Linux users make the mistake to assume that computers work like cars.. they don't.
you can get a car from the 60s and still use it today.
whereas all computers are made to last 7-10 years, some even less. like acer gaming laptops who last ~5.
You can change some components of an old car, and it's worth. on a computer it's never worth it.
why?
because of 'engineered obsolescence' aka ' planned obsolescence' . cars , at least old cars, didn't have this implemented in them, so they could last hundreds of years. whereas computers are built in a way to support consumerism, so that people continue to buy and buy, every decade, to be in a loop.
obsolescence noun ob·so·les·cence ˌäb-sə-ˈle-sᵊn(t)s : the process of becoming obsolete or the condition of being nearly obsolete
obsolete äb-sə-ˌlēt : no longer in use or no longer useful
The Light Bulb Conspiracy (2010) - Planned obsolescence at the heart of consumerism. - here's a documentary on it.
Laptops are built as a whole, and because of this principle of obsolescence , it's never worth to buy new hardware for old computers.. it will bottleneck. You'd have to change all the pieces for this.
a new laptop costs 100%, and each new component costs like 30-40% individually, but there are like 5 key components, so it's not worth it. to buy a new motherboard it's almost half of a laptop.
they usually say to buy a new memory component, to change HDD->SSD , but this is a bad idea, the RAM, CPU, powercircuit and motherboard and so on, are the same.. this is pure bottlenecking. and it creates imbalance.
it's like doing pushups with one hand only, over and over again, and when you try to lift something with both hands, you will have imbalance. or when you try to do pushups with both hands, it will work badly. the body is a whole, a PC is a whole. bottlenecking is real.
then they say to also buy more RAM.. and what's the point, because with the money spent on a new SSD and on more RAM, you might as well put 100-200$ and buy a new computer.. which already has only NEW components for you to use for the next 5-7-10 years..
cars are different because a new whole car is way more expensive than pieces that have to be replaced, and old cars didn't have fast obsolescence built into them. on the contrary, they were designed to last for as long as possible.
There was even a lightbulb that lasted for like 100+ years and so much more , mentioned in that documentary.
You can easily see this principle in phones, like look at IOS users buying a new IOS every 5-7 years.. it's the same for PCs., especially for laptops..
and windows works too on old hardware, even better, because of official hardware support , drivers, that were once covered by a warranty, unlike on linux, whose drivers are made by unpaid engineers who don't have so many resources., don't test as often, and so on. so just from the getgo, it can't run better. it's just propaganda , cherrypicked things and things that are not understood by them. like caching of RAM that is a good thing but they don't get it.
also their priority isn't fixing linux.. :
Windows 10 does run on a 4 GBs RAM PC. I can even produce music.. - my other post. and I'm sure that it works on a 2 GBs RAM too. but 4 is enough. REVI OS and the Ultra Performance Power Plan make it work pretty fast.
back when 2 GBs of RAM was something, so you don't have to update, you can just play older games and browse the web..
there are linux users who buy 8 or more RAM for their old computers, I'm not even joking. not to mention that Ubuntu now is just as heavy as windows 11.
but if we're talking about true ancient computers, then forget about these super-ultra-giga minimal distros that they shill for. they can't do magic. just wear it down all the way with windows and then maybe gather some money and buy a new one, even if it's a second hand one, who cares. still better than trying to bring ancient computers into our age. You wouldn't even be able to browse the net, so it's a lie.
