939 or 754(?) pin CPU.

[Arnold Schwarz 'E' negger]

"you could probably build a much cheaper platform using
the AMD Sempron processors."

Oh dear.

 

[Arnold Schwarz 'E' negger]

"AMD Sempron 3000+ Processor"

Oh dear! Oh dear oh dear.

 

[Arnold Schwarz 'E' negger]

You'll be glad you got a Athlon64 when 64-bit Windows Longhorn fianlly
arrives.

Why Longhorn, why not now.

 

[Arnold Schwarz 'E' negger]

Computers are basically disposable.

Yes im throwing mine away now :-s

 

[Synapse Syndrome]

Why Longhorn, why not now.

No apps. Worse than Linux!

ss.

 

[Arnold Schwarz 'E' negger]

No apps. Worse than Linux!

ss.

No apps so why when Longhorn is released?

 

[Synapse Syndrome]

No apps so why when Longhorn is released?

All major firms have surely started working on making 64-bit versions of
their programs and drivers. Longhorn will have that support when it
arrives. XP-64 is just a prototype really.

ss.

 

[Fakename]

Who said anything about the target being 1 or 2 years away?

After 3, 4, or 5 years it WILL BE cheaper to buy a new one than upgrade
the one you have to the current specs. RAM architectures are changing
every few years so you'll need a new motherboard. You'll need a new
video card to work with your new motherboard too. Right there you've
replaced 90% of of your machine. If gaming is a factor for you then
this is especially true as gaming requirements are the thing that is
pushing the computer hardware industry.

They days when an EFFECTIVE upgrade meant throwing another stick of RAM
into your machine are over.

And no one said anything about putting the old machine in the landfil.
It will still be useful, just not as useful as it once was. At work
we're still recycling P3, 733mhz machines. They run all the business
type apps we want them to. Hell, I even put a 450mhz machine back into
production not too long ago.

But if you're talking upgrading vs. purchasing in the consumer PC
market, purchasing wins hands down.

 

[Fakename]

I'm not sure that's a fair measure to apply to the whole industry as
Dell structures the price of upgrade components to flush the most cash
out of you as they possibly can.

One of the things they do, and I saw a first hand example of this, is
offer a really cheap "bare bones" pc and then charge you inflated
prices, even for Dell, for the nearly essential upgrades.

I was pricing out some of their PC's from a recent $299 special and was
also pricing out some of their higher end PCs and noticed the exact same
RAM upgrade options were more expensive on the $299 machine. ****ing
bastards.

I do agree with you that purchasing is cheaper than upgrading, but not
becasue of the reasons you're citing.

 

[Donald McTrevor]

Absolutely not. It's almost never cheaper. Some options
aren't even available unless you choose the higher-line
system. Instead of trying to make a vague observation, pick
out a specific config. Take Dell for example, after many of
their promos and discounts one can get a basic box for under
$400, with the only cost-effective upgrade being upgrading
from a Celeron to a P4- which is an aside as Dell just
happens to have crazy-low Intel CPU prices, but the courts
are looking into these things now too!

Yes I noticed Dell do not 'do' AMD.

 

[kony]

All major firms have surely started working on making 64-bit versions of
their programs and drivers. Longhorn will have that support when it
arrives. XP-64 is just a prototype really.

Hmm. Suppose that nets you a 15% performance increase. Now
add up how much it would cost to replace ALL your
applications. IMO, for most people it will be quite a
while before that makes economic sense, they could gain more
from merely buying the next-step-up CPU and/or upgrading
sooner if the performance is an issue. It may be quite a
while before the typical non-"workstation" needs over 2GB
memory per process too.

 

[kony]

I'm not sure that's a fair measure to apply to the whole industry as
Dell structures the price of upgrade components to flush the most cash
out of you as they possibly can.

One of the things they do, and I saw a first hand example of this, is
offer a really cheap "bare bones" pc and then charge you inflated
prices, even for Dell, for the nearly essential upgrades.

Perhaps you get little to no further discounts on the
upgrades, BUT that doesn't change the matter of getting
further upgrade value by buying aftermarket upgrades
instead, that the end result is a lower priced system when
one buys through the avenues giving lowest cost, not simply
assuming it would be through Dell (or not) without doing the
math).

I was pricing out some of their PC's from a recent $299 special and was
also pricing out some of their higher end PCs and noticed the exact same
RAM upgrade options were more expensive on the $299 machine. ****ing
bastards.

Why curse them? They give you a great deal on the system
and you're free to buy 3rd party parts for it. That is
IDEAL. FWIW, things like memory are not high-end from Dell,
you'll actually pay less for BETTER quality parts later.

I do agree with you that purchasing is cheaper than upgrading, but not
becasue of the reasons you're citing.

You are completely backwards.

Upgrading is cheaper than purchasing whole new system. I
merely cited the common example of someone buying OEM box as
the base platform.

 

[Synapse Syndrome]

Hmm. Suppose that nets you a 15% performance increase. Now
add up how much it would cost to replace ALL your
applications. IMO, for most people it will be quite a
while before that makes economic sense, they could gain more
from merely buying the next-step-up CPU and/or upgrading
sooner if the performance is an issue. It may be quite a
while before the typical non-"workstation" needs over 2GB
memory per process too.

You can run 32-bit apps in XP-64, so I would only have thought that the
performance of those apps could only be better in Longhorn. As far as I can
tell Longhorn is planned to be 64-bit in the most mainstream editions.

ss.

 

[kony]

Who said anything about the target being 1 or 2 years away?

That's about how long a cheap power supply with last in a
modern box, if it makes it past the first few months.

After 3, 4, or 5 years it WILL BE cheaper to buy a new one than upgrade
the one you have to the current specs.

You have no idea what you're talking about, unless you're
only considering OEM boxes.

RAM architectures are changing
every few years so you'll need a new motherboard. You'll need a new
video card to work with your new motherboard too. Right there you've
replaced 90% of of your machine.

Your math is off by a large margin.

If gaming is a factor for you then
this is especially true as gaming requirements are the thing that is
pushing the computer hardware industry.

They days when an EFFECTIVE upgrade meant throwing another stick of RAM
into your machine are over.

Nobody ever said "upgrade" only mean one part did they?
Actually I made a very valid point when I specifically
mentioned the case. It would seem pretty clear that if the
case were mentioned as a part to spend more on, it'd be
reused.

And no one said anything about putting the old machine in the landfil.
It will still be useful, just not as useful as it once was. At work
we're still recycling P3, 733mhz machines. They run all the business
type apps we want them to. Hell, I even put a 450mhz machine back into
production not too long ago.

But if you're talking upgrading vs. purchasing in the consumer PC
market, purchasing wins hands down.

All depends on what you're buying. Purchasing new also
means all new software, unless you want to no longer use old
PC for much or only use the 2nd rate junk that OEMs pack
with new PCs (besides office and windows).

 

[kony]

You can run 32-bit apps in XP-64, so I would only have thought that the
performance of those apps could only be better in Longhorn.

What are you thinking will cause this "better"?
MS has made some vague claims about "some" things being
faster in Longhorn, but so they did with past OS, using
questionable methodology to arrive at such conclusions. It
seems fairly clear that Longhorn itself will have higher
overhead, and I fully expect that running same things you do
today will be slower with Longhorn 64, not faster. Booting
the OS might be faster, as well as a few power management
areas, but a few seconds booting or 3 seconds off a wake-up
are things I'm not nearly as concerned about as the REST of
the time, regular system uses.

As far as I can
tell Longhorn is planned to be 64-bit in the most mainstream editions.

We'll see how it does... can't help but think a properly
tuned 2K or XP box will be a better choice until MS has
released a service pack or two. Even then, I'm sure the
Longhorn EULA is going to be a thing of *wonder*.

 

[Ardent]

X-No-Archive: yes

(I have a Cyrix II processor about 266mhz, 66mhz bus),

Do not despair. What is your motherboard? Look at the manual and the
Web sites. I have a machine which I have been using with Cyrix 300 and
a 4gb hard disk for several years and with the resources in the web I
have upgraded it to AMD 450 mHz and 80gb hard disk. Definitely better
performance now.

Well, I do have other much larger machines which I use for my regular
audio and video editing as well as CAD related work.

HTH

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...

We'll see how it does... can't help but think a properly
tuned 2K or XP box will be a better choice until MS has
released a service pack or two. Even then, I'm sure the
Longhorn EULA is going to be a thing of *wonder*.

Are you *sure* that is the most appropriate adjective?

 

[VWWall]

You can run 32-bit apps in XP-64, so I would only have thought that the
performance of those apps could only be better in Longhorn. As far as I can
tell Longhorn is planned to be 64-bit in the most mainstream editions.

You can get a free evaluation copy of WindowsXPProf x64 right now. I've
been using it for a few months. It uses something called WoW, (Windows
on Windows), to run 32-bit apps. They seem to run OK, but certainly
don't run better! It's a problem finding 64bit drivers, and I haven't
seen any real 64bit apps yet.

AMD64 3000+ in a MSI K8MM ILSR MB (754pin) Found drivers for everything,
even the on-board video. It's an inexpensive way to try 64bits. (<$200)
Plug in an APG card, and it makes a pretty good Win32 system.

There have been 64bit Linux distros for some time now! The Windows x64
is available only in OEM. (Figure that EULA!) :-(

 

[Fakename]

You're not hearing me. In 3-5 years you are going to HAVE TO make a
major upgrade. Adding some RAM and a new video card are not going to
cut it.

You will have to upgrade so many things you will practically be building
another pc.

I curse Dell because they were charging 2 different prices for the same
part, to the same type of customer. Thereby negating the savings you
would recieve on a cheap base unit. I call that a deceptive business
practice. It's common to charge SOHO users more than big commercial
customers, in all industries, but to try to offer a sale and then eat it
up with inflated upgrade prices is just dirty.


And I'm not backwards. Here's the thread:

Donald McTrevor said:

"Thats not true, it is normally cheaper to 'upgrade' at time of
purchase, a look at any price list shows big disounts on such upgrades,
as opposed to buying the items seperately."

Then you said:

"Absolutely not. It's almost never cheaper..."

So when I say I agree that "It's...never cheaper..." I am not backwards.

 

[kony]

You're not hearing me. In 3-5 years you are going to HAVE TO make a
major upgrade. Adding some RAM and a new video card are not going to
cut it.

True, but I never claimed "ram and video".

You will have to upgrade so many things you will practically be building
another pc.

Most things, yes, but practically, the difference is reusing
as much as possible because it WILL reduce cost of buying
same thing again. Certainly that must be weighed against
the value of having a 2nd system for use or resale. There
are different scenarios and desires- it's not the best
option for everyone but for some it can be.

I curse Dell because they were charging 2 different prices for the same
part, to the same type of customer. Thereby negating the savings you
would recieve on a cheap base unit. I call that a deceptive business
practice. It's common to charge SOHO users more than big commercial
customers, in all industries, but to try to offer a sale and then eat it
up with inflated upgrade prices is just dirty.

Yes I hate that too but at least knowing it you can shop
appropriately IF you shop there at all. I don't buy Dells
but i can see an arguement for it in a corporate setting.

And I'm not backwards. Here's the thread:

Donald McTrevor said:

"Thats not true, it is normally cheaper to 'upgrade' at time of
purchase, a look at any price list shows big disounts on such upgrades,
as opposed to buying the items seperately."

Then you said:

"Absolutely not. It's almost never cheaper..."

So when I say I agree that "It's...never cheaper..." I am not backwards.

If you say so.