We've had video editing software available to most personal computers since at least 1999 with imovie and 2000 with windows movie maker. IMO this is all general computer users need.

Professional level video production is not general computing, it's very niche. Yes it's nice that more people have access to this level of software but is it responsible.

The post does raise some real issues, increasing hardware specs is not consequence free. Rapidly increasing hardware requirements has meant most consumers have needed to upgrade their machines. Plenty of these could have still been in operation to this day. There is a long trail of e-waste behind us that is morally reprehensible.

[–] rambaroo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You don't need to be a "professional" to edit 4k videos at home, people do that every day with videos they took on their effing phone.

And that's the point. What people do with their computers today requires far more resources than computers did in the late 90s. I'm sorry, but it's completely idiotic to believe that most people could get by with 256 - 512MB of RAM.

"Morally reprehensible" give me a break, you simply don't know what you're talking about. so just stop.

[–] spiderplant@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

My point is not that we should all go back to using old hardware right now with current the current way we use our tech because that is impossible.

My point is that the way we look at technology is wrong and the way we upgrade without real reason. The average person does not need a 4k camera, it does not make them a better photographer. I've used digital cameras with < 15 M sensors, the photos generally sufficed for family/holiday snaps and professional photography. Yet there will be people who have thrown out phones because they unnecessarily want the latest camera tech. Wait till people want 8k recording.

That perfectly working phone that was thrown out is an example of the e-waste I was talking about. Producing computers is not with out societal and environmental cost, and to throw perfectly serviceable machines is morally reprehensible. Current culture would agree with me that its not sustainable, but most people aren't ready to have to keep their device for 5+ years.

[–] kamen@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So what are you suggesting - everyone to stick to 640x480 even though many smartphones today shoot 4K/60?

[–] spiderplant@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Everyone should keep their current devices as long as possible (either the device breaks or can no longer run work related software) to reduce the upgrading culture. You can shoot 4k now, that's great! Keep the device even if the latest device supports 8k video. Same applies to other hardware/software features.

[–] kamen@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Somewhat agree. Manufacturers releasing successive models at less than a year's interval now is ridiculous and you buying each new one - even more so, but on the other hand using the same phone for 5-6 years just because you can is also a bit drastic (even if you swap the battery midway through, by the time the second one's dead the phone will be obsolete). Maybe a bit more doable with computers, especially given that you can upgrade one component at a time. 2-3 years seems doable for a phone.

[–] spiderplant@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

I mean its not that crazy, I'm writing this on a moto Z2 play. It was released June 2017, not long till year 6 bit hope it goes longer. It's perfectly usable, runs most apps fine, can even run TFT.

Phones haven't changed that much recently, this model has a great screen, 4gb of ram(more than some laptops that are still being released!), and a decent chip. Only issue is the battery is sub 3000mah but I know of a few models from around the same time went up to 5000mah.

You do get better mileage running an OS like lineage and being degoogled since a lot of their tracking processes kill the battery and slows things down.