Desktop PCs and the Windows desktop: Endangered species?

waltc said:

Heh... I enjoyed your sarcasm! Yep, the PC-desktop peripherals business is through the roof...as one can see just by looking at motherboards, ram, PSUs, GPUs and CPUs sold separately through Amazon...dozens and dozens of product pages, and Amazon is merely a single source.

This number is actually much smaller than it used to be... but that's really beside the point.. Unless you can point to actual sales figures showing a strong growing trend, then it's a pointless argument.

waltc said:

This is an old thread, I saw...Intel just the other day reported record revenues and said the lion's share of them came from its PC chips and other strictly PC-related products...and they've said their PC business is booming. Of course it is...cell-phones can't do 1/10th of what average PCs can do and touch-tablets can barely do 1/5th of what a decent PC can do in terms of hardware, application, and raw performance support.

Many so-called "touch tablets" are just as powerful as desktops, and fully capable of everything the average desktops can do, but the average desktops don't have touch or pen capabilities, can't be taken along with you when you leave, can't be used on the couch or on the train.

While it's absolutely true that a top end desktop PC can't match a portable device, because a portable device has power savings requirements, among others, only a small percentage of people actually *NEED* a top end desktop PC, or could even benefit from one. While a much larger percentage of people can benefit from mobility. (probably not your standard data entry clerk, or call center agent, but most office workers).

It's a complete cop-out to argue that Desktops can't be replaced by mobile devices because some tiny fraction of users need top end desktop performance. True for that small percentage, but not true for most anyone else.

Intel sells chips, yes PC chips for tablets and laptops... not just desktops. So yeah, their business is booming. Just not for desktops. The sales numbers don't lie... Desktop PC sales are sinking like rock.

waltc said:

The other devices generally are not user serviceable and upgradable as is the very, very consumer-friendly desktop PC. It's by far the best product available for personal computing, both in performance *and* value--you just can't beat a desktop PC. The very best of all possible routes, of course, is to build it yourself and use the components you choose...! It doesn't get any better than that... I saw just today an ad for a 1TB SSD that reads data at ~500MB/s through a SATA3 connection and comes with a factory warranty of a cool ten years (at no additional cost.)

Again, a very tiny fraction of people build their own, or even upgrade or service their computers. Most people just buy new ones when their old one stops working or get too slow (even if they could be cheaply upgraded). When you can get a whole new PC for $300, why upgrade your old one for $150? You still have a old computer with some newer parts.

I'm not saying the build it yourself market will disappear, now ill desktops completely go away, but it will certainly be a niche market... Even now its hard to find non-laptops or tablets at any big-box store.. there aren't many desktops on the shelves.

Laptops that are used for desktop replacement are no different from desktops as far as the usage and the OS are concerned. The only difference that one's sitting closer, but only if you use the laptop's own screen, not any additional monitor. Then one might argue for the touch, but I honestly don't see where it might help me.

lehnerus2000 said:

Agreed.

Laptops are horrible (those awful scratch pads).
For me, they only become usable once they are on a desk, connected to a monitor and mouse.

"...scratch pads." That's one of the nicer names I'bve heard for those misbegotten abominations! I can live with the keyboard and the smaller monitor but a mouse is a necessity for my. I even keep a spare mouse in my notebook case in case the one I use dies.

unifex said:

Laptops do have their use as do tablets. But they are not really replacing desktops...

Prexactly. I only use my notebook when on the road though I can use it for a spare if my desktop ever goes down.

unifex said:

Laptops that are used for desktop replacement are no different from desktops as far as the usage and the OS are concerned. The only difference that one's sitting closer, but only if you use the laptop's own screen, not any additional monitor. Then one might argue for the touch, but I honestly don't see where it might help me.

Correction. Laptops that are *ONLY* used for desktop replacement are no different from desktops. If the laptop is used as a desktop replacement as well as taken out and used as a mobile device, then it's dual usage and it needs to be able to work in both scenarios.

Mystere said:

Correction. Laptops that are *ONLY* used for desktop replacement are no different from desktops. If the laptop is used as a desktop replacement as well as taken out and used as a mobile device, then it's dual usage and it needs to be able to work in both scenarios.

Not really, I mean that's not what I meant. Whether or not you can carry you computer in your backpack has nothing to do with the way you use it. The "scratchpad" on my laptop is permanently off, I use a mouse even on a plane. The only difference between me using it in the office and elsewhere is that 30 inch monitor that I'm obviously not carrying around. The way I use the OS and the software I need is exactly the same on that laptop, regardless of whether in the office or not, and on my desktop at home.

In other words, I don't really care in which box do my processor, ram, ssd, etc. live. When I say desktop, I mean what I see on the screen.

But if you care about the formfactor, then the difference is that desktop is more powerful. Whether you need this power is up to you. The argument that desktops are not seen in big electronics stores seems irrelevant to me. I've never bought a computer in any such store, let alone a supermarket.

Mark Phelps said:

With the technology that's available today, what is really a "desktop" and what is really a "portable device" when the latter can be connect to a dock, a keyboard, a mouse, and a large flat panel -- and then offer the same functionality as what used to be considered a "desktop"?

Last major project I worked on, which consisted of several hundred people, had everyone issued a high-end HP laptop. And the first thing that everyone requested upon signing for their new laptop was the following: 1) a dock, 2) a keyboard, 3) a mouse, 4) a high resolution flat panel monitor.

So, while the "portable computing" fans would say -- "See! Laptops replaced Desktops!" -- the "desktop" fans would say, no they did not because, with all those plugged components, the laptops essentially became desktops.

I've retired since then, but keep in touch with folks that NOW, have tablets instead of laptops, and in ALL cases, those folks demand the same four components that we had on that last project.

So basically, what I'm saying is -- you plug enough stuff into a laptop or tablet, it becomes essentially, a desktop -- and then, the argument about which is better (in THAT environment) becomes nonsensical. In such cases, the laptops (or tablets) function as portable desktops.

It is really difficult for me to understand why some people are so invested in *not* owning a desktop. The economic advantages and hardware customization options for desktop far surpass anything portable. Android and iOS are very nearly "toy" OSes in comparison with Windows--and why shouldn't they be? That's what they're for--the off-label uses of a cell phone paired with ridiculously expensive Internet access packages, courtesy of the carriers who are raking in the dough...

You are exactly right--if you are going trick out a tablet with all of the stuff that makes it a non-tablet, you might as well be using a desktop. I'm semi-retired, myself, and the way I always did things was I always made sure I had a desktop in the physical locations where I would most need access to a computer--I didn't have just one desktop. When in the course of a particular job I was forced to a laptop I was not a happy camper. And when you start figuring in the pricing, the factory warranties, and the user-serviceability and hardware upgradability--the desktop knocks the tablet (and laptops, too, imo) out cold. It's a first-round K'O...!

So what is the *only* advantage of a tablet? It runs on batteries and is therefore portable. OK, fine--but so does a standard laptop PC. But the hardware design parameters for tablets/laptops versus desktops are entirely different. Every component in a laptop/tablet is designed on the altar of power consumption--everything. Performance is entirely secondary to power conservation for the sake of battery life--internal components in tablets are generally not user-upgradable (I think most tablet warranties are voided the moment the casing is cracked), and as a result cannot be serviced or upgraded by the owner. This remains true regardless of how many external peripherals a person may buy for it. Laptops are only a little better in this regard, imo. A desktop is user-upgradable a component at a time and therefore has a life span far in excess of any portable device--devices which are generally throw-away when a component fails out of warranty or the owner would like a hardware upgrade. Speaking of warranties as an example, check this out...a 1TB SSD with a ten year factory warranty...and at no additional cost, I might add. It's the kind of thing you can put in a desktop easily and quickly if you want--but in a tablet or even most laptops (you might get this in a few laptops, although they'd need to be Sata3 to get the 500MB/s reads from it)--you can fuggedaboudit...!