Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Sign In
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Reason: None provided.

you're asserting A => B

I'm asseritng A <=> B. It is circular dependency. There is no any real need nor in bloatware, nor in hardware that could sustain it.

As for your numbers, you miss the point. Little decline or little rise of sales speak nothing about huge constant flow of unnecessary hardware to replace perfectly working one. This fluctuations perfectly explained by overall economy health.

If software is good enough to not force customers to upgrade constantly, this flow will be magnitude orders lower then we have now. Only to replace few suddenly broken or add a few to existing thousands. The sole fact that corporate PC sales exist at current levels is already a proof of artificially created demand. And fluctuations at few percent level does not change anything.

Market with artificially created demand could never be saturated. At the same time fair market, where demand is obviously limited quickly saturates and then fall with only supportive (or spare parts) sales.

There exists markets where constant demand is inevitable - it is energy, food, water and other consumable things. Computer tech, just like cars, home appliances and so on is not consumable by default. Humans do not chew PCs and drink cars to live. This things could last centuries, without any need to replace if designed properly.

You could easily find examples of such non-consumable tech in industry. F.e. decently serviced during its lifetime 70 years old lathe absolutely don't need replacement and not worse than lathe you could buy today. Sometimes it is even better than modern one. There are still a lot of half-century old (or even older) tech in industry that perfectly do its job. I don't see any reason why computer tech of last decade should be any different. Moore's law turn out to be a hoax. There is already nothing that could be improved in current computer architecture, that could noticeably rise its consumer usefulness. That was a thing in 90s, but not now. I estimate that optimum was reached around decade ago, everything we see since then is a pure creation of artificial demand from absolutely nothing.

129 days ago
1 score
Reason: Original

you're asserting A => B

I'm asseritng A <=> B. It is circular dependency. There is no any real need nor in bloatware, nor in hardware that could sustain it.

As for your numbers, you miss the point. Little decline or little rise of sales speak nothing about huge constant flow of unnecessary hardware to replace perfectly working one. This fluctuations perfectly explained by overall economy health.

If software is good enough to not force customers to upgrade constantly, this flow will be magnitude orders lower then we have now. Only to replace few suddenly broken or add a few to existing thousands. The sole fact that corporate PC sales exist at current levels is already a proof of artificially created demand. And fluctuations at few percent level does not change anything.

Market with artificially created demand could never be saturated. At the same time fair market, where demand is obviously limited quickly saturates and then fall with only supportive (or spare parts) sales.

There exists markets where constant demand is inevitable - it is energy, food, water and other consumable things. Computer tech, just like cars, home appliances and so on is not consumable by default. Humans do not chew PCs and drink cars to live. This things could last centuries, without any need to replace if designed properly.

You could easily find examples of such non-consumable tech in industry. F.e. decently services during its lifetime 70 years old lathe absolutely don't need replacement and not worse than lathe you could buy today. Sometimes it is even better than modern one. There are still a lot of half-century old (or even older) tech in industry that perfectly do its job. I don't see any reason why computer tech of last decade should be any different. Moore's law turn out to be a hoax. There is already nothing that could be improved in current computer architecture, that could noticeably rise its consumer usefulness. That was a thing in 90s, but not now. I estimate that optimum was reached around decade ago, everything we see since then is a pure creation of artificial demand from absolutely nothing.

129 days ago
1 score