Re: Once someone has a PC of reasonable MHz the impetus to upgrade is unlikely to be MHz unless the person is a hardcore gamer or technology buff.
But what keeps changing is "a PC of reasonable MHZ". I remember when "a PC of reasonable MHZ" ran at 4.77MHZ and 8MHZ was a high performance "turbo" speed invoked through a control key sequence.
:-)
For retail buyers, gaming and the increasing complexity of browser plug-ins is making the sub 300MHZ generation of PCs ripe for upgrades. For business use, and the increasing number of homes with DSL of cable connections, real time virus checking software is an inexpensive application that by itself puts an enormous load on PCs - but should still be used. The networking of systems everywhere has resulted in heavy use of email, backup, and calendaring software with processes that leave a continuous load on desktops. It also results in far more small applications being loaded onto the computer.
I know you have a 233 - is it networked? Do you have virus protection loaded that checks every executable called? Do you have Outlook running? Taskbars for Office etc? Are you running windows 2000? Is that 233 part of an intranet? Have you seen the difference in web browser performance between your present system and a new one?
It's hard to stand still as a user of computer technology. If you learned only a few applications, aren't a business competing with anyone, and have little curiosity, it can be done for quite a while. But most users interact with other users at work, or friends at their homes, and have the opportunity to see the difference in performance in new hardware, and the stability, functionality, and friendliness of new software. And the further you fall behind that curve the stronger the incentive to upgrade becomes. I'm not talking about the difference a 700MHZ and a 1.2GHZ, but the the difference between 300MHZ and a 1GHZ.
For many of these systems, the need is as much for more memory, a faster video card, and a larger and faster hard drive, as anything else, but there is still a real need (or, at least, justification) for an upgrade.
A lot of these systems were replaced in the race to prepare for Y2K, but any system procured prior to 1998 is a good candidate for replacement - and there are still plenty of those in the field. Many analysts are comparing this quarter's demand to that of a year ago and concluding that a permanent change in demand has taken place. I wonder how many remember the rush to replace non-Y2K compliant systems last year? That one time event pushed demand above trend temporarily, and I think that much of the "permanent change in demand" we are seeing in Q3, Q4 of this year is just a negative echo of that event.
Regards,
Dan |
