IDC Idiocy: Apple iPad is Not a Tablet PC

Although Apple’s iPad could find success, its shipments won’t count in IDC’s Tablet PC numbers since it doesn’t run a full operating system.

Remember when the iPhone hit the scene, and attempts were made to define “smartphone” so it wouldn’t be included? Well, now “tablet PC” is being defined as well.

This is nonsense. Aside from varying definitions on what a “full” operating system is, I’d argue that, as a touch device, a “real” tablet PC must have an OS designed for touch from Day 1. Therefore, “optimized” Windows machines need not apply.

Whatever. The only way for PC makers to avoid being embarrassed by Apple’s runaway success is to try defining Apple out of the picture.

2 thoughts on “IDC Idiocy: Apple iPad is Not a Tablet PC

  1. Kevin,Good points, but I think a desktop OS was included in 2001 because it’s all they had, not because it was inherently part of the definition. Indeed, since nearly every PC had that desktop OS the definition must have revolved around something else. One could argue that the 2001 definition means a tablet PC must use a stylus, yet I don’t hear people today making such claims.

  2. I totally understand your point of view, and while I’m not trying to defend IDC, there’s an important fact to pull in. It’s based on your comment “Well, now “tablet PC” is being defined as well.”Truth is, “tablet PC” isn’t just now being defined. It was coined / defined in 2001 at Comdex when Gates showed off the prototype. And in 2004, Microsoft developed the Windows XP Tablet Edition version for Tablet PCs. So for measurement purposes, folks like IDC settled on a definition years ago and it only includes desktop OSes.I agree with you though. What *should* be happening is that the tablet PC definition should be re-defined. That’s actually what Apple (and others, for that matter) are doing right now with these devices and this market — re-defining it and advancing it. I assume that IDC will measure them elsewhere?

Comments are closed.