Slashdot Mirror


Traditional PC Sales Continue To Slide (zdnet.com)

Sales of traditional PCs continue to decline, although the overall PC market is likely to grow slightly next year. From a report: Traditional PC shipments are forecast to drop by nearly eight percent this year, and another 4.4 percent in 2018, predicts analyst firm Gartner. Which means that, by 2019, 16 million fewer traditional PCs and notebooks will be sold than were shipped this year. However, much of this will be offset by the rise in spending on high-end notebooks like Microsoft's Surface and Apple's MacBook, so that the overall PC market will by 2019 be at pretty much the same level it was last year. Tablets -- defined by Gartner as basic and utility ultramobile devices -- will also decline over the period to 2019.

223 comments

  1. Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Based on the traffic at places like Microcenter I'd offer this: more people have the basic skills now to build a computer on their own rather then buy one. I haven't met a single person in over 10 years that bought a computer, everyone built their own. Corporations are buying laptops for telecommuters and staff versus bulky PCs that are easier to transport, deploy, and use less power for the workloads they deal with.

    1. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I used to build my own computers to try to wring every last ounce of performance out of well selected components; nowadays the technology is so fast it just isn't worth it. I'll buy mass market commodity machines for dirt cheap the run circles around even the most ambitious builds I used to do.

      It's a dying art.

    2. Re:Builders vs Buyers by ZorinLynx · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yeah, it's sad but true.

      Even with gaming systems, unless you're the sort who wants a flashy LED-lit clear-side case that looks like a spaceship, you can build a top-performing system just by buying a mass market machine and selecting the video card you want to put into it.

      The enthusiast market is still there, but it's mostly for people who want their computer to look like it belongs on the set of Star Trek. I (sadly?) outgrew that once I was out of my 20s.

    3. Re:Builders vs Buyers by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      The number of people who build their own computers is a tiny, tiny fraction of the market. Your sample data is skewed by the types of people you know.

      It also used to be cheaper to build. It's really not anymore. I still do because I've been building my own, barring laptops of course, for over 30 years and it's fun.

      Very few people in the market build their own though. You are mistaken.

    4. Re:Builders vs Buyers by oic0 · · Score: 2

      Buying is more cost effective if you want a workstations or web browsing PC. If you want something fast you have to build yourself or you get gouged. Especially if you want a decent video card. They won't just sell you fast guts in whatever you want. They try to make it like buying a car. You have to go on up to the expensive model before you can get a real V8, etc..

    5. Re:Builders vs Buyers by DarkRookie · · Score: 1

      You can buy a sexy case with out lights. I have a nice Antec one that is all black.

      --
      The millennial that doesn't like most of the stuff designed for millennials.
    6. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Scholasticus · · Score: 1

      The only off-the-shelf machines I buy are laptops. I've been doing my own builds since the late '90s. I don't think I'm necessarily getting something better than an off-the-shelf machine, I just enjoy doing the build. I probably end up spending more money than I would have otherwise. That's all right too. If at some point the build-your-own market no longer exists, will I still be able to buy an off the-shelf machine? If not, will I be able to buy a laptop that I can plug a mouse and a full sized keyboard into? If yes to either of those, I'll be happy. The only scenario I really wouldn't like would be being stuck with some handheld thing and the only input device is a touch screen. I don't see that happening any time soon, if ever. So ... I know this change in the market is news, but I kind of don't care.

    7. Re:Builders vs Buyers by sinij · · Score: 1

      I want my PC to be a beige box with no preloaded crapware. This is why I still build my own systems, however last one was more than 4 years ago and it is still going strong with more RAM and new video card.

    8. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Not quite. Prebuilt systems are significantly cheaper. My parents computer died last week.

      They bought a rediculous over specced PC all in one with a 27 inch 2K 1440P screen, i7, SSD, 16 gigs of RAM and even a gaming card Nvidia GTX 950ti for $999. All my Dad needed was the big screen for his 70 year old eyes LOL

      That would be well over $1500 if you home brewed it.

    9. Re:Builders vs Buyers by sycodon · · Score: 2

      Just picked up an iCore 5, 12 gigs, 2 terabtes HD...$197

      Great for porn, web, and most games older than about 4 years ago. It's runs SQL Server 2012, VS 2012, and some other IDEs environments just fine.

      Why would I pay $1k for anything else?

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    10. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Is it the 1200 with the lovely dust-traps on top?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    11. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consider that the GPU may not have enough lanes to get full speed. The RAM is probably not DDR4, and it being an AIO machine means that heat will be a problem, especially with an i7 (which is likely gimped and lacks the full features of the chip).

      It seems like your parents got taken advantage of by sales people.

    12. Re:Builders vs Buyers by sycodon · · Score: 1

      Forgot to mention...Discount Electronics.

      The had iCore 7s for $300.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    13. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      I am 41 and got more into it. It's fun and I like the flexibility that I can add another SSD for a raid as an example which I do use for virtual machines.

      You can't just upgrade (to the grandparent here) the graphics card either. PCs today have shitty 190 watt power supplies that will blow or lack slots on the board even.

      Yes you pay more. But my ram is not soldiered in. My chipset let's me overclock, I can fit a water cooler as lastest i9s and i7ks burn HOT like 90C to piss on AMD and vice versa. If my fans get noisy I can replace them. I can add more hard drives and ssds. My UEFI bios let's me run virtualization and Intel storage options for RAID.

      My point is OEMS suck and have freaking taken an Apple role of gluing and crippling their products so they can sell higher skus. Yes, Asus and Dell are guilty of these things described above and will happily not tell you they under locked your CPU, soldiered your ram, and turned off virtualization until AFTER you bought it.

      But if you just use Chrome and Excel then who cares that Dell is cheaper.

      If you need more and code or need to learn server stuff with virtualization or game you can't beat a home brew.

    14. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Actually it's growing and quite popular as consumer GPUs really started killing the consoles over the past 7 years.

      Asus and gigabyte sell tens of millions of GPUs and gaming motherboards each year.

      Who isn't buying them is Grandma and housewives to text on Facebook.

    15. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can build a top-performing system just by buying a mass market machine and selecting the video card you want to put into it.

      No, you really can't. And I'm not talking about water-cooled idiocy.

      Granted, you can get an okay-peforming system just by buying a mass market machine and shoving a new video card in, but that's been the case for this past decade.

    16. Re:Builders vs Buyers by oic0 · · Score: 1

      They don't put power supplies capable of running decent video cards in most mass market PCs. They also rarely use full width cases anymore.

    17. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buying from one of the big companies has two main problems:

      1.) The PSUs are weak. A 300 watt power supply probably doesn't even have an extra connector to handle more power graphics cards.

      2.) The warranty seals. You can't open the damn things to insert a GPU without breaking it.

    18. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As one who built about twenty desktops for my family, in generations starting with the 8086, I confess to having bought two Dells and one HP desktops as my last three. It's easier, cheaper, and faster.

    19. Re:Builders vs Buyers by war4peace · · Score: 1

      What is an iCore, again?

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    20. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Consider that the GPU may not have enough lanes to get full speed. The RAM is probably not DDR4, and it being an AIO machine means that heat will be a problem, especially with an i7 (which is likely gimped and lacks the full features of the chip).

      It seems like your parents got taken advantage of by sales people.

      Nope I picked it. DDR 4 ram is required by the CPU chipset. The CPU chipset sets the lanes too so ditto on both. They don't need dedicated gaming graphics.

      All they need is a big screen that is quality IPS and fast SSD boot ups. Who cares if i7 is clocked slower as not everyone games or compiles gigabytes of code all day.

    21. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

      This was my assumption. At least it certainly seemed that way.

      I built one last fall, focusing on expandability, specifically ram. I have 32 gb of ram and I can expand to 128. The only reason I didn't go for it immediately is because I wanted dual 970s and an Oculus Rift (I know...). Soon, I'll need to buy 1080s, (or maybe just one this time). I'll expand the ram to 64gb and call it a day. It has an Intel thing with 12 threads (hyperthreaded), more than enough for what I'll need during the useful life of the machine. I don't even care enough to remember what model it was. It holds its own when rendering though - that's what matters to me.

      My hobbies are 3d modeling, programming, 2D art, and some games. This rig is not bleeding edge, but I'd like to keep it close, with newish hardware that's just beginning to come down to reasonable prices.

      If I bought a premade machine, I'd spend more for fewer options and less expandability. It's also less fun.

    22. Re:Builders vs Buyers by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      The only reason to pay $$$ is for the monitor or the looks. Or both.

      I recently bought a cheap HP Stream laptop for about $200. 4GB RAM, 64 GB SSD. Not fast, but very lightweight, and it's good enough for light work when you're traveling. And it has Windows, which for all its faults is still a real OS (unlike what you get on Chromebooks, e.g.).

      That said, where'd you get it? I use an iMac most of the time at home (great monitor, great looks, fast enough for everything I do), but my old PC could use an update.

    23. Re: Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You must have been a shitty builder or building basic mom and dad computers. I have never seen even a moderate performance PC that could outperform a built PC for the same price.

    24. Re:Builders vs Buyers by avandesande · · Score: 2

      it's the stuff that comes out of a demon when you stab him

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    25. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. RAID and SSD are still overpriced. And don't even get me started on the crapware they install. And try to get Win 7 on it. Meh. No thanks.

    26. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Just picked up an iCore 5, 12 gigs, 2 terabtes HD...$197

      Great for porn, web, and most games older than about 4 years ago. It's runs SQL Server 2012, VS 2012, and some other IDEs environments just fine.

      Why would I pay $1k for anything else?

      For one SSD is monumentous improvement. So much so there is no way you will go back after you experience it. Second since you mentioned SQL Server and Web development it is nice to partition that off in a VM. VirtualBox and Linux KMS is free and for a little more you can upgrade your copy of Windows 10 Home to Windows 10 Pro which comes with Hyper-V for free which is great for running Windows based Vms and of course VMWare Workstation.

      Did your OEM turn off virtualization? What if you need more ram? Are they soldiered in?

      You are an IT professional.

      Your time and reputation is worth it if you have a decent system that can have you learn material, practice simulated VMs, and do your job better and more efficiently. So I would argue even building your own new i5 for $1200 you can pick up an NvME 960 or a cheaper Samsung Pro 1 TB SSD and 32 gigs of ram and can put SQL Server where it belongs on a VM and leave your desktop lighter and quicker.

      My 4 year old i7 with raid 0 ssds for VMs and another SSD for bootup complete with an RX 470 AMD card and 32 gigs of ram was expensive but I have 3 virtual machines open right now and they all start within 2 to 3 seconds.

    27. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      more people have the basic skills now to build a computer on their own rather then buy one

      That's not exactly true. It's not that people now have the skills to build a computer, it's that building a computer has become extremely simple.

      Gone are the days when you had to not only get the right parts, but you had to manually configure ports, IRQs, DMAs, memory addresses, solder components, etc. Building a computer nowadays is a matter of just plugging things together. If you can plug a cartridge into a game console, you can build a modern PC.

    28. Re: Builders vs Buyers by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      I was thinking he meant a Sonata, or one of the P100 series cases, such as the P183. Or the P380.

      Those VSK-3000 and VSK-4000 cases look nice also.

    29. Re: Builders vs Buyers by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      It ain't that simple, for a well optimized machine anyway.

      Also, it ain't like you can run an Intel chip on an AMD based motherboard.

      While I will admit it has gotten much simpler to throw something together that will boot Windows, I know very few people with the skills to do even that. Most of them work in IT, though I'm not sure everybody I know that works in IT can build their own PC.

    30. Re:Builders vs Buyers by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Who gives a crap about the case or components, new PC purchase, Windows anal probe 10, stops me cold and with it purchase of software to run on that platform. So pretty much keep the existing going until a platform switch. There is a sound reason PC sales are doing badly and it is all down to M$ and their privacy invasive bullshit.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    31. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      Building it myself is cheaper and more customizable.

      I may want to use a rackmount case that I already have (or buy a new one), use the power supply, hard drive, sound card etc that I already have. This way I only pay for the components I need right now. When building a new main PC (that I also use for games), I usually keep the old video card for a while, until I buy a new one when it is clear that the old one is too slow. That way I do not have to spend as much money at once.

    32. Re:Builders vs Buyers by blackomegax · · Score: 1

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Warranty seals are illegal.

    33. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I buy a decent box with the latest processor and then I upgrade the video card.

      I do not build. It's a pain in the ass.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    34. Re:Builders vs Buyers by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      I've never been into the flashy stuff either. I build my own mainly because I tend to like to pick and choose my components without paying for components that I don't want, like conventional SSD and/or HDD for example when I have a Samsung 960 Pro NVMe disk that I much prefer. I also like cases with ample room to run big, slow turning fans, and have the drive bays totally gutted for even more slow turning fans, thus the PC is very quiet and well cooled even while running heavy loads.

      That, and I still run an i7 2600k (Sandy Bridge era) CPU; I've hacked the motherboard firmware to add features (like NVMe support) so I haven't had a need to either build or buy a new PC from scratch in the past 5 years. I probably won't even move to a new CPU until at least two more generations of GPUs have passed (I'm currently on a GTX970.)

    35. Re: Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do. I have built all my non laptop PCs since the days of ms dos (pre-windows). No bloat ware or factory installed malware (Lenovo) quality brand hardware selected by me. Now the cycle has slowed as the speed I need is now ok on a 7 year old box I overbuilt. But I will not use windos 10 due to the total lack of privacy offered and the lack of features that I use that are not in windows 10. Windows 7 without telementary update is where I stop. Moving to Linux and macOS now. Keeping win 7 for the software I spent a fortune on and will not replace for another os version or not offered for another os. Screw Microsoft they have no right to spy on my computer.

    36. Re:Builders vs Buyers by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      A huge portion of performance parts are sold to smaller shops such as CyberPower PC, etc. They build them and people buy them. I'd welcome any statistics you have that show that end users are increasingly building their own.

    37. Re:Builders vs Buyers by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

      I look for refurb models with last year's high-end hardware, it's so much cheaper and the performance differences are miniscule.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    38. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Pretty much this. Everyone today can build a computer, or at least knows someone who can, and nobody has those extra 50 or 100 to spend on assembly. Not to mention that people noticed that it's easy to mix and match to their liking and needn't buy off the shelf, paying for what they don't need.

      Offices prefer laptops for their smaller footprint and the ability to move them around more easily. Docking stations make it possible to exist in an office where you don't have "your" desk anymore but rather your trolley, where your laptop and other material resides, you take it to a free office desk, dock in and work. Since laptops aren't really that much more expensive anymore than desktops, at least in the office price range where the few bucks difference is easily offset by the increased flexibility, and since offices tend to buy cookie-cutter solutions anyway to ensure their ability to replace broken machines easily and quickly, laptops win out.

      So who'd buy the ready-made desktop sitting on the shelf anymore?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    39. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      In my experience (since I'm the one who gets to assemble them...), most people would rather buy components and assemble them or have them assembled. Maybe they got burned by "value" components in pre-made desktops a few too many times...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    40. Re: Builders vs Buyers by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      I haven't met a single person in over 10 years that bought a computer, everyone built their own.

      You canâ(TM)t believe your anecdotal experience is representative of anything. Especially since over the last decade at least, more people are buying laptops than desktops

    41. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't met a single person in over 10 years that bought a computer, everyone built their own.

      I bet you live in a big house in the suburbs with a spare room for gaming and electronics hobbies.

    42. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For one SSD is monumentous improvement. So much so there is no way you will go back after you experience it.

      On Windows maybe. Linux is much better at using RAM for disk cache, and no matter how slow my hard drive is and no matter how fast your SSD is, my RAM is still faster than your SSD.

    43. Re:Builders vs Buyers by kick6 · · Score: 1

      Corporations are buying laptops for telecommuters and staff versus bulky PCs that are easier to transport, deploy, and use less power for the workloads they deal with.

      What corporations are actually doing is buying cheap, garbage, laptops in bulk and """standardizing""" on them. Which sucks for anyone that has a workload that needs more than an i5 with 8GB of RAM.

    44. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you want to run games that aren't 4 years old?

    45. Re:Builders vs Buyers by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Docking stations make it possible to exist in an office where you don't have "your" desk anymore but rather your trolley, where your laptop and other material resides, you take it to a free office desk, dock in and work.

      They make it technically possible, but that is still an untenable work situation for human beings.

    46. Re:Builders vs Buyers by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The had iCore 7s for $300.

      If I actually intended to do gaming, I'd have got the i7. The i5 is mostly fine now, but the i7 would last longer. In AMD-land I have tended to skimp on CPU, because I knew I'd be able to get another one cheaply later and slap it into the same socket, but since they've finally switched sockets I wouldn't do that there either.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    47. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly this is confirmation bias.

      For everyone one you see built at Microcenter, there were hundreds not bought. The numbers show this. The consumer market for PCs went over a cliff in 2012 and has never recovered. Even the OEMs like Acer and Asus who actually suppl most HP and Dell PCs went over a cliff as well.

      What you are probably seeing is the bottom dropping out and the conventional supply chains emptying out so the best choice for any PC that isn't a piece of shit, lowest common denominator PC, is literally to build your own. However the people who want this are mostly highly technical people or people with special needs (e.g. gaming PCs). Neither of those markets is much more than a few % of the total current PC market. Basically you are seeing an unwinding back to the early days of PC technology adoption.

    48. Re:Builders vs Buyers by tepples · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what you mean by "aren't 4 years old". The Curse of Possum Hollow was released in 2016 and runs on anything with an NES emulator.

    49. Re:Builders vs Buyers by tepples · · Score: 1

      If at some point the build-your-own market no longer exists, will I still be able to buy an off the-shelf machine? If not, will I be able to buy a laptop that I can plug a mouse and a full sized keyboard into? If yes to either of those, I'll be happy. The only scenario I really wouldn't like would be being stuck with some handheld thing and the only input device is a touch screen.

      Or if you can buy a "laptop", but it runs a locked-down mobile operating system that behaves as if it were a tablet with a USB keyboard and trackpad plugged into it, or it doesn't run any applications other than a web browser.

    50. Re:Builders vs Buyers by tepples · · Score: 1

      If you can plug a cartridge into a game console, you can build a modern PC.

      I can plug an Eskimo Bob or Haunted: Halloween '85 cartridge into a Nintendo Entertainment System Control Deck. I even know to use a cotton swab rather than blowing. But I haven't seen (in person) anyone who built his own laptop from a "barebook".

    51. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Agripa · · Score: 1

      I always built my own systems so they are more reliable, easier to maintain, and have features not available in "consumer" systems. This is also less expensive in the long term.

    52. Re:Builders vs Buyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody is talking about assembling a laptop, but I'm sure you thought you had a point.

    53. Re:Builders vs Buyers by tepples · · Score: 1

      building a computer has become extremely simple. [...] Building a computer nowadays is a matter of just plugging things together. If you can plug a cartridge into a game console, you can build a modern PC.

      I haven't seen (in person) anyone who built his own laptop from a "barebook".

      Nobody is talking about assembling a laptop, but I'm sure you thought you had a point.

      My point is that a commentator who thinks everyone ought to build a PC instead of buying one needs to start remembering to toss "desktop" in the post in order to ensure readers that he or she didn't forget about those users who have a valid reason to use a laptop, such as use while riding public transit. I've actually found that the assumption that all PCs are desktops to be related to the assumption that all people drive cars.

    54. Re:Builders vs Buyers by toddestan · · Score: 1

      If I had to guess, if you take the people who buy desktops, and remove the corporate market, the number of people who build their own computers is probably larger than you might think.

      The problem is everyone seems to be like me - built themselves a computer 5 years ago and feel absolutely no reason to build a new one today.

    55. Re: Builders vs Buyers by DarkRookie · · Score: 1

      I have an Antec P90 without the side window https://www.newegg.com/Product...

      --
      The millennial that doesn't like most of the stuff designed for millennials.
  2. longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think people are keeping their machines for longer and longer as time goes on.

    1. Re: longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know I am. I have a dedicated console for gaming and multimedia, and my desktop (built in 2013 and still going strong) for web browsing and Photoshop.

      Iâ(TM)ve thought about getting a NUC and a Synology NAS unit to replace my bulky desktop and tower server, but the space/energy savings will be negligible, and I canâ(TM)t justify the cost.

    2. Re:longer lifetime by Headw1nd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is most likely the case. Twenty years ago, a six year old computer was basically worthless. Now unless it's for high-end gaming, a six year old home computer is fine.

    3. Re:longer lifetime by ZorinLynx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Systems are not becoming obsolete as quickly as they used to.

      I remember how back in 1995, a computer from 1991 was considered slow as hell and could hardly run any current software.

      Now in 2017, a computer from 2013 is still perfectly usable and fast. The rate of performance increase has slowed to an utter crawl. The biggest advancements in recent years have been reduced power consumption and increasing density in solid state storage, and the latter can be an upgrade to your old machine.

    4. Re:longer lifetime by oic0 · · Score: 1

      You can blame that on Intel and their sandbagging. Why would I build a new PC when it would be less than 25% faster than my 5 year old one. Especially if you overclock. The new stuff is not going to blow away my 4.8ghz 3770k.

    5. Re:longer lifetime by MightyYar · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      increasing density in solid state storage, and the latter can be an upgrade to your old machine.

      Yup, this. I'm using a 2009 laptop with memory and SSD added. It's definitely getting long in the tooth, but performance is still acceptable (even if battery life is not). My father had his 5-year-old mid-range desktop die on him. For roughly $200 he can replace it with a brand new machine with the same specs. And there's no reason for him not to do that.

      The problem is they very much do make them like they used to.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    6. Re:longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I credit the OS vendors, who have stopped greedily helping themselves to my machine's processing power and are actually making their code faster and more efficient for a change.

    7. Re:longer lifetime by darkain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It isn't so much that performance has not continued to increase. It is that we've hit the point of diminishing returns for 99% of applications. a single-core 1GHz processor will run Microsoft Word about the same as a 10+ core 3+GHz CPU. And with even low end budget GPUs nowadays offering hardware decoding of 4k h.264, the rest of the computational power of the CPU and GPU isn't really meaningful for the majority of consumers.

      Gamers, content producers, and scientific researchers are really the only fields left to push the boundaries of computational power.

    8. Re:longer lifetime by jwhyche · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It isn't "most like" the case. It is the case. Fifteen years ago I was changing out processors or memory every 6 months. Now I design my personal workstations with a 5 year lifespan. I have a friend that did the same thing. Now he has a 5th generation i7 that is almost 3 years old. He said he has no intention of upgrading anything till something fails or some radical advancement in technology comes out.

      I'm in the same boat. I have a i7-6700K which is a 6th generation processor. Intel just announced they are about to release the 8th generation i7. From looking at what is being release I see no real performance gain over my 6th generation.

      My linux server is a centos 6 running on a AMD 8350. As a server it has different requirements than my workstation. Its my file/plex server. It's been doing that role since 2013. It is entering its 5th year in that role and I see no reason to update it for the next 3 or 4 years.

      As for your mundane computer users, the PC used to be a oddity. Now they treat a PC more like an appliance than a oddity. Its more like a refrigerator than a computer. You don't upgrade your refrigerator every year or so. This is even if they have a PC. Most now have laptops and treat them the same way.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    9. Re:longer lifetime by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      But... But.. How will you do VR??

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    10. Re:longer lifetime by jwhyche · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You can blame that on Intel and their sandbagging

      No you can't. I doubt that Intel is sandbagging anything. If they where then AMD would be running away with clockspeeds. But if you look at AMD processors you will see they are running at the same clock speeds as Intel.

      The reason processors are not going any faster is we have hit the limit of what can be done with the current technology. Over the next few years we might see a increase in a few hundred mhz here and there. But there will never be another leap of 2 or 3 ghz again. Not with what we have.

      To go any faster it will take a radical shift in the basic process of comptuer. Quantum processors maybe.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    11. Re: longer lifetime by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      2013 is considered very new. My Haswel today still is in the same league with Skylake of today. AMD has changed the game with their neat 8 core CPUs. But mine still works in the meantime

    12. Re:longer lifetime by rmdingler · · Score: 0

      Spot on, but if we're being forthcoming, I'd have to admit that I was intrigued by your +4 comment score with no adjective emphasis.

      At this moment, it appears you have a +2 starting score and a single upmod (+1 Interesting)>

      How does that work? Did you pull CmdrTaco's arse out of the fire in college?

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    13. Re:longer lifetime by Streetlight · · Score: 1

      The hardware may last longer before failing, but I'm not sure PCs have gotten much better in terms of processor speed and overall performance. Of course, the newest processors use less energy, but that's been the case for older processors, too. One big advance is the introduction of Solid State Drives (SSD) which make boot up almost instantaneous compared to their spinning drive cousins. The increase in RAM also increases performance by allowing memory hog applications to run fast. With PCs having these couple of advances, why buy a new PC if a newer one would have about the same, excellent performance as the one you already own.

      --
      In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    14. Re:longer lifetime by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      FYI the new AMD CPU Ryzen are 8 core 16 threads and Intel's response coffeelake CPus are 6 core 12 threaded i7s .

      Don't know what your workload works like but I thought I would mention it as AND got competitive again.

    15. Re:longer lifetime by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      You are not the only one that has expressed a interest in this. It started doing that a few months ago after I sent a email to have some issues fixed with my account. I have sent a few more emails to point that out but never got a reply on them.

      So, I figure if the powers that be seem to be fine with me posting at a +3 why should I give a fuck?

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    16. Re:longer lifetime by Megane · · Score: 1

      I see a starting score of 2, an Interesting, and an Insightful, so I don't know what's going on from your point of view.

      A starting score of 2 is something you can get if you both have a high enough karma score and enable it in your settings. It's been a long time since karma was visible, but I think you needed 25 out of the max 50. Back when it was new, it was the shit, but long ago decided I didn't care enough about standing out with that extra point.

      There's also a side-effect where that will cause your post to reach max karma with one less point, meaning you can't get 5 karma points from a really good "karma whore" post. But most posts don't reach +5, because with Slashdot's moderation system, even having a 3 or 4 rating is good enough, and most people won't bother to set their filters to need a 5.

      There are other things which you the reader can do which affect the score you see on a message, particularly the friends/foes system, but you should see those in the score tally. Also keep in mind that in a heavily moderated message, only the most popular three mod types are shown, and rounded to the nearest 10%. This was because of a few incidents where people with mod points would see a message that had been heavily moderated, and pile on just to see a message have a bunch of mods on it.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    17. Re:longer lifetime by Targon · · Score: 1

      There is the whole issue of lowest common denominator when it comes to computers, and what developers base their designs around. Intel really has not been improving processor performance, or system design for a long time, due to AMD not being competitive in the low end. The result is that we still see the majority of new chips being two core processors, up until the 8th generation came out, and not long enough to actually impact the market. AMD is finally competitive again, which is pushing Intel into finally killing dual-core chips.

      Now, you need to also look at programming....why code to take advantage of more threads if the majority of systems are only dual core? Now, clock speed is another story, where clock speeds mean less than looking at performance per clock cycle. When 3.9GHz from one chip is competitive with another chip that runs at 4.5GHz, the pure "clock speed" isn't a important, except if the programs you run are VERY VERY simple, without much complexity.

    18. Re:longer lifetime by antdude · · Score: 1

      Yep. I used to upgrade my custom built computers about every two years because I was a gamer. Not anymore. I rarely play them too and managed to find free time to resume playing old games from a decade ago from my mostly the same gaming computer and OS! :O Some things are slow like the HDDs and same video card (512 MB of VRAM). Overall, still usable for Internet stuff.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    19. Re:longer lifetime by Targon · · Score: 1

      The reason people have kept their machines for longer is because the new machines are not all that much faster. When new machines are a significant improvement over older machines, people are more inclined to upgrade. I will note that the smartphone market has slowed for that very reason, the new phones are not significantly better until you look at the improvements over three generations, not one.

    20. Re:longer lifetime by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      That's implied in "gaming".

    21. Re:longer lifetime by Solandri · · Score: 2

      GHz for GHz, Kaby Lake (Jan 2017 desktop release) is only about 20% faster than Sandy Bridge (Jan 2011 desktop release). 20% improvement in 6 years. I'm still telling people with Sandy Bridge systems not to bother upgrading. Unless you want more cores (i3 to i5 or i7), some of the newer features (like USB-C support), or want lower power consumption, there's no reason to stop using a Sandy Bridge system.

      Clock speed has also been relatively static. 3.6-3.9 GHz in 2011 to 4.4-4.5 GHz in 2017. A 19% increase. Combine the two and you get an underwhelming 42% improvement in processor speed in 6 years.

      Even as recently as the late 1990s, by the time a system was 6 years old, it was far beyond obsolete. For example, November 1995 saw the release of the 200 MHz Pentium Pro. If you skip ahead 6 years, you find the 2.0 GHz Pentium 4 released in August 2001. A 900% increase just in clock speed in 6 years.

      PC sales are lackluster because there's no reason to upgrade at anywhere close to the rate we had to upgrade in the past.

    22. Re:longer lifetime by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      We typically have a 3-year rolling upgrade program, but my work laptop is now 4 years old. The newer Intel CPUs are only about 20-30% faster and until they start supporting LPDDR4, I'm stuck with a choice of 16GB of RAM (the same as my current machine) or a crappy battery life (10W+ idle power consumption for 32GB of DDR4). GPUs are quite a bit faster, but I don't use the GPU much for work.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    23. Re:longer lifetime by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 2

      My desktop is from 2010, and it still keeps up quite. To be fair, it's a 3.2GHz 6-core Phenom II with 16GB RAM, so reasonably high-end for the time, but I honestly think I could keep using it just fine for at least another 3-4 years, before noticing any shortcomings. The graphics card (GTX460) is its weakest point by far, once I upgraded to an SSD.

      --
      Eat the rich.
    24. Re:longer lifetime by hackertourist · · Score: 1

      +2 starting scores are part of the system:
      "Normally users with high karma post at Score: 2, but you can choose to post down in the Score: 1 gutters with the rest of the user population with this option. "

      (see your account options)

    25. Re:longer lifetime by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I think people are keeping their machines for longer and longer as time goes on.

      And why replace them?

      Even gamers don't really have a compelling urge anymore to upgrade every other year. The "leaps" in hardware performance get smaller and the gaps between those leaps bigger. The difference between GForce 9xx and 10xx is measurable, but hardly an argument to toss a working 9xx for a 10xx. Likewise, CPUs from 2 generations ago are still quite capable of running modern games, especially since the bottleneck is less and less the CPU power. With "bottleneck" already being rather silly a term, for we have arrived at a point where there is very little left to be desired when it comes to realism.

      And it's even less relevant with office computers that were essentially "good enough" 5 or even 10 years ago. The bottleneck there is the user, not any component residing in the computer. Anything but the most complex operations that you do once every blue moon (as an ordinary office user) happens instantaneous with zero delay. Why buy a faster computer, so it spends even more time idle?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    26. Re: longer lifetime by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I play games on a machine built in 2014. Still way, way more than "good enough". The only time I actually do notice a slight performance hit is with VR.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    27. Re:longer lifetime by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      20 years ago, a 2 year old computer was basically something you toss at your poor friend so he can play some old games while you bought the bleedin' edge computer that allowed you to at least run the new stuff at decent framerates.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    28. Re:longer lifetime by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      And, lo and behold, since we don't upgrade our OS anymore because everyone's hoping and waiting for something to finally replace Windows 7, the urge to upgrade your hardware stopped. At worst, you have to reinstall Win7 to get the performance back on par.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    29. Re:longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Now I design my personal workstations with a 5 year lifespan.

      Yet, PC hobbyists still bitch about Apple only updating the Mac Pro once every 5 years.

    30. Re:longer lifetime by houghi · · Score: 1

      I think I bought my PC in 2017. I have 3 4K screens and the only thing I added was a new video card. Running three video cards in 2D is all I need. The limiting factor is me, not the PC.

      I get more speed by adding an adfilter than anything else.

      I have moved my data to a NAS, so I have access to it and do the backup on a second NAS. Both have 2X2TB and 2X4TB HD's. That is 12TB each. Still have 5TB available. If they go down enough in price, I will just replace that with 12TB in each.

      The only reason I am thinking about getting a new machine is that I have a tower and would like to go mini-ITX and I have disposable income. Technically I think I could wait another 5 years easy and perhaps more.

      Technically there is no reason now.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    31. Re:longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look at his posts. He's starting at +3.

    32. Re:longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That, and also because I could actually spend about 300$ to upgrade my 8 yr old pc with a new PSU, and a video card. Putting an SSD drive also gave new life to my old pc.

      Couple with the face that a lot of games are designed to have long life spans where the engine itself doesn't change that much (just think League of legends being released in 2009 and it's still up there in terms of esports)

    33. Re:longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's also a side-effect where that will cause your post to reach max karma with one less point, meaning you can't get 5 karma points from a really good "karma whore" post. But most posts don't reach +5, because with Slashdot's moderation system, even having a 3 or 4 rating is good enough, and most people won't bother to set their filters to need a 5.

      Warning: off topic from TFA but rather reply to the parent post... I have to post AC due to I'm putting some mod points in the discussion (but not the one I'm answer though).

      Anyway, it is incorrect that you can't reach real +5 point with +2 being turned on. If you don't notice, some +5 post can still get 1 more mod point. It is not the case where someone else mods it down before you refresh the page. The reason is that the display says +5, but the system actually has +4, so it can still accept +1 more mod point. However, most people wouldn't mod up any +5 post again because they think it is at max already. Therefore, you still can reach real +5 post with +2 turned on but very unlikely due to people skip modding up when they see a post with +5 post.

    34. Re:longer lifetime by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      In part. However I think it is just as much the fault of changing trends forcing chip makers to refocus priorities.

      With a PC, you could make your CPU run as fast as you want, just pump more power into it. It was coming from the wall so who cares. So long as you can somehow cool you cpu down enough to keep it from melting you're fine...

      Enter the age of the laptop. Now you have a battery. Any performance gain in cpu driven by power is going to reduce your battery duration. All the focus and development in the last decade hasn't been to increase raw cpu power but rather to make small gains while trying to making them as power efficient as possible. Indeed as many have mention the demand isn't as much any more as software hasn't really required it, and those that do are usually more gpu dependent than not. At the same time software has struggled to really take advantage of the 64bit architecture that has been around for years, nor even parallel processing with multiple cpu's that have been around for some time now. At most, there is more memory available generally, and you can multitask programs, but that is mostly it. Very few applications really take advantage of either really, and even then how many things do you really need to do at the same time we these 8, 12, 16 core systems?

      Anyway I'll probably build a new system in the next year or so anyway, though I may not really actually *need* to... Then again I could probably get away with just buying a new gpu really...

    35. Re:longer lifetime by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      GHz for GHz, Kaby Lake (Jan 2017 desktop release) is only about 20% faster than Sandy Bridge (Jan 2011 desktop release). 20% improvement in 6 years. I'm still telling people with Sandy Bridge systems not to bother upgrading. Unless you want more cores (i3 to i5 or i7), some of the newer features (like USB-C support), or want lower power consumption, there's no reason to stop using a Sandy Bridge system

      This is the reason I upgraded from my old AMD 8150. It wasn't because of processor performance. I upgraded because the features I anted, USB-C and decent m.2 support, where not available on AMD at the time. Large jumps in PC performance are not because of processors but due to better I/O devices like PCI-e M.2 modules.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    36. Re:longer lifetime by neoRUR · · Score: 1

      Same here, same computer for 5 years, Just upgrade the Graphics card. The computer even crashed and I replaced the hard drive, but same computer. Same thing at work, No real need to upgrade.
      But it all comes and goes in cycles, just the cycles seem to be getting longer.
      There is no real new hardware that is forcing people to buy new machines. I think that people are building their own rigs for coin mining, but that is just a basic motherboard, memory, power and lots of graphics cards.
      Maybe when Neural Net chips will start to become more common place.

    37. Re:longer lifetime by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      I don't believe we will be seeing a shortage of uses for dual core cpu's for a very long time. Of course I think I said the same thing about single cores too, so take that with a gain of salt. I would say that most things that a PC needs to do can be done quite nicely with a dual core CPU..

      I think the real performance increases for the next 10 years will come in storage. One of the reasons I upgraded was to get a m.2 module for my workstation. There is still plenty of room for performance increases in that area.

      Memory still lags behind processor performance too. DDR4 is fast but there is still plenty of room there too.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    38. Re:longer lifetime by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The graphics card (GTX460) is its weakest point by far, once I upgraded to an SSD.

      Yep, that's probably enough CPU to keep a 970 or even 980 busy. I have a FX-8350 with dual 950 OCs (Zotac AMP!) in SLI (one was a warranty replacement for a 750 Ti, WTG Zotac) which is about equivalent to a 970, and I still seem to be GPU-limited.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    39. Re:longer lifetime by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I would say that most things that a PC needs to do can be done quite nicely with a dual core CPU..

      The average user who does anything more complicated than email and youtube will see benefits up to about four cores, even for light gaming because the OS keeps chugging along and doing things in the background whether you like it or not, and because multithreading is now common — but only three or four threads. However, having more threads is now not wholly uncommon either, thanks to the dominant game consoles going to more cores.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    40. Re:longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, in the same time, creimer's food intake has increased four-fold as well.

      Coincidence? You be the judge.

    41. Re:longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heck, I'm using a 2010 iMac and it still works great (HD upgraded to SSD of course). I figure maybe 3 more years before I buy a new desktop system.

    42. Re:longer lifetime by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      I would go farther and say even most extreme users don't need more than 4 core or 8 threads. I'm considered a power user by most who know me. I'm also a creator in second life. It's not unheard of for me to have 2 firestorm viewers up and running on one desktop, blender open on another, photoshop on the third, and all the while there is a VM running in the background where my shoutcast station is running to provide a stream to the sims I manage. Doing all this and my processor rarely clocks more than 40% across all 4 cores.

      Lots of people don't realize how powerful modern desktops really are.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    43. Re:longer lifetime by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I think it depends on whether you're using AMD or Intel, frankly. You need more cores to accomplish the same thing with AMD that you do with Intel. Having more real cores actually makes some things faster, and the price:performance ratio is still better in most cases, but the point still stands. AMD put more cores into their processors because they needed them. And that's why minimum frame rates are still better on an Intel processor with 4 cores and 8 threads than on an AMD processor with 8 cores. In the best (and most parallelized) case, the AMD processor is faster. The rest of the time, it's Intel. For example, Ryzen produces a faster result in Cinebench than the "equivalent" Intel processor, but loses most other benchmarks. But that equivalence is not price equivalence...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    44. Re:longer lifetime by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      That has really only been true with the bulldozer core from AMD. Most of the time AMD only lagged behind intel by a few percent, not enough to pay an extra hundred or more bucks for. The bulldozer cores are where AMD fumbled the ball, but even then the processors where still more than enough for most people. Hell, I bought two of them.

      I think a lot of it depends on the software too. I've noticed that when running windows on similar class processors, one AMD and one intel, the AMD system always seems to be more sluggish than the intel. I've noticed nothing like this on linux systems. In-fact my 8350 sometimes out performs xeon class machines on some tasks.

      Of course nothing here is new. Most of us already know that gaming engines are compiled and optimized for the most common processor out there. An that is a quad core intel based system.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    45. Re:longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is most likely the case. Twenty years ago, a six year old computer was basically worthless. Now unless it's for high-end gaming, a six year old home computer is fine.

      Exactly. In the early 2000s my two sons and I played Barbie doll with computers as they upgraded, handing down CPUs, motherboards, and GPUs (As the non-gamer I was at the end of the hand-me-down chain.) There seemed to be a component coming thru the pipeline every 3-6 months as they did something that roughly doubled performance. It's now been about three years since any of us upgraded. My eldest has remarked that there's no reasonable way to double his speed. Yeah, it could be done but it would take $5000 (CPU,motherboard,video) vs the $300 upgrades back then.

    46. Re:longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christopher, my love,

      I am deeply sorry. I didn't feel well lately but I am better now. I am sorry that I called you all sorts of names on /. and I feel truly ashamed of myself.

      The python click script you wrote for me my sweet love for my pheromone revenue stream web site suddenly stopped to work.

      Could you come visit me in my studio so we could look at it?

      Update: I could go get you at work around noon and we could go have lunch at the Cafe Latte near by where we went last week and tonight we could have a look at that python click script you wrote for me my sweet love for my pheromone revenue stream web site.

      Signed:
      Your sweetee who will love you for ever.

    47. Re:longer lifetime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the desktop user, average CPU usage is mostly irrelevant. What matters is the machine's ability to accomplish short bursts of intense activity quickly. For an interactive session, I want the machine to spend all its time basically idle, then when I perform some UI gesture I want it to obey my command and display the result as fast as possible.

  3. New PCs aren't needed by Snotnose · · Score: 0

    Didn't replace my tower when the PS gave up it's smoke, didn't use it much anymore. Had my last laptop 5 years. This one is 3 years old and still going strong.

    The days of needing to upgrade everything every 2-3 years are long gone.

    1. Re:New PCs aren't needed by Dwedit · · Score: 1

      Except for GPUs, those are still gaining processing capabilities at an exponential rate.

    2. Re:New PCs aren't needed by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      But if you are not hard-core gaming then most people are fine with computer made years ago and are somewhat okay with tablets.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:New PCs aren't needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      and? your point? you still have a pc and still contribute to sales numbers every few years.

      and oh, btw.. your current laptop will get replaced sooner than you think it will. they are simply no longer designed to last past the warranty or typical lease periods... like that old thinkpad or latitude that would go for 10 years, easy.

      anything past 1 year is lucky, past 3 years is a god damn miracle.

    4. Re:New PCs aren't needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is no longer necessary to upgrade desktop PCs and laptops every 2-3 years. For most, the performance of a 5-7 year old desktop or laptop is good enough, and buying a newer desktop or laptop will not get most people enough of a boost in speed to justify the cost.

      Also M$'s surface, and (Cr)apple's iCrap are not actually high end devices, they are no better than Dell, who took over the title of the most cheaply made junk from e-machines and Gateway years ago. (Cr)apple has managed to convince idiots and hipsters (and M$ is trying to) that owning their cheaply made junk products makes one hip, or cool, or whatever. iCrap is more like vastly overpriced fake jewellery than a useful product, and always has been.

      A few of my friends have owned iCrap over the years. It never took them long to figure out that they had paid far far far too much for useless iCrap, and they in every case they passed the iCrap off to some iDiot, and got something better that cost a lot less!

    5. Re:New PCs aren't needed by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I have an AMD A8-7600 and it runs a lot of games very respectably. I tried out the Destiny2 Beta and it only got like 20 fps, but that game is pretty amazing. I can run Unreal 4 on it without much problems with lag. For a computer without a dedicated graphics card it actually runs a lot of games.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    6. Re:New PCs aren't needed by darkain · · Score: 1

      While I agree mostly with this, I think I've lucked out. I purchased my Acer Aspire One back in 2012, and still going perfectly strong!

    7. Re:New PCs aren't needed by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      They do gain, compared to CPUs at least, but what for? Unless you're mining Bitcoins, do you need the additional horse power? What resolution at what Hz do you really need? Where is the limit of "good enough"?

      Sure, you can get more out of a 10xx than a 9xx. Does it warrant the price difference, that is the question. Does it warrant upgrading?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  4. I've said it before ... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 0, Troll

    We have "Personal Computers" that aren't running windows, we have them in our Pockets running Linux and BSD.

    The idea that a PC has to be a Desktop running Windows is one that has to die. We are in a post windows world.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    1. Re:I've said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So did you write this comment on a desktop or pocket computer?

    2. Re:I've said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are many times when a larger display is necessary, or far more convenient and not as babysitting'ish.
      Processing and data wise I agree, but not for visual.
      I'm talking OS-agnostic, since it's about hardware and not software.

    3. Re:I've said it before ... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      A lot of modern smartphones and tablets have HDMI output, so you can carry them around in your pocket and plug them in to a big screen plus a bluetooth keyboard and mouse. Of course, then you're stuck with a somewhat underpowered device with a UI that's designed for a 5" screen and doesn't scale well to a larger display.

      That said, I'd love for someone to resurrect the Samsung research project from about 10 years ago that did partial migration with Xen. They had a demo where they ran a VM on a phone, then plugged it into a big computer and used the OS hotplug facilities to make it think that it now had more cores, more RAM, and some extra peripherals, in a NUMA arrangement: memory pages were automatically faulted across between the machines by the hypervisor and if the scheduler moved a process to the fast CPUs it would eventually move over. The only real problem was that everything broke horribly if you unplugged the phone before migrating everything back, but that could be solved by providing a dock that doesn't release the phone until it's either powered off or everything is migrated back. This arrangement let you use a small mobile device for everyday computing, but move large workloads transparently to more powerful compute resources when you needed them.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:I've said it before ... by tepples · · Score: 1

      Good luck doing any substantial programming on a pocket BSD machine.

  5. Intel by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much of this is related to Intel's ~7 competition-free years in the desktop processor market. I, for one, have not yet felt compelled to upgrade beyond Sandy/Ivy Bridge. Still not quite there yet, as I just don't need more than 6 cores at 4GHz+; the power consumption improvements are looking pretty enticing though.

    Does anyone out there keep statistics specific to 'enthusiast' platform (LGA2011, TR4) sales? I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that those have spiked a bit.

    --
    There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    1. Re:Intel by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      I'd say it has more to do with the fact that tablets and smartphones are generally okay for most people to do the majority of their computing tasks these days. For those that need a desktop or laptop, one from several years back is sufficient. Gamers and some professionals need the latest and greatest. For example, my parents got a new laptop only because their last desktop died and only for certain things. They use their tablets/phones for things like checking mail and reading news.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:Intel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's both.

      My PC which I bought about 7 years ago is still technically good enough. Could be better certainly, but good enough.

      I'm also doing more and more on my phone and my tablets. So I have less time and money for my PC. So when push comes to shove... Why upgrade it?

  6. The x86 PC and security. by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 1

    People never liked the x86 PC, but had to have them to use the Internet's content consumption aspects.

    But the issue I have is this: I currently have a Lineage OS Running Phone, and a DD-WRT Router that I have to re-flash to fix a terrible security vulnerability. (KRACK) and due to the design of these things, the update could possibly soft brick them. I neevr had this issue with my x86 PCs

    1. Re:The x86 PC and security. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd hope you never had that problem on any PC... no matter the processor. That's an issue with appliances only.

    2. Re:The x86 PC and security. by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Could be worse, I have a Motorola (now Lenovo) phone from 2014. It was their flagship phone when it was released. It hasn't received a security update since 2016
      It's not like I expect it to run the next version of Android, just a security patch level later than 1 August 2016

    3. Re:The x86 PC and security. by maestroX · · Score: 1

      Never liked?

      x86 is the greatest tune,tinker & upgradefest in computing history.
      Current alternative offerings are glued to last warranty at most.

      Countless patches, fixes, whoring BIOS glitches and aftermarket parts to keep it running and extended, it's the ugly dutiful locomotive that owes respect, not your shiny new Tesla.

    4. Re:The x86 PC and security. by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      People never liked the x86 PC

      No. Back in the day a few hackers and engineers didn't like the x86 PC. I wasn't a big fan of it back then ether. I liked the 68K line.

      Then and now most people didn't give a shit what processor their PC was running as long as it did the job. I'm willing to bet that most of the people out there don't know what processor their phone is running. I bet even less of them realize that their smart phone is a really just a mini computer they can carry.

      Now today most hackers and engineers embrace the x86 PC because it is the best game in town. Sure the ARM processors are doing a good job and have the phone/tablet in the box, but the world runs on x86 processors.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    5. Re:The x86 PC and security. by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      People never liked the x86 PC

      No. Back in the day a few hackers and engineers didn't like the x86 PC. I wasn't a big fan of it back then ether. I liked the 68K line.
      Then and now most people didn't give a shit what processor their PC was running as long as it did the job.

      I don't think they mentioned x86 because they thought people didn't like the x86. I think they mentioned it because all those other things were also personal computers, and they wanted to differentiate. It was true, too; until about the Windows 95 era, a PC was considered by many if not most people both inside and outside of the industry to be the lame but affordable option. If you were in the industry, you were comparing it to "real" computers like ones from Sun, or even other machines from IBM; if you weren't, you compared it to a Mac, or even an Amiga or Atari (both of which offered much more functionality for less money.) Remember, while the dominant word processor on the PC was still WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS, everyone else was using WYSIWYG with onscreen graphics and scalable fonts. People would drop right back into DOS out of Windows 3.1 to run WP, making Windows a glorified task launcher.

      Anyway, until it sprouted a PCI bus, the x86 PC was a pathetic joke to almost everyone. Before that there were only occasional efforts to build "real" machines around x86 chips, all of which were economic failures. There was an 8-way 486 which would run SunOS, for example, and Sun's own 386-based i86pc. There was the brief flirtation with the EISA bus, and the less brief but more restricted to IBM MCA bus, but these were both crap without even the style of other personal computer buses like Zorro (Amiga) or NuBus (Macintosh) which offered autoconfiguration without floppy disks. VLB was also garbage; in theory you could use two bus-mastering, DMA-transferring devices on the same PC, but in practice this was usually problematic and required extensive troubleshooting to make work if it would in fact work at all.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re: The x86 PC and security. by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      "Then came the Win95 era", and the Pentiums, and id Software, and 3DFX, and Sound Blaster.

      And then it was all about what could run Windows the fastest.

      To be honest, when Windows 95 first came out, it ran like Vista did when it first came out. It would barely boot on the specs we had at the time, much less run anything of any use.

    7. Re: The x86 PC and security. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "Then came the Win95 era", and the Pentiums, and id Software, and 3DFX, and Sound Blaster.
      And then it was all about what could run Windows the fastest.

      I'd suggest that the watershed moment wasn't actually until Windows 2000 in the enterprise, or Windows XP on the consumer desktop. Before that, it still seemed like there was a point to [classic] MacOS, for example, and the Unix workstations were still more powerful than a PC.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re: The x86 PC and security. by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      I don't know. Windows 98 SE was tha bomb diggity! Especially if you had a Pentium Pro or better!

      My Windows 2000 Pro, dual Pentium III 600mhz, with 512mb of RAM and an AGP Geforce MX440 was a nice rig about the time XP came out. Almost never blue screened. Not sure if I'd call those watershed moments. Windows XP was pretty big, much to my shagrin. Hated that OS more than any other.

    9. Re: The x86 PC and security. by Miamicanes · · Score: 2

      I was a die-hard m68k fan... but in retrospect, that's because back in the early 90s (right before DOS4GW), writing programs in anything besides realmode assembly was damn-near impossible.

      I remember how I discovered (sometime around 1992 when I was in college) that every x86 from the 386dx onwards HAD orthogonal registers & could do flat addressing... then went in literal circles for MONTHS trying to find anything that resembled documentation or development tools.

      To this day, I have no idea whether published books about the topic even EXISTED circa 1992, or whether MASM circa '92 could actually DO protected mode. I basically gave up after someone on Usenet disillusioned me... basically, protected-mode (circa '92) meant no BIOS calls (DOS extenders didn't quite exist yet). No BIOS calls meant you couldn't even output characters to the screen without knowing more about the inner workings of a VGA card's CRTC than any 18 year old could have hoped to know at that point (the first meaty books explaining videocard programming weren't readily available yet... they technically existed, but if you didn't already KNOW their titles & author names, your likelihood of discovering them was basically "nil" unless you were rich enough to blindly order expensive books from B. Dalton's or Waldenbooks sight-unseen based on their titles alone... and wait 6-8 weeks for them to arrive. Information-wise, it really WAS the Dark Ages compared to now.

      Pre-Google, finding stuff about esoteric subjects was *hard* -- even as an undergrad at a major research university that HAD internet access... you'd post to Usenet, but if you missed seeing a reply, it was *gone* forever (as far as you were concerned) a few weeks later (from what I recall, the university's admins purged Usenet posts after ~1-4 weeks... 1 week for alt.binaries.*, 4 weeks for comp.sys.*). The library had computerized indices, of course... but you still had to try and FIND the bound journal. Half the time, it was missing. The other half of the time, it was in limbo (the journals for that year pulled from the shelf for hard-binding, but not actually BOUND yet). And if you weren't a professor or grad student, the library staff had zero interest in tracking missing resources down for you.

      Come to think about it, the "good old days" actually sucked pretty badly.

    10. Re: The x86 PC and security. by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      I would agree that it was around windows 2000 where the PC as we know it was born. That was when most Linux people I know abandoned Linux and moved to windows.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    11. Re: The x86 PC and security. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Windows 98 was not appreciably more stable than Windows 95. I bluescreened it plenty. Windows 2000 is dramatically more stable than Windows 9x or NT4, which let's face it was a bit of a crapfest. 3.51 was much much better than 4 in terms of reliability, though I will concede that its 2GB filesystem limit meant that there was really no choice but to upgrade.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re: The x86 PC and security. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Come to think about it, the "good old days" actually sucked pretty badly.

      We romanticize them because when you solved a significant problem you were a goddamned hero. It's much calmer and safer to live in an age which does not require heroism, but compared to nostalgia it seems boring.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re: The x86 PC and security. by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      Funny. Windows 2000 was a good OS, but during the Windows XP era I switched to Linux.

      I had tried Mandrake 7.2 previously, with WINE, and even an actual Windows 9x install for WINE to lean against. The OS was alright, but I couldn't quite make it my primary OS. Stayed with 98SE, though I probably spent as much time on a used Macintosh.

      Fast forward to the XP era and I switched to Xandros Linux 3, a KDE flavored Debian derivative, tweaked to closely match the Windows 2000 UI standards. That became my primary OS.

    14. Re: The x86 PC and security. by Monster_user · · Score: 1

      I don't see stability as the determining factor for a "watershed" moment. Windows 98SE was sufficiently stable for the games I played, and little work I did. I also knew to save frequently so as to not lose progress during the BSOD of the day.

      Usability probably more so. There was very little difference in the UI between 2000 and 98. Though I don't recall the control panels.

      Windows 2000 and XP introduced a superior multiuser environment than the old 9x OSes had, which made it safer to share the family computer.

    15. Re: The x86 PC and security. by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      When I first saw windows xp I thought "what is this crap?" The interface reminded me of AmigaOS 1.3. After about a month I had figured out how to disable all that theme crap and had XP looking like Windows 2000. Once you got rid of that XP wasn't really that bad of a OS.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
    16. Re: The x86 PC and security. by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      We romanticize them because when you solved a significant problem you were a goddamned hero. It's much calmer and safer to live in an age which does not require heroism, but compared to nostalgia it seems boring.

      Can't argue with you here. Back in the "dark ages" I remember how happy I was to have set up a usenet and email on my Amiga 500 and it actually worked the first time. Hero time.

      We tend to forget the times when we almost burn down our apartment trying to resurrect a toaster oven we pulled out of the dumpster. Just saying....

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  7. Forrester by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Traditional PC shipments are forecast to drop by nearly eight percent this year, and another 4.4 percent in 2018, predicts analyst firm Gartner.

    Forrester says they doubled in the last month and will increase hundredfold by the end of the year.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Forrester by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what about Netcraft? Do they confirm it?

  8. PC longevity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Despite the market sales sliding from mobile sales, I think this can also be attributed to older PCs having a good lifespan. I donâ(TM)t think the average user can tell the difference in performance between an i5 2500K and an i5 7600K. So why upgrade? A vast majority of people I see donâ(TM)t upgrade desktops/laptops because their old one still does the job well. The average person I know is happily using a PC from the 2012-2015 dates. Iâ(TM)d say the only benefit to upgrade is SSDs and for laptops, better battery life

    1. Re:PC longevity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My PC is from 2012 and although I'm surely jinxing it right now, I still don't even find a way to take advantage of it most of the time. The only time it feels insufficient is if I'm trying to play a AAA-video-game from the last 2-3 years at something beyond Medium settings. Or if I compare it to something with multiple video cards - but since I'm barely even using the one I've got now that doesn't really strike me as a shortcoming.

  9. That word... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

    >> gaining processing capabilities at an exponential rate ...I do not think you know what it means.

    1. Re:That word... by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      Moore's Law is exponential, and means exactly this.

      Single-thread performance has pretty much hit a wall, maintaining coherency between too many cores of a traditional processor is an extremely hard task... on the other hand, giving a GPU more cores is nice and easy.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  10. Pretty simple since 2005... by alexandre · · Score: 2

    Buy 4x the amount of ram people buy, be good for 10 years.

    1. Re:Pretty simple since 2005... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why?
      Just buy double and then get the cheapest sticks from ebay if you need to squeeze a couple more years.

    2. Re:Pretty simple since 2005... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nowadays "4x the amount of ram people buy" is at least 32GB which is probably not going to be needed anytime soon. Most OSes have stopped bloating up lately, in part because the manufacturers are trying to use as much of the same code as possible in their mobile OS. Plus for some reason current, supported 32-bit OSes still exist and apps have to account for that.

      May I suggest this alternate rule which applies from at least 2015 on: "buy a 4x bigger SSD than you need now, be good for 10 years". Or until the SSD dies, which was an issue in 2005 as well (hello IBM Deskstar!)

      Caveat: Yes, I know some people will need a big spinning drive for media. Those people will probably have to upgrade their storage within 10 years now matter what they buy now so I consider us an exception. :)

    3. Re:Pretty simple since 2005... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      More RAM stops helping when your entire working set fits in RAM. If you have enough RAM, then when you're machine has been on for a while you write to disk but never read things back. For most people, that amount is still more than 32GB. Even with SSDs, there's a noticeable performance difference between getting data from RAM and from SSD.

      That said, I agree that SSD vs spinning rust is a far more noticeable performance win for most workloads.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:Pretty simple since 2005... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      OSs stopped bloating, games started. Especially with early access games that have zero optimization and leak more than a puppy, 16 Gigs are quickly filled.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  11. Don't forget Linux! by kristofer.vesi · · Score: 1

    (on mobile, quote) "on high-end notebooks like Microsoft's Surface and Apple's MacBook" and Google's Pixelbook. ?

  12. Windows 7 support is needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need support for Windows 7 on new hardware and extend its support beyond 2020. Windows 7 is a stable OS compared to Windows 10. If support for new hardware doesn't happen, then expect prices to rise on older hardware instead of buying new hardware, similar to how 17 inch mac books are rising in price. Mozilla is also to blame, with them discontinuing support for non SSE2 processors and breaking XUL extensions.

    1. Re:Windows 7 support is needed by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      Oh no... Firefox doesn't run on Pre-Pentium 4 or Pre-Athlon 64 CPU's from 15+ years ago?
      You're talking Pentium 3/Celeron of the age and Athlon XP's

    2. Re:Windows 7 support is needed by viperidaenz · · Score: 2

      also... "We need Microsoft to invest a crap-ton of money to further enhance their old software, for no extra money, to support it after the time they said they would when you bought it."

      Good one.

    3. Re:Windows 7 support is needed by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Windows 7 is 8 years old near EOL and quite dated. It's not energy efficient and lacks touch, extra security, and mobile apps like Hulu, Netflix and office 365 add ons like planner, Dynamics, etc.

    4. Re:Windows 7 support is needed by Stormwatch · · Score: 2

      And Windows 10 is a glitchy mess with a butt-ugly interface. Is it a surprise that people cling to the old alternative that actually works better?

      Oh, and Windows is a desktop operating system. No one gives a fuck about those retarded mobile apps.

    5. Re:Windows 7 support is needed by l20502 · · Score: 1

      Energy efficency is good enough considering the underlying hardware, touch is not important, those mobile apps are mostly a consumer thing and companies that have switched from XP not too many years ago aren't going to move away from 7 any time soon.

    6. Re:Windows 7 support is needed by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Fine, charge me a (sensible!) annual fee to continue using Win7 and we're good.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  13. NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by RobinH · · Score: 4, Informative

    I opted to just install an SSD rather than upgrade our PCs at home, and definitely got a few extra years out of them. However, the SSDs are maxing out the data rate of the SATA ports, and now they're coming out the NVMe drives that are 4 times faster than SSDs but you need an M.2 port (as I understand it a direct connection into your PCI bus). For these you typically need a new motherboard. So whereas the upgrade from an HDD to an SSD was very simple and easy, taking the next step means a new motherboard, so if you were already delaying buying a new PC because you did the SSD thing, you're almost certainly going to buy a new PC next time. There's a lot more incentive now.

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    1. Re:NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NVMe is the direct connection. M.2 is similar but in a smaller form factor.

    2. Re:NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      You can get a small card to adapt a pcie slot to give you an m.2 port, as they're basically the same thing with a different connector...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    3. Re:NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd love to know what you're doing at home that requires 50k+ IOPS of a NVMe drive.

    4. Re:NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      Even my 2014 era Haswell has all of that.

    5. Re:NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Nah, you can just get a $15 adapter and put it in any PCIe 4x slot. By the way, if you really want crazy performance get a X399 motherboard with PCIe bifurcation and load it up with quad NVMe cards and you can go nuts with 28GB/s in an 8-way RAID 0 configuration. Not that you'd really notice at consumer queue depths.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by l20502 · · Score: 1

      Those small M.2 things get really hot, no thanks.

    7. Re:NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > as they're basically the same thing with a different connector...

      Sorry, this is incomplete. The M.2 port is a mess. (I just spent a few days understanding it)
      As of now, you're right that all M.2 ports (Keys A, B, E, M) offer PCIe connectivity. However, only the Key M offers PCIe x4, which is what you'd want for NVMe.
      Also in Keys B, M is an integrated SATA line.
      Keys A,B,E include USB lines. (For use with Wifi + Bt combos, mostly).
      There are also other buses on the M.2 connector, I'll refer you to wikipedia for that.

    8. Re: NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by liefer · · Score: 1

      Better, actually, since these add-in cards usually connect directly to the CPU instead of going through the PCH. This lets you run 2 NVMe drives in raid without being bottlenecked by the DMI 3.0 (PCIe 4x) connection between the CPU and PCH

    9. Re:NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      The connector may offer several things (like usb-c does too), but an actual SSD will typically only use either PCIe or SATA so you can buy an adapter that ignores all the other buses available over the connector.
      I have a mac pro using a pcie to M.2 adapter with an SSD connected to it, and the adapter itself appears to be extremely simple... I think it's just a board with connectors, as well as a small handful of resistors, capacitors and a single LED.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    10. Re:NVMe and M.2 ports will likely boost PC sales by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Note that not all motherboards will boot off a M.2 drive connected like that. With Linux, you can just put /boot on something else and everything else can be on the M.2 drive. For Windows it can be a bit more annoying to set up.

  14. Computers aren't "leaping forward" anymore. by pecosdave · · Score: 1

    Used to we had to get new computers to run the latest software and to keep up. If your computer was five years old in 1995 you were working on a joke.

    I have an 11 year old computer in my computer as an HTPC - it supports plentiful RAM, has four cores and plenty of storage room with room for upgrade. I've got a computer that's about eight years old that I'm using for gaming - and I don't have to stick with just ancient stuff, even most modern games that aren't boundary pushing first person shooters run fine on it. In fact I just ordered a used but more powerful than what it already has video card for the HTPC.

    I can buy brand new computers that are NOT as powerful as either of those systems. Sure they'll use less electricity and probably in a smaller form factor, but I can still buy ones that aren't as powerful. That speaks volumes.

    It's time to start building "heritage class" computers that are meant to work for decades instead of cast asides. Instead of a visit to Geek Squad so they can try to build you a new computer it's time to visit something more akin to a jewelry store to keep PCs running and doing smaller long term upgrades.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re:Computers aren't "leaping forward" anymore. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody is gonna pay extra for a computer that will last decades. Because lasting decades isn't guaranteed. And if it doesn't last, you wasted your money.

      What I want is something like a Raspberry Pi that I can plug into a disk drive (or array of them) and a screen and have it just work. Low-cost, low-power and low-hassle to replace if needed.

  15. I upgrd the CPU,MB, GPU, and MEM every 3-4 yrs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had a 3770K, 16GB DDR3, 580GTX SLI, and Sata 3 SSD which has been fine for the past few years, but last month upgraded to the Z299 / 7800X platform, 1080GTX SLI (only using 1 for now), m2 SSD, and 16GB of DDR4 memory. Pretty big difference in gaming, but for regular users.... They will not notice a difference and can easily use a (clean) W7 machine still with a 2nd or 3rd Gen I5 series.

    If any upgrade for the regular user, an SSD would be the biggest bang for the buck.

    (Yes I'm fully aware I jumped the shark on the Z299 chipset....)

  16. 1974 Ford LTD Wagon by Nethead · · Score: 1

    In other news, sales of full sized family wagons have declined for the last 20 years.

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  17. Re:This trend will destroy Firefox. by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Firefox died years ago when they stopped listening to the requests of their users (memory leaks) and started pushing crap nobody asked for including cloning the look and feel of Chrome and I knew it was all over when Mozilla started doing wasteful crap like changing their logo to Moz://a

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  18. apple lack of new hardware on the desktop by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    apple lack of new hardware on the desktop then the imac. Both the mini and pro are very out of date at high prices.

    The imac pro is going to have down clocked cpu's due to the it being thin.

  19. it's a mobile world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People don't like to be tied to a single spot for their computing needs. The average person - almost everyone I know - is now primarily a mobile user. For normal people, that suffices, for browsing, social media updates, watching online videos, listening to music, movies, etc. The fact is that, mobile is now good enough for about 95% of what ppl use computers for.

    Yes, that other 5% will keep existing, but it won't sustain the PC market in the scale that it has been in the past.

  20. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  21. What about Windows 10 migrations? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    Have they forgotten Windows 7 is near EOL soon. I would surely hope they don't count on IT departments waiting until the last minute to migrate like they did during XP.

    I know bank of America has already started their migration early this year and is replacing their fleet of aged hardware as they go on

    1. Re:What about Windows 10 migrations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not being able to find a new PC WITHOUT Win 10 is a big reason why I am not upgrading. I'd rather hold onto my 5 year old PC with Win 7 on it. When I do upgrade, I will probably just go with a Mint Workstation instead of Windows. Works for me since I don't game on my PC anymore.

    2. Re:What about Windows 10 migrations? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I still game on my PC but I won't buy a new version of Windows, so I just won't buy any game which won't run on my dual FX8350/GTX 950 AMP! (one was a warranty replacement for a 750 Ti, so I bought it a twin). These days I mostly just get games from humble bundles, which will all run great on this machine.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:What about Windows 10 migrations? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Pretty much this.

      "PC-purist" gamers tend to be an older bunch who are probably more resilient to the "oohhh, shiny!" factor of $sportsgame $year and $FPS_franchise [$lastversion+1|$lastversion $silly_tagalong_name]. I'm old. I play my games on a PC. And today I guess I'll dust off Roller Coaster Tycoon, haven't played that one in a while. In other words, of course we do play "new" games, but when I look back the past 3 years of me buying "new" games, it's mostly from HBs, a few EA (that's supposed to mean "early access", not the scourge of gaming) titles or stuff that's been in the bargain bin.

      That runs on Win7. And it will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, provided the early access titles don't insist in using DirectX features that MS refuses to backport.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  22. Re:This trend will destroy Firefox. by Bert64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The decline of desktops is more to do with average users realising that a complex computer complete with maintenance requirements and malware risks is not the best choice for someone who just wants to read facebook. These people are better off with an ipad, and they are also the sort of people who will just use whatever browser the machine came with not realising anything else exists.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  23. Red herring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was a red herring to begin with. If mobile devices had been around at the dawn of the www, PCs wouldn't have ever existed outside of niches to begin with, most people don't need all that hardware, they were the only point of access available at the time. Those that require real work stations likely always will, though.

  24. Thresholds haven't been reached by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let them wait until PCI-e 4 and 7nm technology comes about. That will be a good jump in quality for most enthusiast use.

  25. Old / refurb PCs are good enough by Stormwatch · · Score: 2

    Why would you buy a new machine? You can get a $60 refurbished C2D that will meet a regular user's needs comfortably. Or you can get a $150 i5, just add a $150 video card, et voila, a solid gaming rig for the same price as a current console. Some people may want something more high-end, but that's a bit of a niche.

  26. Re:This trend will destroy Firefox. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The decline of desktops is more to do with average users realising that a complex computer complete with maintenance requirements and malware risks is not the best choice for someone who just wants to read facebook. These people are better off with an ipad, and they are also the sort of people who will just use whatever browser the machine came with not realising anything else exists.

    Certainly the case. And this is the only reason why EDGE with a default bing search will eventually see a substantial market share on what home PCs and business workstations there are sold in the next few years. Microsoft is hoping eventually even sys admins will just give in and stop changing the default bing search on their companies thin clients and servers which are slowly moving to Windows 10. The company that I work for even changes the remote server browser to include Chrome and hide IE and EDGE from the users.

    This is exactly why Google is paying huge amounts of cash to have it come up on Safari as the default. Firefox is already irrelevant in business but Google still rules the search so home PCs and even thin clients are becoming a pain in the ass to use custom setting. Not that you cannot change the defaults in Windows 10 and servers but it is becoming more of a pain in the ass to constantly stop the onslaught of lock down through obfuscation of settings controls that Windows 10 brings to new users and those who rely completely upon so called techs to do something as simple as change a default in Windows 10.

  27. Hold on a minute by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Traditional PC shipments are forecast to drop by nearly eight percent this year

    I'm getting ready to put together a monster water-cooled gaming PC build in the next month or so when I start seeing sales on components. Will that count as a "PC sale" or does that only apply to people who go to the Wal-Mart and buy whatever horseshit is sitting on the shelves?

    You know what? Maybe I'll just go to that iBuyPower place and order me up some sick Intel Ultimate Pantyripper Black Box Edition and let them do the heavy lifting. This way I won't have to nick up my hands digging around the sharp edges inside a full tower case.

    Either way, it's going to be sweet. And I really don't give a fuck if "traditional PC sales" are down or not. I'm gonna get mine, and the rest of you can fiddle with your iWatches and eTablets like the fruits that you are.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  28. Wait until 2020 by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    While it is true that home built desktops are a big thing (like my home PCs), and don't show up in metrics unless you clock motherboard stats, with those counted being that somebody buys an OEM OS for them, the next big thing is going to be wearable computers.

    We have the tech to do this already. Basically, you wear the computer. It might be a belt, or part of a jacket, and the sleeve of your pants or jacket might be the keyboard or one uses a holographic input. The power supply has been the main constraint, but we're getting much improved battery tech and we can use incidental Wi-Fi for power charges.

    It won't replace your gaming computer yet, but it's coming.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Wait until 2020 by Megane · · Score: 1

      You'll have to be careful where you put the GPU. You can either keep yourself comfy all winter, or you can singe your balls off if you're not careful.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  29. Not exactly by rsilvergun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Dell & HP often skip the full sized PCI-E slot for graphics entirely. When they do include it they've been known to use boards that can't deliver enough power on the slot. Finally their power supplies often lack the extra plug needed for most video cards. Asus & Acer are a little better, but it's not a sure bet.

    The major manufacturers all sell 'gaming' pcs and they'll be damned if you're going to buy an i5 equipped PC on sale for $400, stuff a $200 graphics card in it and get 95% of the performance of their $1200 gaming rigs. They figured that out trick out in the late 90s/early 2000s.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  30. What are you doing that it even matters? by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    a mid range SSD is fast enough for just about any game I can think of. Maybe huge maps on Ashes of the Singularity will bottleneck but nothing else will. If you're a pro video editor maybe, but there aren't enough of those to drive new PC Sales.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:What are you doing that it even matters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gotta instalock that character pick in Overwatch.

  31. I'd love to buy a computer! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd love to buy a new computer but Apple doesn't make one I'd like to buy.

    Seems everyone's into data slurping and less innovating.

    That's too bad, I'll save my money and buy something else.

  32. They also last longer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Needs aren't increasing as quickly as before.

  33. Re: Prices are too high by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No idea why I was downvoted. I'm quite serious. Sure I read comments about people buying computers for $200-500 but those are shit components. It is 2017. I wouldn't consider anything with less than 16 GB RAM and SSD.

  34. Re: Prices are too high by Monster_user · · Score: 1

    Maybe that is why you were downvoted?

    Sounds like you bought a $500 computer about nine years ago. One that would have been hard pressed to run Vista, and lucky to have a dual core.

    My rig was $300 about 9 years ago, but I did get some components gifted to me to upgrade it shortly after purchase. (Dell Inspiron i530, single core Celeron, 2GB RAM, Vista Basic). Gifted part was a Core 2 Duo E7500 2.9ghz, which is more than adequate for anything but video games. Later I upgraded to 4GB of RAM, a 1TB HDD, and a $50 Geforce GT 240. Think it now qualifies as a high end rig from the 2009 era.

  35. Re:Prices are too high by Kargan · · Score: 1

    Unless you are a serious gamer, you should be able to put together a really fast machine for WAY less than $1500.

    On that high of a budget, you should be able to run a Core i7, a GTX 1080, a really nice power supply, an SSD and a mechanical HD, etc. etc. That's not moderate, that's a f'in hotrod right there.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/re...

    --
    Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
  36. Sales of complete systems, or sales of components? by Targon · · Score: 1

    Considering that Ryzen has pushed the PC industry for the first time in close to ten years, and the resulting excitement for people to buy or build their first new system in over six years, I doubt that the PC market is slowing down. The pre-built PC market may be slowing, due to a lack of Ryzen based systems by the large OEMs, and that means people are building their own systems. On the low end, you don't see the new chips showing up in large numbers yet as well, though that will improve in the next few months. If you include laptops, AMD Raven Ridge isn't out yet, and 8th generation Intel won't show up in large numbers for a few months.

    So, the market is heating up, but the big names like HP and Dell may not have seen it yet, due to being slow to market with products people would actually care about.

  37. Bullshit Article by nateman1352 · · Score: 1

    First of all, the table that ZDNet has in TFA is outdated from the newest table available on Gartner's actual website:

    https://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3560517

    The PC numbers on Gartner's website look more rosy for the PC than the ones in ZDNet's article. Also, here is an important snippet from Gartner's website that ZDNet conveniently did not include in their screenshot:

    Note: The Ultramobile (Premium) category includes devices such as Microsoft Windows 10 Intel x86 products and Apple MacBook Air.

    The Ultramobile (Premium) category is growing 11% this year. I would count x86 devices running Win10 or macOS as part of the PC market. Combine the "Traditional PC" category with the "Ultramobile (Premium)" category and suddenly the PC market looks flat in total volume shipments year over year. Combine that with the fact that the average selling price for the "Ultramobile (Premium)" category is probably higher than the stuff they count as "Traditional PC" and 2017 is actually looking like a pretty good year for PC OEMs.

    A better headline would be "Cheap glossy plastic laptops decline, thin and light metal body laptops on the rise."

  38. Plus 1 by aepervius · · Score: 1

    Same here I used to buy a new PC every 2 or 3 years, when the next generation of much quicker processor and graphic card came.... Now It usually take 5+ years and most of the time I just switch off Anti Aliasing and I am fine (and since I am short sighted I don't care a yota about AA).

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  39. Re:This trend will destroy Firefox. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think they're necessarily realizing anything, they just aren't buying PCs because the phone does everything they want it to do. They probably have at least one computer or laptop in the house if they really need to type up a paper, but after school most people only have to do that sort of thing at work.

  40. That's because PC's haven't advanced much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm running a Core i7-965 Extreme.... 20 years ago, if I'd kept a computer for nearly a decade, it would be useless. Today, programmers have completely failed to take advantage of hardware. Clocks speeds haven't increased much either. I managed to drop a GTX-1080 into my rig to drive a 4k monitor, and all is well. Unless and until programs start taking advantage of resources, not even a techno snob like me can drop 2k on a CPU that doesn't improve the majority of my daily tasks.

  41. The Point of Desktops is I/O by rally2xs · · Score: 1

    I have a nice, new Surface Pro 4. It has 1 USB 3 port, plus 4 more if I use the docking station. I'm trying to make it my ham radio station computer. Right now, my $300 Gateway desktop computer, one of those little things with no expandability at all, is an easier machine to work with. Why? The little Gateway has I/O. It has about 8 native USB-2 ports. It has traditional sound connectivity of speaker, mic, and line in. Attempting to connect the radio with digital communications means, for the Surface Pro, an external sound card run thru USB. For a full-sized keyboard and mouse, I use a wireless system with USB dongle. For controlling the radio directly there's a USB to RS-232 converter, and for sending digital signals out over the shortwave bands there's RS-232 control to a Rigblaster Pro that requires another USB to RS-232 converter. For the Surface Pro to load some software that comes on CDs, there's another USB requirement for the external CD/DVD/BluRay drive and burner. Then of course if I want to store more than the internal 500 Gb., and especially if I want to have it portable, there's the 1 Tb USB-3 pocket-sized hard drive that is powered thru the USB-3 connection alone.

    For all that, I have the docking station and a 10-station USB-3 hub. Surprise, don't plug the keyboard / mouse dongle into the hub, because there's so much traffic on it that it makes the mouse movements jerky. You have to plug it into the lone side port USB on the Surface Pro itself, then it works fine, except for the mouse wheel which was inexplicably DOA - and since I bought the keyboard and mouse a couple years ago when building my Core i7 tower computer and didn't use it, I'll likely have to buy a new wireless keyboard and mouse to recover that functionality if it's that important. So far it isn't.

    Future expansion that might require yet more I/O would be if I connected up both the SteppIr 4-element antenna's adjustments for frequency automatically from the computer, and connected up the antenna rotator for pointing the antenna automatically from the computer. Not being quite as intensely real-time as the keyboard and mouse, I'm sure they would do fine being plugged into the 10-station USB-3 hub.

    But if you want to do a lot of I/O, its easier with even a really, really basic PC for $300 than it is with an I/0 limited, but otherwise golly-gee-whiz ultra-portable $3000 Surface Pro 4 laptop / tablet with its detachable keyboard. Love the Surface Pro, am amazed by the accuracy of the touchscreen and the touch panel, etc., its an outstanding machine, but... it can't be absolutely everything to everyone. Sometimes a desktop is just what is needed.

  42. Re: Prices are too high by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    The GT 240 was a peach. 80% of the performance of the 250 for something like 50% of the power consumption. A C2D is still a surprisingly peppy machine, I have one here at 1.86 GHz and with 4GB which I so far haven't been able to part with. Cute little Lenovo ThinkCentre. I paid $50 for it with a 2TB disk.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  43. I think it's longer than 6 years... by gosand · · Score: 1

    I am running a Core 2 Quad Core, and it is perfectly fine. I built it probably 8 years ago.
    My kids all have Core2 Duo machines, and the only thing I've had to upgrade is their video cards. They are all hand-me-downs that people we knew were giving away.
    My wife has an i3 laptop we bought from Dell small business 5 or 6 years ago. Still doing just fine.

    I think the computer market just finally got saturated. As it's always been, only the geeks know what is in their computer. If people still use them, instead of phones or tablets, they shop on Amazon or burn time on FB, maybe read email, and pay bills. Why get a new one if the old one still works?

    Besides, they have to save up their money to buy a $500 phone every couple of years.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  44. Does creimer have a FetLife? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    C.D. Reimer is a renowned Slashdot collaborator, as he puts it himself; "Because of the quality of my posts and my article submissions, I'm a highly rated commentator and moderator."

    But does anybody ever wondered what "C.D." stands for? Well, it stands for Creimy Dumpty of course!

    Creimy Dumpty sat on the wall,
    Creimy Dumpty had a great fall.
    All the king's horses
    And all the king's men
    Couldn't put Creimy Dumpty
    Together again.

    Creimy's siblings video and theme song, very realistic, especially the pants, just like Creimy's:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oKreL1jvkg
    Creimy's real pictures:
    Before the sex change:
    https://ibb.co/cc7Ddw
    After the sex change:
    https://ibb.co/gVad65

    Creimy's "enterprise-level" chair, he talks about it all the time on slashdot:
    http://www.keynamics.com/images/bariatric-chair.jpg
    Creimy's head, while his supervisor was talking to him, not with him, since it is impossible to do with Creimy:
    https://school.discoveryeducation.com/clipart/images/ani-hello.gif
    Creimy acting in educational resource document, he actually confirmed himself on Slashdot that he was handled by Special Education for the Santa Clara County Office of Education! He is really a king Dumpty!:
    http://www.sccoe.org/depts/students/special-education/Documents/Guide%20to%20Adult%20Agencies.pdf

  45. MODS : CREIMER SOCKPUPPET REPORT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The following creimers are posting at 0 or greater karma. If you have mod points you should mod them down!

    https://slashdot.org/~IApeFatC...
    https://slashdot.org/~ITapeFat...

  46. Use Gallium on a Chromebook by tepples · · Score: 1

    And it has Windows, which for all its faults is still a real OS (unlike what you get on Chromebooks, e.g.).

    As wierd_w explained to me at length, you can put a real OS on a Chromebook. First enable developer mode, enable legacy boot from within developer mode, and disable developer mode. Then you can dual-boot Chrome OS on the internal drive with Gallium, a real OS based on Xubuntu, on a flash drive that fits in your Chromebook's USB port. Just press Ctrl+L at startup when you want to boot from the external drive.

  47. Compulsory, capacity, and write-through penalty by tepples · · Score: 1

    Linux is much better at using RAM for disk cache, and no matter how slow my hard drive is and no matter how fast your SSD is, my RAM is still faster than your SSD.

    You still get a ton of compulsory misses when you restart the computer after a security update to Linux or other sufficiently low-level components. You also see capacity misses if your PC's motherboard doesn't take more than 2 or 4 GB of RAM, which I still see on laptops sold in 2017. An SSD substantially reduces the penalty for these misses.

    In addition, though caches help with reads, they don't help quite as much with writes. Many applications call sync after a write to allow new information to hit oxide even in case of subsequent power loss. This forces the disk cache to behave as write-through instead of write-back, for which RAM won't help much. You see this, for example, when running sudo apt upgrade to install security updates.

  48. Barebooks? by tepples · · Score: 1

    What fraction of your assembly orders involve laptops as opposed to desktops? I know barebone laptops exist, but I'm curious how common they are.

  49. Re:This trend will destroy Firefox. by tepples · · Score: 1

    They probably have at least one computer or laptop in the house if they really need to type up a paper, but after school most people only have to do that sort of thing at work.

    If you work from home, you need to type things up at home.

  50. "Content producers" by tepples · · Score: 1

    Gamers, content producers, and scientific researchers are really the only fields left to push the boundaries of computational power.

    Your use of the term "content producers" causes me a bit of anxiety. Why isn't everyone a participant in our shared culture, or a "content producer" as you call it?

  51. PS4 CPU is two Athlon 5150s by tepples · · Score: 1

    Most of us already know that gaming engines are compiled and optimized for the most common processor out there. An that is a quad core intel based system.

    Since when? I thought the AMD Jaguar processor in the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One, which is about the same as a pair of Athlon 5150s, was the most common current-generation x86-64 video gaming processor.

    1. Re:PS4 CPU is two Athlon 5150s by jwhyche · · Score: 2

      While you may have a point the discussion is geared toward gaming PC's.

      --
      I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  52. Replying to what you read needs a keyboard by tepples · · Score: 1

    my parents got a new laptop only because their last desktop died and only for certain things. They use their tablets/phones for things like checking mail and reading news.

    I don't seem to understand the use case for using a phone for those things. To me, checking mail involves replying to mail, and reading news involves commenting on news, as we are doing right now. Using a tablet or phone for that is painful, especially without a Bluetooth keyboard.

    1. Re:Replying to what you read needs a keyboard by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      I don't seem to understand the use case for using a phone for those things. To me, checking mail involves replying to mail, and reading news involves commenting on news, as we are doing right now. Using a tablet or phone for that is painful, especially without a Bluetooth keyboard.

      I don't know about you but my parents don't write hundred page responses to emails. Sure having a keyboard is much nicer to have when typing out a thesis but for a paragraph or two, a phone is fine. Also that's IF they respond to emails. Many of my emails are verification of things I buy or reminders about stuff. Work emails sometimes involve longer responses and when I have to use a laptop I do.

      Also you are ignoring a large portion of the world population where the keyboard is not better than a touch screen for language input: Asian languages like Chinese, Japanese and Korean are far easier to input for some people using a finger as opposed to a keyboard system.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  53. "Content consumption" by tepples · · Score: 1

    People never liked the x86 PC, but had to have them to use the Internet's content consumption aspects.

    A creative work isn't "content" to fill a box, nor is it "consumed" by viewing it. With that out of the way, assuming "content consumption" refers to viewing works made by others:

    Once someone finishes viewing works, what device should he use to create other works, such as replying to mail, commenting on news, or drawing his own art? Or perhaps by "content consumption", you were implying that people are content to view works created by others rather than participating in creation. If so, why does this remain the case?

  54. I blame CAFE by tepples · · Score: 1

    The 1974 vehicle you cite is also from the last model year prior to the introduction of government-imposed corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards. So is the decline of station wagons based on lack of demand, or is it based on CAFE forcing automakers to redesignate their larger family vehicles as "trucks", leading to the SUV fad?

  55. Painful to move insertion point or insert HTML by tepples · · Score: 1

    for a paragraph or two, a phone is fine.

    When I compose a paragraph such as this one, I don't necessarily enter the words in the order that I intend them to be read. I go back and forth, using Ctrl+left and Ctrl+right to move backward and forward in what I'm writing. I have found moving the insertion point with Android's touch screen input to be an exercise in frustration. I also find it frustrating with Android's touch screen input to select text to copy for an inline quotation and place the insertion point to paste them. Having the parts of an HTML or BBCode closing tag such as </em> or [/quote] spread across three different pages of the on-screen keyboard is also painful, as well as turning href into great or beef when I'm trying to enter an <a> element because autocorrect can't tell markup from prose.

    Work emails sometimes involve longer responses and when I have to use a laptop I do.

    You are correct that I had work email in mind, be it my day job or free software projects' mailing lists, not noreply@ things like purchase receipts.

    Asian languages like Chinese, Japanese and Korean are far easier to input for some people using a finger as opposed to a keyboard system.

    I can see your point for logographic languages like Chinese and Japanese. But Korean hangul is an alphabet, theoretically just as amenable to keyboard entry as the Latin letters in which English is written.

    1. Re:Painful to move insertion point or insert HTML by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Yes you don't find using a touch screen to enter in text very efficient especially if you are entering HTML code. But as I stated before a large portion of the world does not use email the same way you do. Short messages are the norm. These days people have started using more abbreviations even in email to avoid typing as much as in the past.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  56. Who knew? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's hard to believe the PC market is in decline given the fact that for a month now it's virtually impossible to buy an i7 8700K anywhere on planet earth

  57. Why, why use Blender on a laptop?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're doing graphic design, 3D content creation, and video editing (as I do), you need the best setup possible, which is clearly going to be a desktop for the money. There's NEVER enough power, enough space, enough cores, a big enough screen on the monitor, etc etc etc. Using a laptop for a graphics program IMHO makes no sense until the technology really improves in relation to the investment that has to be put into it. I've seen users doing it, but WHY?? Otherwise, I think that most people just don't use their computers for the types of activities that really need so much power.