Maybe its just me cuz I be one cheap, um, customer. This is what I don't get and maybe its because I'm not seeing the correct break down, desktop PCs + tablet makes the most economic sense to me. The reason I am confused is that no one is talking about the laptop market being eaten by tablets. Desktops are cheaper and more powerful than a laptop but are not conveniently portable, tablets are getting more robust and are cheaper than many/most laptops and are just as portable. (and many laptop owners basically surf the web, check email with their laptop)I don't know many folks that use their laptops for power computing, presentations sure, word processing yes, and lightish database and spreadsheet work why not. I realize the really heavy lifting is done by ORCL like systems. I can buy a quality, not uber, but quality gaming desktop for $1500 while the equivalent laptop would be over $2k and get hot enough to mar a desk or table. Question: Does the PC and the laptop both dwindle into buggy whips while the big mainframe/server side sucks up heavy lifting and the tablet sucks up the portable end? Is that the prevailing theory? Curiouser, people want more for the same or less. Tablets are going to have to get faster, greater functionality and better battery life and so on. Apple has made a killing by borrowing from the auto industry and rolling out this years model with better cupholders. The entire personal computing industry is built around the obsolescence of prior computing power. I cannot see where tablet computing can or will diverge from this pattern. So it seems inevitable, to me, that laptops will be the eventual victims of tablets. It took quite some time before a laptop that was a desktop equivalent came down into the broad consumers group price range. I suspect it will take quite sometime for tablets to bridge that gap. Leaving me back where I started: light lifting(laptop lifting) provided by tablets, heavier usage via a desktop big kahuna lifting by server/mainframes.So who are the players? Can ARM's chip patents be extended into more robust computing? Isn't INTC already there with a huge R&D budget and a pile of cash? TSMN is built to spit out chips and may continue to stamp more out than anyone else as smart phones slowly beat dumb phones into submission. (I'll be sad when my phone isn't just a phone anymore. I like simple). GOOG is assuming portable needs their Google apps. "Cloud" computing is still a buzz phrase but what horse do you bet on or is it even worth betting on "cloud" companies who are far more like RHT than AAPL, no cool factor, no significant technological advantage. INTC seems like the value play and GOOG the growth play. Ideas? or did you fall asleep?jack
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra