I see "average" systems regularly and they are far behind the bleeding
edge. Many people are using systems that are several years old--not
because they are poor or deprived or anything, but simply because the
old systems do everything they require and have more than enough
performance to do it all quickly. There's no reason to upgrade the
hardware.
Indeed, it's hard to find a reason to upgrade any hardware nowadays,
unless one plays certain kinds of video games. Everything else runs
quite fast. When things don't run fast, it's usually the consequence
of poor access time for disks or network delays, neither of which can
be improved with any type of upgrade.
I spend a lot of time in front of a PC, and having a good monitor is
extremely important. I'm amazed at what some people put up with when
it comes to monitors. And, unlike the rest of a machine, monitors do
deteriorate significantly over time (especially CRTs), and upgrading a
monitor often brings a visible and obvious improvement.
Then again, I used my last CRT monitor until it was so worn out that
it would no longer come on even after 2 hours of "warm-up." But that
was a question of budget, not any reluctance to upgrade. The new
monitor had to provide at least the quality of the old monitor, and
that meant spending a great deal on the monitor.
