Slashdot Mirror
Apple Devices To Reach Parity With Windows PCs In 2014
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Horace Dediu writes at Aymco that in 2013 there were 18.8 times more Windows PCs sold than Macs, a reduction in the Windows advantage from about 19.8x in 2012. But the bigger story is how Apple's mobile platform including iOS devices has nearly reached the sales volume of Windows. In 2013 there were only 1.18 more Windows PCs than Apple devices sold. Odds are that in 2014 Apple and Windows will be at parity. Dediu says that the Windows advantage itself came from the way computing was purchased in the period of its ascent in the 1980s and 1990s 'when computing platform decisions were made first by companies then by developers and later by individuals who took their cues from what standards were already established. As these decisions created network effects, the cycle repeated and the majority platform strengthened.' There was concentration in decision making in the 80s so a platform could win by convincing 500 individuals who had the authority (as CIOs) to impose through fiat a standard on the centers of gravity of purchasing power. Today, with mobile products there are billions of decision makers. and the decision making process for buying computers, which began with large companies IT departments making decisions with multi-year horizons, has changed to billions of individuals making decisions with no horizons. Companies have become the laggards and individuals the early adopters of technology. 'Ultimately, it was the removal of the intermediary between buyer and beneficiary which dissolved Microsoft's power over the purchase decision,' concludes Dediu. 'The computer has become personal not just in the sense of how it's used but in the sense of how it's owned.' Finally, all the above is almost moot, given the rise of Android, something that is beating both Cupertino and Redmond alike."
There are tons of PC's in any corporation and home.
The difference is they run XP still and are 8 years old and are therefore not counted. I do not believe there is an IPAD for every corporate employee.
http://saveie6.com/
Let Apple and Microsoft fight over who is a distant number 2. When sales are 3x, the installed base converts pretty quickly.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
ABCco writes that the number of apples and oranges sold in 2014 will also reach parity!
captcha: counters
They're comparing Iphones to PCs? How is this parity?
Investment analysts have noticed for quite some time that Apple's iphone has a "halo effect." Specifically, people who buy iphones are more likely to buy Macs (and ipads) in the future. And apple is quite good at this sort of turnover.
So the news here is not that so many iphones are sold. The news is that this may indicate the status of Mac vs. PC in the future.
Apple apparently sold around 260M devices in 2013.
I can't find a full year for Samsung, but they sold 117M phones in Q3 alone.
Q1: 64M
Q2: 70M
Q3: 117M
That's 251M in just 3 quarters. Phones only, no tablets, no laptops.
Apple sales include Mac, iPods, iPhones and iPads.
PCs have a longer lifespan, they are way overpowered for what most people use them for. I have a five year old 3GHz 64-bit AMD box. It is still quite usable, I upgraded the video card recently, about $150, and it is still quite usable for gaming. I have no compelling reason to replace this five year old PC.
In contrast every two years I can get an iPhone upgrade for free with a two year contract, sure its not the latest generation hardware but its a free hardware upgrade. Or I can splurge and spend $200 every two years and get the latest generation hardware.
You can't directly compare PC vs phone sales if PCs are on a 6+ year purchase cycle and phones are on a 2 year purchase cycle. Keep in mind that these are not competing devices, they are complementary devices. Most people are going to own and use both PCs and phones.
Tablets muddy the waters a little but they are still mostly complementary devices. Not many PC users can switch completely to tablets.
Apple "devices"? So they're including iPods and phones in this? lol
Apple marketing at its best.
since were comparing the entire apple product line to one of microsofts, I think its only fair to toss in the second most popular MS product line out there and see how those numbers add up
Loads of reviews have been written about Windows 8. Some loved it. Some hated it. But they all say the same thing: Windows 8 will require a major retraining for Windows users and there doesn't seem to be some great big advantage for all the relearning, particularly for business users. If Windows 9 retains the Metro interface then Microsoft really is doomed.
Sunspider scores for the iphone 5S and Note 3 are nearly identical to the Core 2 Duo, remember Conroe is 7.5 years or 5 Moore generations ago.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Yes, because a lot of PC users do nothing more than facebook and email... Many people bought them simply because they were the only or cheapest way to access the limited functions of the internet that they make use of.
But for these people an ipad is actually a far superior device, they don't have to worry about malware infections or having to manually update a bunch of different software, or maintaining a software firewall, or running av scans, or any of that junk.
PCs were never "ready for the desktop", they were used because there was no better alternative. Now that better alternatives are available, users are using them.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Way to go, you've published another bullshit article about the end of something. By that rationale, I should be able to say something like "the number of wrist watches in the world are far more than apple devices". Or, for that matter, "the number of actual apples (fruit) in the world are far more than apple devices". Please keep this bullshit off of slashdot!
Move sig!
That's the total to date over years....
Or about the same as something like a month or two of iOS sales.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
My Nexus 5 smartphone is a computer. Its specs are right up there with a laptop in every way. It has 2 office suites installed on it, and I can and do use external displays, Bluetooth mouse and keyboard with it. It also goes with me everywhere. A computer can't get much more personal than that until they start implanting them. It is a personal computer and I would have no problem using this setup to work all day.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
If you look at Betamax it was regarded as being a bit better than VHS but was less widely licensed. Betamax started off with almost all of the market but gradually lost it because Betamax machines tended to be expensive.
I'd say the analogy is pretty good. High end but proprietary system gradually loses market share to more open, cheaper competitor.
You can buy a very good, cheap Android handset from one of the zillions of Android OEMS. That enables Android to gain market share amongst people who can't afford a more expensive iPhone.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Actually that's also how the PC won over the Apple computer: First, by demand of IBM, there were two manufacturers of the processor, enabling competition on the processor side (that's ultimately why now the x86-based architecture is dominant). Second, the PC design was open (although that was only because in the beginning, IBM didn't really believe in the PC), so there was competition also in the PCs themselves.
Sunspider score? That's more to do with improving Javascript engines than a better CPU! The Note 3's CPU is apparently capable of 930 MFLOPS, while even the lowest end E6300 Core 2 Duo can get 8.8 GFLOPS.
If you count GPU performance then the iPhone 5s has 76.8GFlops, but then consumer graphics cards were up to 1TFlop by 2009.
Take a look at T-Mobile. Pay full price for the phone, get the service at 1/4th off.
Best Slashdot Co
Second, the PC design was open (although that was only because in the beginning, IBM didn't really believe in the PC), so there was competition also in the PCs themselves.
False. The original IBM PC design was NOT open. Other companies reverse engineered the BIOS and created 'clones' - hence the term 'PC clone'. Some early clones had hardware compatibility issues with the original IBM PC design.
The BIOS was "open" in that anyone could read it. The Technical Reference Manual included a source listing. It was copyrighted, however, and so could not be used in clones.