Slashdot Mirror


Tech Shoppers in the UK Ditch Desktop PCs and DVD Players (ofcom.org.uk)

Brits are ditching DVD players and desktop PCs and are increasingly turning to newer technology such as smart TVs and smart watches, Ofcom research has found. From the research: Shoppers in the UK are predicted to spend billions of pounds again this year on Black Friday and Cyber Monday, and much of that is expected to be spent buying tech online. So, Ofcom has crunched the numbers on which tech devices people have been buying in recent years, and which ones they're getting rid of.

Ownership of digital devices such as smart TVs, smart watches and smartphones has grown significantly in recent years, as more people need a constant connection to the internet -- internet users say they spend an average of 24 hours a week online. By contrast, MP3 players, DVD players and desktop computers seem to be falling out of favour as smartphone use continues to grow, particularly for browsing and streaming. Meanwhile, the popularity of tablets and e-readers seems to have peaked. Ownership of both is significantly higher than it was seven years ago, but has levelled out in the last few years.

9 of 123 comments (clear)

  1. The desktop is dying! by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Where have I heard this before? Ahh yes, when it was going to be completely "replaced" by the tablet...

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re: The desktop is dying! by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except it only runs a toy operating system (not even real MacOS) and lacks a filesystem. So the things it can do don't really include real work.

      But if you qualify with 'the things it can do' you might be able to make a case.

    2. Re: The desktop is dying! by goose-incarnated · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A 600 eur iPad Pro from last year, at the things it can do, basically runs circles around most 1000 eur PCs of today.

      I doubt it. My dev environment alone eats up around 16GB, that's even assuming that gcc can run on iOS, and cross-compile for my target, or that eclipse/VS/qtcreator will run on iOS, or that various creation tools (gimp, etc) will run on iOS.

      Tablets are not toys because of the hardware, they are toys because they are content-consumption only devices. Those of us who produce more content than we consume won't use tablets to do the production.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    3. Re:The desktop is dying! by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Uhhhh did anybody even bother to see WHAT KIND of desktops they are offering this year? I did because my main PC is getting a bit long in the tooth and was looking to see if there was any deals....ugh.

      We're talking AMD A9s, seventh gen Core I3s, "gaming PCs" with FX-6300 CPUs....noticing a pattern here? Its all old shit they want to get out the warehouse and they are wanting stupid money for those! Hell the one offering the "gaming PC" (I can't remember if it was Worst Buy or Wally World) wanted nearly $400 USD...for an FX-6300 and Geforce GT 710! That's a CPU from 6 fricking years ago in a socket that AMD no longer supports!

      So no shit Sherlock nobody is buying the desktops this run, because what they are offering is overpriced underpowered crap!

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    4. Re: The desktop is dying! by goose-incarnated · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You also will notbuy your PC at that store or Best Buy and spend mire than average on it.

      My desktop is a 2nd-gen i7 with 16GB of ram, cost around $250 when I bought it last year, and yet it will still do more than a top of the range tablet bought now, mostly because the tablet is almost incapable of being used to produce content.

      The tablet can't replace the desktop, because the desktop is used for a much more demanding class of functionality (content-production). The tablet is equivalent to a TV, the desktop is equivalent to a lathe.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  2. No they don't "ditch" them! They keep them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because nowadays, there's barely a point in replacing them.
    A 6 year old PC can still play modern games. And games used to be the only thing left that required non-professionals to follow the expensive upgrade cycle.

    PCs just are what they always were: A tool for universal data processing.
    It's not their fault they were wasted on useless consumer blobs running fixed-function modules ("app[lication]s") to waste their lives.

    But of course the money media must keep up the state that anything but by-definition-unsustainable exponentially exponential growing growth is the devil, and the stable balance of infinitely recycling resources that all surviving things in the universe have in common literally means literal death for being Literally Hitler(TM). Literally. ... /s
    As that's the only way they can keep leeching on society, by making us work, without working themselves.

  3. Upgrading Has Little "Bang For Buck" Ratio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The "Bang for buck" ratio has deteriorated.

    ie:

    8086 -> 80286 -> good BFBR "Bang For Buck Ratio"
    80286 -> 80386 -> good BFBR
    80386 -> 80486 -> excellent BFBR [ VESA local bus, faster ram ]
    80486 -> pentium -> good BFBR [ pci bus, more ram, much faster speeds, MMX ]
    Pentium -> Pentium 4 -> good BFBR [ pcie, more ram, much faster speeds, better video cards, etc ]
    Pentium 4 - > Quad Core or Core2 - > excellent BFBR [ pcie, next gen, DDR3/DDR2 memory, much better cores, and more of them ]

    Now, we are in the era where we:

    -Add slightly faster ram, at the cost of latency - shitty BFBR
    -Add slightly faster video cards, at a very large cost - shitty BFBR
    -Add slightly faster CPUs, at an obscence cost -- very shitty BFBR

    so the BFBR has decreased, where you can spend another $1000, to get 10-15% better performance, measured in "seconds" for most tasks, or less, or a few more FPS, which anything above 30 would be unnoticeable.

    spend $100, get an SSD, and make it feel like a new system.
    Spend $1000, get a slight performance boost.

    I'm still using a 2600k, with 16gb, with a 7770HD video card, I see no reason to upgrade.

  4. Re:At home it mostly is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...that's also because when you buy a PC? You don't need to buy another for several years, and just swapping in the newest no-extra-power-needed graphics card is a huge performance bump whenever the existing GPU gets sluggish. When a GPU that can be slapped into any existing WalMart beige box is under $200 and can play even the newest games decently? Folks aren't dropping big coin on a whole new system.

    - WolfWings, too lazy to login to /. in way too long.

  5. Not ditching, just not replacing by Going_Digital · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The technology in desktop computers is mature, it is no longer developing at the break neck speed it once was. It wasn't long ago when once a system was 3 years old in seemed ancient and slow by comparison to the latest model. Today however your 3 year old system is still perfectly good and you would hardly notice any difference in performance if you replaced it today, so why bother?

    Everything has this cycle, where it gets to the point that what you already have is good enough, and further small tweaks do not justify the cost of replacing.