Lenovo: higher laptop sales but lower desktop numbers

Lenovo is an anomaly among current large PC hardware companies. While most of them are suffering from lower PC shipments worldwide, Lenovo has actually grown its PC business. Today, Lenovo's latest financial results for its last fiscal quarter show sales growth in its laptops but a reduction in its desktop revenues.

Lenovo's press release states sales of its laptops went up by 4.7 percent to $4.5 billion for the quarter and took up 52 percent of the company's total revenue. Desktop sales came in at $2.5 billion, down 2.5 percent for the quarter and brought in 28 percent of Lenovo's revenue. However, sales of its tablets and smartphones have increased a ton, with Lenovo showing that division bringing in $1.2 billion, or a 105 percent increase compared to the same period a year ago. Even with that huge growth, sales of smartphones and tablets still only made up 14 percent of the company's total revenues.

Overall, Lenovo recorded revenues of $8.8 billion for the quarter, up 10 percent from the same period a year ago, along with $174 million in net income. As the number one seller of PCs, Lenovo shipped 12.6 million units and took up 16.7 percent of the total PC shipments worldwide. Lenovo is also now the fourth biggest supplier of smartphones worldwide, mostly due to shipments in its native China, where it is now the second biggest smartphone maker.

Source: Lenovo on Business Wire | Image via Lenovo

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft to help open information technology school in NYC in 2014

Next Story

Microsoft created design for processor inside Xbox One's Kinect

23 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I like my desktop PC.
When at home my PC is my top priority machine, smartphone and tablet below it.
When TV commercials start I walk to my PC

Not running a business, not a gamer.
But I like to go shop for PC parts and build my own PC as theres more choice over the configuration and control over the budget.

I'd like to see a comparison on people who build a desktop and buy a pre-built. Pre-builts are down but Intel is doing fine selling CPU's, Nvidia is fine selling their GPU's, and motherboard makers are making a profit. So basically, normal users are using laptops and tablets, power users are building their own.

Actually plenty of power users are buying laptops for gaming as well. I bought a Vaio with fairly midrange graphics which wont let me hardcore with Crysis or whatever at super-duper framerates with all the settings turned up, but there's a lot of games I can play at 1080p on an external monitor no troubles... and the thing was damn cheap, cheaper than a gaming rig of similar specs.

High-end gaming desktops are still better performance and value-for-money than something of similar specs in a laptop, and you can't even match the best in desktops with a laptop. But you actually don't need to go that far down the performance ladder to find the scales tip in favour of a fairly decent laptop. That weighs not much more than 2kg. With a backlit keyboard.

People aren't buying prebuilt desktops any more because the manufacturers set out to gouge money for awful setups.

If they aren't selling a "gaming PC" with an i7, 16GB of RAM and a 650 or 7770 GPU (or other random wtf configurations) then they're using bottom-dollar PSUs combined with cases that have absolutely no airflow, no ventilation, no cable management and no room to upgrade graphics card or CPU cooler.

The amount of times I've had to replace the PSU on a prebuilt because they put a no-name unit in that has horrible efficiency and literally 5W of headroom is ridiculous.

I saw an ASUS the other day that was listed as a "gaming PC" with an AMD A8, 12GB of RAM and a GTX 650 (non Ti) - they don't even look to crossfire the damned APU, which is the only reason you would put one in a desktop computer in the first place.

This is why people are flocking to sites that let you choose every single component or building it themselves.

Desktop PC manufacturers are just awful.

I forgot to mention that they vastly overcharge for the privilege of giving you an awkward configuration with cheap components as well.

That's also been our (as customers/users) fault; on the one hand, we want high-perfoming desktops, while on the other, we want cheap prices - how do you square the two without cutting corners? If you build your own desktops, you know that - it's actually harder for volume PC builders, because their margins per unit are far lower. Apple doesn't even really try - the entire Mac lineup is basically "boutique PC", which is reflected in the price. (Yes - I'm referring to both desktops AND portables, and specifically those that run OS X.)

I think there's really only two groups that use desktops these days - businesses and gamers. I actually went with a gaming laptop this time around. It cost more and doesn't perform as good, but who wants to sit at a desk and play a game after being at work all day at a desk. I also plug it into my home theater system to play steam games on the big screen.

I'm honestly worried with what would become of the desktop market and how that would overall affect PC gaming. People are buying desktops less and less these day.

dead.cell said,
I'm honestly worried with what would become of the desktop market and how that would overall affect PC gaming. People are buying desktops less and less these day.

Two things:
Slower hardware refreshes (already visible in the rumour that Intel is bringing Broadwell to mobile before desktop), and higher prices (hello DRAM).
The long and the short: desktop PCs are going to get expensive, and will get the interesting tech after mobile users.

Sucks, but what can you do?

dead.cell said,
I'm honestly worried with what would become of the desktop market and how that would overall affect PC gaming. People are buying desktops less and less these day.

Desktops are the 8"/5.25" HDD. People whined for a few years that 3.5" HDDs could never have the capacity or performance of a larger drive. As is usually the case, they were looking in the completely wrong direction, didn't see the new markets smaller hardware created and, in turn, the surge of demand that resulted from it which caused smaller form factors to ultimately become faster, cheaper, larger, and more reliable.

Demand is everything. People can be stubborn old farts till they breathe their last breath, but it doesn't change the fact that, in technology, demand has the power even to give us tablet graphics that surpass the desktop. All it takes is demand.

Getting caught up in the paradigms you're used to and letting that define, for you (not YOU you--the vague, rhetorical 'you'), what can and can't be a good gaming or computing experience, puts you firmly in the same camp as every other group that clung onto old tech until there was nothing left for them to cling to anymore.

Joshie said,
demand has the power even to give us tablet graphics that surpass the desktop. All it takes is demand.
.

Only true if dekstop graphics companies completely stop developing desktop graphics.

Anyway, thanks for the LOL for the rest of the post.

It really is a bit worrying, but laptops are getting some pretty good specs these days. I think in terms of performance it is ultimately a good thing that the consumer market is pushing for thinner, faster, and lower power consuming machines. Also I mean you can buy laptop intended hardware and still put together a beastly gaming desktop, it might just be the mobo that becomes harder to find.

Laptops are becoming better and better... unless you're doing gaming. Yes, the AMD APUs aren't bad, but gaming to me just isn't a great option on a laptop. I guess I can't blame the manufacturers though; demand speaks for itself and if there isn't enough demand, I guess I'll just end up having to play with my thumbs being a console gamer.

I hope that never becomes the case though.

Desktops (the form-factor, and their components) wear like iron - it's getting less and less likely that desktop PC components will need replacing due to failure; obsolescence is actually the bigger driver for desktop-component replacement, and it's been that way for the last fifteen years, if not more. If you have a Core 2 (Intel) or equivalent AMD CPU, or any of their progeny, you can run any x32 (and most x64) version of Windows since XP - and yes, I'm including Pentiums, Celerons, Semprons, and Turions derived from those mainstream CPUs as well. I've mostly upgraded desktops following the lyrics of the late Johnny Cash's "One Piece At A Time" - because you don't have to upgrade everything. (The sour economic outlook has, in fact, driven more desktop owners to enroll in the same "school" of upgrading.) It's how I have wound up with four OSes - including two that aren't even Windows - on a hodgepodge of supposedly-EOL hardware; while three of the four OSes are in beta (and one of those three is a server OS), none are in VMs - I specifically didn't count my VMs.

PGHammer said,
Desktops (the form-factor, and their components) wear like iron - it's getting less and less likely that desktop PC components will need replacing due to failure; obsolescence is actually the bigger driver for desktop-component replacement, and it's been that way for the last fifteen years, if not more. If you have a Core 2 (Intel) or equivalent AMD CPU, or any of their progeny, you can run any x32 (and most x64) version of Windows since XP - and yes, I'm including Pentiums, Celerons, Semprons, and Turions derived from those mainstream CPUs as well. I've mostly upgraded desktops following the lyrics of the late Johnny Cash's "One Piece At A Time" - because you don't have to upgrade everything. (The sour economic outlook has, in fact, driven more desktop owners to enroll in the same "school" of upgrading.) It's how I have wound up with four OSes - including two that aren't even Windows - on a hodgepodge of supposedly-EOL hardware; while three of the four OSes are in beta (and one of those three is a server OS), none are in VMs - I specifically didn't count my VMs.

And yet the very behavior you're describing is a curse on the desktop PC. While there's a joy in taking apart and putting together and upgrading and making things better, that sort of audience is a niche in any mainstream market, one that shrinks as consumer demand grows, and only grows again in *percentage* of users once the market is obsolete and consumers have left.

It won't take long for "personal computers" to become specialty computers, and the businesses will change in response. OEM participation will plummet, and the desktop's future will be evolving toward catering to a smaller audience at higher prices.

Willing things to stagnate or insisting the old ways are the best ways has...well, it's never gotten anybody anywhere, has it?

Well... yeah, i'm one of the few that still uses a desktop in my area
But kinda surprised Laptop sales are up, and by quite a bit more then desktop sales dropped... who cried that Win8 was the cause of a dying computer market?

warwagon said,

Everyone?

Lazy OEM's who wanted to sell people the same rehashed crap with a new OS and crapware slapped on it. Lenovo actually put some effort into embracing Microsofts vision for Window's 8. The others just did the same old same old. The same laziness that belittled XP Media Center and caused outrage at Vista.

indeed with windows 8 and now windows 8.1 MS are forcing these crappy oems's to up there game with design and hardware and price, which at the end of the day is good for us and bad for oems's that want to recycle crap hardware.

Considering Lenovo made the move to offer Windows 7 on some of their computers, one has to wonder if that was a reason for their increase of sales.

Raa said,
Considering Lenovo made the move to offer Windows 7 on some of their computers, one has to wonder if that was a reason for their increase of sales.

Correct, as I remember they were one of the OEM's that were pushing Windows 7.

Sadelwo said,

Lazy OEM's who wanted to sell people the same rehashed crap with a new OS and crapware slapped on it. Lenovo actually put some effort into embracing Microsofts vision for Window's 8. The others just did the same old same old. The same laziness that belittled XP Media Center and caused outrage at Vista.


Good point with the crapware... However, the difference is that Vista was bloated and buggy as all hell... actually, XP was buggy on first release too. Comparitively, Windows 8 is incredibly efficient and relatively bug-free (despite a number of very vocal users moaning about the interface changing and their cheese being moved)

james.faction said,

Good point with the crapware... However, the difference is that Vista was bloated and buggy as all hell... actually, XP was buggy on first release too. Comparitively, Windows 8 is incredibly efficient and relatively bug-free (despite a number of very vocal users moaning about the interface changing and their cheese being moved)

XP was buggy as any other software was at the time. In early 20th Century cars were not as reliable as to today as well. It is called progress....