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

#331

Post by marincounty » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 7:45 AM UTC

Zak wrote: post #272

bluedino wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly what I'm disappointed with on everything new. The Thinkpad T60p, from 2006 remains superior on both points to everything new from my point of view. While a very fine machine in it's day, the screen, battery life, processing power, disk speed, size, and lack of heat on a modern machine like the 13" Retina MacBook Pro are on another level. You're talking about 7 years of evolution.

Well, I have T61 guts and an SSD in mine. It isn't so far behind as you might expect. I've used a 15" Retina Macbook Pro. The screen is not better. Sure, it's higher density and brighter, but the viewing angles are not better. Subjectively, I'd say the color reproduction is worse (I used them next to each other). Reflections, glare and fingerprints are significantly worse on the MBP.

Yea, I have a ten year old Toshiba P26-S2607 I still use on a daily basis.

I have a one year old MBP that I haven't used much; I'm not sure why, but the screens seem the same?

I do know one thing about most old laptops; they were made to last longer than 2 years.

That said--HP--as made crappy laptops for quite some time. I bought one a few years ago and it was horrid on an engineering basis, but it looked Slick.

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

#332

Post by marincounty » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 7:48 AM UTC

asafira wrote: post #141

simonsarris wrote: post #96

I've felt this way since I built my last desktop in 2008. I was sort-of waiting for the "gee its time to upgrade" mark to roll around in 3 or 4 years, but it hasn't happened yet. Any games I want to play it still runs very well, and it still feels very fast to me even compared to modern off-the-shelf systems. When my friends ask for laptop-buying advice I tell them if they like the keyboard and screen, then its just…

I agree with the general consensus here regarding how computers in general have been aging better now. Especially with different computing devices available today, it's hard for the average person to justify buying a new computer within 3-4 years of theirs. At the same time, I think even the "average" person would want more than a 128gb ssd, and therefore today's entry-level harddrives equipped with these small ssd's…

I've never needed a hugh hard drive. External HD's work fine for me.

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

#333

Post by reticulated » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 7:48 AM 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.

Attribution for that analogy should be given to Citrix http://blogs.citrix.com/2012/01/09/do-ultrabooks-mean-ultra-...

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

#334

Post by collyw » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 8:04 AM UTC

001sky wrote: post #217

GuiA wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a kid, my parents were really anti-videogames (except for a few educational ones), anti-TV (we had one, but it was in its own room and rarely used), and would only let me use the home computer for homework. As a result, I spent all of my childhood and teenage years reading (mostly fantasy and sci-fi; several books a week, at my peak) and programming. I taught myself programming in 7th grade because I really wanted…

I am thinking of getting rid of my iPhone when my contract runs out (and just get a dumbphone as a replacement for emergencies Iphones are great for tourtists. Unneccesary otherwise.

Except when you are in another country, and roaming charges are outrageous.

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

#335

Post by collyw » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 8:06 AM UTC

zalzane wrote: post #216

simonsarris wrote: post #96

I've felt this way since I built my last desktop in 2008. I was sort-of waiting for the "gee its time to upgrade" mark to roll around in 3 or 4 years, but it hasn't happened yet. Any games I want to play it still runs very well, and it still feels very fast to me even compared to modern off-the-shelf systems. When my friends ask for laptop-buying advice I tell them if they like the keyboard and screen, then its just…

>because people do not need $2000 Facebook and email machines Devil's advocate: if that is true, then why are macbook pros such a hot sell? I'm typing this here in a college library's lobby. When I look around, I see roughly 3/4 of the laptop-using students are using a macbook pro, with a few macbook airs littered around. If I were to walk around and glance at what people were working on, it'd probably be something l…

While many people but them for the technical side as pointed out in other replies, there is no denying that other buy them as a status symbol, in the same way they will buy a BMW for a car.

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

#336

Post by dikei » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 8:10 AM UTC

carterschonwald wrote: post #230

dikei wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not neccesarily which language is faster, but the which algorithm is faster. He said naively written C, which mean the algorithm may be entirely different and run in O(n2) and much slower than a Haskell version which use a different algorithm and run in O(nlogn).

actually in the specific example I'm thinking about, i'm talking about memory locality being the performance difference (and in this case, array layout for matrix multiplication). The naive obvious "dot product" matrix mult of two Row Major matrices is 100-1000x slower than somewhat fancier layouts, or even simply transposing the right hand matrix can make a significant difference, let alone more fancy things. Often…

This is like replacing the compiler optimizer algorithm with your own, similar to the method of writing critical function in Assembly, right?

Still I don't see the connection to Haskell, can you elaborate ?

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

#337

Post by exodust » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 8:22 AM UTC

Hardly any academics, or professionals who write articles, reports, or serious documents, are doing so exclusively on their iPad. They probably own an iPad, but the majority of people I see who are trying to contribute something substantial to the world - a book, design, quality video and sound recording, or just professional documents to share with colleagues... these people are using a laptop or a desktop. Their PC might be old, but it does the job. These people own tablets and phones too.

Now do the math. If everyone - smart, average, stupid, young, old, are buying tablets and smartphones, then of course this makes PC sales look like death.

It's more like a "post-PC-avoidance" world we're in now. A lot of stupid people avoided using PCs back in the day. Now all those people own tablets and smartphones and use them for entertainment.

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

#338

Post by ekianjo » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 8:29 AM UTC

simonsarris wrote: post #96

I've felt this way since I built my last desktop in 2008. I was sort-of waiting for the "gee its time to upgrade" mark to roll around in 3 or 4 years, but it hasn't happened yet. Any games I want to play it still runs very well, and it still feels very fast to me even compared to modern off-the-shelf systems. When my friends ask for laptop-buying advice I tell them if they like the keyboard and screen, then its just…

> because people do not need $2000 Facebook and email machines

I agree with your post but just wanted to point out a Facebook/Email PC does not cost 2000 dollars anymore (and has never cost that much for a long time) :) You can get around with a 300 dollars laptop just fine of that kind of usage.

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

#339

Post by thom » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 8:33 AM UTC

Interesting that the author assumes smartphones need to be upgraded almost yearly. My smartphone upgrade path in the last 10 years has been HTC Typhoon -> iPhone 3GS 32GB -> iPhone 5S 64GB, and a large part of the most recent upgrade was a crumbling plastic case on the 3GS.

At no point during the 4-year tenure of the 3GS did it stop being astonishing to me that I had flat-rate, always-on internet in my pocket, all my music, ebooks and audiobooks, videos that I took of my wedding, and photos that I took of our first child, who's now inherited it and mostly uses it for In the Night Garden.

Personally I think that because of the reduced horizons of smartphones, they're actually every bit as long-lasting as your PC. Sure, at some point OS updates stop coming, and with that app upgrades, but the performance of the 3GS was fine, and I'm not afraid to admit that part of the latest upgrade was just embarrassment at having such a naff old phone, as much as I loved it.

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

#340

Post by eropple » Fri, Oct 25, 2013, 8:34 AM UTC

shocks wrote: post #111

gtaylor wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was surprisingly easy. I'm not saying you over-paid, but for $2,500 I could have built something pretty ridiculous. Most of my money went into processor and GPU, which are typically your two big ticket items. I trolled around Newegg looking for upper-middle tier components with a higher quantity of good reviews. A lot of the times you won't see a lot of the recently released stuff with useful reviews, so some of t…

Post your specs to give your post some legitimacy… I hope you didn't skimp out on your motherboard… 2010 $1000 rig running all 2013 AAA titles at the highest settings sounds unlikely to me…

My i7-875K (overclocked, but not exhaustively; my Gigabyte motherboard has an auto-overclock function that raised the multiplier without killing stability) with 16GB of RAM, entirely too many SSDs for any one person, and a Radeon HD6870 is capable of playing every new game I've bought this year (Dishonored, Saints Row IV--I don't buy games from EA so the new title list is pretty short right now) at max settings at no worse than 35FPS--I personally can't detect a difference between 30FPS and 60FPS, so I don't care.