Re: The problem with not owning the software

On 12/29/24 2:24 PM, Joel wrote:

-hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote:

On 12/28/24 5:17 PM, Joel wrote:

Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>

people ... buy a laptop every three years, to keep
up with M$'s grotesque OS's bloat, so that they can have their pretty
Office apps.  It's unbelievable.  The value I'm getting from my
computer is beyond what they could know.

>
I was telling my wife the exact same thing. We're not doing much more
than we were in 2008, yet a 2008 machine would be incapable of handling
today's software (unless it's running Linux). At some point, people need
to wake up and realize that the exponential increase in speed isn't
offering any real benefit to users who are doing anything other than
video editing or gaming.

>
It's just a scheme to keep people upgrading hardware.

>
Only if you allow it to be.

  Hence why I'm running and advocating Linux.
 

Case in point, I've recently replaced a 2017 laptop, which in its seven
years of use only had $135 in MS software purchases: that's <$2/month.
Its replacement's initial software was $100 (MS Office 2024), which
should be good for four years and be similarly cost just ~$2/month.
>
If I optionally choose to add photo editing, a new license for Adobe
Photoshop Elements is currently $70 for 3 years, which is ~$2/month.

  Sure, but that doesn't address increasing demands on hardware.

Oh, so *one* software upgrade over 7 years is suddenly now going to be some undue 'hardware demand'?  Not even for MS-Office it isn't.
-hh