For desktop-class hardware, the parts that are most likely to fail around the decade mark are storage drives, power supplies, and perhaps fans. All of these are fully standardized and in plentiful supply; there is no reason that first-party hardware vendor support should be required to keep old desktop systems in service.

We need to actually see some real hard data involving those fail parts from the manufactures themselves and or official repair shops since there are plethora of "refurbished" hw out there ranging from "cosmetic imperfections" to outright "motherboard replacements".  I've experience and seen plethora of spectacular computer failures as part of my dayjob and in my own hw.

Dropping support for old hardware in Fedora should always be based on the costs and benefits, not on a rigid planned lifecycle.

Well here's the thing this is one of these reoccurring long threaded discussion ( which means they are stuck in status quo ) that happen every once in a while, back in the day it used to be Alan Cox that was advocating for lifetimes support of steam powered devices, today the dialog involves deprecating legacy bios.

It should be quite apparent prevent the hw support lifecycle dialog from ever occurring again we need a rigid planned supported hw lifecycle.

That can be 10 years project wide or simply something that each WG tailors for their own target audience ( shorter, longer that's for them to decide since they should be doing all the work involving their "products" and their maintenance ) but as I said we need a rigid planned supported hw lifecycle, leaving this things are one more time just means that we will have this dialog again further down the line.

JBG