New PC

At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner. And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of thumb
for this?
The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything. I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag now
and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard, but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!!
What do you think? Is it time to send it to a retirement home, to be
replaced by a young, nubile athletic model with mellifluous wiring and a
trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing money away?

I you want a new pc just go buy one. It's OK. But I would wait a bit.
64-bit computing will be the hot thing through this year and next. I plan
to wait for the release of XP-64 this summer and for commodity pricing to
take hold in the 64-bit market.

A two-year old eMachine I might replace now. Anything better is probably
worth working with for a while. It all depends on what you like to do in
computing. Gamers replace their boxes at an astonishing rate. Web-surfers
use machines that are five years old without much complaint.

Perhaps you are better off honing your XP and software maintenance skills.
Two years old is not all that bad unless you bought a real rock-bottom
machine two years ago.

Describe your setup to us and the ideas will come flooding in.

--
Colin Barnhorst [MVP Windows - Virtual Machine]
(Reply to the group only unless otherwise requested)
"Geoff A." wrote in message
...
At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner. And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of
thumb for this?
The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything. I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag
now and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard, but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!!
What do you think? Is it time to send it to a retirement home, to be
replaced by a young, nubile athletic model with mellifluous wiring and a
trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing money away?

You give no indication of what your "issues" are. Unless there are hardware
problems, replacing the PC is not likely to help you if you're not
maintaining your system properly and securely.
--

"Geoff A." wrote in message
...
At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner. And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of
thumb for this?
The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything. I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag
now and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard, but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!!
What do you think? Is it time to send it to a retirement home, to be
replaced by a young, nubile athletic model with mellifluous wiring and a
trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing money away?

Geoff A. wrote:
At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner. And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of thumb
for this?
The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything. I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag now
and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard, but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!!
What do you think? Is it time to send it to a retirement home, to be
replaced by a young, nubile athletic model with mellifluous wiring and a
trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing money away?


It all depends on what you're using it for. If you're using it for
business and the downtime is costing you money, then it would be fairly
easy to justify. OTH if you just do e-mail and surf the net maybe not.
I find myself looking at new computers whether I did one or not. I
usually end up buying one every couple of years just because I like to
try out the new stuff. If you have the cash treat yourself, you deserve
it :-)

gls858

I have to agree with GTS in this thread. You give no indication of your
issues or anything about your setup.

That said, as to rule of thumb, in the PC business, many subscribe to the
idea that a system is obsolete the day you buy it. Given the pace of
change, that's a poor rule of thumb because you'd be buying a new PC every
day.

The rule of thumb I use and recommend to others is, if your system can no
longer handle the functions you require of it and small incremental upgrades
will not give you back those functions or if such upgrades make little or no
difference, it's time to buy a new PC.

What those functions are, depends on the individual. Sometimes it's
software related, perhaps you do a lot of graphics work and you find your
system is no longer up to the task or your needs have changed and the system
can't meet your new requirements. Sometimes it's hardware related. Some
new device in which your interested either cannot be installed on your
system or it simply doesn't have the horsepower, then, depending upon its
importance to you, it may be time to consider a new system.

Your needs are the determining factor, it's only obsolete when you say it's
obsolete, not when some magazine, column or general consensus says that's
the case. If your system still meets all your needs, be it mission critical
applications or simply games you wish to play or things which you wish to
add to your system, the only thing a new system provides is a bit of "feel
good."

I'm running a PIII, 733Mhz with 256MB of SDRAM. I had originally planned to
replace it about two years ago. Due to a death in the family, I postponed
the purchase. However, my system met and meets most of my needs. In fact,
only recently have I started running into situations wherein, things I
wanted to add required "greater horsepower" than my system currently has.
Hence, until now I've been satisfied.

I was making tentative moves in the direction of a new system in the second
half of last year and began planning my next system. As Colin indicates,
there are a lot of changes taking place and about to take place. The
technology is in a bit of a state of transition from one platform to another
so I'm holding off a bit or as long as I can given other requirements I
might have in order to get a better fix on where things are headed. That
said, I do get involved in beta testing and that might push me to make a
change sooner rather than later.

I post the above as a guide, your needs determine the rule of thumb and the
best time to buy. Obviously, if your system is acting up and you gave no
indication of the problems you are having, that's a consideration as well
since no one likes dealing with one problem after another. NOTE: sometimes
we create our own problems, Norton System Works and other such utilities
often create more problems than they solve and perhaps some of your tweaking
resulted in some of the issues you have with regard to installing new
software and Norton products can be quite intrusive.

--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org: http://www.dts-l.org/

"Geoff A." wrote in message
...
At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner. And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of
thumb for this?
The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything. I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag
now and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard, but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!!
What do you think? Is it time to send it to a retirement home, to be
replaced by a young, nubile athletic model with mellifluous wiring and a
trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing money away?

I'll offer my thoughts in-line:


"Geoff A." wrote in message
...
At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it?

[... nearly all PC's, with the exception of laptops and highly proprietary
systems, are relatively easy to service by people who have a desire to
follow simple guidelines and advice. One of the biggest hurdles though is
not have access to a working system with internet access so you can find
answers.]


Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner.

[ it really depends on the user's requirements. I rebuild and sell many low
end P1 and P2 systems that the user only wants for basic functions like
e-mail, chatting and surfing. A P-166 with 64MB RAM running Windows 98SE is
fine for MSN, e-mail and basic games. Just keep the spyware off it and don't
expect to load Windows XP. ]

And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of
thumb
for this?

[Updating drivers really isn't hard if you know where to look
www.driverguide.com is a place to start or just do a google seach for the
hardware model and number which is stamped on the device. The basic rule is
to get the network card or modem working asap so you can get online to find
what you need. For that you need access to a working system.]


The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything.

[a system that is only 2 years old generally will be a joy to work with. The
motherboard or system CD's that came with it should have all the drivers you
need. Windows XP will likely support it anyway]

I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag now
and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard,

[...IMO Norton System Works should not come close to a computer.]


but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!!

[....many problems with system performance are directly related to the
computer user's practises. Today the leading casue of computer performance
issues is the proloferation of spyware and malware. Enusre htat you properly
protect and manitain your system. This includes running spyware cleaners
(yes plural), using firewall and antivirus and ensuring you regularly dump
cookies and temp files. You also need to keep the system updated with
current patches. I run 5 systems at home and 2 at work. All systems run very
well and are used for a variety of functions.]

What do you think? Is it time to send it to a retirement home, to be
replaced by a young, nubile athletic model with mellifluous wiring and a
trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing money away?


[You haven't told us what you computing needs are. Perhaps your needs are
such that the current system can't handle them even with hardware upgrades.
However if you simply want to dump a 2 year old system I will gladly take it
off your hands if you are going to toss it. ]



--

Harry Ohrn MS-MVP [Shell/User]
www.webtree.ca/windowsxp

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:10:08 +0000, Geoff A. wrote:

At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner. And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of
thumb for this?
The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything. I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag
now and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard, but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!! What do you think? Is it time to
send it to a retirement home, to be replaced by a young, nubile athletic
model with mellifluous wiring and a trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing
money away?

For me, a PC is 'out of date' when it can no longer do what I need it to
do. I have a few systems that are still running AMD K6-2 400Mhz (about 6
or 7 years old) and even a 166Mhz. They 'do their job' perfectly and
probably will for sometime to come.

Your system only being 2 years old might just need a OS re-install.

Rush
http://www.bythedrop.com

Hi,

Just a few weeks ago, I finally upgraded a few items in my Main PC. I was
running a P3 1GHz using a Gigabyte MoBo. I built this computer in Dec of
99. For the past 5 years, I haven`t any problems with the system. I
originally had Win2K on the comp, till last year Dec I had to replace the
main HHD, then I installed XP Pro SP1, updated to SP2. The computer still
ran fine and had no problems with past or current software. Then a few
weeks ago, while in Electric City (popular name to Akihabara in Tokyo for
electronics stuff), my wife allowed me to buy a new ASUS MoBo, AMD64 FX
3500+ CPU, and 1 Gig Ram, that is then used to replaced my old Gigabyte MoBo
and P3 1GHz CPU.

That old board and CPU went into my second computer which had a Gigabyte
MoBo and Celeron 850MHz CPU. A lot of things depends on what applications
you plan to use on the computer, what other hardware you have in the system.
My Main comp also has a ASUS NVidia FX 5700 video card with 256MB while
running the old P3. I have a lot of software that put my poor P3 to the
test, but the system continued to run fine. So, depending on what you plan
to run or what isn`t running well, will determine if you need to get a
updated system

Jeff

"Geoff A." wrote in message
...
At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner. And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of
thumb for this?
The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything. I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag
now and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard, but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!!
What do you think? Is it time to send it to a retirement home, to be
replaced by a young, nubile athletic model with mellifluous wiring and a
trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing money away?

"Geoff A." wrote in message ...

At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner.

The OP might do well to consider comparing his old computer (set up to
run a modern Linux distro) with his new one running on XP. Gigabyte
have linuxware, the only snag might be his graphics card. But even
then the original manufacturer (i.e. if not nVidia but "the other
one") may have drivers in Linese. Or the distro might have drivers.

"I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time trying to solve issues."

You answered the question yourself. If you find yourself unable to get
anything done because you are fixing the darn thing constantly, it's time to
get a new one.

Just make sure that you are protected against viruses, spyware and other
attacks from the start. It's far easier to keep everything working right that
way.

"Geoff A." wrote:

At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner. And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of thumb
for this?
The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything. I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag now
and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard, but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!!
What do you think? Is it time to send it to a retirement home, to be
replaced by a young, nubile athletic model with mellifluous wiring and a
trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing money away?

I fully agree. The problems may simply be due to an accumulation of spy-
ware, add-ware, etc, since I note no mention of any program to cope with
such stuff. Secondly, if the poster purchased junk originally and buys a
current equivalent then no improvement will be noted. Most Computer
users [Internet, E-mail, and a few other occasional uses] will not
experience significant gains in usage between processor sizes or
hardware upgrades (all my opinion). The point: spend your money if you
wish; however, do not believe all that advertising hype. As you said, so
long as the machine adequately accomplishes what you want keep the
money. Folks who keep track of such things say that the average computer
user buys a new one about every 4 1/2-5 years. I think the average user
probably got passed by when processor chip speed got higher than 900HZ
and Hard Drive size exceeded 80GB (possibly 40GB). Such terminology as
RAID does not reach them. I know of several people who completely
re-install the OS about once each year for the reason that it will fix
problems that are not readily fixable any other way PLUS problems not
yet known to the operator. As one poster has already stated, the 64
bit version of XP is the next big thing to come.
Gene K

Rush wrote:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:10:08 +0000, Geoff A. wrote:


At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner. And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of
thumb for this?
The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything. I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag
now and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard, but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!! What do you think? Is it time to
send it to a retirement home, to be replaced by a young, nubile athletic
model with mellifluous wiring and a trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing
money away?


For me, a PC is 'out of date' when it can no longer do what I need it to
do. I have a few systems that are still running AMD K6-2 400Mhz (about 6
or 7 years old) and even a 166Mhz. They 'do their job' perfectly and
probably will for sometime to come.

Your system only being 2 years old might just need a OS re-install.

Rush
http://www.bythedrop.com

Rush wrote:

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 17:10:08 +0000, Geoff A. wrote:



At what point do you say to yourself that your PC has had it? Surely there
comes a time when every PC needs to be put out to pasture, no matter how
knowledgeable its owner. And surely you can only re-build a PC a certain
number of times, before you find yourself spending 3 weeks updating and
upgrading all the out-of-date software and drivers. Is there a rule of
thumb for this?
The reason I ask, is that I've had mine for 2 years now, and I dread
installing anything. I've tried being nice to it, treated it to a defrag
now and then, even allowed Norton system works to gently massage its
motherboard, but I find that I'm spending an increasing amount of time
trying to solve issues, when really I should be just using the thing for
what I bought it for i.e. to save time!!! What do you think? Is it time to
send it to a retirement home, to be replaced by a young, nubile athletic
model with mellifluous wiring and a trim pair of hubs? Or will I throwing
money away?



For me, a PC is 'out of date' when it can no longer do what I need it to
do. I have a few systems that are still running AMD K6-2 400Mhz (about 6
or 7 years old) and even a 166Mhz. They 'do their job' perfectly and
probably will for sometime to come.

Your system only being 2 years old might just need a OS re-install.

Rush
http://www.bythedrop.com








You are right,