is it possible that he can use something like puppy linux like distros (essentially live usbs, where you can make a persistent partition and make changes)? that way you can prepare a usb, and maybe teach them how to plug the usb in, and change the boot order to include usb? it would be slow (for boot times, if you use some faster usb, that would help), but does not require any fancy operation requiring him to open his computer.

Or if opening the computer/laptop and installing ssd/hdd is within scope, then maybe you can prepare a ssd with complette install, and just ship that. give him additional video/text instructions on how to open a computer, and install it. (In case their system supports ssds, then I highly recommend ssds over hdd, as they do not require special packaging, would be much faster, and ssd installations are also easier(detachhing and reattaching sata ribbon is hard imo, where as with something like nvme ssd, it is very close to like plugging in usb, and then just screwing or something similar.)) If their system is old, and does not have nvme/u.2 connectors, i would still recommend ssd over hdd, then you would also have to procure (and ship) an extra enclosure (i think they are called caddys) to fit a ssd in a husk, which after closing looks like a harddisk and connects via sata. these steps are tad bit hard, but if it is within scope, then I do not think their is a better option.

on my laptop (specs wise - consider steam deck non oled, but worse graphics performance, 1080p screen (IPS)) - 5.3-6 Wh for 2x speed playback. for full hd playback 6-7 Wh. Idle power is much higher though 4.5 Wh, on my old laptop, video power consumption consumed similar power, but idle power was close to 2.5-3 Wh (in terms of specs, it had halve the number of cores, and a tn panel)

i would presume yes. you could run cinnamon wayland since early 2024 (iirc), but it was only experimental, so i would presume it might have become more stable since then.

yeah, they even worked on that this time (90+% of packages are now reproducible)

He seems overly dramatic about it. and some of the things are factually incorrect. for example, he says we functionally do the same things, but we do not, we essentially now run much more complex software in browsers. the best way that i can put it, is, browsers are practically virtual machines, which run softwate like word processors and meetings. I am not encouraging anything here, I myself am the kind of guy who refuses to use web applications, but I understand why people use them. in the broll, there was some example of a few tabs open, and only 2 gigs of memory usage. not sure exactly how old that clip is, but things have changed, many for better. for example, your browsers ususally limit memory usage to half of total available (be it 4 gig, or 8 gig or 16 gig (tthere are now some better/finer things related to exact limit, but lets not go there)), and if you have larger amount of ram available, your browser caches more (save future cpu/gpu cycles). Also, we now have better sandboxing and better isolation of tabs, which results in duplication of assets, but better security. you can still do some manual tweaking (i do, for example, disable js by default, or instead of per tab isolation, i have per site instace, which is less secure, but more efficient, plenty more), nobody stops you from doing that.

I do get the hatred for cloud shift. I dislike it too, and maintain offline stuff. but that has nothing to do with hardware performance decreasing. if anything, it would lead to less memory/storage required, as most of compute will be done in server. you would have lighter machines, with just display and inputs. and this was the exact model of computing 40yrs ago, servers/mainframes and weaker terminals.

if you want to complain about stuff, you can complain about excess use of js, or writing desktop stuff in js (this while is worse than using some compiled languages, it is not that bad), or about the amount of things that now want your attention. you can rant about bad tech practices, but not, about comparing a modern web + video editing, as opposed to older static sites