From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 06:31:26 -0500, -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
wrote in <vh9vqe$3v8n4$1@dont-email.me>:

On 11/15/24 4:50 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 08:36:19 -0500, -hh wrote:

That there's an upward trend isn't what matters: what matters is the
change over the product's design lifespan.

How much of the upward trend the product can cover will limit its
lifespan.

Of course. So then, what is that trend?

As I've already said, my observation is that its ~4GB/decade or less.

Mainstream users often replace their PCs more frequently, so the
practice of "upgrade at replacement" has replaced component upgrades.

For example:

Notebook:
2017-present: Started with 8GB, hasn't changed.
(FYI: likely to replace this machine in 2025).

Power desktop:
2012-2022: Started with 24GB, never changed.
2022-present: 32GB

Post your own hardware history for the past decade.

-hh

"The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'."

I believe I've had two machines this past decade. The
old one I'd built, had 64GB iirc. Current one has 258G.

$ lsmem
RANGE SIZE STATE REMOVABLE BLOCK 0x0000000000000000-0x000000407fffffff 258G online yes 0-128

Memory block size: 2G
Total online memory: 258G
Total offline memory: 0B

RAM is cheap and handy to have around. By default, Linux
Mint splits the RAM in two, half of it ramdisk for various shared
memory operations. It's owned by root, but world-writable with
the sticky-bit set. So one can:

_[/dev/shm]_(vallor@lm)🐧_
$ time -p tar -xf ~/OS/linux-6.11.8.tar.xz
real 8.45
user 8.16
sys 4.02
_[/dev/shm]_(vallor@lm)🐧_
$ ls -ld linux-6.11.8
drwxrwxr-x 26 vallor vallor 820 Nov 14 04:21 linux-6.11.8

...so you're most of the way to building Linux on your hotrod.

_[/dev/shm]_(vallor@lm)🐧_
$ df -h .
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
tmpfs 126G 2.5G 124G 2% /dev/shm
--
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
OS: Linux 6.11.8 Release: Mint 21.3 Mem: 258G
"There's my way, and then there's the easy way."
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 11/17/24 1:38 AM, vallor wrote:

On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 06:31:26 -0500, -hh wrote:

On 11/15/24 4:50 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 08:36:19 -0500, -hh wrote:

That there's an upward trend isn't what matters: what matters is
the change over the product's design lifespan.

How much of the upward trend the product can cover will limit its
lifespan.

Of course. So then, what is that trend?

As I've already said, my observation is that its ~4GB/decade or less.

Mainstream users often replace their PCs more frequently, so the
practice of "upgrade at replacement" has replaced component upgrades.

For example:

Notebook:
2017-present: Started with 8GB, hasn't changed.
(FYI: likely to replace this machine in 2025).

Power desktop:
2012-2022: Started with 24GB, never changed.
2022-present: 32GB

Post your own hardware history for the past decade.

"The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'."

Precisely. That's why I was speaking in generalities and then
provided a personal anecdote. You're doing the same here:

I believe I've had two machines this past decade. The
old one I'd built, had 64GB iirc. Current one has 258G.

And how many normal people do you know who's home PCs are similarly so equipped? Particularly non-geeks/gamers who do fine in the 4-8GB range?

RAM is cheap and handy to have around.

RAM has gotten cheaper (& rarely hurts), but when there's COLA boys who
are loathe to spend more than $50 for an entire machine, they're not
about to drop $1200 for one 128GB stick of DDR5, let alone two.

<https://www.crucial.com/memory/server-ddr5/MTC40F2047S1RC56BR>

By default, Linux
Mint splits the RAM in two, half of it ramdisk for various shared
memory operations. It's owned by root, but world-writable with
the sticky-bit set...
[stuff]
...so you're most of the way to building Linux on your hotrod.

Yes, RAMdisks have been a thing .. for decades. Initially, manually
invoked by the user, later as cache automatically managed by the OS.

Apple's OS X has had automatic management for a decade+; one would watch
one's system's swap rate to see if you're significantly enough memory-constrained or not to bother to do anything about it. Case in
point, my system's uptime is 30+ days and total swap used so far is
still <10GB.


-hh

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

-hh wrote:

vallor wrote:

I believe I've had two machines this past decade. The
old one I'd built, had 64GB iirc. Current one has 258G.

And how many normal people do you know who's home PCs are similarly so >equipped? Particularly non-geeks/gamers who do fine in the 4-8GB range?

Well, 4GB was getting weak ten years ago. My last decade has been
dominated by my Ivy Bridge machine, which had 8GB and did just fine,
really, and my Skylake machine, which still gets used and has 16GB.
My Alder Lake machine has 32GB.

RAM is cheap and handy to have around.

RAM has gotten cheaper (& rarely hurts), but when there's COLA boys who
are loathe to spend more than $50 for an entire machine,

Yeah? And some, like vallor, are not.

Again, asshole, you pretend that Linux users are any different than
are people at large. It's true that some are cheap. But some are
extravagant. The vast majority are reasonable and somewhere
in-between cheap and extravagant.

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 2024-11-17, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:

-hh wrote:

vallor wrote:

I believe I've had two machines this past decade. The
old one I'd built, had 64GB iirc. Current one has 258G.

And how many normal people do you know who's home PCs are similarly so >>equipped? Particularly non-geeks/gamers who do fine in the 4-8GB range?

Well, 4GB was getting weak ten years ago. My last decade has been
dominated by my Ivy Bridge machine, which had 8GB and did just fine,
really, and my Skylake machine, which still gets used and has 16GB.
My Alder Lake machine has 32GB.

RAM is cheap and handy to have around.

RAM has gotten cheaper (& rarely hurts), but when there's COLA boys who >>are loathe to spend more than $50 for an entire machine,

Yeah? And some, like vallor, are not.

Again, asshole, you pretend that Linux users are any different than
are people at large. It's true that some are cheap. But some are extravagant. The vast majority are reasonable and somewhere
in-between cheap and extravagant.

In the corporate world, the tech refresh cycle fo equipment and that includes everything
from mainframe iron to x86 PCs both desktop and server revolves around how the the
iron was sold in the first place which is usually 1 year of warranty and 2-4 years of maintenance
coverage by the vendor.

So in general happens as the contracts are expiring, the client is offered a deal on the
latest and greatest by the marketing divisions of said companies be it Dell, IBM, HP or whomever.

Bottom line it's cheaper to tech refresh and get the latest rather than renewing contracts on older
hardware.

Tinse and repeat every 3-4 years or so.
--
pothead

All about snit read below. Links courtesy of Ron: <https://web.archive.org/web/20181028000459/http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/snit.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20190529043314/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitlist.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20190529062255/http://cosmicpenguin.com/snitLieMethods.html>

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:

In the corporate world, the tech refresh cycle fo equipment and that includes everything
from mainframe iron to x86 PCs both desktop and server revolves around how the the
iron was sold in the first place which is usually 1 year of warranty and 2-4 years of maintenance
coverage by the vendor.

So in general happens as the contracts are expiring, the client is offered a deal on the
latest and greatest by the marketing divisions of said companies be it Dell, IBM, HP or whomever.

Bottom line it's cheaper to tech refresh and get the latest rather than renewing contracts on older
hardware.

Tinse and repeat every 3-4 years or so.

This is a hair distinct, but I just ordered a new UPS, same model I
had for the better part of four years from APC, I didn't even use the
new USB cable, just plugged the one already hooked up into the new
one, sometimes it's just time to go ahead and buy new. The fault I
saw last night was clearly not just needing a new battery, but that
the unit was failing. Same shit different date, as they say, I've
been using these devices for 20+ years.
--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 11/18/24 6:39 PM, pothead wrote:

On 2024-11-17, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:

-hh wrote:

vallor wrote:

I believe I've had two machines this past decade. The
old one I'd built, had 64GB iirc. Current one has 258G.

And how many normal people do you know who's home PCs are similarly so
equipped? Particularly non-geeks/gamers who do fine in the 4-8GB range?

Well, 4GB was getting weak ten years ago. My last decade has been
dominated by my Ivy Bridge machine, which had 8GB and did just fine,
really, and my Skylake machine, which still gets used and has 16GB.
My Alder Lake machine has 32GB.

I've had no problem with 4GB workplace productivity PCs even up through
Win10, for just the likes of MS-Office, Teams, Outlook, Acrobat, etc.

RAM is cheap and handy to have around.

RAM has gotten cheaper (& rarely hurts), but when there's COLA boys who
are loathe to spend more than $50 for an entire machine,

Yeah? And some, like vallor, are not.

Sure, there's exceptions such as Scott. But the exception doesn't
change the rule of thumb.

Again, asshole, you pretend that Linux users are any different than
are people at large.

Looking at COLA, one can't actually believe that claim.

It's true that some are cheap. But some are
extravagant.

So besides Scott, just who might be these "extravagant" ones be?

The vast majority are reasonable and somewhere
in-between cheap and extravagant.

In the corporate world, the tech refresh cycle fo equipment and that includes everything
from mainframe iron to x86 PCs both desktop and server revolves around how the the
iron was sold in the first place which is usually 1 year of warranty and 2-4 years of maintenance
coverage by the vendor.

So in general happens as the contracts are expiring, the client is offered a deal on the
latest and greatest by the marketing divisions of said companies be it Dell, IBM, HP or whomever.

Bottom line it's cheaper to tech refresh and get the latest rather than renewing contracts
on older hardware.

Precisely. The era of Enterprise doing in-house upgrades died a long
time ago, even before the migration to notebooks.

[R]inse and repeat every 3-4 years or so.

A five year cycle works for business tax write-off purposes too.

One can stretch it too, with a "let sleeping dogs lie" policy : let the out-of-warranty PC say in use until it breaks and the employee puts in a service service request, at which point you deploy a new PC to them.

-hh

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 16:21:20 -0500, -hh wrote:

A five year cycle works for business tax write-off purposes too.

People say “tax write-off” as if you deduct expenses against tax. You don’t: you deduct them against taxable income.
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 11/19/24 5:02 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 16:21:20 -0500, -hh wrote:

A five year cycle works for business tax write-off purposes too.

People say “tax write-off” as if you deduct expenses against tax.
You don’t: you deduct them against taxable income.

Agreed; its a lazy shorthand, like saying Unix instead of UNIX(tm) <g>


-hh

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 19:55:15 -0500, -hh wrote:

On 11/19/24 5:02 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 16:21:20 -0500, -hh wrote:

A five year cycle works for business tax write-off purposes too.

People say “tax write-off” as if you deduct expenses against tax.
You don’t: you deduct them against taxable income.

Agreed; its a lazy shorthand ...

Worse than that, a misleading one. It might lead some naïve PHBs into thinking that throwing away money on expenses comes at zero cost.
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

-hh wrote:

Yeah? And some, like vallor, are not.

Sure, there's exceptions such as Scott. But the exception doesn't
change the rule of thumb.

It's a rule of lying asshole, at best.

The -highhorse asshole has also claimed that "the open source nature
of Linux tends to attract the type of persona who somehow believes
that all avenues are one-way streets set up to benefit him (and only
him) as the true & deserving holy center of the universe."

And that's just one of countless similar assholish, lying attacks from -highhorse, as all long-time readers of this forum should know.

Again, asshole, you pretend that Linux users are any different than
are people at large.

Looking at COLA, one can't actually believe that claim.

Looking at a liar like -highghorse, one can't believe anything that he
claims.

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 11/19/24 8:23 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 19:55:15 -0500, -hh wrote:

On 11/19/24 5:02 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 16:21:20 -0500, -hh wrote:

A five year cycle works for business tax write-off purposes too.

People say “tax write-off” as if you deduct expenses against tax.
You don’t: you deduct them against taxable income.

Agreed; its a lazy shorthand ...

Worse than that, a misleading one. It might lead some naïve PHBs into thinking that throwing away money on expenses comes at zero cost.

Sure, but many will realize how easy it is to commit easy tax fraud by
using this 'business expense' to buy a new laptop for their kid.


-hh
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 11/20/24 7:36 AM, chrisv wrote:

-hh wrote:

Yeah? And some, like vallor, are not.

Sure, there's exceptions such as Scott. But the exception doesn't
change the rule of thumb.

It's a rule of lying asshole, at best.

And chrisv makes another confession about himself..

Looking at a liar like -highghorse, one can't believe anything that he claims.

Merely YA lame attack to desperately try to avoid the question posed:

"So besides Scott, just who might be these "extravagant" ones be?"

With Scott presumably #1 at 258GB RAM, what poster is #2 biggest RAM?
Your 32GB? Maybe. But that's the 'high end' of my prior comment:

"So sure, RAM demand has grown, but slowly: a decade ago, a new PC was
4GB & high end 12-60GB; today, its 8GB (to 16GB); high end 32-64GB."

So who in COLA own PCs exceeding 64GB to meet your 'extravagant' claim?
Or is this merely YA one of your unsubstantiated delusional fantasies?


-hh
--
"(snipped, unread)" inbound! <g>

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

-hh wrote:

(snipped, unread)

So besides RonB, just who might be these "cheap" ones be?

You sure get off on attacking people, -highhorse. What's your
problem? How long have you known that you are inferior?

Such an asshole.
--
"I've used Linux for awhile; it failed to be compelling so I moved on.
This really pisses off the COLA boys because their "..but if you were
to just TRY it.." argument has been applied and they still failed." -
lying asshole "-hh", lying shamelessly
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 11/20/24 3:56 PM, chrisv wrote:

-hh wrote:

(snipped, unread)

Called that!

So besides RonB, just who might be these "cheap" ones be?

I didn't ask you about cheapskates: I asked who was in your own choice
of words the "extravagant" spenders.

So far there's one, with 528GB RAM...

...but who's #2? You, at just 32GB?

Is there really no one else in all of COLA?

You sure get off on attacking people, -highhorse. What's your
problem? How long have you known that you are inferior?

I don't attack reasonable people: I note when a highly implausible
claim gets made, for which I ask for them to substantiate.
Of course, assholes whine when they get caught in their lie.

Such an asshole.

That's an appropriate .sig for you, chrisv.


-hh


--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

-hh wrote:

chrisv wrote:

-hh wrote:

(snipped, unread)

So besides RonB, just who might be these "cheap" ones be?

You sure get off on attacking people, -highhorse. What's your
problem? How long have you known that you are inferior?

Such an asshole.

(snipped, unread)

In the cola advocates, you found a group of ignorant, entitled,
dishonest, ridiculous, hypocritical penny-pinchers, eh, -highhorse?

You're not the asshole, the cola advocates are, eh, -highhorse?
--
"And what this also means is that the allegations and insinuations
that 98% of the world are ignorant boobs is way, way off base" -
lying asshole "-hh", lying shamelessly
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 2024-11-20, chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:

-hh wrote:

(snipped, unread)

So besides RonB, just who might be these "cheap" ones be?

You sure get off on attacking people, -highhorse. What's your
problem? How long have you known that you are inferior?

Such an asshole.

The killfile works very well if you want to avoid "-highhorse's" road
apples. I make good use of my killfile.
--
“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.” —J.R.R. Tolkien
--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114

From Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.advocacy

On 11/20/24 8:17 PM, chrisv wrote:

-hh wrote:

chrisv wrote:

-hh wrote:

(snipped, unread)

(snipped, unread)

In the cola advocates, you found a group of ignorant, entitled,
dishonest, ridiculous, hypocritical penny-pinchers, eh, -highhorse?

Nah, just mostly loudmouthed cowards. Many now identify as 'MAGA' /s

-hh

--- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114