The company claims that the Wall Street Journal got it all wrong

May 14, 2008 15:01 GMT  ·  By
Dell stays committed to the XPS lineup, but it will invest more in Alienware's products
   Dell stays committed to the XPS lineup, but it will invest more in Alienware's products

Dell has issued an official response claiming that it would not phase out its XPS gaming products, as previously reported. Despite the fact that it will invest more resources in its boutique PC division Alienware, Dell stays committed to the XPS brand.

"Dell XPS and Alienware are both great brands... and both will live on", spokeswoman Anne Camden said in an official blog entry. "But we are going to expand our focus on Alienware. We are going to invest like crazy in product development, design, and engineering to propel Alienware as the premier gaming brand in the future", she wrote.

Camden also wanted to make it clear that the XPS family of products is more than a simple brand of gaming computers. She said that XPS machines are cutting-edge computers that are optimized for any computing-intensive task.

"XPS remains an important Dell brand with its heritage of premium performance... In the last year, XPS has expanded well beyond a gaming brand-look at the XPS One, our first entry into the all-in-one market, the XPS M1330, an industry leading ultraportable or the XPS 420 desktop, designed for multimedia activities", Camden continued.

It seems like all the confusion was triggered by the online version of the Wall Street Journal and Camden alleged that the journal misreported the company's future plans regarding the XPS system lineup.

"XPS gaming systems will remain an important part of our gaming product portfolio. We don't plan an early phase-out of these systems, as the WSJ incorrectly stated, and in fact we'll continue to refresh them to keep them on the front edge of gaming", Camden concluded.

Dell's allegations actually make sense, given the fact that it has just announced a graphics update to its XPS M1730 gaming notebook. The update would have been pointless if applied to a product that was about to be phased out.