Slashdot Mirror
Dell's Marketshare Decline Due to Intel?
timeOday writes "News.com reports that Dell's PC sales are growing more slowly than the overall PC market for the first time on record. Gartner's Charles Smulders blames Dell's decline on their allegiance to Intel, and cites Hewlett Packard's embrace of AMD as a key to their growing sales. Can Dell continue to shun AMD, or is a breakthrough imminent for the #2 chipmaker?"
Is it really Dell's allegiance to Intel, or is it market saturation?
Why gamers don't take them seriously. Hopefully they'll be content to let Alienware do their thing and won't try and foist Intel on them.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
Could it be because Dell sucks and people are sick and tired of calling tech support only to speak with someone they can barely understand from India who claims his name is "Bill".
The problem here is Intel doesn't have a processor that the public views as solid and powerful. They have a processor that fits that description (dual core mobile), but they try to push P4s at people instead.
Dell is only failing because they expect Intel to do all their work for them. If they want people to get back on board they'll have to convince them that their systems perform well.
Their models are so unlinked to the processors that they carry that this will be a disaster for dell to handle simply because they have a stupid branding scheme. Moving to AMD wont help dell, but solidifying their position will.
This whole summary is based on a false premise. I for one think it's absolutely absurd to suggest that following Hewlett Packard's business plan is a good idea. If you do that everyone will just think you're the other HP.
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
Dell has long been the leader because they have been able to ship easily configurable PCs quickly and dependably to their customers. Now anyone can do that. They used to offer premium discounts on their PCs. Now anyone can do that.
Dell has always used very marginal hardware in several levels of their lineup. Perhaps this is what has caught up with them. Another company who used to sell well until their reputation caught up with them was Packard Bell. If you keep shipping inferior product, at some point you will get called on it.
Now, does it hurt that they need to keep prices high in order to offer genuine Intel Inside PCs? You bet. But that's just a straw on the camel's back. It was the heavy load that broke the camel in the first place.
I believe it has more to do with Dells ailing reputation than it does not sticking to intel. The fact is the *quality* that was once associated with Dell isn't really there, and hasn't been for a long time, and consumers are wising up to this. Plus, there is some good competition out there for dell in the low end computer market. emachines, for example.
It almost seems like an unnatural progression but it is possible.
Back in the 8088s - 286 days IBM was King of the PCs By the 386-486 Gateway Became king then Pentium Dell took over. It wasn't because of price At the time each respective vender was priced a bit more the the rest. Then after they became king of the mountain the only way they could still compete (More) is by price shaving which lowered its quality so The next guy came in selling a higher quality product at a slightly higher price and the customers were happy with it and by word of mouth they became #1.
I remember people going I am going to get a Gateway because I heard they are reliable for their 486. Then by 1999 I hear people go Next Time I am going to get a Dell because this Gateway is a piece of crap (after having to swap 3 drives and a motherboard) In a year. Now Dells quality is getting more and more shaky and their support is getting more cheap. So who will be the next Dell? Right now the best I am hearing that Apple Computers while may cost a bit more are of better quality and with the Intel Chips you can put windows on it as a fail safe emotional device. But It could also be HP/Compaq turn if they get on the Gun and made better PCs. I originally had AlienWare as the next Dell but Dell just bought them so who knows. But I don't think AMD has anything to do with it, it is about Quality not manufactures.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Dude, no one's getting a Dell.
I understand that Dell would like you to simply replace the box more often, that's in their own interest. But it's in my own interest not to recommend Dell to people to whom I provide "informal" tech support.
I am not a crackpot.
Dell is no exception. Indeed, I think compared to many other vendors they are not that bad in terms of actual hardware. Their support on the other hand is absolutely horrible. I have had several customers who have had to order replacement parts and it is a pain. I can expect to spend on hour on the phone to order a replacement Windows CD or a heat sink retention assembly. That time gets billed to my customers. Parts replacement up until recently was handled in the US but that too has been offshored to India.
Of course hardware replacement is the exception rather than the rule, so generally, I am still comfortable recommending Dell with the caveat that they are better to pay for my support services than try to call Dell.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
As a fairly well-known technician hereabouts, I'm often asked for advice about purchasing systems, particularly laptops, etc.
Back in the day, I might have recommended Dell. Their laptops were fairly well features, reliable, and competetively priced. Note that the AMD/Intel difference might place into the last factor nowadays...
Anyhow, my more recent experience with Dell has been just as indicated: they've ridden their previously decent reputation for awhile but now their crappy call-centres, incompatible parts, and not-so-great quality is starting to bite them. Dell computers are getting more and more cheap nowadays, and that's in quality as well as price.
Now let's look at some of the others:
- IBM systems (up until Lenovo, who I don't have too much experience with recently) are generally reliable but less-featured (esp with the small HDD sizes)... still I'd say they are or were good for the office types who wanted a system that would keep on ticking.
- I haven't had many problems with Toshiba laptops, other than the gazillion little tray icons that the have loading at startup to control the touchpad/wireless/burner/etc settings. I turn most of the unnecessary ones off though, and lots of laptops have 'em... so no biggy. The newer laptops seem a bit more thin/plasticy though so I'll be keeping an eye on them, but they've been good so far other than a few here at the office that have been shitkicked (big big scuffing marks).
- HP: Well, I'm using one now. I've got one at home. The home model (ZD7000) has a built-in defect wherein it doesn't like having two sticks of RAM in with high-memory graphics/etc applications (spontaneous reboots). Not great, but that's the only model where I've seen that issue and haggling with HP eventually scored me a free 1GB stick of RAM for that laptop. It works fine for me, and despite being lugged around regularly it's been durable. My office-style work compaq (NX8220) aside from giving me nightmares configuring the ATI graphics card, has been both reliable and durable as well. AMD64 processors in the newer compaqs (and me being a linux user) scores personal points and recommendations for other linux users (such as at work), but not recommendations for the windows users. Compaq laptops also were known to be not great in quality before, but that seems to have quite improved with HP making them.
- Acer: You get what you pay for. Acer's have quite a lot of features for your buck. I've also seen generations spanning three years that had consistant power unit/modulator issues, and quite a few with screen burnout. However, I might add that I do have a (non-laptop) Acer LCD at home, and it's holding up nicely, so maybe they're improving in that area... however the plasticy feel and the rumours I've heard about HDD burnout make me tend to say "whatever you get, try to avoid Acer" to most people who ask advice.
- Sony: When you buy Sony, you're buying a brandname. And proprietary parts. And a sinking brandname. Overpriced and underperforming are usually two good words
Now, back to desktops. I haven't seen too many Dells explode lately but when I do look in them I find relatively cheap parts (motherboard) and massive compatability issues with standard parts. Floppy drives won't fit properly behind the happy little Dell bezels, power supplies can be funk or custom, and sometimes even PCI/etc cards don't seem to go in right. Sure, you can buy a cheap Dell machine, but upgrading or adding/repairing any parts is oftimes a major pain.
I wouldn't actively recommend against Dell, but I'd still advise caution to potential Dell buyers, and that's a step down from the days when I happily promoted how my little Dell laptops kept on kickin' (hell, some of the older P-II era ones are outlasting the more current gens)
You can on