News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.3K     0 

I just threw together a good rig for only $1200, really if you don't want a uber-gaming system, you should be able to put a computer together for 800-900, and vista is great, I've had a few problems, but the os is slick and I like the ui, I can understand people don't like the system because they say it sucks resources but I don't see it, it usually only is using 20% of my ram when idle.

here is my rig.

Intel Core 2 Duo E8200 2.66GHz over clocked to 3.2 GHz
4 GB DDR2 RAM
500 GB HDD
Radeon 4850 512 MB GDDR3 RAM Video Card
HT Striker Sound
Cool Master Case
600 W Power Supply
Gigabyte MoBo
running Vista Home Premium

Now that I feel like an Uber-techo dork, I spent $1200 for that ,this is a fairly powerful build for the money, I have no problems with any software.
 
Umma, sounds great to me. I agree /w the Vista comments, especially because I remember in 2002 when XP had so many more problems than Vista ever has had after its release.

Vista is the most solid Windows operating system ever released and has had the fewest problems, but people have complained more about Vista than they did about Millennium Edition which was a truly sucky operating system.
 
Not really surprising. Most companies don't upgrade to the latest OS for a while anyways.

With Windows 7 coming out relatively soon (as far as Windows releases go) there is really no sense in upgrading.
 
I forwarded the article on to our small IT department, and this is the last few items that came up (other than Vista steeling all the memory for graphics)...

item1:
we had some noise on our network, after going down to layer 2, I was embarassed it was caused by my freshly installed vista machine. Further investigation the networking in vista was complaining that the switch didnt support some *new functionality* and should also be upgraded. Im happy to say either vista fixed this since then with a patch or vista64 doesnt suffer the same... but c'mon.. wtf, why !?!

item2:
ITGUY2 had troubleshooted a friend's vista at home, where web browsing had become extremely slow.... other machines on the network were fine... Inadvertantly he decided to upgrade the linksys router firmware.... web browsing was fine again on the vista machine. Again... wtf... again... why?
 
contractor guy 1: (just bought a new laptop)

Besides using up all 4gb of my ram, I too noticed my network traffic at home had increased. My router basically looked like a christmas tree 24/7.

Also noticed a ton of hard drive activity for no reason. I had full anti-virus and spamware protection on it too so it wasn't that.

Its just a horrible OS.

Oh, and anyone using a Linksys router should be shot on sight. The only valid firmware upgrade for linksys is if it auto crumples it and throws it in the trash for you.
 
The company I worked for (1999 - 2002), went with XP almost immediately (in fact most companies [mostly techie] typically go to the new version within a year - last time I failed to see that was DOS 4). Currently - there are no plans to leave XP (current company, and company I worked for pre 1999) .....

Last year they (company 1999 - 2002) gave the consultants an option, laptop with XP, or a Apple laptop..... on the techie side (the largest side) - most are choosing Apple laptops....
 
cacruden said:
The company I worked for (1999 - 2002), went with XP almost immediately (in fact most companies [mostly techie] typically go to the new version within a year - last time I failed to see that was DOS 4). Currently - there are no plans to leave XP (current company, and company I worked for pre 1999) .....

Last year they (company 1999 - 2002) gave the consultants an option, laptop with XP, or a Apple laptop..... on the techie side (the largest side) - most are choosing Apple laptops....
Click to expand...


I know a lot of companies that don't bother upgrading until the OS has been out for years...by then most of the kinks are worked out.

XP wasn't considered that great when it first launched. It's only after SP2 it was really considered a solid OS.

My new laptop will have a 64-bit version of Vista installed, so I'm curious to see how it works out. I won't be surprised if I just install XP instead though.
 
It basically states what I have been saying, that Apple hardware DOES NOT necessarily cost more - they just do not offer the low cost alternatives.

PC World is a magazine that if it has a bias, is going to favour Windows since that is the target audience.... and that is where their revenues for advertising comes from.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/148032/mac_vs_windows_laptops.html

Interesting points:

"The Mac OS X Leopard is a clever, nimble operating system and a pleasure to use. Windows Vista is a behemoth. While not the demon it's often made out to be, it ain't the Mac OS, either. "

"Don't buy into the old argument that Mac laptops are categorically more expensive than Windows machines. Sometimes that's true--but they're often on par with, or cost less than, their closest Windows laptop equivalents."
 
^They don't necessarily cost more compared to specific models from certain companies.

Even the comparisons aren't that great. I'm not sure how a Macbook Air can win out over the X300 when it has no optical drive, less battery life, the battery can't be removed and the system can't really be upgraded.

If you factor in other little features you can't get on a Mac then the gap widens even further. Add in manufacturers like Asus (which makes quality products) and it isn't even close.

Compare the 15.4" Macbook Pro to the Asus G1SN-B1 and Asus wins by a landslide.
 
BrandonTO416 said:
The only thing that is different these days is the MacOS X software, and there is no reason to pay that significantly different of a price for an operating system. ESPECIALLY when Linux variants are available free of charge and have similar UNIX based technology.
Click to expand...

Nope, Linux is not quite there yet....

I have been playing around with my Mac Pro and because I like playing with the Oracle (which is not available for OS X Intel right now [2H 2008 delivery]), I decided to install Linux as well. With Mac OS X, I just booted it up - it recognized I had 2 video cards with 4 24 inch monitors - all I had to do was drag them around into how I wanted them organized (2 over 2 - big desktop).

With Linux, it has been nothing but headaches. I installed the latest version of Linux, it activated 2 monitors mirrored. It will not allow me to configure 4 through the UI setup program, so I have to go edit the Xorg.conf file.... The open-source driver will not work when trying to use 2 video cards, so I installed the binary one.... The binary one did not support the latest X setup so I had to downgrade it. Then I installed it, and it installed the necessary libraries.... I could get the 4 monitors to work, but a bug in the binary driver made playing DVDs impossible. Great - I can live with that. I then want to install oracle and install the libraries it needs. Problem - one of the libraries it requires the video driver needed and installed -- but installed the 32 bit one because the binary driver could not use the 64 bit one..... but Oracle would like the 64 bit one..... Now, the binary one is pretty useless if I can not get Oracle to install.... So I reinstall from the ground up, and I have so far only been able to get one monitor working.... None of this was user friendly of course. So - no - Linux is not quite fully complete yet... luckily I only have 4 months left in the year.... so hopefully the new open-source video drivers at the end of the year will help solve the Linux problem, and Oracle releasing an Intel version for "OS X" will help on the "OS X" side.

Basically, it is still not - just put the DVD in and it works 100% with Linux :p
 
I am shopping around for a computer as well. My current PC has an Athlon 1.4 Ghz processor, so it is really old. Probably 6-7 years now.

I like a computer for general purpose, but also able to play the latest games. I also liek a computer that look snappy too, no more beige. I don't want to spend too much because it is not possible to keep up with technology anyways. You spend a lot and then the value depreciates quickly anyways... sort of like buying a car. It is not worth spending extra.

The computer interests me right now is the Dell XPS 420. Seems powerful, and the price seems okay, around $900. What do you think?

Intel® Core™2 Q6600 Quad-Core (8MB L2 cache,2.4GHz,1066FSB)
Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium Service Pack 1
500GB - Seagate 7200RPM, SATA 3.0Gb/s, 16MB Cache
nVidia GeForce 9800 GT 512MB
Single Drive: 16X CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) w/double layer write capability
No Monitor
Integrated 7.1 Channel Audio

The thing that concerns me is that there is no dedicated sound card. I checked their higher end gaming machines, and they also have sound integrated into the motherboard. So I assume that a dedicated sound card is not important anymore?

The other thing that concerns me is that there is no choice of Windows XP. XP is very stable (at least compared to the 95/98) and it already has enough compatibility problems with older games (even some Windows 95/98 games), and so I am a little worried aobut Vista.
 
The sound integrated into the motherboards these days is actually pretty good. I have found no need to add in high-end sound boards. If you were planning to hook it up to a surround sound system, with full sized speakers - then maybe a better sound card might be warranted..... but adding in an other sound card can be done later anyways.

The Q6600 is a very reasonable performing CPU.

If you are going to run Vista - 4GB of memory is suppose to be the "sweet spot". I would ask if they have the option of downgrading to XP though :p
 
doady:

Just keep in mind that XPS 420 uses a BTX motherboard - which means you can't go aftermarket for any motherboard upgrades in the future. You won't be able to overclock this machine either, unlike XPS 630 (important to note since Q6600 revision B0 is known to be very overclockable). Do they offer Intel Q9300 for this model? It's the 45nm version of Q6600 and it runs cooler and slightly faster. With regards to soundcard - DON'T go for the X-Fi that Dell offer (actually I would suggest avoiding Creative altogether unless you're a gamer). If sound quality is important to you, go for the Asus Xonar DX (about $90) instead - integrated audio is fine, but you will notice the hiss and pop. As to video cards - if they offer ATI Radeon 4850 (or better yet 4870), it might be a good idea to take it - it's the current GPU sweetspot.

AoD
 
Alvin's advice is good. Futureshop actually has some decent deals too. If your'e willing to build a system there are a few decent barebone kits at Tiger Direct. I'm sure you can also find some good deals at College and Spadina.

I'm closing in a laptop choice. I think I'll probably be going with the new Sony FW series, which is probably the nicest PC laptop I've seen:

fw_gallery_middle.jpg


Not a big fan of the lid though.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top