|
My logic was that they will have to compete with the tablet and other similar devices if they want to sell something.
There is no logic for the prices to go up, because if they do everyone just gonna go and buy a laptop or tablet. And their prices are going down. So there is no logic to raise the price of the desktop pcs
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm.
The way I see it, when the masses of ordinary Joes realise that they don't need a PC or heavy laptop, but can do everything (IT) they need with a fondleslab, private PC owners will become rarer and rarer, eventually turning it into a niche market -- and we all know what the prices are like in that playing field.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Is it the year of the Linux desktop yet?
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote: Is it the year of the Linux desktop yet?
No.
It is the DECADE of the LINUX DESK-LAP-TOP!!
Of course I don't use Linux, I'm running Windows 7 everywhere.
I do have it dual-booted on one of my laptops with WINDOWS 7. 
|
|
|
|
|
I read something that said the last quarter PC sales had levelled off from decline. Could it be Microsoft are trying ship things that make it an attractive OS again?
|
|
|
|
|
I don't suppose they consider the fact that PC sales are in a tailspin because, erm... the economy is in the toilette or anything.
The advent of tablets as a content consumption platform has split the users of general purpose technology into two camps based on the richness of their required interactivity with that technology.
Roughly it's producers and consumers. BUT things like games and such are more well suited to wider breadth of input capabilities of a "normal computer."
|
|
|
|
|
I think you make a great point, because many people have really only wanted a "computer" which allows them to check email, play little gamesa and maybe read books/articles on anyway. Why buy a PC when you can get a cheapo phone,pod,pad? It makes sense. You can get a decent android with quadcore at walmart for $99 and that is going to suit most people, but if you do anything beyond those few simple things you are going to want more and you're going to need a PC.
I personally know some people who've even opted for the chrome books only to be greatly disappointed that they were just word processors.
|
|
|
|
|
newton.saber wrote: PC Sales In Tailspin
Only thing I could think of: Talespin[^]!
It's an OO world.
public class SanderRossel : Lazy<Person>
{
public void DoWork()
{
throw new NotSupportedException();
}
}
modified 15-Jul-14 15:00pm.
|
|
|
|
|
11*11=4
22*22=16
'
'
'
10*10=?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
And what happened? I thought you were visiting QA. 
Whether I think I can, or think I can't, I am always bloody right!
|
|
|
|
|
|
1?
You're adding the numbers on each side of the operator together and multiplying them right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
My thought exactly, there must be dozens of possible answers, and without further information we can just regard all of them as correct.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
2
(1 + 0 + 1 + 0 ) * 1 = 2
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
| 42
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Damn it, you beat me to it 
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overflow Exception
Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true
|
|
|
|
|
11*11 = 121 -> sum of digits = 4
22*22 = 484 -> sum of digits = 16
10*10 = 100 -> sum of digits = 1
|
|
|
|
|
Smart thinking!
I saw it differently, but I don't know if it would have applied for all cases:
11*11 -> (1+1)*(1+1) -> 2*2 = 4
22*22 -> (2+2)*(2+2) -> 4*4 = 16
10*10 -> (1+0)*(1+0) -> 1*1 = 1
|
|
|
|
|
Which proves the problem is underspecified.
One day I aspire to having a signature.
|
|
|
|
|
Right. There are several paths to a solution. We can only speculate about the intended solution.
|
|
|
|
|
Nonsense. It is only underspecified if there isn't sufficient informatino to reach a solution. The existence of multiple paths to a correct solution does not imply a lack of specification, else the entire concept of OOP would fail.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
