What are the tier 1 & 2 vendors/brand (2017)?

[revzephyr]

What are the current tier 1 and tier 2 IT companies?

I heard that a few years back was:
Tier 1: HP, DELL, Lenovo

How about ASUS, Fujitsu, Toshiba, etc.?

 

[GreyCatz]

What are the current tier 1 and tier 2 IT companies?

I heard that a few years back was:
Tier 1: HP, DELL, Lenovo

How about ASUS, Fujitsu, Toshiba, etc.?

One answer could be:
Tier 1: Apple.
Tier 2: Everyone else.


Here's another much longer answer (for whenever you have some time to spare):

HP, Dell, Lenovo, and Apple are IT supermarkets, meaning they all cover a very broad range of computers/computerized devices. HP have the most extensive range that includes specialized hospital and research equipment, but they don't make smartphones. Lenovo and Apple make computers and smartphones but do not make printers. Of those mentioned, Dell have the most limited range of computer devices.

This supermarket strategy allows these companies to offer a host of different products at competitive prices. I guess you could consider them 'Tier 1' companies solely on that ground. Another argument often invoked is that of 'pedigree': HP and Apple are 2 of the oldest computer companies still in business (IBM still make giant industry servers, but their product range is too limited as to be part of this discussion).

Lenovo started out as an IBM subcontractor in the early 1980s and eventually bought IBM's PC Division in 2005, so they definitely have some computer history but not much experience in consumer-grade products. Backed by a very aggressive strategy of 'carpet-bombing' the market with a multitude of cheap-to-affordable smartphones, they are now the world's largest computer manufacturer with a current product line covering the entire quality gamut - from the cheap, throw-away IdeaPad 100 to their flagship ThinkPad P50/70. The deal with IBM, that included the ThinkPad brand, gave them a massive presence in the business community overnight, one that HP and others spent decades on building, and so far Lenovo seem to recognize the value of keeping this 'golden goose' instead of cashing in on the 'golden eggs'.

Along with IBM, HP are definitely one the 'blue-bloods' of the computer industry. Currently, they are involved in a global strategy of divesting as many divisions as possible. This is bound to affect employees, too, and thereby also the level and quality of consumer support. It's been a while since I last checked the business pages, so I don't know exactly how far they've come in this process, and it might indeed yield a slimmer and more efficient organization all around. HP's zBook workstations enjoy a very loyal and enthusiastic following despite the very steep prices.

Starting out as an aggressive underdog, Dell have made an impressive journey considering its short history. They are generally favoured by professionals who put a premium on quality screens. Dells are typically priced slightly above comparable Lenovos and slightly below comparable HPs (specifically workstations). While offering a wide range of industry servers, Dell are still rather limited in terms of product lines. This could turn out to be a wise decision or one that makes them more vulnerable. Consumer support seems to be a mixed bag.

Apple really should be considered the very definition of 'Tier 1' - in terms of build quality and resources spent on design. Whatever your opinion on the obscene prices or the stereotypical Apple consumer, you have to recognize the fact that they routinely introduce features and design solutions that others will eventually copy some 5 or 6 years down the road (one such example is Lenovo's P900 workstation, which is basically a carbon-copy of Apple's G-series from the early 2000s, except the P900 looks like a kid's toy by comparison).

As for the rest, or 'Tier 2':
- ASUS make very desirable consumer laptops and also offer workstations alongside gaming computers. Their ZenBook line, while great-looking, is far too obviously a MacBook copy to be considered a serious rival, and unlike the MacBooks, the ZenBooks are hampered by all manner of battery issues. They are, of course, also significantly less expensive than MacBooks.
- Fujitsu are one of the casualties of the PC battles of the late 1990s; they used to be everywhere (like HP) but today they are mostly to be found in large corporations (as servers) and in specialized technical fields.
- Toshiba are also one of the 'blue-bloods', except they're Japanese and somehow people don't put their computers in the same league as HP or even Lenovo. Toshibas are generally well-built and tend to grow on people once they buy one.
- Acer offer computers with generous specs and less impressive build quality. Whether by design or accident, this has been the case for most of their short history, but they're still here and seem to do well. Consumer support remains less than generous among online posters.

Finally, there are all the niche or boutique brands, such as MSI, XMG, and EuroCom. Most of these brands are little more than rebranded Sagers, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, except you do pay a hefty premium. EuroCom do rate a special mention as they primarily target professionals or specialists. As such, they seem to be more of an 'insider's choice'.

Cheers,
GreyCatz.

 

[revzephyr]

Thank you GreyCatz,

I thought it was something to do with ODM and OEM. From your explanation, it sounds more like tier is determined by percentage of market share. Is that what you are saying?

What are the current tier 1 and tier 2 IT companies?

I heard that a few years back was:
Tier 1: HP, DELL, Lenovo

How about ASUS, Fujitsu, Toshiba, etc.?

One answer could be:
Tier 1: Apple.
Tier 2: Everyone else.


Here's another much longer answer (for whenever you have some time to spare):

HP, Dell, Lenovo, and Apple are IT supermarkets, meaning they all cover a very broad range of computers/computerized devices. HP have the most extensive range that includes specialized hospital and research equipment, but they don't make smartphones. Lenovo and Apple make computers and smartphones but do not make printers. Of those mentioned, Dell have the most limited range of computer devices.

This supermarket strategy allows these companies to offer a host of different products at competitive prices. I guess you could consider them 'Tier 1' companies solely on that ground. Another argument often invoked is that of 'pedigree': HP and Apple are 2 of the oldest computer companies still in business (IBM still make giant industry servers, but their product range is too limited as to be part of this discussion).

Lenovo started out as an IBM subcontractor in the early 1980s and eventually bought IBM's PC Division in 2005, so they definitely have some computer history but not much experience in consumer-grade products. Backed by a very aggressive strategy of 'carpet-bombing' the market with a multitude of cheap-to-affordable smartphones, they are now the world's largest computer manufacturer with a current product line covering the entire quality gamut - from the cheap, throw-away IdeaPad 100 to their flagship ThinkPad P50/70. The deal with IBM, that included the ThinkPad brand, gave them a massive presence in the business community overnight, one that HP and others spent decades on building, and so far Lenovo seem to recognize the value of keeping this 'golden goose' instead of cashing in on the 'golden eggs'.

Along with IBM, HP are definitely one the 'blue-bloods' of the computer industry. Currently, they are involved in a global strategy of divesting as many divisions as possible. This is bound to affect employees, too, and thereby also the level and quality of consumer support. It's been a while since I last checked the business pages, so I don't know exactly how far they've come in this process, and it might indeed yield a slimmer and more efficient organization all around. HP's zBook workstations enjoy a very loyal and enthusiastic following despite the very steep prices.

Starting out as an aggressive underdog, Dell have made an impressive journey considering its short history. They are generally favoured by professionals who put a premium on quality screens. Dells are typically priced slightly above comparable Lenovos and slightly below comparable HPs (specifically workstations). While offering a wide range of industry servers, Dell are still rather limited in terms of product lines. This could turn out to be a wise decision or one that makes them more vulnerable. Consumer support seems to be a mixed bag.

Apple really should be considered the very definition of 'Tier 1' - in terms of build quality and resources spent on design. Whatever your opinion on the obscene prices or the stereotypical Apple consumer, you have to recognize the fact that they routinely introduce features and design solutions that others will eventually copy some 5 or 6 years down the road (one such example is Lenovo's P900 workstation, which is basically a carbon-copy of Apple's G-series from the early 2000s, except the P900 looks like a kid's toy by comparison).

As for the rest, or 'Tier 2':
- ASUS make very desirable consumer laptops and also offer workstations alongside gaming computers. Their ZenBook line, while great-looking, is far too obviously a MacBook copy to be considered a serious rival, and unlike the MacBooks, the ZenBooks are hampered by all manner of battery issues. They are, of course, also significantly less expensive than MacBooks.
- Fujitsu are one of the casualties of the PC battles of the late 1990s; they used to be everywhere (like HP) but today they are mostly to be found in large corporations (as servers) and in specialized technical fields.
- Toshiba are also one of the 'blue-bloods', except they're Japanese and somehow people don't put their computers in the same league as HP or even Lenovo. Toshibas are generally well-built and tend to grow on people once they buy one.
- Acer offer computers with generous specs and less impressive build quality. Whether by design or accident, this has been the case for most of their short history, but they're still here and seem to do well. Consumer support remains less than generous among online posters.

Finally, there are all the niche or boutique brands, such as MSI, XMG, and EuroCom. Most of these brands are little more than rebranded Sagers, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, except you do pay a hefty premium. EuroCom do rate a special mention as they primarily target professionals or specialists. As such, they seem to be more of an 'insider's choice'.

Cheers,
GreyCatz.

 

[GreyCatz]

I guess what I was trying to say (before I drifted off quite badly) is that (a) I don't usually use those terms myself, and (b) such classification tends to be used in very specific circumstances, e.g. on the stock exchange.

If we're to use these terms on this forum, I would expect them to reflect the following company characteristics:
1. Product range,
2. Staying power, and
3. Level of support.

So, any computer manufacturer that offers a decent range of products, has been in the business for a decent amount of time, and will take your call when you need support will qualify as a 'Tier 1' company.

The range of products is an indication of economic resources and (sometimes) innovation. If it's more than 20 years old, chances are it will still be around next year as well. And when you need support, it's always reassuring to talk to someone who actually knows about your product. These may sound as pretty obvious concerns, but you'd be surprised how many computer companies fall short on at least one of them.

But this is my interpretation of 'tiers'. If yours is different, please let me know - I don't own the truth on this.