Some People Don’t Love Small Cheap Computers

They want a hair-drier on every desk. Ars Technica is an example. Their “budget box” comes to $700+ including accessories. They even manage to spend about as much on a video card as on the motherboard and CPU… Don’t even look at their “god” box.

It’s all too silly. For less than $500 one can buy or build a system adequate to 90% of needs. The rest is gold plating on the Cadillac, pretty but useless.

I like IT. I like powerful IT. Spending money on unused idling stuff is just a waste, like a V12 engine that never leaves the garage. With networking it makes absolutely no sense to waste such powerful systems on a single user when GNU/Linux is a multi-user/multi-tasking system that loves to share.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Some People Don’t Love Small Cheap Computers

  1. ray says:

    There is Best Buy, and Future Shop, and Staples here.

  2. Are Macs sold in the usual retail stores? I have never seen one and I have visited many stores in Winnipeg.

  3. Ray says:

    “Look, a consumer walks into a store and sees 40 different personal computers for sale, all with that other OS.”

    You left out the Mac.

  4. Look, a consumer walks into a store and sees 40 different personal computers for sale, all with that other OS. Where’s his choice of OS? He has none. He is not a geek likely to download and to install an OS even though he could. I teach teenagers how to do it all the time but I don’t have the advertising budget of M$. M$ has trained hundreds of millions of consumers and their retailers and OEMs to accept that other OS as the standard and it’s not the only choice. We have seen repeatedly with netbooks and smart thingies that consumers will choose Linux if they have the choice. They should have the choice on all personal computers.

    Choice of OS “matters” because it affects how efficiently a computer operates. M$ designs their OS to maximize the flow of money to M$ not to run PCs efficiently. GNU/Linux or Android/Linux are better choices for many.

  5. oldman says:

    “Now, in 2011, folks are beginning to choose and to have choices that matter.”

    “choices that matter” is an interesting choice of words. It implies that people who are not satisfied with the small cheap computer that you seem to glorify aren’t making the right choices.

    I would suggest that the “choices that matter” are those choices that people make for themselves. If the sum total of their computing experience is the computer functions of the smart phone that they are carrying and they are happy with it then that is a choice that matters. Likewise, if someone determines for themself that a “small cheap” computer doesnt cut it, then that too is a choice that matters to the chooser.

    What it looks like a choice that matters to you Pog, is ultimately irrelevant.

  6. Until recently there were no choices of small cheap computers on the shelves. It was x86 boxes or nothing. Then there were notebooks. Then there were netbooks. Now there are smart thingies. Now, in 2011, folks are beginning to choose and to have choices that matter.

  7. oldman says:

    “With networking it makes absolutely no sense to waste such powerful systems on a single user when GNU/Linux is a multi-user/multi-tasking system that loves to share.”

    Actually, it doesn’t have to make sense to you, but only to the person who is purchasing the computer. They may wish to have even the most trivial application run blindingly fast. they may be in love with the latest tech. They may be sizing their system for maximum longevity. But in the end, if they wish to over provision their desktop for arbitrary reasons, and they have the money to pay for it, its their CHOICE to do so.

  8. Ray says:

    If you read closely, it said a budget “Gaming” box. This means the minimum you need to have a good gaming PC to last 4 years.

  9. Bender says:

    I bought my PC for about 320$ though i saved for GPU since i don’t play much nowadays. And it works!! It works flawlessly and fast! Ars Technica is one of those services that are in the “drive users to better hardware”, so is Microsoft requiring upgrades all the time, it’s all connected… But on the other hand, it is human nature, if we get more powerful hardware we tend to use it “harder” until there is this “must upgrade”. Though for simple browsing/music/video a cheap PC is more than enough.

  10. Matias says:

    Most of the people have too good hardware and too bad OS. My son (now in university) bought 5 years old former enterprize pc with 170 € (Windows XP SP3 and Ubuntu 10.04 LTS) and 2 GB RAM. That’s was good decision coz those enterprize computers have normally much reliable hardware. He propably saved quite a lot of money.

Leave a Reply