Does it make sense to upgrade a PC anymore? With new computers costing less than $1,000, sometimes much less, why should you sink money into a PC that's already on its way to obsolescence?
Many computer users feel compelled to periodically add more memory, larger hard drives, faster processors, new motherboards, more powerful graphics cards and other components to their PCs.
More than bragging rights are involved. New operating systems and application programs have stiffer hardware requirements, forcing you to upgrade to keep up. But upgrading has its pitfalls. Even those used to getting silicon under their fingernails frequently run into compatibility problems. The added RAM doesn't work with the existing RAM, the new hard disk prevents Windows from loading, the new graphics card conflicts with the old printer, the motherboard doesn't fit right inside the case and so on.
If you find someone to do the work, you still have to pay for the new components, along with the labor.
With this seemingly never-ending cycle of new software requiring new hardware requiring upgrading hassle and expense, it's as if the software and hardware industries are in cahoots, conspiring against you and your budget. Though this has led to impressive growth for the PC sector, the benefits to users have sometimes been less evident.
The situation is changing. For most people, the speed bottleneck is no longer the PC itself but the Internet. Surfing the Web can be painfully slow with a 56K modem, no matter how fast your other hardware. Fortunately, relief is on the way with fast cable and DSL modems, though cable and telecommunications companies haven't been quick in making these services widely available.
Another argument against new hardware components is that most software upgrades aren't as compelling as they once were. The PC revolution is now two decades old, and most programs have already gone through many upgrades. "Mature" software has less room for further improvement. Many computer journalists, professionals and users are realizing that upgrading software shouldn't be a knee-jerk process.
If you're running Windows 95 without problems and don't need the USB support of Windows 98, save your money. Unless you oversee other Microsoft-only users and can benefit from Microsoft Office 2000's collaboration and Web-integration features, stick to Office 97.
