…Its worth skipping every other generation to avoid the costly stinkers? Vista springs to mind…

Have to admit Im posting this after having read the other thread about how Boost may well make a lot of current 650B frames, forks and wheelsets “obsolete”.

Another PC parallel I can think of is when I used to regularly rebuild/ upgrade my PC for gaming (back in the day) but always buy secondhand** or if new, always one generation older that current tech. This was mostly in regard to gfx cards, mobo’s and CPU’s as they changed the fastest and cost the most.

Anyway…

Not a rant and I know things have to move forward. So Im told anyway. However, at least with PC tech you really were getting pretty big jumps in quantifiable performance after upgrading. With bikes, I cant help but think that after adopting a new standard many riders (perhaps only in the back of their minds) think… “what, so thats it” after their first ride?

Anyway, could be worse. If Apple ever takes an interest in bikes we are all totally skr*wed.

** Always let early adopters of any new tech (even bike related now?) pay the inflated premium for the new stuff AND let them be the unpaid Beta testers for it too. Then buy their still very good “old tech” cast offs at bargain prices… 26″ wheels anyone? 😉

I ran Vista on a laptop for years. Because I don’t read computer magazines and am not a specialist, I never realised that it was a stinker. 😉

For complex reasons, I “impulse bought” a Santa Cruz Nomad last month. It was the most suitable bike in my size that I could walk out of the shop with in Hong Kong in the week I found myself “urgently” needing a full-sus for a holiday. I’m not sure there’s anything about it that I’d have chosen if I’d thought about it carefully rather than buying a complete bike for immediate use. It’s rather good.

🙂

My take on Vista, although I am no computer expert, was that it was actually quite good, it was the under-spec’d machines it was loaded on to.

As for bike standards, it only applies to those who must have the newest stuff. IMHO…

Unlike 29er “clown” bikes, I’ve never seen a 42″ laptop (yet)

Is it really that complicated to just buy something appropriate for your needs and price point at the time of purchase?

The only thing that should be obsolete is these threads complainig about standards

so 650B is like Vista?

and only 650B+ with Boost is Windows 10?

Jeez, my 26er must be practically square wheels and be Windows ME, given what I hear about something a few mm larger taking only the benefits of random diameters and none of the drawbacks.

It’s only a problem if you had to have 650B the day it came out and then 650B+ and then 650B+ and Boost wheels, and then had to have stealth dropper, and then…

I just had to go Google “Boost”, and I build bicycles for a living, that’s how ridiculous it’s getting.

Its more inherently nasty than Vista – Windows try to make useful changes year on year in the name of progress – sometimes of course they fail. The bike industry (recently) have been making pointless tweaks that really make little or no difference in the name of money.

Mostly this is because bike technology has plateaued…its really very difficult to make a better bike nowadays as they are already pretty bloody awesome. But the bike company’s still need to make money….

So unlike buying a new version of Windows where you are paying for something that is usually better but is sometimes rubbish, with a new bike you are paying for something that is always exactly the same as it was before (unless your old bike is really ancient). This in my opinion is far worse.

This can happen in the bike industry and not the software industry for 2 reasons.

1. Its possible to make a bike that looks wizzy and different but performs exactly the same…. a piece of code will always look like a piece of code and therefore needs to actually do something better than previous version.

2, Bikes wear out so a new bike will always feel better than the old bike. Code does not wear out so the new code must be functionally superior to the old code in some way or the customer will be dissatisfied.

Consequently instead of better bikes we get 27.5, boost, tapered headtubes etc

Jeez, my 26er must be practically square wheels and be Windows ME, given what I hear about something a few mm larger taking only the benefits of random diameters and none of the drawbacks.

Nah, more like XP – only reason companies have moved from it is MS withdrawing support.

But, I’ve to agree with the OP in a sense – IMO it is worth (unless you need to buy something new) sitting back and not slavishly following fashion.

I quite like the look of the new Whyte 130 carbon. Almost none of it is compatible with my current 26ers, so would be a whole new world for me, rather than part-compatible.

Nah, more like XP

but it’s also 3×9 with a fixed seat post 😉

Just on the day I was contemplating finally getting that FS with 650B or maybe 29er just to NOT fall in the 650B trap… now it’s time to contemplate waiting a bit longer yet again to make sure I don’t inadvertently get Windows 8, with no upgrade path.

Or should I just say sod it ditch the Windows style and buy a new bike every year, Mac style?