Wondering what your opinion is...

[haw730]

I have been thinking about this since i heard this today from a person at my workplace. I work at Best Buy and I must say that I am just floored at the way computers are coming along in the consumer market. I found out today that we have some new computers that will have 3 GB of ram and a Quad Core processor. Now I can understand if you are running some killer servers or if you are doing some intense rendering but I feel as though these powerful computers are being designed with Windows Vista in mind. From using linux I have realized that you dont have to have an uber computer. I just thought I would rant, and see if there is any opinions as to whether or not there is such a thng as too much computer (just in the idea that anybody can stroll into a store and get a quad core processor with 3 gigs of ram)?

[karellen]

how much do they cost?

[haw730]

I think the price will be about 1099-1199.00 for the CPU, I guess its a good deal comparatively but I dunno for me it just seems a little over the top.

[kvonb]

There are only 2 things pushing the "advancement" (and I use the term sarcastically!) of computers: Games, and Microsoft's Windows O/S!

I pulled my old Amiga 1200 out of storage the other day, and was shocked at how fast it booted.

Six seconds from flipping the power switch to getting to the desktop!!!

Six seconds, just try to imagine that!!!!

Sure it has a lot lower capability, and is completely useless today, but shouldn't we be getting even better boot times?

Each time things are sped up, along comes Microsoft to slow them down again!

Makes you wonder :S

.

[The Soundophiliac]

I bought a low-end laptop a year ago. It was about as cheap as laptops go. It does everything I need it to do (except maybe run some games). I do audio work which is supposed to be quite resource-heavy with realtime effects and such but I'm doing fine with my relatively measly laptop. With the exceptions of gaming, being a speedfreak, doing rendering and the likes or having a server I don't see why anyone would need a more powerful computer.

3 gigs of ram is overkill for most. I guess it's profitable and good for marketing to have such machines available. A lot of people don't have a realistic idea of how powerful computers they need.

[Feba]

sad thing is, 99% of things I actually do on my computer I can do on my 7 year old iMac, with the exception of watching youtube (the mac is a teeny bit slow)

Unless you play the latest games, a 400$ computer brand new is plenty enough for the next few years.

Honestly, I keep hoping there will be an effort to make computers cheaper or faster instead of more powerful, or artificially prettier, but oh well...

[jrusso2]

I still remember when the 1 ghz Intel P III came out and every one said thats so fast you will never use that much power.

[BuffaloX]

Wow
I'd like to have one of those.

90% of the time, I use less than 5% of my CPU power, and it's pretty weak by todays standards.
(single core) Athlon 64 2 Ghz.

The extra power is handy in some situations like gaming.
One of the cool things about multi core CPU's is that they have better power management.

Non gaming ordinary users probably won't even notice the difference.

[haw730]

Thats my thoughts exactley, I had one of my friends in the store say 'dude you cant play games on linux', i then proceeded to burst his bubble and told him that he could run WoW in linux. I am still content with my 2.2 ghz p4 with a gig of ram, although I might end up getting a laptop soon ;)

[Zzl1xndd]

Thats my thoughts exactley, I had one of my friends in the store say 'dude you cant play games on linux', i then proceeded to burst his bubble and told him that he could run WoW in linux. I am still content with my 2.2 ghz p4 with a gig of ram, although I might end up getting a laptop soon ;)

LOL on a side note you just brought up one of the Rants that I normally go on. People who don't know anything about Linux saying things like 'dude you cant play games on linux'. I play more games on Linux then I ever did on windows.

Back to the main topic my Athlon 2200+ with 768megs of ram & Ubuntu 7.04 runs a lot faster then most of my friends new Core2duos with 2 gigs and Vista :)

[LaRoza]

The newer processors and RAM used are just following the trends of hardware development. If you were to make a chart of processor speeds and average RAM in new computers, it would probably indicate that todays computers are right on schedule.

The only function of computers that the average user will need these computers is games, and now, Windows. All other computer functions should not need such capabilites.

[Miguel]

The funniest thing is that the only reason that machine has 3 Gb instead of 4 Gb of RAM is that they probably have 32bit Vista installed. Personally, if I had a quad-core with 4 Gb, I'd install Debian with no X or anything (fvwm at most) and use it as a computing PC (you know, ssh, DFT software...)

[samschoice]

I'm ashamed to say I have 4 gigs of ram. I had a "Tim the Tool Man Taylor" moment when I was shopping online, I guess. I got my computer at MagicMicro off of ebay. I was all pumped about Vista at the time .... then Vista killed my new computer! I installed ubuntu, and I've never turned back. This saga began last Jan.

BTW, you should try 64 bit ubuntu with 4 gigs of ram. Its super fast!

[init1]

There are only 2 things pushing the "advancement" (and I use the term sarcastically!) of computers: Games, and Microsoft's Windows O/S!

I pulled my old Amiga 1200 out of storage the other day, and was shocked at how fast it booted.

Six seconds from flipping the power switch to getting to the desktop!!!

Six seconds, just try to imagine that!!!!

Sure it has a lot lower capability, and is completely useless today, but shouldn't we be getting even better boot times?

Each time things are sped up, along comes Microsoft to slow them down again!

Makes you wonder :S

.
6 seconds? Holy Crap! My Vic20 is even faster, but even more worthless. About 1 or 2 seconds till the BASIC command line, beat that!

[arsenic23]

I think I may have read an article somewhere that insinuated that Vista is a hardware hog on purpose, and that the reason is that Microsoft is trying to keep the price of the average family PC above the price of their OS license.

[mips]

I pulled my old Amiga 1200 out of storage the other day, and was shocked at how fast it booted.

I wish I never sold mine, I really do.

I would love to try AmigaOS4 but it needs dedicated harware.