Seriousness How much computer is enough? - Page 2

phenomshel · 05-25-2009, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andybaby

blackboard seems to work fine in firefox, my girlfriend has never complained to me about it and shes on it all the time for her school.

also I'm a win7 convert too. I love the new smart bar. and short cuts. its nice all the way around.

The tech dept. at school posted a big announcement not to use IE8, Firefox 3, and whatever the latest version of Safari is.
I suppose I could see if I can find Firefox 2.whatever at Oldversion.com and try it again on 7...

RickyMaveety · 05-25-2009, 04:06 PM

It's funny how different people are. The only part of Office that I use is Excel. I don't use Word, or Outlook, and these days I don't even use OneNote anymore.

I use my scanner everyday. But then, I scan in all of my receipts, people's business cards, and just about anything else that is paper that I might need later.

Acrobat gets a lot of use, but I wasn't knocked out by the latest feature set.

I stopped using IE ages ago, went with Maxthon for a long time, but I've since switched to Firefox.

Oooo .... just noticed, I've been painting some metal and the overspray has caused my arms and hands to go all glittery. Looks like pixie dust.

Stitchawl · 05-25-2009, 05:23 PM

Enough? There is no 'enough.' Need vs. want.

There are some programs that I use that need to be as up-to-date as possible because of what they can now do (i.e PhotoShop CS4, Lightroom, Firefox, Calibre...) while others can be 10 years old and still work perfectly. How many people, other than secretaries, use more than 6-8 functions in Microsoft Word? Remember, there are now several hundred.

I have a Pentium 4, quad-core with 4G of RAM (using 3.25G,) 2 internal hard drives, four external drives (two of them 1T each, and 2 500G each.) I don't play games but do a lot of graphics work, store a whole lot of music and video, and download 24/7 from the Net. I don't think I'd be happy using my old Vic 20 or Commodore 64, but do I need what I have? I do know that I want what I have!

Stitchawl

jgray · 05-25-2009, 09:41 PM

We continue to have one major problem when it comes to how much computer to buy. Every time faster hardware is available, software gets more bloated, so things run no better than your old system did.

Having said that, my rule is that when I am ready to upgrade to a new computer, I spend enough money so that the new system will seem to be at least twice as fast as the old one (including software bloat). This way, I stand a chance of being satisfied with the new computers performance for some time. There is nothing like buying a new system and having it appear to run as slow as the old one in just a few months.

Because of this rule, I actually keep computers for more than a few years before upgrading. It seems to take a while for sufficiently fast components to drop in price to where I can afford them. I never buy the "bleeding edge" super fast stuff, as that costs big bucks. Besides, you know the saying, "if you can buy it, it is obsolete". Very true.

ruskie · 05-26-2009, 04:56 AM

I used a p133 with 96mb of mem for 6 years. Of course at the time most GNU/Linux coders actually had a clue about writing streamlined software. This seems to be a harder and harder skill now-a-days. So I'm becoming more and more picky about what software I run.

I'm just glad I can always find something to fall back to and not need all those resources.

Examples:
http://kazehakase.sourceforge.jp - my main browser now for 3-4 years or so
http://www.uzbl.org - A very promising browser project I plan on using as soon as it get's some more functionality

http://www.fvwm.org/ - my window manager for the last 3 or so years - I started with this more than 10 years ago and in between tried all the others and now am back to this

http://www.mpg123.de/ - insanely optimized mp3 decoder. This will run on a p100 at ~30-40% cpu usage compare that to MAD which is what tends to be used with it's 60-70% cpu usage and you get a clue.

Hallmark of all these projects? Low resource usage which tends to be the result of good coding practices.

I constantly search for such projects. Why can't people still code like they have 32mb mem available and a p100 machine. It would improve general power use and improve overall performance.

Sadly even those that have such constrained environments i.e. cell phones running ARM and so on seem to think they can throw away resources. A few apps on my cell phone can make it get so hot due to usage that it's annoying to handle.

Sweetpea · 05-26-2009, 05:41 AM

Hmm, we have multiple PC's in our household.

Two Intel Core 2 Duos (no idea about speed) with a decent, 128Mb video card, onboard sound, onboard network. Those are our PC's and they get a lot of use with Visual Studio, games and PSP (I think I got version 9). Both on XP.

Then we've our multimedia pc beside the tv, which is a AMD Duron 700 with a lot of HDD space. The video card in it died recently, but it was a cheapo card. And got replaced with one of our old video cards. (OS is XP MediaCenter)

And finally, there is our web/sql/file/mp3/everything-server. That's a AMD Athlon 700, again with a lot of HDD space and the DVD burner. As it is a server, it's running Win2K3.

The Duron will be replaced once we've a new TV, which will be between now and 3 years in the future (somewhere), the Athlon will be replaced when more memory dies (we're running out of SDRAM!) and our own PC's will be replaced when there's money (they are about 2 1/2 years old) or when there's a real need (like a game that I really, really, really want comes out and it won't run on my current set).

So, we generally only upgrade when there's a need. Parts may be replaced or upgraded (one HDD died on the server, we replaced all three with a bigger one, more memory in our own PC's, etc.)

pdurrant · 05-26-2009, 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

How much computer is enough?

More than we can get at present, both in terms of hardware and software.

The hardware is the easy bit. The hardware is getting faster, storage is getting bigger, screens getting better.

The software is the problem. Progress is a lot, lot slower, especially in things like voice recognition and natural language processing.

RWood · 05-28-2009, 09:46 AM

Since I build all the PCs here (except the two laptops that see only limited service), I too follow an incremental upgrade path. The last upgrade was when my wife's on-board video gave out and I added a new video card to her machine. No expense was spared -- I got her the finest $50 ATI video card I could find. HD-3450 with 512 MB RAM. She watches sewing videos on the web, designs patterns, and email. All requirements are well below the limits of the video card. We are not gamers so there is not always another new game coming out that requires new hardware.

With incremental upgrades I have been able to build the music server over time. The next upgrade there will be to retire more of the old PATA133 drives for newer and larger SATA drives. This increases speed and capacity while reducing power consumption and heating.

Greg Anos · 05-28-2009, 03:15 PM

Thanks for all the responses. The underlying reason for the thread is that with all the efforts to be energy efficient, computers are a frontier that is seldom addressed. With nettops starting to come in at 40 Watts and less, for lesser throughput, we seem to be being pushed to more and more computer and power consumption due to more and more complex software, and little way (other than Linux) to get off the treadmill. I wish there was a way off....

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Unutterably Silly Old Bad Computer/Computer Programming Jokes	RWood	Lounge	114	02-21-2012 01:39 PM
New Computer for Me.. soon	griffonwing	Lounge	6	12-15-2009 03:28 PM

05-25-2009, 04:06 PM	#17
RickyMaveety Holy S**T!!! Posts: 5,213 Karma: 108401 Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: San Diego, California!! Device: Kindle and iPad	It's funny how different people are. The only part of Office that I use is Excel. I don't use Word, or Outlook, and these days I don't even use OneNote anymore. I use my scanner everyday. But then, I scan in all of my receipts, people's business cards, and just about anything else that is paper that I might need later. Acrobat gets a lot of use, but I wasn't knocked out by the latest feature set. I stopped using IE ages ago, went with Maxthon for a long time, but I've since switched to Firefox. Oooo .... just noticed, I've been painting some metal and the overspray has caused my arms and hands to go all glittery. Looks like pixie dust.

05-25-2009, 05:23 PM	#18
Stitchawl Opsimath Posts: 12,344 Karma: 187123287 Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Chiang Mai, Northern Thailand Device: Sony PRS-650, iPhone 5, Kobo Glo, Sony PRS-350, iPad, Samsung Galaxy	Enough? There is no 'enough.' Need vs. want. There are some programs that I use that need to be as up-to-date as possible because of what they can now do (i.e PhotoShop CS4, Lightroom, Firefox, Calibre...) while others can be 10 years old and still work perfectly. How many people, other than secretaries, use more than 6-8 functions in Microsoft Word? Remember, there are now several hundred. I have a Pentium 4, quad-core with 4G of RAM (using 3.25G,) 2 internal hard drives, four external drives (two of them 1T each, and 2 500G each.) I don't play games but do a lot of graphics work, store a whole lot of music and video, and download 24/7 from the Net. I don't think I'd be happy using my old Vic 20 or Commodore 64, but do I need what I have? I do know that I want what I have! Stitchawl

05-25-2009, 09:41 PM	#19
jgray Fanatic Posts: 549 Karma: 2928497 Join Date: Mar 2008 Device: Clara 2E & Sage	We continue to have one major problem when it comes to how much computer to buy. Every time faster hardware is available, software gets more bloated, so things run no better than your old system did. Having said that, my rule is that when I am ready to upgrade to a new computer, I spend enough money so that the new system will seem to be at least twice as fast as the old one (including software bloat). This way, I stand a chance of being satisfied with the new computers performance for some time. There is nothing like buying a new system and having it appear to run as slow as the old one in just a few months. Because of this rule, I actually keep computers for more than a few years before upgrading. It seems to take a while for sufficiently fast components to drop in price to where I can afford them. I never buy the "bleeding edge" super fast stuff, as that costs big bucks. Besides, you know the saying, "if you can buy it, it is obsolete". Very true.

05-26-2009, 04:56 AM	#20
ruskie Shade Posts: 100 Karma: 546 Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: U.LC.MW.Sol.Earth.EE.SI.LJ Device: Hanlin Jinke V3ext running OpenInkPot	I used a p133 with 96mb of mem for 6 years. Of course at the time most GNU/Linux coders actually had a clue about writing streamlined software. This seems to be a harder and harder skill now-a-days. So I'm becoming more and more picky about what software I run. I'm just glad I can always find something to fall back to and not need all those resources. Examples: http://kazehakase.sourceforge.jp - my main browser now for 3-4 years or so http://www.uzbl.org - A very promising browser project I plan on using as soon as it get's some more functionality http://www.fvwm.org/ - my window manager for the last 3 or so years - I started with this more than 10 years ago and in between tried all the others and now am back to this http://www.mpg123.de/ - insanely optimized mp3 decoder. This will run on a p100 at ~30-40% cpu usage compare that to MAD which is what tends to be used with it's 60-70% cpu usage and you get a clue. Hallmark of all these projects? Low resource usage which tends to be the result of good coding practices. I constantly search for such projects. Why can't people still code like they have 32mb mem available and a p100 machine. It would improve general power use and improve overall performance. Sadly even those that have such constrained environments i.e. cell phones running ARM and so on seem to think they can throw away resources. A few apps on my cell phone can make it get so hot due to usage that it's annoying to handle.

05-26-2009, 05:41 AM	#21
Sweetpea Grand Sorcerer Posts: 9,707 Karma: 32763414 Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Krewerd Device: Pocketbook Inkpad 4 Color; Samsung Galaxy Tab S6	Hmm, we have multiple PC's in our household. Two Intel Core 2 Duos (no idea about speed) with a decent, 128Mb video card, onboard sound, onboard network. Those are our PC's and they get a lot of use with Visual Studio, games and PSP (I think I got version 9). Both on XP. Then we've our multimedia pc beside the tv, which is a AMD Duron 700 with a lot of HDD space. The video card in it died recently, but it was a cheapo card. And got replaced with one of our old video cards. (OS is XP MediaCenter) And finally, there is our web/sql/file/mp3/everything-server. That's a AMD Athlon 700, again with a lot of HDD space and the DVD burner. As it is a server, it's running Win2K3. The Duron will be replaced once we've a new TV, which will be between now and 3 years in the future (somewhere), the Athlon will be replaced when more memory dies (we're running out of SDRAM!) and our own PC's will be replaced when there's money (they are about 2 1/2 years old) or when there's a real need (like a game that I really, really, really want comes out and it won't run on my current set). So, we generally only upgrade when there's a need. Parts may be replaced or upgraded (one HDD died on the server, we replaced all three with a bigger one, more memory in our own PC's, etc.)

05-28-2009, 09:46 AM	#23
RWood Technogeezer Posts: 7,233 Karma: 1601464 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Virginia, USA Device: Sony PRS-500	Since I build all the PCs here (except the two laptops that see only limited service), I too follow an incremental upgrade path. The last upgrade was when my wife's on-board video gave out and I added a new video card to her machine. No expense was spared -- I got her the finest $50 ATI video card I could find. HD-3450 with 512 MB RAM. She watches sewing videos on the web, designs patterns, and email. All requirements are well below the limits of the video card. We are not gamers so there is not always another new game coming out that requires new hardware. With incremental upgrades I have been able to build the music server over time. The next upgrade there will be to retire more of the old PATA133 drives for newer and larger SATA drives. This increases speed and capacity while reducing power consumption and heating.

05-28-2009, 03:15 PM	#24
Greg Anos Grand Sorcerer Posts: 11,263 Karma: 35056282 Join Date: Jan 2008 Device: Pocketbook	Thanks for all the responses. The underlying reason for the thread is that with all the efforts to be energy efficient, computers are a frontier that is seldom addressed. With nettops starting to come in at 40 Watts and less, for lesser throughput, we seem to be being pushed to more and more computer and power consumption due to more and more complex software, and little way (other than Linux) to get off the treadmill. I wish there was a way off....

Advert

Advert