The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones • Hacker News Board

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#51

Post by gordaco » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 5:03 PM UTC

> You rarely have the need to buy a whole new box.

This is the number one reason why I love the PC above any other kind of computing machine. Need more disk space? Sure, go get a new disk, you may not even need to remove any of the others. Want a better graphics card for that new game? Easy as pie. Your processor died because the fan was malfunctioning? Too bad, but luckily those two are the only things you'll have to pay for. The list goes on.

I bought my current PC on 2009. The previous one still had some components from 2002.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#52

Post by nrivadeneira » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 5:03 PM UTC

badman_ting wrote: post #12

Right, that's what it means to say that the market is dying. But if you need to feel clever, feel clever.

Wish I could downvote this. Snark like this is toxic and is neither useful nor interesting.

A lot of folks reading sensationalist articles about the PC market decline are making the conclusion that nobody likes or uses PC's anymore since sales are declining. The author is pointing out that it's a poor conclusion to make since there are other factors contributing to the decline, including the fact that the usable lifespan of today's PC's is longer than it used to be.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#53

Post by JVIDEL » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 5:04 PM UTC

fiatmoney wrote: post #23

"For what" is the obvious question. Web development with a remote testing environment, office applications, email, web browsing - sure, a Core 2 Duo is more than good enough if your software environment is kept in order. Audio / video / photoshop, gaming, developing software that does math, data analysis - you can never get fast enough. The limiting factor is if your computer's feedback loop is tighter than your brai…

In what planet? I'm not even going to use myself as an example because I do other heavy stuff with my PC, I'm going to use my non-tech friends: one of them got a new laptop with 8GB of RAM, why? because she was complaining about webapps using too much memory and slowing down her previous system.

Regular users don't know or care about memory management, they don't even close old windows or tabs, its about convenience. That's not a problem in mobile where the need is the mother of invention so mem management is automatic and chrome reopens the tabs you had by itself, but in a desktop environment (specially windows) one wrong click and the session restore in chrome wipes your previous session.

But it was cheap, cheaper than an unlocked iphone and it gets the job done so its ok for her.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#54

Post by gtaylor » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 5:04 PM UTC

eco wrote: post #44

wisty wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can still run just about any modern AAA game at the highest settings. AAA games mostly target the console. Look at GTA5, which isn't even out on the PC. Most AAA games will run on a PS3, which came out in 2006, and has 512MB of RAM (combined system / graphics). That said, there's a point of diminishing returns - making games look much more realistic will take obscene amounts of resources.

I expect there to be a system requirements explosion for PC games now that the new consoles are right around the corner and AAA game developers can finally target much higher specs.

An interesting opposite is the previously mentioned Planetside 2. It was initially released for PC only, and was a resource hog. Now they're working on bringing it to the PS4, so they're having to do an extremely aggressive round of optimizations to make it run decently. The optimizations will get a lot of testing on the PC version (think it's hitting the test server next week). PC players will benefit as a result of the console port.

Planetside 2 is a weird example, though. I don't think there will be many games that have a 1-year+ delay from landing on PC before they hit consoles.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#55

Post by bnegreve » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 5:04 PM UTC

badman_ting wrote: post #12

Right, that's what it means to say that the market is dying. But if you need to feel clever, feel clever.

People don't only claim that the market is dying, they also say that PCs will simply disappear [1].

And that's a huge difference for the application developers so it's not only about being smart, that's a very relevant question.

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=pc+will+disapear&ie=utf-8&oe...

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#56

Post by bennyg » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 5:06 PM UTC

mortenjorck wrote: post #47

Five years ago, I bought a MacBook Pro to replace my PowerBook G4, which was itself five years old. The list of obsolescences was enormous: It had only USB 1.1 in a market teeming with new USB 2.0 hardware that couldn't have existed with the slower speeds; it had a single-touch trackpad just as OS X was introducing all sorts of useful multi-touch gestures; it relied on clumsy external solutions for wi-fi and Bluetoot…

I would just upgrade the RAM and put an SSD in there and you should be good for a while. Drooping an SSD in mine was the single biggest upgrade I've done for productivity and battery life.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#57

Post by nsmartt » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 5:06 PM UTC

UVB-76 wrote: post #46

People snack on smartphones, dine on tablets, and cook on PCs. A lot of people don't want to cook, so are happy with smartphones and tablets. Why buy a desktop or laptop when an iPad will do everything you need for a fraction of the price? That's what people mean when they sound the death knell for the PC.

Nicely said. I don't think we'll see the full conversion for a few years, but this is more or less how I think of it.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#58

Post by tehwalrus » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 5:08 PM UTC

I have bought laptops, but not a whole desktop ever in my life. I've been through two desktops, mind you, that were both built from scratch[1].

I think this article gets it about right - I've started enforcing a 3 year cycle for both phone and laptops because they were costing me too much (in a mustachian sort of way) - and I've stuck to it with laptops (I made 3.5 years on a 2009 MBP) and will be doing so with the iPhone (due for replacement spring 2015.) If the nexus devices keep getting cheaper and awesomer, then I might jump to those a bit earlier (particularly if I can sell the 32GB 4S for an appreciable fraction of the new phone cost.)

Working with the 3.5 year old laptop got slightly painful (re-down-grading back to snow leopard from lion was essential, I even tried ubuntu briefly) but perfectly bearable for coding and web browsing. I'll see how slow the phone gets, but I'm quite relaxed about not having the latest and greatest iOS features (I've not seen anything compelling since iOS 5; I only did 6 because some new app requested it.)

[1] or rather, one was, and then I gradually replaced all the parts until I had a whole spare PC to sell on ebay, and one mobo bundle later and I'm still using it with no problems, playing games etc.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#59

Post by gtaylor » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 5:08 PM UTC

maerF0x0 wrote: post #36

usaphp wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

~$1,000 sounds quite cheap for a gaming machine which can still run any modern game at highest settings. I remember I built mine at about the same time (2010) for $2500, top notch video card, fastest cpu, lots of ram, but its 2013 now and I can not say that it runs any modern game at highest settings.

I bought a ~1000 setup in 2009 and it still runs most games acceptably (not necessarily highest settings). it was a Dell boxing day deal $500 computer + $350 video card (GTX 260) + changed the case and PSU. Maybe the OP doesnt play some of the most demanding games?

> Maybe the OP doesnt play some of the most demanding games?

I play some pretty demanding games, but I was able to get a lot of performance per dollar building custom. I knew where it was OK to spend more/less and did a lot of research/shopping around.

Re: The PC is not dead, we just don't need new ones

#60

Post by nsxwolf » Thu, Oct 24, 2013, 5:13 PM UTC

fiatmoney wrote: post #23

"For what" is the obvious question. Web development with a remote testing environment, office applications, email, web browsing - sure, a Core 2 Duo is more than good enough if your software environment is kept in order. Audio / video / photoshop, gaming, developing software that does math, data analysis - you can never get fast enough. The limiting factor is if your computer's feedback loop is tighter than your brai…

Nothing is ever good enough for a development box when you use an IDE and work with larger and larger projects.

Faster CPUs, more memory, and faster storage are always welcome. I look forward to the day when Eclipse and other IDEs really start taking advantage of GPU stream processors for indexing and validation.