Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 5th Mar 2013 23:41 UTC, submitted by Nth_Man
Thread beginning with comment 554279
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by themwagency
by Morgan on Wed 6th Mar 2013 04:33
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by themwagency"
You didn't even glance at the article I linked, did you? I'll quote the relevant bit:
Note: Data includes desk-based PCs and mobile PCs, including mini-notebooks but not media tablets such as the iPad. Data is based on the shipments selling into channels.
In other words, the Gartner report is based purely on desktops and laptops. Not servers, not thin clients, not tablets as your horribly skewed stats did.
To put it in a way you might be able to grasp: You can't throw out statistics with tablets and phones to try to "balance out" what you assume to be statistics that include servers and thin clients but actually don't. Try doing some actual research before making wild assumptions and grabbing wilder statistics to try to make a point that doesn't even need to be made.
It took me all of thirty seconds to find that Gartner report, probably less time by far than you took to find your flawed and pointless stats.




Member since:
2013-03-06
Why would HP need a smartphone or tablet?
For years Apple didn't have a server nor did it ever have a dumb terminal yet they were on the losing end of the distorted statistics.
Why should HP or any PC manufacturer for that matter not be held to that standard?