Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 19th Oct 2012 20:07 UTC
Permalink for comment 540198
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
You're looking at the past through very rose-tinted glasses.* Past software was generally way more unstable, did a lot of less, cost more (especially taking into account whole package, together with sufficiently fast hardware), was notoriously insecure.
Present software is simply much better. And WRT hardware - a half+ decade dualcore (virtually any dualcore) machine is more than good enough for virtually any kind of consumer software. A decade old machine is also still quite fine, if some minimal care is taken when selecting current software for it (as in: you'll still be able to use current software, with current capabilities). That was virtually unheard of in the past... (a decade-old PC in 1995 or 2000 or 2005 would a total junk)
It's ironic (but telling, shows how much thought you put into your views) how you praise Google Chromebooks - which depend entirely on a browser, a category of software that doesn't have the most efficient way of doing things...
*why won't you crawl into that hole of the 80s, with hardly any OS to speak of and memory sizes measured in kilobytes?
Edited 2012-10-27 00:07 UTC