What happened to the PCs?

Only a couple of years ago PCs were the most spread computers on earth. No the situation is different;  notebooks, netbooks, tablets and smartphones are dictating the pace of technical development. This rush for mobility seems natural but I'm convinced that for work, entertainment and information gathering and production till the PCs are the best equipment. In my view the PCs have lost market share so rapidly because their makers forget to innovate. And just the companies (the PC makers, Microsoft and Intel) are to blame. The concentrated on the price and this is what I think missed:

• Design. Although there were some efforts to make computers more attractive, in general they still look like industry boxes. The only exception is Apple, no wonder it's successful and earns times more money on a PC than anybody else.
• Segmentation. PCs are more or less segmented (there are smaller and bigger ones plus barebone) but I think PCs for business and home must be designed and developed more or less independently. It seems that vendors couldn't decide which segment to serve and they fail on both. 
• Performance. Today microprocessors are anything but slow, however they are not the only part of a computer which influence performance. Why is that there are no PCs e.g. with two level file systems. Most users only a fraction of the files regularly. These should be on SSD primary disk, providing faster boot times and overall performance. (And the secondary drive could be slower and having more capacity or lower prices. An other option is to use the graphic cards - which are in fact supercomputers - for everyday calculations. Providing a good library they could be used for a lot of tradition applications to boost performance (like excel). 
• Comfort. Why we can't have computers without noise? I would like to see refined cooling systems which doesn't need fans (or can be more powerful). My dream idea is to cool the PCs with thermoelectric generators which also would produce electricity so lowering power consumption.
• Green Computing. Even if we put environmental concerns aside the power consumption of a PC is considerable (even in standby). Less need for power could be a sales argument but it's almost never used.
• Integration. Apple came up with the idea of a media hub but later quietly abandoned it. Why can't be a PC an integral part of our household connecting, appliances, entertainment devices, communication and surveillance systems. The technology is available only nobody seems to take care to standardise it and put good solutions onto the market (I would watch Samsung however). 
• Services. Again the industry had to wait for Apple to implement iTunes and Appstore. Such services should be an integral part of any PCs people buy.  But what I find intriguing is the vast amount of computer power and capacity sitting on our desk most of the time unused. Why there isn't a way to share these resources e.g. by spreading the shared files on workstations and such saving the file server. Or providing search, database or enterprise solution in the same share manner. The system could scale fine with the number of users (except the network) no need to extra investment. Global companies could eventually move processing around the globe, and private persons sell the unused capacity of their computers to cloud computing providers.
•  Modularity. Why can't computer be more modular. Why we don't have displays with built in camera, speaker, touch interface and Blue-tooth or WiFi connection to use it like a tablet.
• Detaching personal data and computing. I would prefer that e.g. my mobile phone connects to my computer and exchanges (after proper authentication) all my personal settings. If I change may computer or use another computer my mobile phone configures it form me maybe also using a web service. This detaching of computer power would allow to me work even on my handy (e.g. dictating a text) and then to went on with the work at my desk. 

I think there are options which we all could use well.