What's wrong with IBM desktops?

Message

pianowizard · #1 Post by **pianowizard** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 12:26 am

We all know that Thinkpads rock and that's why they are so popular. But how come few people buy IBM desktop computers? I haven't used any and therefore I don't know how good/bad they are. Are they not as good as their laptop counterparts?

#2 Post by **jdhurst** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 7:34 am

There is less to do under the covers of a desktop as compared to a laptop. But I still think IBM desktops are excellent machines. I only use IBM myself, and I change client computers to IBM after they have no end of trouble with Dell desktops. I have not run across HP or Compaq desktops in my clients - just Dell, No-name and IBM. ... JD Hurst

#3 Post by **JaneL** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 8:35 am

To me (and I used to select hardware products for a Fortune 500, and I had vendors shipping me nearly everything on the market to test), one boring desktop is very much like the next boring desktop. There's not a lot of difference between them. Notebooks are a much more personal item with widely varying differences.

Support and parts availbility, of course, is the key to everything, desktop or notebook.

#4 Post by **thePCxp** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 10:29 pm

I own an IBM desktop and I have also used some other ones and I think they are good.

bhtooefr · #5 Post by **bhtooefr** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:45 pm

They're marketed towards businesses.

I mean, how many people do YOU know that have a (new) Dell OptiPlex at home? It's all Dimensions - their home line.

IBM doesn't HAVE a home line any more, so you don't see IBM desktops in homes any more.

r50cheapskate · #6 Post by **r50cheapskate** » Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:59 pm

I love my ThinkPad, but for a home (or even business) desktop machine, IBM/Lenovo doesn't appear to even be trying. HP has what appear to be great XP Media Center machines with dual-core processors, big hard drives, great TV/audio/video cards, etc.

ThinkPad is the only serious notebook, but desktops seem to be quite commoditized. I wonder if the brand loyalty ThinkPad users have extends to the desktop. (And let's face it, notebooks just don't have 23" displays, good speakers, 400GB hard drives, etc., though I suppose you could obviate the portability you paid a fortune for and attach those.)

bhtooefr · #7 Post by **bhtooefr** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 12:20 am

Now that I have an X series, I'm not sure whether I'd build my own laptop in the way that one can build their own desktop, given the chance. I'd probably stick with IBM.

However, for a desktop, homebuilt all the way...

mattfromomaha · #8 Post by **mattfromomaha** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:34 am

I agree with the statements that one boring desktop is much like the next boring desktop, but IBM still has some good innovations in that department. Our ThinkCentre M51s are very user-serviceable, with things like the hard drive being able to be removed in maybe 30 seconds, max.

Definately not as innovative as ThinkPads, but then again, there's no need to be!

leoblob · #9 Post by **leoblob** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:23 pm

bhtooefr wrote:They're marketed towards businesses.

This is why I LIKE them... they're not flashy pieces of crap that will break in 2 years (or can't be upgraded).

And FWIW, I DO have an Optiplex at home, an ancient GX1 tower, now running a (PIII) 1400C/256/100... runs great.

bhtooefr · #10 Post by **bhtooefr** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 10:28 pm

*shudder* GX1s make me want to smash things...

Good choice, though, going with business desktops over home desktops. (FWIW, I said NEW OptiPlexes. You would have an old OptiPlex, and I've seen them in homes before

)

STS06 · #11 Post by **STS06** » Tue Aug 09, 2005 10:54 am

leoblob, almost all desktops can be upgraded. Laptops are a different story.

Whoever said that IBM desktops are designed as workstations (for buisnesses) is completely correct. That is the number one reason you do not see them in homes..they arent designed as entertainment centers and etc....and really thats what desktops are for!

Secondly, with desktops (and someone already mentioned this), the two things people look for is price and customer support. Dell, though still a bit on the expensive side, does have good support. Other than that, all comps are the same...it really boils down to how much you pay for a certain config. With laptops, it goes further into build quality, weight, heating issues, etc.

Many companies use Dells and IBMs (workstations) and after working on them, you realize that you wouldn't want these comps in your house unless all you do is number crunch or work realated tasks. If you are at all into games, watching movies, listening to music, the home pcs is what you want.

farmer kev · #12 Post by **farmer kev** » Tue Aug 09, 2005 8:11 pm

I have several older ones, mom bought a Aptiva back in 97 and it was not a good unit.

#13 Post by **jdhurst** » Tue Aug 09, 2005 9:25 pm

It turns out that, from any reasonable perspective, Aptiva and IBM are mutually exclusive. I got an Aptiva for my oldest daughter for University. It was junk, a major mistake on my part. ... JD Hurst

T22 4me · #14 Post by **T22 4me** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:37 am

STS06 wrote:

Many companies use Dells and IBMs (workstations) and after working on them, you realize that you wouldn't want these comps in your house unless all you do is number crunch or work realated tasks. If you are at all into games, watching movies, listening to music, the home pcs is what you want.

I guess thats my dumbness.If I want watch a movie I use the TV........If I want to listen to music I use the stereo................I just use the computer for.......... well,computing and web browsing,picture storage.Guess thats why I am able to skimp by with a measly business machine.........netvista m42...........while I get up in the middle of the night pretty often to turn off monitor on Wifeys more modern DELL home pc as the pretty blue glow of the BLUE screen of death is a common occurence on that pc of crap............Boy am I glad you cleared us up on that one.......................

Maybe I will go out and buy another Dell home pc..............

probably not though.........If I want to play football...........I will buy a......... football.............

leoblob · #15 Post by **leoblob** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 12:10 am

T22 4me wrote:I guess thats my dumbness.If I want watch a movie I use the TV........If I want to listen to music I use the stereo................I just use the computer for.......... well,computing and web browsing,picture storage.Guess thats why I am able to skimp by with a measly business machine.........netvista m42...........while I get up in the middle of the night pretty often to turn off monitor on Wifeys more modern DELL home pc as the pretty blue glow of the BLUE screen of death is a common occurence on that pc of crap............Boy am I glad you cleared us up on that one....................... Maybe I will go out and buy another Dell home pc.............. probably not though.........If I want to play football...........I will buy a......... football.............

Man, that is so true!

I once spent hours getting a DVD to play on an older computer, then I realized watching it on TV set was much better than sitting in my desk chair, seeing it on a much smaller (computer) screen. (Now the big thing is to watch video on the tiny 2" screen in a cell phone. Ain't "progress" a funny thing...!!)

notebooknewbie · #16 Post by **notebooknewbie** » Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:55 am

jdhurst wrote:It turns out that, from any reasonable perspective, Aptiva and IBM are mutually exclusive. I got an Aptiva for my oldest daughter for University. It was junk, a major mistake on my part. ... JD Hurst

The IBM Aptiva was the first PC I ever got (in 1998) and to this day I still use it for word processing, surfing the net and mild stuff like that...hasn't given me ONE problem to this day. It's probably the reason why I've become an IBM fan.

But then again, I have heard of people having big problems with their IBM PC...

silo · #17 Post by **silo** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 4:35 am

My university has an arrangement with IBM/Lenovo and I was just required to buy my new desktop there as an IBM M52. Haven't gotten it yet, so if there's anything I need to know about it, please advise.

wolfman · #18 Post by **wolfman** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 8:23 am

I bought my wife an IBM tower (Think Centre) - been running fine for over a year - she likes and uses it a lot. Definately would recommend and buy again.

bhtooefr · #19 Post by **bhtooefr** » Fri Mar 03, 2006 9:59 am

Nothing wrong with IBM desktops. They're just "business" machines, not "multimedia" machines (they're PCs... you could even take a server and turn it into a multimedia PC by adding a GPU and a decent sound card...)

They don't have the "sex appeal" of a Dell, or an HP. Being able to yank a failed hard drive in 30 seconds isn't something that Joe Sixpack looks for - he thinks the computer is a black box that magically does what he wants it to do, some of the time.

superdx · #20 Post by **superdx** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:12 pm

IBM desktops are okay, but then again they're just desktops. The inside is pretty much standard, you could probably replace every component with aftermarket parts.

I used to build my own, but then noticed that by default, many OEM machines are quiet vs. the hobbyist jet engines we tend to build. Plus I like an all-in-one warranty. You can call for support and they send you replacement parts right to your door. Better than making a trip to the krusty ol' computer centers.

Currently I have a Dimension 9150 sitting in my home. Great machine, really quiet. Chassis is tool-less (new for me, I haven't used a desktop in 8 years) and cables are nicely tucked away and binded. My roommate's machine is home built, sounds like a 747 and inside the case the wires are everywhere. It's also faster than mine, but these days, the difference is negligible especially if your components are from around the same generation. He chose a P4 HT core and I got an Intel Dual Core.

To date, 3 of his parts have had failiures vs. 1 of mine. He had to go back to the stores he bought them from and haggle over the receipt and warranty. I think it took him a whole weekend. My 20" widescreen LCD crapped out, Dell had a new one at my door in 2 business days. Didn't have to even put on my shoes.

#21 Post by **jdhurst** » Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:17 pm

superdx wrote:IBM desktops are okay, but then again they're just desktops. The inside is pretty much standard, you could probably replace every component with aftermarket parts.
<snip>

I much disagree. IBM has traditionally used quality parts (making them more expensive). I have had IBM provide annual maintenance for up to twice as long as Dell was ever willing to do.
... JD Hurst

gearguy · #22 Post by **gearguy** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:08 am

pianowizard wrote:We all know that Thinkpads rock and that's why they are so popular. But how come few people buy IBM desktop computers? I haven't used any and therefore I don't know how good/bad they are. Are they not as good as their laptop counterparts?

Because people can litterally build their own desktop from scratch and chose exactly what they want.
Buying a branded, prebuilt desktop computer is no fun.

christopher_wolf · #23 Post by **christopher_wolf** » Tue Jun 13, 2006 12:25 pm

The customer will most likely, unless they are a serious business or large commercial R&D outfit, build their own systems to within their own specs. Show me a costly Alienware system and I can still build you the same thing that costs less (with each part having a prime warranty from the maker; a good idea since you can RMA a part that has stopped working without being hassled for the entire system.) and performs just as well if not better than that Alienware box that costs more; IMO, paying $5K for a screamer of a desktop is silly when I could simply build one. What is even better is that you get a good, intimate understanding of your system and thuse ease-of-maintenance should to need arise; you also get the satisfaction of building it and knowing [censored] near *exactly* what is going on in there.

tghlk · #24 Post by **tghlk** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:07 am

Back several years ago, IBM did most if not all development of their desktops and it showed. Some of them like the Aptiva model, had a hibernation mode before any other desktop PC. ok, I admit the MWAVE card was a fiasco!

Later Aptiva models were made by acer, and some of the last models were just stupid cheap clone models, nothing unique about them.

christopher_wolf · #25 Post by **christopher_wolf** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:22 am

tghlk wrote: ok, I admit the MWAVE card was a fiasco!

Heyyyyyy....

ShadowGray · #26 Post by **ShadowGray** » Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:13 pm

nonny wrote:Support and parts availbility, of course, is the key to everything, desktop or notebook.

First post...Hello

Two completely different animals (laptop vs. desktop) although the end effect is the same. With a laptop, sitting in front of the keyboard, it boils down to...no matter where you go, there you are. One is just more portable than the other.

For home use, you won't beat a desktop but it also depends on who makes the it.

nonny said it best!

mattfromomaha · #27 Post by **mattfromomaha** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:42 pm

All IBM desktops at work here - and for the most part they run great. IMHO, though, a desktop just doesn't have the personality of a notebook!

pianowizard · #28 Post by **pianowizard** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 7:05 pm

So, I guess the concensus is that while IBM desktops are usually pretty good, because they tend to be more expensive, they are far less popular than Dell desktops?

#29 Post by **AlphaKilo470** » Tue Aug 08, 2006 10:36 pm

Probably. Either pricing and/or the fact that there seems to be even less marketing effort for the desktops than for the ThinkPads.

bhtooefr · #30 Post by **bhtooefr** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 1:17 pm

We're moving over to Lenovo as our PC supplier.

Any Dells that need replaced? ThinkPads or ThinkCentres.

Any new machines that need bought? ThinkPads or ThinkCentres.

What's wrong with IBM desktops?

What's wrong with IBM desktops?

Underpowered

Buying an IBM tower M52

Re: What's wrong with IBM desktops?

Who is online