I’m not talking about refurbished parts or new old stock. I’m talking about the brand-new SATA HDDs and SSDs, ATX power supplies, case fans, and other components that are backwards-compatible in systems pushing twenty years old (SATA) or older (PSUs, fans). Maybe I misunderstand, but your argument seems to be based on the idea that all replacement parts are custom designs tied to OEM support policies rather than commodities based on long-lived standards. It also feels like this is an argument in favor of intentionally forcing people to retire old hardware “for their own good” because it is too unreliable or hard to fix. That isn’t a goal of this Change as far as I can tell, and if you are in fact suggesting that removal of hardware support should be an objective rather than an unfortunate necessity based on limited resources, I don’t think you’ll find much community support for that position. On Thu, Apr 14, 2022, at 11:33 AM, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: > On 14.4.2022 13:09, Ben Beasley wrote: >> For desktop-class hardware, the parts that are most likely to fail around the decade mark are storage drives, power supplies, and perhaps fans. All of these are fully standardized and in plentiful supply; there is no reason that first-party hardware vendor support should be required to keep old desktop systems in service. > > > We need to actually see some real hard data involving those fail parts > from the manufactures themselves and or official repair shops since > there are plethora of "refurbished" hw out there ranging from "cosmetic > imperfections" to outright "motherboard replacements". I've experience > and seen plethora of spectacular computer failures as part of my dayjob > and in my own hw. > > > >> >> Dropping support for old hardware in Fedora should always be based on the costs and benefits, not on a rigid planned lifecycle. > > > Well here's the thing this is one of these reoccurring long threaded > discussion ( which means they are stuck in status quo ) that happen > every once in a while, back in the day it used to be Alan Cox that was > advocating for lifetimes support of steam powered devices, today the > dialog involves deprecating legacy bios. > > It should be quite apparent prevent the hw support lifecycle dialog > from ever occurring again we need a rigid planned supported hw > lifecycle. > > That can be 10 years project wide or simply something that each WG > tailors for their own target audience ( shorter, longer that's for them > to decide since they should be doing all the work involving their > "products" and their maintenance ) but as I said we need a rigid > planned supported hw lifecycle, leaving this things are one more time > just means that we will have this dialog again further down the line. > > > > JBG > > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
