Tech you miss/ new tech trends you hate - ok boomers

I thought DVI and HDMI were electrically identical, i.e. a converter is entirely passive and just rearranges the pins for a different connector. I guess that requires the actual signal to be compatible and it definitely was at some point, since I used that extensively with consoles and satellite tv.

What I'm saying is, for those DVI monitors, a HDMI "converter" which is just a bunch of wires should serve you fine and it's as native as USB-A to USB-B is

unless you know all this and I misunderstood completely and this is purely a conceptual ideological thing, then I agree
Even if that's true, it's 10 bucks for a converter, and another 10 for a very cheap hdmi cable, instead of picking up a old DVI cable at a flea market for two bucks if they still included the socket on boards and cards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Falcos_Commisar
DVI can also carry an analog signal. (DVI-A) as opposed to DVI-D, which indeed is easy to convert to HDMI. A connector carrying both is a DVI-I connector, Single link DVI tops out around 1080p iirc above that you need dual link. You can usually tell what cable supports what by the missing pins. DVI was still designed around CRTs and their sync timing requirements. The original idea was a VESA connector that can both supply analog video and analog audio+USB (looked basically like a DVI connector, just more pins) but DVI ended up being that compromise that often happens in such things because flat panels showed up and we needed that digital signal. Also DVI is video only contrary to that early attempt at a more multifunctional connector which we then got with HDMI. Most late stage DVI connectors on mainboards and GPUs from last decade are usually DVI-D connectors and don't carry an analog video signal anymore, because that would usually require extra circuity to generate and it simply wasn't needed anymore.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Falcos_Commisar
I just want a laptop that can play CDs and DVDs.

No, I don't want to buy a separate fucking thing and plug it in with a fucking USB cable that will inevitably fucking break after a month or so.

I want that shit integrated into the fucking laptop, like they used to be. Like they  should be.
 
DVI can also carry an analog signal. (DVI-A) as opposed to DVI-D, which indeed is easy to convert to HDMI. A connector carrying both is a DVI-I connector, Single link DVI tops out around 1080p iirc above that you need dual link. You can usually tell what cable supports what by the missing pins. DVI was still designed around CRTs and their sync timing requirements. The original idea was a VESA connector that can both supply analog video and analog audio+USB (looked basically like a DVI connector, just more pins) but DVI ended up being that compromise that often happens in such things because flat panels showed up and we needed that digital signal. Also DVI is video only contrary to that early attempt at a more multifunctional connector which we then got with HDMI. Most late stage DVI connectors on mainboards and GPUs from last decade are usually DVI-D connectors and don't carry an analog video signal anymore, because that would usually require extra circuity to generate and it simply wasn't needed anymore.
There is still very usable tech with it. Nvidia had DVI-I up until the Maxwell (GTX 900 Series), which they still fully support with software updates. Pascal (GTX 1000) had DVI-D, and from Turing on it was entirely HDMI and DisplayPort, but I am pretty sure AIBs can shift things up and add in their own ports, I know there is a AIB 3050 with a DVI port.
 
I just want a laptop that can play CDs and DVDs.

No, I don't want to buy a separate fucking thing and plug it in with a fucking USB cable that will inevitably fucking break after a month or so.

I want that shit integrated into the fucking laptop, like they used to be. Like they  should be.
I miss these. They became obsolete by the early-2010s and I'm still pissed about that
 
The trend of taking a perfectly functional desktop application and then shitting all over it by making it a glorified web browser. Software companies have become complacent at best and lazy at worst because instead of making a program that is well optimized and works really efficiently, they make it into a web application and throw it into Electron, then call it a day. Then, when people rightfully complain about their chat application or whatever hogging their resources and leaking memory like old pipeworks, they just say "get better hardware lol".

Absolute joke of an industry.
 
I miss these. They became obsolete by the early-2010s and I'm still pissed about that
I'm studying another language in my free time. Ordered a text book online. Book comes with a CD with all the audio on it so you can learn pronunications/practice or whatever right?

The only thing that even has a CD tray in my office in 2024 is the damn PS5 and I don't think it can read the format the CD's in. Ended up having to find a file someone ripped and uploaded to reddit.
 
I'm studying another language in my free time. Ordered a text book online. Book comes with a CD with all the audio on it so you can learn pronunications/practice or whatever right?

The only thing that even has a CD tray in my office in 2024 is the damn PS5 and I don't think it can read the format the CD's in. Ended up having to find a file someone ripped and uploaded to reddit.
USB CD drives are like $10 a unit. For the few times a CD is used in laptops these days, I'd take the sacrifice for a bigger battery.
 
I just want a laptop that can play CDs and DVDs.

No, I don't want to buy a separate fucking thing and plug it in with a fucking USB cable that will inevitably fucking break after a month or so.

I want that shit integrated into the fucking laptop, like they used to be. Like they  should be.
That might be a thing of the past in laptops, but I'll keep an optical drive in my desktop forever. FOREVER.
 
I hate that every piece of software these days nags the shit out of you for updates. Now, I could understand if there was major bug or an exploit they're patching, or they're adding a new feature, and they communicated that through a changelog, but nearly everything I used that demands I update it never tells me why I need to update. It's just "Updates, updates, updates, updates, updates, UPDATES"

WHAT AM I UPDATING FOR?

To understand my frustration, allow me to relate the two biggest offenders in this regard.

First, I used to record gameplay footage using Shadowplay. But sometimes, Shadowplay would just randomly not work anymore. Why not? Oh simple, because my graphics drivers were 0.0002 milliseconds out of date, and NVidia prevents you from using it unless your graphics drivers are up-to-date. Which meant going to their website, punching in my graphics card, downloading their little installer, waiting for their shit to install, and then restarting my computer, which set me back about 30-45 minutes. I fucking hated it.

Second, and much more recently, my phone will sometimes nag me to update it, preventing me from using it unless I press "Remind me later" in which case it gives me a few more days before it asks again. Oh, and I can only do this so many times before my phone holds itself hostage and prevents me from using it at all until I agree to install the "updates" that never seem to do anything useful. In fact, at one point, the update installed a bunch of shitty mobile games onto the Home Page that I literally never asked for, requiring me to uninstall that shit. So, not only do the updates never seem to do anything useful, but they're actually detrimental to my user experience in more ways than one.

Fuck updates. If the software works perfectly fine in its current condition, then updating should be opt-in, not compulsory. I'm convinced that the only reason they force updates on you like this is to install more fucking spyware on your system, which should be fucking outlawed to begin with.
 
Software that needs to be constantly updated has quality problems. I think it has kind of a cargo cult mentality now though. There's this big mantra around developers that a software always needs to get updated, otherwise it's "unmaintained" and "abandoned". Nothing in-between. Software never can just have a very distinct scope and then eventually be finished and be feature complete and as good as it gets.

The text editor I'm using saw it's last serious update about two years ago and that's fine because it has a very set scope of features, already does everything I need and doesn't have any bugs I would've noticed. For a concerning amount of people this state would mean I need to find a new text editor because this one is obviously "abandoned and not maintained anymore" and they even say this without a hint of self-reflection like this perpetual development, ever-expanding scope and staying in beta of every single thing is somehow normal. A lot of them actually are forced to constantly "update" because their software depends on half a million 3rd party libraries they don't know what they really do but also constantly change because of the same development mantra. It's a fucking mess.
 
here's this big mantra around developers that a software always needs to get updated, otherwise it's "unmaintained" and "abandoned".
Can confirm, had to fight the security checklist people years ago that gptfdisk, a disk partition editor hasn't been in active development for years. It edits disk partitions, how much updates is it going to get when GPT format has been set in stone since forever?
 
I also fucking hate the entirety of modern web design. Every company these days has decided that everything needs to be bulky and practically unusable on lower resolution monitors. All in the endless goal of making everything look "modern". What was so wrong with keeping function balanced with form? Why is everything inflated like a fucking balloon? What is the point of having all these smooth fancy ass animations? The point of a website is to provide or exchange information, not to be a fucking art exhibit.
 
I also fucking hate the entirety of modern web design. Every company these days has decided that everything needs to be bulky and practically unusable on lower resolution monitors. All in the endless goal of making everything look "modern". What was so wrong with keeping function balanced with form? Why is everything inflated like a fucking balloon? What is the point of having all these smooth fancy ass animations? The point of a website is to provide or exchange information, not to be a fucking art exhibit.
My biggest complaint is the ridiculously low information density
I know that low information density has been the design paradigm for the last 20 years, but I refuse to succumb to such a level of retardation
 
Back