At work I have: dual P4 2.8GHz, 512MB RAM, 80GB HDD, dual 21inch monitors, nVidia Quadro4.
+ P3 700Mhz, 512MB RAM, 20 GB HDD, GeForce2GTS, 19inch monitor
At home: P4 2.53GHz, 512MB RAM, 80GB HDD, 19inch monitor, ATI Radeon 9700 Pro
+ P2 450Mhz, 512 MB RAM, 40 + 13 GB HDD, GeForce2, 17inch montor
All these machines are really nice to have when you're developing, debugging, testing, etc.
But one has to be very careful not to let the minimum system specs for the enduser of your apps, rush
to extreme heights!
But then again... nothing beats having the best tools available for your job
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.
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 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.
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 .
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...
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.
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.
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.