Where this causes me serious nerd rage is that to many people, “PC” in the sense of “IBM PC-compatible” seems to mean Windows, specifically. Which, for sales of software, is a quite foolish assumption to make. If I buy a game for “PC”, and try to use it on my PC which is running Linux (GNU, etc, yada) then it is probably not going to work. Software is offered for a specific operating system, and this needs to be explicitly named.
It’s almost as if people hate saying “Windows” for some reason… But it’s what I do. I’ve got a few different systems. When people brag about PC games I often brag harder about how much better Windows games are than PC, which causes some head-scratching to occur. Will it work on my PC running Linux? My PC running MacOS? My PC running CP/M? How about my server running Windows?
That’s a very open/general question. If I had to relate it to my previous comment I would distinguish between “the systems which actual computer science is done on” and “some crappy tank which was marketed as a scientific computer”. The 1620 was the tablet of it’s day! It was stripped-down, less costly, and less functional. But offered as being mostly “good enough”.
Walled gardens are quite limited when one needs to design beyond current limitations to do what is not currently possible and yield The Next Big Thing. Also, another reason why tablet and phone I/O was sacrificed was because people already had systems which were capable of interfacing with everything else. So this allowed them to make the tablets even yet smaller and cheaper. So, if I don’t have control over the file system, or the I/O, it’s just not very practical, as I see it.
Now that I earn a crust selling computers and other technological whizzbangs, I find myself trying to steer customers away from tablets. The phrase, “I want something to be productive with” indicates you want a netbook or a laptop, or even (*gasp!*) a desktop. Tablets are not well designed for flexibility or prolonged intensive use, and are pricey to boot. But everyone insists that what they want is a tablet and at the end of the day, I make the same amount of money regardless of what they buy.
I’m not even anti-tablet. I have a Kindle Fire, which is great for what I use it for. Even if it is unnecessarily hamstrung by a very limited app ecosystem, if e-books aren’t a big part of why you have it, buy something else. Maybe even then. Tablets are excellent at two things:
Leisure use. Games, book reading, occasional note jotting, Skype, social media play, etc.
Specialized enterprise use. Meter reading, order entry, inventory… anything where cracking open a laptop is unnecessarily cumbersome and where specialized industry hardware is more expensive than tablet hardware and software.
ETA: Let us not forget the neglected, but still extant role of the “desktop replacement” laptop. Big, unwieldy things that are designed for minimal shuttling around, and can pack a decent computational punch. Anyone who is essentially using a laptop as a primary home desktop device, should have bought one of these, instead of whatever wafer-thin extravagance they likely have.
Which is probably overkill for most users. Although lately I’ve been recommending Apple to certain low-power PC users who are… “intellectually prone” (not trying to be insulting, a lot of people are ignorant about computer maintenance) to PC slowdowns over time and can afford the system.
To be fair, although the term “personal computer” existed, desktop computers before the IBM PC were generally called “microcomputers” (to emphasize that they were even smaller than the refrigerator-sized “minicomputers”) or “home computers” (because, wow, you could actually have one in your home).
Windows 10 is right around the corner. It wouldn’t surprise me if people are holding off to buy PCs that have it already installed. That’s what my spouse is doing.
I’ll wait for people to figure out 10’s teething problems before I upgrade. so far, what I’ve heard is positive, but I always hold off upgrading when it comes to Windows. I’m glad they’re getting rid of (or otherwise de-emphasizing) Metro, and I’m glad I never used Windows 8, after already suffering through Vista.
I didn’t mind Vista really. Okay it had some issues that did get fixed after sp2, but then I remember all the pain and joy of the early XP days so I took it with a grain of salt. I am guessing win7 was more of a vista.2 or something but it was quite a bit nicer on the UI and the taskbar was a great enhancement. Win8 just didn’t wow me and the start screen I found it kinda jarring for a desktop user and had no reason to update despite all the good I heard from my tech friends that did use it. Win10 looks like they got their act together for a desktop and I will happily upgrade for free when it is available.
I’ve heard this distinction, referring to programable computers
Mainframe-- smallest form factor obtainable with vacuum tube technology. example
MiniComputer-- smallest form factor obtainable with transisters example
Microcomputer-- smallest forn factor obtainable with integrated circuits. example
ETA: Let us not forget the neglected, but still extant role of the “desktop replacement” laptop. Big, unwieldy things that are designed for minimal shuttling around, and can pack a decent computational punch.
Mine is like that–quad-core i7 processor, two drives (ssd and hd!), nvidia video, etc. But it is 13", so it still fairly portable. But packing all that into 13" means it’s not so great on battery life and runs kinda hot.
No, I think the ‘PC’ will be around for a good while yet. Now there are more choices of form and portability, but I don’t think that means everyone is going to give up using the full-featured machine, just yet. Will that mean that the market for the PC is going to change some, yes, it does.
Thats more or less what I have settled on as I have come to want the screen real estate. On my 2nd 17" laptop now. i5 and nvidia and I tend to see it more as easily movable vs. portable and my long fingers really appreciate the bigger keyboard when I am using it away from the desk it normally sits at.
The notion that the PC is dying is ridiculous. The PC is going to do the tasks that require a PC, for many people, for a long time. Those tasks are basically anything related to controlling hardware, serving up data, designing stuff, writing stuff, drawing stuff, etc. Google uses a lot of PCs.
Heck, I even use a PC to surf the web, as it’s a much more pleasant experience than using a tiny touchscreen.
Call me when Gartner predicts the death of the tablet.
