Challengers

Challengers have high scores in Ability to Execute, but their Completeness of Vision scores are not as high as the leaders. Challengers often have a good market presence and financial stability, but they may have less geographic coverage or they lack an innovative view of the products.

Visionaries

Visionaries have high scores in Completeness of Vision; however, their Ability to Execute scores are not as high as vendors in the Leaders quadrant. Their market presence may be less than the leaders, and their financial stability may not be as solid. Also, their sales organization and customer support mechanism my not be as comprehensive as the leaders.

Niche Players

Vendors in the Niche Players quadrant do not have high scores in both axes. They have a low market presence, and market coverage is limited. Meanwhile, they may specialize in particular areas in a vertical-market segment or have product portfolios in which leaders may not have much focus.

Vendor Comments

Acer

Acer is in the Challengers quadrant, but on the border of the Niche Players quadrant. Acer has global product offerings, with a highly efficient supply chain and a strong market presence across many regions. However, its core business targets transactional customers (small business and retail), and its business model is not focused on the higher- volume requirements of large-enterprise customers. Global service and support capabilities, as well as account management, are far below those offered by the market leaders. Acer’s lack of investment in these enterprise capabilities limits our evaluation of its ability to execute and completeness of vision as a potential enterprise notebook supplier.

Recommendation: Acer is recommended as a potential supplier for global enterprise notebook requirements only if standardization and global account management are not required.

Dell

Dell’s scores for Ability to Execute are the highest among all notebook vendors. Dell has an excellent supply chain for notebook products and strong marketing execution capabilities. Dell achieved the highest overall viability score and remains the leader in service and support for the largest global enterprises. However, for smaller enterprises that do not achieve “global account status” with Dell, the level of service is often less. For such customers, service and support may be inconsistent across different regions, ranging from excellent in some mature markets to barely adequate in others.

Recommendation: Global enterprises and large organizations (irrespective of location) should consider Dell as a prospective supplier for all business notebook requirements. Midsize organizations, especially those operating in multiple geographic locations, should expect Dell’s level of service and support to be less consistent.

Fujitsu/Fujitsu Siemens

Fujitsu and Fujitsu Siemens offer a common range of global PC products, although they are two separate entities. Thus, this Magic Quadrant evaluates these two companies as a single aggregate vendor.

Fujitsu/Fujitsu Siemens is positioned in the Leaders quadrant although its position is close to the border of the visionaries quadrant. Fujitsu/Fujitsu Siemens offers a range of quality enterprise notebooks. Its ability to understand customer needs matches that of leading competitors. Customer feedback mechanisms and appropriate service offerings are integrated into its operation. A challenge for Fujitsu/Fujitsu Siemens is its inconsistent global presence, which results in inconsistent levels of services between regions. In particular, its capabilities in North America lag those in other regions, particularly Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA).

Recommendation: Fujitsu/Fujitsu Siemens should be considered for global notebook PC contracts only by organizations for which the majority of users are not U.S.-based. Organizations with high numbers of U.S.-based users should consider it as a potential supplier only if they have some other compelling

4