|
I replace my dev box roughly each year, and recycle the old one as a server.
However, I upgrade continuously.
I have added 1TB of RAID 1 disk and another 8GB RAM to my current dev box since I built it about 9 months ago. It has a motherboard that supports the new 1600MHz FSB Xeons, as I hoped that I could plug in a pair of E5472's, but they are still too expensive so I guess my E5420's will stay.
I spend about £1500 ( $2000 ) per year on hardware which is about a week's pay. I buy 'economy' parts, because the premium for the 'latest and greatest' is not warranted IMHO. However, I have had dual processors, RAID 1 disks and plenty of RAM in all my boxes since '95.
Nick
----------------------------------
Be excellent to each other 
|
|
|
|
|
i think the problem is not to upgrade the hardware,
the problem is to setup everything on the new hardware, for me as driver developer it takes about 2 days until everything is installed
everytime i need to install:
msvs2003
msvs2005
msvs2008
directx sdk
windows ddk
our own library
windows media sdk
wxwidgets
vmware
eclipse
java
and many many other things, and to much updates
i hope that microsoft includes in the next windows a system to transfer EVERYTHING inclunding the software and not only the files and documents
|
|
|
|
|
My development environments are installed in VMWare virtual machines. So my time to upgrade is only an hour or so:
- Install VMWare
- Copy virtual machines
|
|
|
|
|
Does that really work with product codes, changes for hardware drivers etc?
|
|
|
|
|
A VMWare image stores the entire state of a machine. It should work
|
|
|
|
|
 Well unless you have one of the latest hardware-vm cpus, virtual machines tend to be slower than running your tools on the real hardware, especially with an ring 0-intensive OS such as Windows. So until recently (much more recently than latest hardware replacement), this was not much of an option.
 I might consider it next time round though.
This message is hasty and is not to be taken as serious, professional or legally binding.
I work with low level C/C++ in user and kernel mode, but also dabble in other areas.
|
|
|
|
|
I am running a W2K8 Server with virtual machines for development, and god, it flies!
modified on Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:32 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Until recently W2K8 was not available...
Two questions:
- On what CPU does W2K8 virtual machines fly?
- Is the guest OS W2K8 too (W2K8 in a W2K8 VM uses private speedup tricks to avoid heavy instruction by instruction Ring 0 emulation, these are not available if either host or guest is an older Windows version such as XP).
This message is hasty and is not to be taken as serious, professional or legally binding.
I work with low level C/C++ in user and kernel mode, but also dabble in other areas.
|
|
|
|
|
It's an... ummm good dual core - I'll check the specs tomorrow if you like.
Guests are XP and W2K3. I haven't compared to running them natively, but I am generally hapyp with the performance.
The one comparison I have is a VMWare Windows 2000 guest (can't use Virtual PC on that). Of course it flies against the original PC - some mass market machine from 2000 - but it also builds the main project in about 80% time of my main development PC which is mostly stumped by not-so-fast disks.
|
|
|
|
|
you should take a look at WPI, the Windows Post Install wizard.
|
|
|
|
|
hardware upgrades are only needed if new software needs more power. As the Vista Windows needs more power. So Windows 7 wont need new hardware. 
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
True!
My upgrades are usually memory.
Even Vista, from my experience, if the XP box was decent, a new pair of DIMM's pushing it to 4Gb and a not so bad graphic card if you care about Aero will do the trick.
Vista needs memory... feed it!
|
|
|
|
|
I buy a new laptop each 4-5 years
Wormhole is the God divided by zero
|
|
|
|
|
Danila Korablin wrote: I buy a new laptop each 4-5 years
Do you develop on a laptop? I have yet to find one that I would use for this purpose. The hard disk is way too slow for me to do real work and I can not type at all on the small keys of the keyboard.
[EDIT]I forgot one. The display is way too small. [/EDIT]
John
modified on Monday, March 9, 2009 1:26 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
I also develop on a laptop.
I got a 17" monitor which gave me a full keyboard.
Now work follows me very easily - anywhere I go.
I don't think I would switch back to a PC machine unless I really needed a LOT more power.
Miro
|
|
|
|
|
I am in a similar situation. A little over a year ago, I replaced my 3-4yo dev PC with a new laptop. Our small group of developers discussed whether we would want to replace the desktop or get a laptop for roaming/taking home and also getting a newer PC. We decided to not spend more of the company's money on the extra PC and went to straight laptops. I am personally very pleased with our decision. I have a full powered laptop now and at my desk (with dual 19" monitors, external mouse/keyboard on my docking station) I can't tell the difference. When coding at home or away from my desk, I have a speedy machine with me. I don't think I would go back now.
The only drawback is not having a PC to run processes overnight, but my old dev PC is still available for that and we can get newer PCs in a pinch if needed for certain tasks. For me, when using the laptop by itself, I do have a smaller screen and keyboard but I can comfortably switch at home or elsewhere. If I had to work strictly on my laptop screen all the time, I would definitely find that prohibitive with the reduced screen real estate, but power-wise, I would be fine.
-Wayne
|
|
|
|
|
aaah, so you also live in the land where monitors distribute keyboards. 
|
|
|
|
|
I have a 17" widescreen laptop @ 1920x1600, and a 7200RPM HD... works well for me, but then for some reason I like the laptop-style keyboards. The laptop is important for me because when I travel, I can take my work environment with me, which means as a self-employed consultant I can afford to do so more often.
|
|
|
|
|
John M. Drescher wrote: Do you develop on a laptop?
I've been developing on laptop for 8+ years (except for 1 year in 2007)
John M. Drescher wrote: The hard disk is way too slow
many laptops come with low budget HDD. I have seen laptops with 4200 rpm and terrible seek time. look for the spec before buying anything, or opt for an upgrade.
John M. Drescher wrote: and I can not type at all on the small keys of the keyboard.
yea, that sucks. I use external keybaord and monitor, both at home and at the office. It is rarely I run the laptop solo.
The biggest benefit I get from the laptop is work portability. I don't have to recreate my environment both at home and work ( I telecommute couple days a week) and I don't like working over vpn. They are to check email and stuff life that, but to be connected for long time, not my taste.
Yusuf
Oh didn't you notice, analogous to square roots, they recently introduced rectangular, circular, and diamond roots to determine the size of the corresponding shapes when given the area. Luc Pattyn[^]
|
|
|
|
|
John M. Drescher wrote: The display is way too small.
And also connected to keyboard. I have to look down all the time. So I don't use laptops as well.
"In the end it's a little boy expressing himself." Yanni
|
|
|
|
|
John M. Drescher wrote: Do you develop on a laptop?
Yes, a 17" with full size keyboard. When at my work desk I have another 17" screen and lots more storage over the network on a server and for backups NDAS drives. I do lots of work outside my desk and a portable machine is a must. When I need more power I use my server.
|
|
|
|
|
The 1GHz machines from a few years back run Visual Studio just fine. If I was a gamer, I might enter the upgrade loop, but as I'm not, I prefer to spend the extra money on books.
|
|
|
|
|
The last thing I upgraded was my RAM (2GB -> 3GB) and bought a 600GB external.
The next upgrade will probably be for gaming purposes (New graphics card), or another External (They always seem to run outta space... :p)
-= Reelix =-
|
|
|
|
|
They might run small projects fine, but an older machine will definately bog down on larger solutions(I'm talking like 30+ projects), especially web apps. Debugging applications that do a lot of memory manipulation is also considerably more enjoyable on a fast PC.
We also target Vista/Win7 with some of our applications, and I wouldn't touch Vista with a 10 foot pole without a decent dual core processor.
With good PC's going for $400 brand new with 2GB ram and core 2 duo processors these days, sacrificing developer efficiency to save on hardware costs just doesn't make sense in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
