One big thing is people will often buy for a niche that they don’t need (like buying a big truck because they go to home depot once a month to get 2x4 and the other (in tech mostly) is “its for future proofing bro”
I manage about three dozen PCs, it’s only like 5% of my job. I’m starting to move some of them to a Linux Mint Cinnamon distro but it doesn’t work for all of my use cases. Even at home, I have a lot of really niche software solutions for things I do and games I like that aren’t supported yet on Linux. I honestly don’t know what I’ll do when Win10 support ends, my PC is pretty decent, I’m nowhere near ready to replace it. I play new games at 1440p/144fps at nax settings with very few frame drops.
The problem with future proofing is that you can never predict what new feature will end up becoming the next big thing or the next bottleneck. Sure, if everything works out exactly as predicted, if what the companies said was going to be the next big thing, really did end up being the next big thing, then you’d be future proof for up to 10 years. But then what if it turns out that the next big thing wasn’t what anyone predicted it was going to be? Think about the whole VRAM issue that came up last year. Almost overnight, supposedly high end GPU’s got instantly re-evaluated to be not worth the money. DLSS, too - the newest version only supports the newest generation. And mesh shaders - even some GPU’s from a couple years back don’t support it. Out of all the things that people predicted was going to be the next big feature, how many actually ended up being the next big feature? You end up just as worse off as if you had just went for a lower-tier option.
I’m not advocating for replacing your GPU frequently. Far from it. But the argument of splurging on an excessively overkill tech part for futureproofing is just marketing mumbo jumbo
Let me put it this way, you could buy a 4090 now for 2k, then get prolly like 7-10 years out of it, or you could get something more midranged for like 300-400, and if you upgrade every other gen for the same price that means you spent at most 1200 which is more than 50% less than if you’d gone for the 4090 to be “future proof”
One big thing is people will often buy for a niche that they don’t need (like buying a big truck because they go to home depot once a month to get 2x4 and the other (in tech mostly) is “its for future proofing bro”
What if we future proof with full intent to use until it’s chugging?
Because I will be very unhappy if my pc needs new parts by 2045
Just wait until 2031 when they end support for Windows 11 and require you to have an 18th Gen CPU to run Windows 12.
Running Windows clearly belongs on this list.
I manage about three dozen PCs, it’s only like 5% of my job. I’m starting to move some of them to a Linux Mint Cinnamon distro but it doesn’t work for all of my use cases. Even at home, I have a lot of really niche software solutions for things I do and games I like that aren’t supported yet on Linux. I honestly don’t know what I’ll do when Win10 support ends, my PC is pretty decent, I’m nowhere near ready to replace it. I play new games at 1440p/144fps at nax settings with very few frame drops.
The problem with future proofing is that you can never predict what new feature will end up becoming the next big thing or the next bottleneck. Sure, if everything works out exactly as predicted, if what the companies said was going to be the next big thing, really did end up being the next big thing, then you’d be future proof for up to 10 years. But then what if it turns out that the next big thing wasn’t what anyone predicted it was going to be? Think about the whole VRAM issue that came up last year. Almost overnight, supposedly high end GPU’s got instantly re-evaluated to be not worth the money. DLSS, too - the newest version only supports the newest generation. And mesh shaders - even some GPU’s from a couple years back don’t support it. Out of all the things that people predicted was going to be the next big feature, how many actually ended up being the next big feature? You end up just as worse off as if you had just went for a lower-tier option.
I’m not advocating for replacing your GPU frequently. Far from it. But the argument of splurging on an excessively overkill tech part for futureproofing is just marketing mumbo jumbo
Let me put it this way, you could buy a 4090 now for 2k, then get prolly like 7-10 years out of it, or you could get something more midranged for like 300-400, and if you upgrade every other gen for the same price that means you spent at most 1200 which is more than 50% less than if you’d gone for the 4090 to be “future proof”