"Incorrectly" meaning "not in the way that casts Apple in the best possible light." There are very legitimate problems with lumping the iPad in with PCs for the purpose of making a sales comparison, and the news reports (e.g.) have done a good job making the perils of this comparison clear. You, on the other hand have decided that it's simply "incorrect" to differ with the notion that the iPad might not be comparable to a PC.

You can't rightly say it's a "brand new category" to make a certain argument, then lump it in with Apple's desktops and laptops running traditional OSes with traditional OS features to make a different argument. If you're going to do that, why not count the iPad Mini, er, iPhone?



What "alternative OS" are these other netbooks running? Are you calling Ubunto an "alternative OS" to be compared with IOS? Again, it's either a new paradigm or it's not.

As a huge fan of OS X and Apple hardware, I'm very pleased with Apple's ascendancy to the #3 spot in *computer* sales, and their complete domination of the "tablet type thingies that run a walled garden phone operating system" market is admirable. But, iPads aren't PCs, and they're not "computers" in the conventional sense. That's a good thing for Apple's bottom line, but bad for someone who wants to try to stretch this unambiguously great news into something more than it is.