586
Windows 11 24H2 goes from “unsupported” to “unbootable” on some older PCs (arstechnica.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
251 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 17 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Hard disagree. If this was the 80s or the 90s, you would have a case. But nowadays? 14 year old PCs are quite capable for many everyday uses.

The only people trying to convince you that you have to upgrade things every other year are the ones who sell them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    IDK, it's a far cry from "dropping support for stuff 14+ years old" to "we're going to coerce you into buying new hardware every other year".

    I bought a laptop at the beginning of 2010 and used it until spring of 2021. It was long overdue for replacement by then, so even that wouldn't have been affected by this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    What made it long overdue for replacement, though?

    Because I bet a mom or pops who only browse facebook could (technically) still use it for five more years*.

    *Though facebook is not the best example because they are constantly bloating their own product.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    For me: I like to play games. It was still fine for games like Dwarf Fortress or Civilization, and it could handle Factorio decently well (enough to launch a rocket, not enough for a megabase, heh).

    For my mom? IDK, I was already pushing it with how long I stayed on Windows 7. I'm not sure that this particular laptop would have been a good hand-me-down in 2021.

    Finally...I have to repeat: I bought the laptop in 2010. I got eleven years out of it for a type of device that most people replace every 2-3 years. Why isn't that good enough for you?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    You're right. 11 years is a good run.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Thank you!

    I was pretty thrilled at how much use I got out of that laptop. I originally picked it up as a companion machine to a desktop, but about a year later, I switched over to using the laptop almost exclusively. I got a docking station and hooked it up to my desktop monitors, and all was well. It did limit the games I could play, but hey, I guess you could call me a "patient gamer".

    I did have to repair it a couple of times -- I replaced both the cooling fan and the hard drive around 2015-2017.

    It was funny, what finally spurred me to start looking for a new machine was a free giveaway of Total War: Shogun 2 on Steam back in 2020. Free game? New computer!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    14 year old PCs are quite capable for may everyday use

    I got a core 2 duo (3gb of ram and a HDD as a boot drive, really ancient I know) computer, it's the only computer I have and I absolutely hate it since it sucks, even with Linux (xfce as a desktop) it takes so long to boot (usually 3 to 4 minutes, windows took like 6 to 7) and not to mention it being so laggy it struggles with launching Firefox and for example a file browser at the same time, and loading a webpage also takes a long time (around 20 seconds for Google, YouTube about 30 s)

    Yeah, these computers are really just unusable even for really lightweight work, yeah "upgrade to a SSD, it will be blazing fast", wouldn't that just speed up the boot time? The least important thing? Since like I can just walk somewhere and then come back before it boots, but when I'm waiting for a webpage to load or a program to load up it's really that I do have to wait there, doing nothing in the meantime

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    An SSD really is the solution. You believe it just speeds up boot time, but it does speed up nearly everything else too.

    Your Webpage? Your Browser loads it, stores new data into the cache and stalls while waiting for the HDD. Or it knows elements are in the cache and stalls waiting for them.

    You click on the application menu? You PC tries to load 20 icons, tiny amounts of data an SSD has ready in a microsecond. Your HDD takes a full second because the seek between the 20 places where the icons are on the HDD takes so long.

    I have some very old PCs I manage (mainly for relatives) and one couple uses a Core 2 Duo E6400 which should be quite similar to your PC. This PC is very usable for daily browsing with Ubuntu 22.04, boot time is about 25 seconds, then about 10 seconds to load up ebay. (I admit I optimized boot time quite a bit) The other PC they have is even slower than that, I just do not remember the exact CPU right now. That one is even used for old browser games similar to candy crush.

    Of course it is not what I would use given the choice. I want to compile code in seconds, watch videos in glorious 4k and play a 3D game from time to time. But for them it works perfectly well, so well that they deny my offers to upgrade them

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    IMO, it'll probably still be slow at a lot of things. The gen-6 i5-U laptops we at my job use have SSDs and 8GB ram (granted, also running windows because required for some software) and they're still really slow compared to things like my personal desktop and laptop. Boot times are fine at least, but web browsing isn't as quick and responsive as I'm used to (<2 seconds per page). They probably take more like 10 pages to load pretty basic pages (no videos).

    Still, probably a ton faster with an SSD than without one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    It would help the boot time but also loading software. But I agree a Core 2 Duo is pretty much cooked at this point.

    I just replaced a Core 2 Quad in my server, which mostly is a file server and database, that sort of thing. It was doing fine until I started trying to do virtual machines on it (running Home Assistant), and that just killed it. But as a machine I'd be using directly? Nah.

    My desktop machine was an i5 from about 2015 and was fine, but I recently upgraded the desktop and put the guts of that in the server.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You can have it, but expecting modern windows to run seems a bit silly. It's a for sale product not a community supported hobby project.

    If it was worth supporting for old ATMs or POS terminals, Ms probably would. But the people with those systems aren't paying for windows updates.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    I never said 14 year old PCs have to support modern Windows as it stands now.

    But anyway. With all the billions Microsoft has as its operating budget, why can't it launch a Windows tailored to low spec machines? Not profitable enough. That's why.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •