|
Read the question -> What would you buy?
Your absolut correct that your machine is enough but what if you go shopping for a brand new computer for the next years?;)
Try this @ home. (B&B)
|
|
|
|
|
KarstenK wrote:
Read the question -> What would you buy?
I know, I made a mistake, misread the question.
KarstenK wrote:
Your absolut correct that your machine is enough but what if you go shopping for a brand new computer for the next years?
Then I will get the best price, basically any computer on sale now (you cannot get anything below a PIII 1.4 gig nowdays) will be capable for a good few years. So it is pointless buying a P4 2.8 gig monster with a huge markup because it is brand new.
Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa
My photoSIG portfolio[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Watson wrote: < 1ghz works for me
Really?  Sorry, I'm a little late to respond.
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero
.·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·.
Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, at the time.
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
I voted for 4 GHz, as in 2x2 GHz. As someone mentioned below, if you're writing multithreaded software (like I do), IMO you absolutely must have a dual CPU machine for the testing purposes alone.
Dual monitors also make it so much easier to debug UI stuff, as you can have VC on one monitor and your app on the other.
--Mike--
I'm bored... Episode I bored.
1ClickPicGrabber - Grab & organize pictures from your favorite web pages, with 1 click!
My really out-of-date homepage
Sonork-100.19012 Acid_Helm
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, but dual monitors are an ergonomic nightmare. I'm back to one, a 19".
Christian
No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer.
- Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002
C# will attract all comers, where VB is for IT Journalists and managers - Michael
P Butler 05-12-2002
Again, you can screw up a C/C++ program just as easily as a VB program. OK, maybe not
as easily, but it's certainly doable. - Jamie Nordmeyer - 15-Nov-2002
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Graus wrote:
I agree, but dual monitors are an ergonomic nightmare. I'm back to one, a 19".
I do not need two cpu's but I always want 2 seperate PC's.
I am using 2 computers for all testing purpose and remote debugging. I do not feel that this is an ergonomic nitghtmare. My desk is formed like an L and the both monitors are near to the edge.
Nothing can crash and influence my test szenario. Also I am able to test every OS, by switching it via Norton Ghost.
Martin
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Richter wrote:
My desk is formed like an L and the both monitors are near to the edge.
How high they are is more important. If you physically more from one monitor/keyboard to the other, that is different to sharing two monitors at the same time. There is no ergonomic way to set up two monitors for dual use, it simply is not possible.
Christian
No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer.
- Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002
C# will attract all comers, where VB is for IT Journalists and managers - Michael
P Butler 05-12-2002
Again, you can screw up a C/C++ program just as easily as a VB program. OK, maybe not
as easily, but it's certainly doable. - Jamie Nordmeyer - 15-Nov-2002
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed - whilst I've not tried it for long since I simply don't have space for two monitors, I found it difficult to work with having used a single monitor for so long. I'm happy enough with my laptop, and if I get down to some serious work, I plug in an external 17" flat panel, keyboard and mouse and away we go .
--
Andrew.
|
|
|
|
|
Michael, I Agree with you, I need the same, but in my country the Pc are very Expensive.....  For example, In this country, the machines wiht 1 Ghz are a news. When I need to buy Hardware, I buy it in The States, from my country, is the only way to buy new hard...
Best Regards
Carlos Antollini.
Pi Five[^]Creator
Sonork ID 100.10529 cantollini
|
|
|
|
|
I totally agree with you about the dual processor stuff
Michael Dunn wrote:
Dual monitors also make it so much easier to debug UI stuff, as you can have VC on one monitor and your app on the other.
I dont have enough space for dual monitors on my desk 
But when debugging things like GUI where a dual monitor system would be nice, I use remote debugging against my plaptop (which I can fit on the desk  ) it's just as good as debugging on a dual monitor system.
- Anders
Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Dunn wrote:
you absolutely must have a dual CPU machine for the testing purposes alone.
Dual monitors also make it so much easier to debug UI stuff, as you can have VC on one monitor and your app on the other.
 Can I put this through to my managers as a strong reccomendation from an industry expert?
- Nitron
"Those that say a task is impossible shouldn't interrupt the ones who are doing it." - Chinese Proverb
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, with a hyperthreading cpu (3.06Ghz here), its possible to test multithreaded processes with a single cpu. IMO, though, testing multithreaded software is nessesary on both single and multiple processor systems. Its not ever guaranteed that your program will be used on an SMP system if its a commercial app. Testing on single and dual systems, and now also hyperthreaded cpu's, is the neccesity. Hyperthreading has massive potential as well, and applications that properly utilize it can gain great boosts in performance and parallelism.
|
|
|
|
|
You know... I'd say ALL of us write multithreaded software these days. At my previous job I'd never really need to worry about multiple CPU's... the software we developed was to run on computers in truck bays and we'd be lucky for those guys to have a Pentium 2 with an OS greater than Windows 95. These days the software I write is for our internal use and on hardware that we control completely (kiosks). So... yikes. Mulithreaded is difficult enough without having to consider multiple CPU's. Spinlocks... yay.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a 2.4 GHz machine at work. It is plenty fast enough (compiles almost instantly) for the coding that I do, however if anyone tries to take my 21 inch monitor, they are dead.
Gary Kirkham
A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs
I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted paychecks
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Kirkham wrote:
Speed isn't everything
Next you'll be telling us size doesn't matter 
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
The only people that say that are those that possess little ones. You know who you are... 
OTOH, speed kills! 
Gary Kirkham
A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs
I thought I wanted a career, turns out I just wanted paychecks
|
|
|
|
|
After developing with a dual-proc machine, I hope I never have to go back to a single-proc. Man, these things are sweet! 
Jon Sagara
Hi! I'm Melanoma, Moley Russell's wart.
-- Uncle Buck
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, far more important than the speed/responsiveness of a dual-proc machine is the ability for a mulit-cpu machine to reveal threading/deadlock/race condition bugs which rarely, if ever, surface on single-processor machines. This is extremely important if you expect that your software will ever be run by someone with a SMP machine.
I've seen lots of organizations which write COM objects for IIS servers. I've seen these same organizations have nightmarish production roll-outs because all of the development and QA machines were single-proc, and all of the production machines were SMP.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess it all depends on how much stuff costs to a certain extent.
Like "markkuk" says I'd rather spend the money on a 19" (or bigger) display"
My arguement is that you should look at how you will increase your production with the spare cash you have.
I find good large twin monitors, a decent keyboard, and a great chair actually make me work more efficiently.
I don't really believe if I upgraded my current RAM and CPU I would actually get work done any faster.
On the other hand you must look at how long will the current specs you buy be appropriate for.
In 5 yrs time a 4Ghz processor will be absolute crud compared to the 30Ghz stuff that will probably be about then.
But quite often I'm sure a lot of people are upgrading more because of what the guy in the next cubicle has rather than using any fiscal logic.
Regardz
Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining.
Said by Roger Wright about me.
|
|
|
|
|
why everybody does not choose the quickest machine? 
Mazy
"And the carpet needs a haircut, and the spotlight looks like a prison break
And the telephone's out of cigarettes, and the balcony is on the make
And the piano has been drinking, the piano has been drinking...not me...not me-Tom Waits
|
|
|
|
|
Because not everyone has access to the Boss' credit card?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Everybody isn't a 3D FPS game junkie?
I'd rather spend the money on a 19" (or bigger) display, software and other actually useful stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
Fast enough for the job is all you need. I basically chose my current spec ( 2 gHz, 512 MB RAM ) as minimum, because I won't go backwards, but I must admit that the geek factor is the only thing that keeps me upgrading, my AMD 700 with 700 odd MB of RAM ran .NET just fine.
Christian
No offense, but I don't really want to encourage the creation of another VB developer.
- Larry Antram 22 Oct 2002
C# will attract all comers, where VB is for IT Journalists and managers - Michael
P Butler 05-12-2002
Again, you can screw up a C/C++ program just as easily as a VB program. OK, maybe not
as easily, but it's certainly doable. - Jamie Nordmeyer - 15-Nov-2002
|
|
|
|
|
i voted for the fastest and the memory. however, that is not good,if the machine is for developing software,since it can encourage the writting of bad code.
It's a sh*tty world. Take advantage of whomever,whenever,whereever. And oh.. becarefull what you say to me,am too sensitive.Or i might just show up at your house.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
