Report: 2009 to be PC industry's worst year since dot-com implosion
At the end of this year, the number of PCs shipped is expected to be lower than the previous year, a rarity for the industry.
In fact, it would be the first time that's happened since 2001, when the tech world collapsed in on itself, according to market research firm iSuppli. A report released Tuesday by iSuppli is projecting that 287.3 million PCs will be shipped in 2009, a 4 percent decrease from the 299.2 million shipped around the world in 2008.
And though expectations weren't particularly high for this year, the industry is now on track to do worse than previously thought: iSuppli had predicted 0.7 percent growth for the year. PC makers have been able to ship more each year for eight straight years, so it's fair to say this dip is unusual. Said iSuppli analyst Matthew Wilkins, "Even in weak years, PC unit shipments typically rise by single-digit percentages."
The culprit in this case is the fading out of the desktop computer. Shipments of desktops are expected to decline 18.1 percent this year, as notebook PCs become ever more popular. Notebooks are on track to grow almost 12 percent this year, for the first time outpacing desktop shipments for a whole year.
It's been clear for several years that PC buyers prefer mobility, and the increasing power of notebooks have helped push more customers in that direction. PC manufacturers have looked for ways in the last couple years to reinvigorate desktop sales. Many have been pushing all-in-one desktop computers, some with touch-screen interfaces. iSuppli's numbers show that mainstream consumers have yet to take the bait.
Another factor in the sagging PC industry is the severe drop off in IT spending by large corporate customers. There could be good news ahead though. Dell's CFO said Monday the company is seeing demand for its computers, servers, and services stabilizing, which could mean they think they've seen the bottom of the market.
Erica Ogg is a CNET News reporter who covers Apple, HP, Dell, and other PC makers, as well as the consumer electronics industry. She's also one of the hosts of CNET News' Daily Podcast. In her non-work life, she's a history geek, a loyal Dodgers fan, and a mac-and-cheese connoisseur. E-mail Erica. 





If you do it right (1gbit/full minimum in the LAN, VDI and/or Panologic in the middle with Panologic and/or embedded thin clients, then make sure you have the network shares direct-connect to CIFS/NFS on the SAN w/o a middle-man file server mucking it up), it can be a beautiful thing.
There are companies doing well in this bust.
Or the amount of non-Mac hardware sold by Apple compared to Macs sold by Apple.
I'm not walking that path again. XP on old machines works well enough. No need to spend fresh money for an "upgrade" just like the one that didn't work last time.
I say that after using the Beta and finding that it had no problems unlike Vista. Other than losing all my data and not doing a real upgrade since 7 wanted me to upgrade from Vista and not XP. They lost me there. To much time to invest to get things working again.
'Nuff Said!
- by AaronCT123 July 15, 2009 12:09 PM PDT
- Too bad every all-in-one I've seen costs either way more than Apple's iMac or costs the same but doesn't meet their specs- often substituting integrated graphics for an actual graphics card. Also, as an art student I need a powerful machine and anything Dell, HP or anyone else can offer ends up costing about $1,200 so I'm just going to build it myself. Everyone else who wants a powerful machine for a good deal will probably do the same, leaving the general market to snatch up notebooks/netbooks.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(17 Comments)