the desktop market. They have the ability to overthrow Microsoft.
With the usual MS crap being sold at increasingly ridiculous prices, everyone is looking for an alternative to Windows. Linux is the obvious answer, but the problem remains that not enough people, and not the right people take it seriously.
Managers don't feel comfortable about switching their whole systems over to a "free" OS. They like to have a big name like Microsoft to back their software. This is exactly where IBM comes in. They've got the big name that the PHB's like, and they've got the resources to create a distro that works. One that's guaranteed to work with their hardware, and in concert with their servers and laptops. Its a total solution.
As for the home desktop user who also wants to get away from MS, it offers the same benefits. A linux distro that can come preloaded, is guaranteed not to conflict with the hardware and has great tech-support. Plus with a name like IBM behind it, and enough homogenous linux machines out there, some of the major software and hardware developers might start to take linux seriously as well.
The best part of it all, is that this is the perfect beginning to the demise of Microsft. They've set the stage with their recent moves for people to look elsewhere. Now IBM just needs to slip into that gap and give everyone exactly what they're looking for.
--
"Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." - Homer Simpson [1F10]
Dvorak's right; IBM makes very little money on PC's, perhaps is even loosing money, when looked at by itself. That's why they no longer sell to people through office stores and so on. But IBM has a services/solutions arm, and having a PC division allows the services division to sell complete IBM solutions, which is very profitible. So, the moral here is to look at things from a company point of view, not at individual divisions.
Note, I work for IBM, but have no real connection to the PC division, though I do think my ThinkPad rocks. The above is conjecture.
Silly signature limit . . .
while $66 Million is a large amount to me personally, from a corporate point of view, esp the Global 2000, it's lunch money....
and Apple is a small, boutique computer maker, that had gone down from nearly $10 billion in sales to nearly $1 billion in sales....if the iMac hadn't come along when it did??????
(keep the flames to yourself, i support both Apple and wider PC choice by buying them...i'v bought (just for my personal business) 6 in the last 12 months...)
what exactly can Apple do with the $66 million?
is it enough to start a whole bunch of R&D programs into Natural Language or Data Mining?
maybe a few small R&D programs could be started with that money, but what do you do about bonuses for your best workers, rebates to your best channel partners, R&D into improving current generation products, cash payments to Motorola for G5 production, etc, etc.
Blue makes THE VAST MAJORITY OF ITS ****PROFITIBILITY**** on SERVICES...it's estimated by industry insiders that Blue lost ***20 billion dollars*** on OS/2 alone (though they won't admit to more than 10-15 billions lost), and more billions were lost on the MCA-PS/2 desktops
about 3 years ago, there had been a push from Global Services inside Blue to dump ALL the h/w (except big iron) and just concentrate on their highly profitiable services and consulting efforts...
the ThinkPad line was restored to prove that they could do it, (i've owned 3 in a row, 770ED, 770Z and an A22P, they ROCK) they've restored their rep in laptops and now many inside Blue want to move on...as seen by IBM's really strong $$$$$ committment to LINUX and Java....
the Wintel PC, from the standpoint of the much debated ***innovation*** is D-E-A-D...that doesn't mean that many, many billions more won't be sold, but each year the margins will get thinner and thinner as the PC falls into the "home appliances" category...with appropriate accompanying (much, much lower) commodity hardware margins
that's why the Wintel Boyz are pushing the upcoming Tablet PC so hard, to try to maintain their eroding margins on CPU's (i owned the original Tablet PC, the Grid Convertible, even if the thing had worked as designed, it's one of those ideas that look better on paper, it's a niche machine design, and will stay that way, all marketing hype aside)
another view on Apple's 66 million dollars profit...if the story is true (about a one billion dollar loss for ibm on PC desktops last year)....
IBM lost ***FIFTEEN TIMES AS MUCH MONEY**** in one year as Apple made, and for IBM, the loss wasn't even noticeably in either their stock values/market cap or overall analysts' buy recommendations
Ten quid, she's so easy to blind. And not a word is spoken...
You know, just a thought, but, maybe IBM would be making alot more money on their desktop PC's if they hadn't taken there desktop PC's out of the stores and decided to only sell them online. Seems to me it's hard for someone to buy a computer online when they don't have a computer to begin with.
---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"