4 ms·

I would like to add that PC manufacturers are not able to innovate precisely because Microsoft and Intel took all the money in the platform, commoditizing their

by DenisM 15y ago

I would like to add that PC manufacturers are not able to innovate precisely because Microsoft and Intel took all the money in the platform, commoditizing their complements. That's why PCs often suck in quality - they have to compete of price and they have to cut every corner, which sometimes they get away with, and sometimes not. And that's why they install crapware on their PCs - every penny counts in race to the bottom.

forensic 15y ago
Apple pretty easily dispels this notion. The PC makers commoditized themselves by provided no added value.
- kissickas 15y ago
  Hardware is not added value to a PC? I'm asking an honest question. Obviously I hate the "value" HP adds to PCs with terrible pre-installed software, but surely the manufacturing still counts as adding value to software, which would be useless without the hardware.
  - philwelch 15y ago
    The actual hardware is supplied by the CPU manufacturer, the motherboard manufacturer, the video card manufacturer, etc. The "added value" is basically distribution and sales--they buy the parts, have them shipped to a Chinese manufacturer, and then have the assembled computer shipped and distributed to retailers and customers. Some companies do the manufacturing themselves (generally the Chinese manufacturer, who's edged into the sales and distribution side a la Lenovo) and some companies design their own cases (poorly, a la Dell). It's really a boring industry.
philwelch 15y ago
Exactly what I meant by "in a world that Microsoft and Intel created". Their value added doesn't extend much further than manufacturing, distribution, and coordinating the suppliers. Sometimes not even the manufacturing.
lallysingh 15y ago
See, the funny thing is that I'm just not that price sensitive, and that's the case with a lot of customers. People can feel quality, and appreciate when they see it. But the PC manufacturers are running like coked-up lemmings in their race to the bottom. That behavior's really helped Apple succeed. Many people spend over half their average workday on a machine, and even medium-sized changes in the machine is going to have a large, substantive difference. But, then again, I think some of this psychology directly stems from Windows. MS has traditionally had this feature-checkmark mentality that pushes for more checkmarks & features over substantive quality; and you can see exactly the same thing with most Windows PCs. Now, the consumer's left a complete-shit algebra to reason about which computer is best for them. Ugh, ok, I'm cutting the rant off here.

by DenisM 15y ago

forensic 15y ago

Apple pretty easily dispels this notion. The PC makers commoditized themselves by provided no added value.

kissickas 15y ago
Hardware is not added value to a PC? I'm asking an honest question. Obviously I hate the "value" HP adds to PCs with terrible pre-installed software, but surely the manufacturing still counts as adding value to software, which would be useless without the hardware.
- philwelch 15y ago
  The actual hardware is supplied by the CPU manufacturer, the motherboard manufacturer, the video card manufacturer, etc. The "added value" is basically distribution and sales--they buy the parts, have them shipped to a Chinese manufacturer, and then have the assembled computer shipped and distributed to retailers and customers. Some companies do the manufacturing themselves (generally the Chinese manufacturer, who's edged into the sales and distribution side a la Lenovo) and some companies design their own cases (poorly, a la Dell). It's really a boring industry.

philwelch 15y ago

Exactly what I meant by "in a world that Microsoft and Intel created". Their value added doesn't extend much further than manufacturing, distribution, and coordinating the suppliers. Sometimes not even the manufacturing.

lallysingh 15y ago

See, the funny thing is that I'm just not that price sensitive, and that's the case with a lot of customers. People can feel quality, and appreciate when they see it. But the PC manufacturers are running like coked-up lemmings in their race to the bottom. That behavior's really helped Apple succeed. Many people spend over half their average workday on a machine, and even medium-sized changes in the machine is going to have a large, substantive difference. But, then again, I think some of this psychology directly stems from Windows. MS has traditionally had this feature-checkmark mentality that pushes for more checkmarks & features over substantive quality; and you can see exactly the same thing with most Windows PCs. Now, the consumer's left a complete-shit algebra to reason about which computer is best for them. Ugh, ok, I'm cutting the rant off here.