Computer/tech hardware lifecycles

When installing from an USB thumbdrive it usually takes about 20 min.

 

In a work environment, I only change out the hardware if it fails or is no longer compatible with the custom nursing software. My current place of employment had workstations running Windows 2000 until six months ago when the custom nursing application updated their software and mentioned that it will no longer work on Windows 2000.

Personally, I want to buy the latest gadget/workstation/laptop, but I don't need it since my current setup is working fine.

 

If the motherboard supports dual-channel (would be surprised if it didn't) then it's optimal to have the memory in pairs.
To really benefit from the 64 bit versions of Windows you need more than 4 GB ram, and in a system this old getting drivers could be a problem. I have noticed that people don't want to talk about the driver problems with 64 bit Windows and in reality many "normal" users would be better of with Win7 32 bit rather than the 64 bit that came pre-installed on their machine. The number of 32 bit processes (applications/drivers) running by the "normal" user is surprising.

 

it's not the re-install thats so bad for me; it's the re-loading all my games and programs and then patching them thats the major pain in the ass.

 

i use steam as well, but even with fios, the installs and updates for my game collection can take 2 or 3 days. but it's programs too... all the little maintenance things and tools i use. i have to find them online and download and install them again which i can't let the computer do itself. i have to babysit it.

 

Typically, I like to stay a generation behind on technology (about 6 months hardware, 1 service pack Microsoft software) when I go for new purchases. Reason / rationale: Stability. I can't stand bugs getting in my way. As far as hardware goes, it tends to lower costs a bit, and allow me to get something stable & powerful for the same price I would pay for something brand-spanking-new, but less of it. I am, however, considering splurging on a couple of (quad) Core i7 sockets and a MB that'll take 4 sockets (but only 2 to start... shit's expensive). ECC, the works. (MO POW-AH!)

I am however, running Windows 8 & Visual Studio 11 on a box right now, prepping packages I'm building in VS 2010 for the next gen of mobile when we'll have our first generation of mobile management applications out. (And Windows 8 is not playing nice w/ Apple dev stuff, let alone the typical Android VM woes.)

Sorry, y'all, as much as I admire the Steam engine... I'm not a game programmer or player :/

 

I'm a whole page behind so I'll do this rapidfire to catch up:

Harddrives make the biggest difference in booting up and the first time you load something, and when moving big files around. outside of that you're probably not going to notice it's there too much and if you do it means you desperately need more RAM.

I've NEVER had this problem and I went straight to win7 x64 from 32bit XP. I haven't heard from anyone else even anecdotally that win7 x64's misbehaved when they decided to grab the 32bit version of something for want of a 64bit one. The memory cap difference alone is worth it imho, and i'm personally comfortable calling it Strictly Better at this point.

Now you're speaking my language. My mother always taught me never get the first generation or highest end of anything, always give them a chance to work the kinks out first and go for the ideal price/performance point instead of going straight to the top.

 

My computers are generally more the "dull edge" of things rather cutting edge. It has worked for me so far, but I would invest in newer things if the need arose. It took me until 2009 to even get SATA and that kind of upgrade cycle will probably continue.
I did benefit from waiting that long to upgrade from WinXP to Vista, as I seem to have gotten the version that worked most of the annoyances out of it that people complained about.

 

You have been lucky, I have seen a new (big brand) laptop where few of the built-in devices didn't work because there aren't any drivers available that will work in Win7 x64 for those devices.
An other notorious scenario is network connected HP printers ( not shared via server), we see about 25%-50% chance of success when printing something else than clear text file.
Boiled down I just saying that the "edge" can give some people problems and it's not always the best option.
From Shadowex3 and Martins posts it apparent that I'm more disk intensive than the normal user since I experience the disk being a limiting factor on regular basis.

 

It's hard to tell, it really depends on the motherboard, I'm leaning towards that you will need 2 modules. Most motherboards will switch the memory down to the speed of the slowest module installed, therefore it's probable best to match the current modules. Getting 2 x 1 GB modules might be worth it even if in Vista (or any 32 bit Windows) there will be only 3 GB available.

 

if you really want to open things up, get a solid state drive. you don't need a big one; just enough to put windows onto. you can put your programs on a seperate hd.

ssd's are getting pretty reasonable in price now; you can usually get a deal for about a buck a gb.