On 1/17/25 5:50 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:
> On 1/17/25 2:57 PM, -hh wrote:
>> On 1/17/25 3:04 AM, Physfitfreak wrote:
>>> On 1/16/25 9:40 PM, -hh wrote:
>>>> On 1/16/25 5:56 PM, Physfitfreak wrote:
>>>>> On 1/16/25 3:34 PM, -hh wrote:
>>>>>> but $25K today buys a new Civic or another "budget" car.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> $25K car is a "budget" car these days? Hehe :-)
>>>>
>>>> New car, just like how the conversation was originally about new PCs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And yes, 'budget' in the context of new car prices, since Edmunds'
>>>> 3Q24 report found that the average new car in the USA cost $47,542.
>>>>
>>>> And FYI, average used car price was $27,177.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The last car I bought is a Toyota Echo 2002, in 2017, for $1600.
>>>>
>>>> Bully for you.  Did it include a radio?  My first car didn't.
>>>
>>>  From today's craigslist:
>>>
>>> https://dallas.craigslist.org/ndf/cto/d/lewisville-2009-toyota-yaris-
>>> hatchback/7815953954.html
>>>
>>> 2009 Toyota Yaris. A nice used car for just $1500. Right there about
>>> 20 minutes drive from me to go get it. If I had any serious problem
>>> with my Echo 2002, I would jump on this one.
>>>
>>> A used car is worth, and priced, between $1500 to $2000. Anything
>>> above that is a rip off. A computer is worth between $70 and $80.
>>>
>>> And at the bottom of it, ANY car above $2000 and ANY computer above
>>> $80 is a rip off. New or used. That's my main point.  You guys have
>>> bad habits.
>>
>> If something really is a "ripoff" depends on many more factors than
>> merely if it minimally meets your personal transportation needs.
>>
>> For example, when someone isn't personally handy with doing DIY
>> roadside repairs, how does that change selection criteria?  Ditto for
>> other factors, such as to reliably arriving at work on time.  Or
>> driving through remote regions without being stranded, or even just
>> though unsafe urban neighborhoods.  Plus seating for how many
>> passengers?  Need heat?  Snow tires?  Or summer A/C?  Handicapped?
>> There's a wide variety of what constitutes "good enough"
>> transportation across a population.
>>
>> And sure, one can keep a car running forever with enough maintenance,
>> but that's not free, nor constant per mile:  as costs change and
>> accumulate, there's a cost-benefit trade-off decision for where
>> vehicular replacement can become the more fiscally prudent choice than
>> the sum of various maintenance costs (including time spent) to keep
>> the old Yaris on the road vs junking it and getting another one.
>>
>> Likewise, you can also choose to go buy another used vehicle with its
>> unknown history/reliability and spend whatever time & money again to
>> make it sufficiently reliable/etc ... but it again comes back to the
>> question of if that's how you want to spend your time vs pursuit of
>> other endeavors/interests.
>>
>>
>>> You guys have bad habits. You're like those psycho Shoe freaks. Or
>>> those who lose their savings buying stocks that aren't worth what
>>> they're paying for. You don't know what you're doing, and others
>>> smarter than you, or rather are simply healthy in mind, are taking
>>> advantage of that.
>>
>> Not at all, for much of the point here is that everything can be
>> simplified down to a "Make, or Buy" kind of decision point:  want to
>> keep on making your DIY repairs on PCs & cars?  No one is stopping
>> you. But trying to call everyone else a fool because they've not made
>> the same choices you have is what's inappropriate.  Particularly for
>> anyone who's ever paid someone to prepare a meal instead of making it
>> themselves.
>>
>>
>>> In how many different ways have I pointed to this fact? Blows my mind.
>>
>> As many as you think you'll have to, in order to keep deflecting from
>> the original "new vs new" cost comparison, and how PCs costs have come
>> way down in price ... because this also includes the used ones which
>> have also become cheaper over the years too.
>>
>>
>> -hh
>
>
> With some people I have to exaggerate to show my point.

Keep trying, for someday you just might be successful.

> ... Some pay $80k for an automobile! I know what drives you.

Depends on the use case, and its alternatives. For example, what's the
lifecycle difference of $80K for a ten year ride with no maintenance or
repair costs versus buying a used beater for $2K annually which then
requires putting in $6K/year worth of maintenance/repairs throughout?

-hh

DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:

>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>
>Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.

Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
motherboard every three years. "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
my point.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 1/18/2025 1:07 PM, Joel wrote:
> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>
>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>
>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>
>
> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
> motherboard every three years. "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
> my point.

Total absurd bullshit.

You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
new version of Windows.

As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
just fine on it.

DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:

>>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>>
>>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>>
>> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
>> motherboard every three years. "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
>> my point.
>
>Total absurd bullshit.
>
>You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
>new version of Windows.
>
>As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
>around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
>just fine on it.

And yet I already felt advancing 11 wasn't great.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Le 18-01-2025, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> a écrit :
> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>
>>>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>>>
>>>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>>>
>>> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
>>> motherboard every three years. "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
>>> my point.
>>
>>Total absurd bullshit.
>>
>>You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
>>new version of Windows.
>>
>>As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
>>around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
>>just fine on it.
>
> And yet I already felt advancing 11 wasn't great.

It wasn't his point. He wasn't saying if you would be able to run it or
not. Which isn't the same. And for that, I'm not that sure but I can't
read the future. What I know is when Vista was out, they claimed that
they were doing 3D when the only thing that was in 3D was the [Alt][TAB]
combination. When my computer was to old to run Vista, it was running
Ubuntu with compiz smoothly, which was real 3D. Then, when Windows 10
was out, you needed to have a recent computer, not because it needed
power, but because it needed secure boot which didn't exist in old
computers. And I see a lot of old computers on which Linux was able to
give a second life when Windows was too slow.

So, maybe your actual computer will be able to run the last version of
Windows in twenty years. I don't know, I don't even care, but history
proves otherwise.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 1/18/25 4:08 PM, DFS wrote:
> On 1/18/2025 1:07 PM, Joel wrote:
>> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>>
>>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>>
>>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>>
>>
>> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
>> motherboard every three years.  "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
>> my point.
>
>
> Total absurd bullshit.
>
> You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
> new version of Windows.
>
> As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
> around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
> just fine on it.

I have to agree with you here. There was pressure to buy new hardware
every two or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
goes a decade with the original operating system on it. However, Windows
in that time will become unbearably slow for most users since they
usually have no idea how to maintain it. Linux, for its part, will be
just as fast ten years down the line as it was on day one.

--
CrudeSausage
Gab: @CrudeSausage
Telegram: @CrudeSausage
Unapologetic paleoconservative
KDE supporting member
ASUS Zephyrus GA401QM on Manjaro

Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> wrote:
>Le 18-01-2025, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>>
>>>As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your [JWC's] current [Win11-era] hardware
>>>around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
>>>just fine on it.
>>
>> And yet I already felt advancing 11 wasn't great.
>
>It wasn't his point. He wasn't saying if you would be able to run it or
>not. Which isn't the same. And for that, I'm not that sure but I can't
>read the future. What I know is when Vista was out, they claimed that
>they were doing 3D when the only thing that was in 3D was the [Alt][TAB]
>combination. When my computer was to old to run Vista, it was running
>Ubuntu with compiz smoothly, which was real 3D. Then, when Windows 10
>was out, you needed to have a recent computer, not because it needed
>power, but because it needed secure boot which didn't exist in old
>computers. And I see a lot of old computers on which Linux was able to
>give a second life when Windows was too slow.
>
>So, maybe your actual computer will be able to run the last version of
>Windows in twenty years. I don't know, I don't even care, but history
>proves otherwise.

Check this deal on a laptop:

https://www.amazon.com/Lenovo-V15-G2-Dual-core-Processor/dp/B0CNKZ7CSY?th=1

But note, it boots Win11 as shipped. Needs Linux to be self-
installed, but then, boom.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>On 1/18/25 4:08 PM, DFS wrote:
>> On 1/18/2025 1:07 PM, Joel wrote:
>>> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>>>
>>>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>>>
>>> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
>>> motherboard every three years.  "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
>>> my point.
>>
>> Total absurd bullshit.
>>
>> You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
>> new version of Windows.
>>
>> As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
>> around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
>> just fine on it.
>
>I have to agree with you here. There was pressure to buy new hardware
>every two or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
>goes a decade with the original operating system on it. However, Windows
>in that time will become unbearably slow for most users since they
>usually have no idea how to maintain it. Linux, for its part, will be
>just as fast ten years down the line as it was on day one.

For you to be right for my machine, Win10 would need support till
2031, it's ending this year with an optional paid extension.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 20:53:08 -0500, Paul wrote:

> On Fri, 1/17/2025 6:55 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> Windows seems to force you into thinking in terms of sector-level
>> copies and low-level “imaging” and like that. Filesystems are supposed
>> to abstract away from all that. They do on Linux, but it seems Windows
>> hasn’t quite caught up to that idea yet.
>>
> No, you just gotta use your brain. That is all.
>
> Who in their right mind, picks the least efficient way to do something ?

Nobody did. They picked the only way that would actually work, and that
was to give up on Windows, and boot up a Linux system to access the same
volumes.

Remember, the Windows way was the least efficient way --- it was so
inefficient, it was looking like it would never complete.

On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 20:54:44 -0500, Paul wrote:

> On Fri, 1/17/2025 6:56 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> The right tool turned out to be: “use Linux”.
>>
> The right tool turned out to be: "use a computer"

The right answer turned out to be: “use a *real* computer”.

Here’s a nickel, kid. Go get yourself a real computer.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 20:54:44 -0500, Paul wrote:
>> On Fri, 1/17/2025 6:56 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> The right tool turned out to be: “use Linux”.
>>>
>> The right tool turned out to be: "use a computer"
>
>The right answer turned out to be: “use a *real* computer”.
>
>Here’s a nickel, kid. Go get yourself a real computer.

All three platforms are real computers, in fairness.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 1/18/25 7:08 PM, Joel wrote:
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 1/18/25 4:08 PM, DFS wrote:
>>> On 1/18/2025 1:07 PM, Joel wrote:
>>>> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>>>>
>>>> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
>>>> motherboard every three years.  "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
>>>> my point.
>>>
>>> Total absurd bullshit.
>>>
>>> You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
>>> new version of Windows.
>>>
>>> As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
>>> around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
>>> just fine on it.
>>
>> I have to agree with you here. There was pressure to buy new hardware
>> every two or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
>> goes a decade with the original operating system on it. However, Windows
>> in that time will become unbearably slow for most users since they
>> usually have no idea how to maintain it. Linux, for its part, will be
>> just as fast ten years down the line as it was on day one.
>
>
> For you to be right for my machine, Win10 would need support till
> 2031, it's ending this year with an optional paid extension.

It will install Windows 11, so I am right. It won't be a fun experience,
but it will work anyway. Still, you're better off with Linux.

--
CrudeSausage
Gab: @CrudeSausage
Telegram: @CrudeSausage
Unapologetic paleoconservative
KDE supporting member
ASUS Zephyrus GA401QM on Manjaro

On 1/18/25 7:08 PM, Joel wrote:
> CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 1/18/25 4:08 PM, DFS wrote:
>>> On 1/18/2025 1:07 PM, Joel wrote:
>>>> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>>>>
>>>> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
>>>> motherboard every three years.  "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
>>>> my point.
>>>
>>> Total absurd bullshit.
>>>
>>> You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
>>> new version of Windows.
>>>
>>> As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
>>> around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
>>> just fine on it.
>>
>> I have to agree with you here. There was pressure to buy new hardware
>> every two or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
>> goes a decade with the original operating system on it. However, Windows
>> in that time will become unbearably slow for most users since they
>> usually have no idea how to maintain it. Linux, for its part, will be
>> just as fast ten years down the line as it was on day one.
>
>
> For you to be right for my machine, Win10 would need support till
> 2031, it's ending this year with an optional paid extension.

Not necessarily: Win10 came out back in 2015, and your current PC was a
license transfer from an older machine.

When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?

-hh

On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 19:04:00 -0500, Joel wrote:

> Check this deal on a laptop:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Lenovo-V15-G2-Dual-core-Processor/dp/B0CNKZ7CSY?
th=1

I thought Intel dropped the Celery or were calling it something else.

On 2025-01-18, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 1/18/25 4:08 PM, DFS wrote:
>> On 1/18/2025 1:07 PM, Joel wrote:
>>> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>>>
>>>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>>>
>>>
>>> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
>>> motherboard every three years.  "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
>>> my point.
>>
>>
>> Total absurd bullshit.
>>
>> You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
>> new version of Windows.
>>
>> As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
>> around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
>> just fine on it.
>
> I have to agree with you here. There was pressure to buy new hardware
> every two or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
> goes a decade with the original operating system on it. However, Windows
> in that time will become unbearably slow for most users since they
> usually have no idea how to maintain it. Linux, for its part, will be
> just as fast ten years down the line as it was on day one.

And considerably faster if you replace the hard drive with an SSD. My old
computers are "living" proof of that.

--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy
what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien

Le 18-01-2025, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> a écrit :
> On 1/18/25 4:08 PM, DFS wrote:
>> On 1/18/2025 1:07 PM, Joel wrote:
>>> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>>>
>>>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>>>
>>>
>>> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
>>> motherboard every three years.  "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
>>> my point.
>>
>>
>> Total absurd bullshit.
>>
>> You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
>> new version of Windows.
>>
>> As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
>> around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
>> just fine on it.
>
> I have to agree with you here. There was pressure to buy new hardware
> every two or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
> goes a decade with the original operating system on it.

Except now Microsoft request people to update to the last available
version of Windows. Which is not always possible due to hardware
requirements.

> However, Windows
> in that time will become unbearably slow for most users since they
> usually have no idea how to maintain it. Linux, for its part, will be
> just as fast ten years down the line as it was on day one.

That's another subject, but yes.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 1/19/25 2:22 AM, RonB wrote:
> On 2025-01-18, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>> On 1/18/25 4:08 PM, DFS wrote:
>>> On 1/18/2025 1:07 PM, Joel wrote:
>>>> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
>>>> motherboard every three years.  "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
>>>> my point.
>>>
>>>
>>> Total absurd bullshit.
>>>
>>> You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
>>> new version of Windows.
>>>
>>> As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
>>> around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
>>> just fine on it.
>>
>> I have to agree with you here. There was pressure to buy new hardware
>> every two or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
>> goes a decade with the original operating system on it. However, Windows
>> in that time will become unbearably slow for most users since they
>> usually have no idea how to maintain it. Linux, for its part, will be
>> just as fast ten years down the line as it was on day one.
>
> And considerably faster if you replace the hard drive with an SSD. My old
> computers are "living" proof of that.

I can't even imagine using a computer with a hard disk nowadays. I guess
it takes severe retardation, like the one Larry Pietraskiewicz is
suffering from, to see benefits to using one.

--
CrudeSausage
Gab: @CrudeSausage
Telegram: @CrudeSausage
Unapologetic paleoconservative
KDE supporting member
ASUS Zephyrus GA401QM on Manjaro

On 1/19/25 3:53 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 18-01-2025, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> a écrit :
>> On 1/18/25 4:08 PM, DFS wrote:
>>> On 1/18/2025 1:07 PM, Joel wrote:
>>>> DFS <guhnoo-basher@linux.advocaca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I reject the Win platform as a dead end.
>>>>>
>>>>> Windows will long outlive you and all the other doomsday cola advocates.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Explain how to keep up with demands on hardware without replacing
>>>> motherboard every three years.  "Don't upgrade to Win12" only supports
>>>> my point.
>>>
>>>
>>> Total absurd bullshit.
>>>
>>> You have NEVER needed to upgrade/replace your mobo every 3 years for a
>>> new version of Windows.
>>>
>>> As I've requested several times, make sure to keep your current hardware
>>> around so I can rub your Linuxy face in it when Win13 installs and runs
>>> just fine on it.
>>
>> I have to agree with you here. There was pressure to buy new hardware
>> every two or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
>> goes a decade with the original operating system on it.
>
> Except now Microsoft request people to update to the last available
> version of Windows. Which is not always possible due to hardware
> requirements.

There was an article yesterday or the day before about Microsoft forcing
people using 23H2 and 22H2 to update 24H2. I imagine that their excuse
will be security, but it should serve as an example of how the company
doesn't care if you think your system runs fine as it is. You have to
use the latest whether you want it or not.

>> However, Windows
>> in that time will become unbearably slow for most users since they
>> usually have no idea how to maintain it. Linux, for its part, will be
>> just as fast ten years down the line as it was on day one.
>
> That's another subject, but yes.

I've had to re-encode songs lost to bit rot and lost photos of my kid
over the last four years for the same reason. Additionally, I can't go a
month in Windows without needing to correct the fact that some of the
system files got corrupted. I know how to do it and am aware that this
problem exists, but most people can't imagine that things saved on the
storage could suddenly break for no reason.

--
CrudeSausage
Gab: @CrudeSausage
Telegram: @CrudeSausage
Unapologetic paleoconservative
KDE supporting member
ASUS Zephyrus GA401QM on Manjaro

-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

>> Win10 need[s] support till
>> 2031, it's ending this year with an optional paid extension.
>
>Not necessarily: Win10 came out back in 2015, and your current PC was a
>license transfer from an older machine.
>
>When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?

Think, power user, is anyone other than Relf's old computer running a
vintage *build* of Windows 10, since an expert knows it grew bloat-
wise at least until 20H2. It would save me from Win11 hell, if it had
real extended support, but they'll make it short-term. M$ has
endorsed GNU/Linux.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 1/19/25 11:38 AM, Joel wrote:
> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>

Original context:
>>>> .... There was pressure to buy new hardware every two
>>>> or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
>>>> goes a decade with the original operating system on it.
>>>> ...
>>>
>>> For you to be right for my machine, Win10 would need support...
>>>
>>> Win10 need[s] support till
>>> 2031, it's ending this year with an optional paid extension.
>>
>> Not necessarily: Win10 came out back in 2015, and your current PC
>> was a license transfer from an older machine.
>>
>> When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?
>
>
> Think, power user, is anyone other than Relf's old computer running a
> vintage *build* of Windows 10, since an expert knows it grew bloat-
> wise at least until 20H2. It would save me from Win11 hell, if it had
> real extended support, but they'll make it short-term. M$ has
> endorsed GNU/Linux.

Irrelevant to the question posed on lifecycle costs ...

"When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?"

-hh

-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

>Original context:
> >>>> .... There was pressure to buy new hardware every two
> >>>> or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
> >>>> goes a decade with the original operating system on it.
> >>>> ...
> >>>
> >>> For you to be right for my machine, Win10 would need support...
> >>>
>>>> Win10 need[s] support till
>>>> 2031, it's ending this year with an optional paid extension.
>>>
>>> Not necessarily: Win10 came out back in 2015, and your current PC
>>> was a license transfer from an older machine.
>>>
>>> When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?
>>
>> Think, power user, is anyone other than Relf's old computer running a
>> vintage *build* of Windows 10, since an expert knows it grew bloat-
>> wise at least until 20H2. It would save me from Win11 hell, if it had
>> real extended support, but they'll make it short-term. M$ has
>> endorsed GNU/Linux.
>
>Irrelevant to the question posed on lifecycle costs ...
>
>"When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?"

My PC started life with 20H2, which was a dream. Win11 might've led
me back to 10, but then no support soon. M$ has disowned numerous
computers.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 07:22:39 -0000 (UTC), RonB wrote:

> And considerably faster if you replace the hard drive with an SSD. My
> old computers are "living" proof of that.

I had to go SATA on the old Dell since the one PCIe slot was in use. While
the SSD allows SATA to reach its theoretical speeds the a HDD couldn't the
difference to NMVe is noticeable.

On 1/19/25 12:32 PM, Joel wrote:
> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
>> Original context:
>>>>>> .... There was pressure to buy new hardware every two
>>>>>> or three years back in the 90s, but hardware nowadays easily
>>>>>> goes a decade with the original operating system on it.
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> For you to be right for my machine, Win10 would need support...
>>>>>
>>>>> Win10 need[s] support till
>>>>> 2031, it's ending this year with an optional paid extension.
>>>>
>>>> Not necessarily: Win10 came out back in 2015, and your current PC
>>>> was a license transfer from an older machine.
>>>>
>>>> When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?
>>>
>>> Think, power user, is anyone other than Relf's old computer running a
>>> vintage *build* of Windows 10, since an expert knows it grew bloat-
>>> wise at least until 20H2. It would save me from Win11 hell, if it had
>>> real extended support, but they'll make it short-term. M$ has
>>> endorsed GNU/Linux.
>>
>> Irrelevant to the question posed on lifecycle costs ...
>>
>> "When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?"
>
>
> My PC started life with 20H2, which was a dream.

Which PC? The new one that you've since given up on Windows for?

And when was this, for the question still remains unanswered:

"When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?"

> M$ has disowned numerous computers.

By almost as much as you've avoided answering this simple question.

-hh

-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

>>>>>> Win10 need[s] support till
>>>>>> 2031, it's ending this year with an optional paid extension.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not necessarily: Win10 came out back in 2015, and your current PC
>>>>> was a license transfer from an older machine.
>>>>>
>>>>> When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?
>>>>
>>>> Think, power user, is anyone other than Relf's old computer running a
>>>> vintage *build* of Windows 10, since an expert knows it grew bloat-
>>>> wise at least until 20H2. It would save me from Win11 hell, if it had
>>>> real extended support, but they'll make it short-term. M$ has
>>>> endorsed GNU/Linux.
>>>
>>> Irrelevant to the question posed on lifecycle costs ...
>>>
>>> "When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?"
>>
>> My PC started life with 20H2, which was a dream.
>
>Which PC? The new one that you've since given up on Windows for?

My Linux dream machine, yes.

>And when was this, for the question still remains unanswered:
>
>"When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?"

At 10's release, it had 7 and 8/8.1, then 7 again, then 10, then
Linux.

>> M$ has disowned numerous computers.
>
>By almost as much as you've avoided answering this simple question.

Win10 would make this PC golden, but support is dropped.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 1/19/25 3:59 PM, Joel wrote:
> -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> Win10 need[s] support till
>>>>>>> 2031, it's ending this year with an optional paid extension.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not necessarily: Win10 came out back in 2015, and your current PC
>>>>>> was a license transfer from an older machine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?
>>>>>
>>>>> Think, power user, is anyone other than Relf's old computer running a
>>>>> vintage *build* of Windows 10, since an expert knows it grew bloat-
>>>>> wise at least until 20H2. It would save me from Win11 hell, if it had
>>>>> real extended support, but they'll make it short-term. M$ has
>>>>> endorsed GNU/Linux.
>>>>
>>>> Irrelevant to the question posed on lifecycle costs ...
>>>>
>>>> "When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?"
>>>
>>> My PC started life with 20H2, which was a dream.
>>
>> Which PC? The new one that you've since given up on Windows for?
>
>
> My Linux dream machine, yes.

Which is the evasion that I expected, for I was asking of its predecessor.

>> And when was this, for the question still remains unanswered:
>>
>> "When was that older PC originally put into service with Win10?"
>
>
> At 10's release, it had 7 and 8/8.1, then 7 again, then 10, then
> Linux.

Meaning that it predated Win10's 2015 release date, so you did get
roughly ten (10) years life out of that legacy hardware, as per what DFS
was saying.

>>> M$ has disowned numerous computers.
>>
>> By almost as much as you've avoided answering this simple question.
>
> Win10 would make this PC golden, but support is dropped.

Support hasn't been dropped yet. MS has extended claimed EOL's in the
past and could easily do so again.

Plus Win10 currently has a 62.7% usage share of all Windows OS systems,
and it doesn't seem all that likely that its usage is going to drop fast
enough to make it an insignificant percentage by October 2025

<https://gs.statcounter.com/os-version-market-share/windows/desktop/worldwide>

Plus even if an OEM's official support has ended, there's nothing which
prevents you from just continuing to run a legacy OS. Case in point, 3%
of Windows usage share is of pre-Win10 OS's (XP/7/8/etc) still in use.

-hh