4 ms·

I disagree. My father bought one of those TRS-80 Model IIIs in 1980, and I used it tons. By 1985, though, we had migrated over to a PC. Our Model III had been r

by dangoor 10y ago

I disagree. My father bought one of those TRS-80 Model IIIs in 1980, and I used it tons. By 1985, though, we had migrated over to a PC. Our Model III had been really decked out (even had a 5MB hard drive that we had gotten in a closeout deal). The difference between what you could do with a 1985 PC and a 1980 Model III was huge. In contrast, we have a 2009 MacBook Pro. Still works just fine for web browsing, word processing and things of that nature. Mobile phone hardware is moving super fast as desktop computers were in the '80s, but I think that the improvements in desktop (well, laptop is the equivalent today) hardware are less important for most people.

jacquesm 10y ago
When you migrate from one architecture to another it is kind of logical that you would get a new machine. The TRS-80 wasn't able to compete with the PC for very long (though in the beginning there was of course more software available for the TRS-80). But if you had stuck with the CP/M world you would have been able to run that old hardware for many years more. Note how you have relegated your 2009 MacBook Pro to 'web browsing, words processing and things of that nature', whereas as a developers machine it is likely quite underpowered. We are also at the end of the easy pickings from Moore's law so this too means that machine replacement pace is now (fortunately) finally dropping off a bit. But phones and tablets are basically an exercise in planned obsolescence and computers while they last a bit longer than in the past are still being replaced quite frequently. Your MacBook Pro is on it's 'second life', no longer in use for its primary purpose.
- dangoor 10y ago
  My point was in relation to your comment about these old machines being in use for a decade whereas "That fully loaded Macbook Pro will be outdated before the ink of the advert is properly dried." I think that software developers and computer enthusiasts back then wanted to upgrade as often as they would now (though I might still argue that even for developers the pace is less today than it was back then). For your "average office worker" or "average home computer user", I'm guessing that their computer will serve them well for longer today with less clear incentive for upgrading. I mentioned the web browser, word processing and such because those are things that many non-developers commonly do with computers. That 2009 MacBook Pro would likely continue to serve a non-developer just fine and the only reason they might consider upgrading is that Mac OS Sierra doesn't support it. In short, I think desktop/laptop machine replacement pace started dropping off for most people years ago. In the 80s the performance and storage improvements were way more meaningful than they are for many people than any time recently.
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    > I think that software developers and computer enthusiasts back then wanted to upgrade as often as they would now I was a software developer back then and the pace was measurably slower. Development tools would be static for years between upgrades too.
- tibbon 10y ago
  Eh, my 2010 MBP 15" spec-wise seems around as fast as some of the new ones (has a real GPU, was able to update the memory to 16GB and throw an SSD in there). I'm still using it for Protools and it's just as good now as it was then (I don't use plugins, all outboard) But- I see your point. I have a 2013 MBP as my developer machine and it's being replaced the day the new one comes out.

by dangoor 10y ago

jacquesm 10y ago

When you migrate from one architecture to another it is kind of logical that you would get a new machine. The TRS-80 wasn't able to compete with the PC for very long (though in the beginning there was of course more software available for the TRS-80). But if you had stuck with the CP/M world you would have been able to run that old hardware for many years more. Note how you have relegated your 2009 MacBook Pro to 'web browsing, words processing and things of that nature', whereas as a developers machine it is likely quite underpowered. We are also at the end of the easy pickings from Moore's law so this too means that machine replacement pace is now (fortunately) finally dropping off a bit. But phones and tablets are basically an exercise in planned obsolescence and computers while they last a bit longer than in the past are still being replaced quite frequently. Your MacBook Pro is on it's 'second life', no longer in use for its primary purpose.

dangoor 10y ago
My point was in relation to your comment about these old machines being in use for a decade whereas "That fully loaded Macbook Pro will be outdated before the ink of the advert is properly dried." I think that software developers and computer enthusiasts back then wanted to upgrade as often as they would now (though I might still argue that even for developers the pace is less today than it was back then). For your "average office worker" or "average home computer user", I'm guessing that their computer will serve them well for longer today with less clear incentive for upgrading. I mentioned the web browser, word processing and such because those are things that many non-developers commonly do with computers. That 2009 MacBook Pro would likely continue to serve a non-developer just fine and the only reason they might consider upgrading is that Mac OS Sierra doesn't support it. In short, I think desktop/laptop machine replacement pace started dropping off for most people years ago. In the 80s the performance and storage improvements were way more meaningful than they are for many people than any time recently.
- jacquesm 10y ago
  > I think that software developers and computer enthusiasts back then wanted to upgrade as often as they would now I was a software developer back then and the pace was measurably slower. Development tools would be static for years between upgrades too.
tibbon 10y ago
Eh, my 2010 MBP 15" spec-wise seems around as fast as some of the new ones (has a real GPU, was able to update the memory to 16GB and throw an SSD in there). I'm still using it for Protools and it's just as good now as it was then (I don't use plugins, all outboard) But- I see your point. I have a 2013 MBP as my developer machine and it's being replaced the day the new one comes out.