Last week, I pointed out some of the remote access solutions shown at CES that allow you to tap into the power of a full desktop computer from a mobile device. I said it was another nail in the coffin for traditional personal computers, which some took as me saying that the PC is dead. That’s not the case, of course, unless you look at the world solely in black and white. I don’t. For some time to come, especially in certain industries or specific use cases, the PC will be important. For most folks, however, the PC is losing relevance as we’re morphing from a local / desktop user base to one of mobile / cloud.
A rather timely graph illustrates this. Horace Dediu, who tracks market data on his Asymco blog, tweeted an image showing a “brief history of personal computing platforms” on Saturday, going back from present day to 1975. Notice anything interesting?
Starting around 2007, when Apple introduced the iPhone, sales of devices running mobile platforms have eaten into a large portion of traditional desktop and laptop sales. The sales of Apple products are lumped together in this graph, so not all of the green area is composed of iOS devices such as the iPhone, iPod touch and iPad. But we know that Apple sells far more iOS devices than those that run Mac OS X: In the last quarter of 2011, Apple sold at least 28 million iOS devices, vs 4.9 million Macs. And with a few niche exceptions (Google TV and some low-end laptops) that don’t account to a meaningful number of sales, Android devices are all mobile devices, not traditional computers.
Here’s another telling datapoint showing the big picture: According to a recent Gartner news release, 352.8 million PCs were sold worldwide in 2011. To put that number in perspective, Samsung alone estimates it sold 300 million handsets and estimates it will sell 372 million in 2012; 150m of them being smartphones. While not all Samsung’s mobile devices sales are or will be smartphones, they’re all mobile devices, and most of them can tap into the web and run apps: two key activities that are shifting away from the traditional computing paradigm.
As I said last week, I’m planning to get an Asus Transformer Prime review unit (or buy one myself if I have to) to truly test if an ARM-powered mobile device can take the place of my computing needs. Note that I don’t draw CAD files, create stunning 3-D movie files, build programs or calculate equations that require heavy processing power. The fact is: Most other people don’t do these tasks either. So for many, a traditional computer can be overkill in terms of price, power and performance. And if you need 3-D graphics for gaming or some other processor intensive tasks, there’s always the option of remotely accessing a PC at home or in the cloud: Amazon now offers 750 hours a month of free Windows Server instances through its EC2 product line, for example.
One can argue the lagging economy is hurting PC sales, and I’d agree with that. But that’s not the key driver for this trend I’m illustrating. If it is, then Intel’s Ultrabooks, which are expected to cost $1,000 or more at first, won’t be too popular. And sales of $200 to $400 netbooks wouldn’t be declining over the past year or two. Sure, some folks that want to buy a PC aren’t able to spend the money right now. But that makes a smartphone or tablet even more appealing, when you see high-end handsets or capable tablets selling for much less; at least up front. Sure, there’s a recurring fee for monthly service, but it’s more manageable than spending $700 to $1000 or more at one time.
The bad economy is actually helping create a perfect storm for mobile devices. They’re a cheaper starting investment, they have connectivity to the growing number of cloud services and they meet many needs that a used to be the sole domain of a PC. Is the PC “dead”? Nope, and I never said it was. But I tend to think ahead of the curve and think of future implications rather than simply observe what’s going on today. If you live for today and must have a PC, there’s nothing wrong with that. But my future — and I think yours too — will become less reliant on the computer on your desk or lap today.
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
- Connected world: the consumer technology revolution
- 2012: Data, spectrum and the race to LTE
- Envisioning future strategies for Sony’s success
In December 2007, Mitt Romney was asked by “Meet The Press” host Tim Russert about the history of racism in the Mormon church, which excluded African Americans from participation until 1978. Romney claimed that his father marched with Martin Luther King. Romney would also claim that he “saw his father march with Martin Luther King” in a speech about his Mormon faith earlier that month. In 1978, Mitt Romney would tell the Boston Globe that he and his father both marched with Martin Luther King.
The problem is, Mitt Romney’s father, George Romney, the former governor of Michigan, never marched with Martin Luther King. Mitt Romney would concede that fact to the Boston Globe in 2007. The Boston Phoenix could find no record of Mitt’s father, George marching with Martin Luther King at all.
Still Politfact reports that while George Romney never marched with Martin Luther King, he was supportive of King’s goals and of the Civil Rights movement,
But it’s also clear that George Romney, who served as governor from 1963 to 1969 and died in 1995, supported King’s goals at a time when few politicians did. When King visited Detroit and led a rally of 125,000 people in 1963, Romney issued a proclamation and sent personal representatives. (The Times report noted that Romney was Mormon and did not make public appearances on Sundays.) Two years later, Romney led a march of 10,000 people in Detroit to protest events in Selma, Ala. (King wasn’t there.) When King died in 1968, George Romney attended the funeral.
George Romney’s support of the civil rights movement put him at odds with the Mormon Church, whose Apostle, Delpert Stabley wrote him a letter criticizing him for helping “the negro cause” which went against the Prophet, Joseph Smith and God, who had cursed the Negro. So while Mitt Romney’s father was not a racist, Mitt Romney’s “prophet” Joseph Smith, who believed that the Black people were cursed, was.