![]() ![]() So how long do computers last? Every situation is different, but you can expect the average desktop PC to last between three and eight years. The average lifespan of a desktop computer While a seldom-used and well-maintained computer could, theoretically, continue working for decades, its practical lifespan is usually between three to eight years. Developers cease providing security updates for outdated operating systems, which leaves you vulnerable to nasty viruses and hacks. Should your immaculately maintained, albeit ageing, computer still handle essential tasks, you’ll eventually stop receiving updates and support. Despite the hardware running flawlessly, it’ll struggle to keep up with the latest, resource-intensive operating systems, applications, and games. Then there’s the risk of human-induced mishaps, such as dropped laptops and water-damaged keyboards.Įven if you take meticulous care of your prized machine, it’ll eventually become obsolete. Components with moving parts like the hard disk drive (HDD) inevitably grind away. Delicate hardware such as the motherboard and RAM take a beating from prolonged exposure to intensive heat. Like the car in your garage, a computer will degrade from everyday wear and tear. I give you the 3.18 % more than the 15% I mentioned. That means every year 18.18% of computer owners buy a new (maybe latest model) computer. ![]() With computers having an average lifespan of 3-8 years, the average computer buyer would be replace his computer every 5.5 years. I know it's how the internet works, but it is misguided to conclude that because you think a thing, everybody else obviously must feel the same way. My point being that you're probably best served by not automatically assuming that your experience and opinion somehow reflects the reality experienced by most Lr users. You have no idea - none - whether or not this affects "a majority" of users: it may well be that only 15% of subscribers are unable to get the benefit of the new denoising. Making up statistics doesn't really add to the credibility of your opinion. While Topaz Photo AI can be used by older computers. In my view when Adobe comes out with a new feature that only can be used as it should by 15% of their subscribers they should wait and work on the product till a majority of their subscribers can use this feature to its fullest before they release it.It is ridicules that only subscribers who have bought computers in the last 1.5 year can get the full benefit of Adobe Denoise. So: we either upgrade our hardware wait until the software is sufficiently optimised to meet our arbitrary expectations (which might never happen, of course) live with the longer processing times or use something else.Īscribing agendas to Adobe's imagined motivations is futile and disagree on this one. The point is that this is a simple fact of life: as software gets more and more resource intensive, we're all going to run into instances of software bogging down because it has surpassed the capabilities of the hardware it's running on. Adobe is already far ahead of DxO in performance and code optimisation terms, and we can expect that trend to continue. You mention Topaz: I know from my own experience that it runs like a dog on what constitutes "older hardware" for its requirements - the fact that it's currently faster than Lr on your machine is pretty irrelevant as a data point: it just means that its requirements more closely match your machines capabilities.Ī pure fluke, really - certainly not evidence of an evil Adobe agenda.įor further context: on my machine (which has a functional, though far from cutting-edge, GPU with 8gb of memory) files that take 15 seconds in On One Photo Raw take a minute in Lr and ten minutes in DxO PhotoLab or PureRaw. There's no call to take things personally - Adobe isn't out to get you. The simple fact is that we're talking about resource-intensive code, which Adobe will surely refine as they develop it. Than that says at lot about there attitute for there customers. For Adobe, the people who have "older hardware" (and that are most of there subscribers), are not a first priority. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |