Buying a new PC

On 19/06/2020 18:14, micky wrote:
I should have said that I was talking about a desktop.

But whatever was said about laptops was useful too, because I was
thinking about getting another one. I'll start a new thread about in a
few months.

Do you have to keep coming here to ask about everything?Â* when will you
grow up and learn to solve problems for yourself?

I bet you don't even know what you use the computer for?Â* When you know
your daily tasks then the solution would be quite simple.Â* At you ripe
ageÂ* of 86, you don't need to worry about the future as there won't be
future for you in a few month time.Â* Not everyone is Dame Vera Lynn who
died at a tender age of only 103. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53091856

[ Dame Vera Lynn ]
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/BE42/production/_112960784_gettyimages-1034083490.jpg



--
With over 1.2 billion devices now running Windows 10, customer
satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows.

[Disclaimer: Yes, I saw the smiley.]

Mayayana wrote:
"Rene Lamontagne" wrote

| I routinely have about 250-350 tabs open in Firefox, arranged into
| windows
| by customer and project, and I haven't seen any slowdowns or UI issues
| since I bumped the RAM to 64GB. Even when the number of open tabs climbs
| above 400, the most RAM Firefox has used is about 14-16GB. That's
| heavily
| site dependent, of course.
|
|
| I guess having sufficient memory as in your case really makes more tabs
| viable, But with only 4 or 8 GB it would be best to hold the number of
| open tabs to a reasonable level.

I think the trick is just not to live with someone like
that. They're the people who leave the sink full
of dishes, the driveway full of wrenches, coffee cups
in their car back seat, and a dried paintbrush on
the kitchen table from that little odd job they did
last month.

Come on! He uses the system professionally for several (many?)
customers and projects. Yes, there are situations/uses like that and
it's not on us to judge, especially because it's *his* system, not the
sink, etc..

"Frank Slootweg" wrote

| I think the trick is just not to live with someone like
| that. They're the people who leave the sink full
| of dishes, the driveway full of wrenches, coffee cups
| in their car back seat, and a dried paintbrush on
| the kitchen table from that little odd job they did
| last month.
|
| Come on! He uses the system professionally for several (many?)
| customers and projects. Yes, there are situations/uses like that and
| it's not on us to judge, especially because it's *his* system, not the
| sink, etc..

"Routinely have 250-300 tabs open in Firefox...."
"I stopped single-tasking when I left the Commodore64..."

Running Linux, '98, XP, etc. If that's a professional
setup I don't think I'd want to be his customer. Who
would test software or adjustments on OSs while running
250 browser tabs? And who's doing tech support for
Win98?

At any rate, judging is what this thread is all about.
People are comparing notes about priorities and
hardware needs. I like to provide a counterpoint to
the suckers who think they need all the latest,
most powerful stuff, lest others with less experience,
like Micky, end up thinking they need 16 GB RAM for
web browsing.

In the days of PC magazines there used to be articles
every time a new CPU came out -- about every 6
months. Somehow the CPU that was "screamingly,
blazingly fast" 6 months ago always magically became,
"good enough for losers who only need email and web
browsing". And of course the latest CPU was a must-have
for anyone who actually needed to do anything on
their computer.

It's all just marketing.

Today, it's all far more powerful than needed, yet
people find ways to bog it down by running VMs or
leaving 200+ browser windows open. It's pure idiocy.
I can't count the number of times people have told
me I should install Linux and run XP in a VM. Why?
Because it's cool. Or something.

On 6/19/20 5:44 AM, micky wrote:
Well, the computer has continued to crash, mostly with the same 4
problems. Other times, it's frozen.

So I need a new one. I haven't had a new one since the PCJr.

Replacing hardware to fix a SOFTWARE problem? Reinstalling might work as
well.

[snip]

--
"Nothing can be more contrary to religion and the clergy than reason and
common sense." -- Voltaire

On 19 Jun 2020 19:39:46 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

[Disclaimer: Yes, I saw the smiley.]

Mayayana wrote:
"Rene Lamontagne" wrote

| I routinely have about 250-350 tabs open in Firefox, arranged into
| windows
| by customer and project, and I haven't seen any slowdowns or UI issues
| since I bumped the RAM to 64GB. Even when the number of open tabs climbs
| above 400, the most RAM Firefox has used is about 14-16GB. That's
| heavily
| site dependent, of course.
|
|
| I guess having sufficient memory as in your case really makes more tabs
| viable, But with only 4 or 8 GB it would be best to hold the number of
| open tabs to a reasonable level.

I think the trick is just not to live with someone like
that. They're the people who leave the sink full
of dishes, the driveway full of wrenches, coffee cups
in their car back seat, and a dried paintbrush on
the kitchen table from that little odd job they did
last month.

Come on! He uses the system professionally for several (many?)
customers and projects. Yes, there are situations/uses like that and
it's not on us to judge, especially because it's *his* system, not the
sink, etc..

Thanks. Yes, multiple customers and multiple projects, and of course I
clean up when a project wraps up, but not before. Some projects last a
week, a few have lasted 2+ years, but most are 6 months or less. When a
project is finished the browser tabs get closed, the VMs get deleted, and
all I keep are the system configs and other support files so that I can
help the customer with any questions that might come up. As one project
closes, another begins, so the number of browser tabs remains high, but
they aren't the same tabs from one customer to the next.

I'm aware that most folks here are retired or simply not using their
computer(s) to support their work, but I have to. It's what I do. When I
propose a new network design to a customer, I have to be able to show them,
with actual traffic, how it will work and how it will solve the problem
that they're having. In the old days, my colleagues and I would simply draw
the network on their whiteboard, get them to nod in agreement, then go away
and build it, but these days most folks want to see it in action before
they pull the trigger. I can't very well lug two dozen laptops around with
me, (we used to do that in extreme cases!), so it's VMs for the win.

On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 06:44:47 -0400, micky
wrote:

Well, the computer has continued to crash, mostly with the same 4
problems. Other times, it's frozen.

So I need a new one. I haven't had a new one since the PCJr.

1) This time I want 16 gigs of RAM, or do I want even more?????


Unless you're into serious gaming, just get one of these....
https://www.intel.com.au/content/www...beh-brief.html

I threw away my old tower machine when all those tedious SATA sockets
gave trouble. Now everything here is fine.

They take less room too.

I have survived to tell thee!

micky wrote:
Well, the computer has continued to crash, mostly with the same 4
problems. Other times, it's frozen.

So I need a new one. I haven't had a new one since the PCJr.

1) This time I want 16 gigs of RAM, or do I want even more?????

The reason for more than 8 gigs is that I tend to open way too many FF
tabs and the computer slows and eventually FF stops. Won't more RAM
make that take a lot longer to happen?


2) And maybe I should get a SSD for the PC??? One page said that
READing the drive over and over won't wear it out, only writing to it.
Right?

So if I had another harddrive for data, that would solve the wearing
out, except I've separated the email data and the Usenet data from the
programs, but isn't it much harder to separate the Firefox data? And
that gets rewritten all the time.


3) Brand. I suppose if I get a name brand, I'll get the latest
technology on the SSD, but a) aren't lesser brands a lot cheaper. b)
don't they use the older technology where there is a difference, because
once better is invented, the name brands like Dell generally don't use
it anymore. In practice does this make a difference for me? Is the
previous design of SSDs so much not as good as the latest design?

I have to post this before the computer freezes.

I have an XP laptop and a win7 laptop. I'll unbury one of them if need
be.

You know, I took a look, but I really couldn't believe what
a dogs breakfast of stuff I was offered.

Tiny ****boxes for hundred more than I expected.

for the amount of aggravation just looking at those
pages caused, I'd just buy parts and assemble my own.

I wanted a particular processor, an i5-9600K or so
(I was trying to get a decent four core but had
to settle for six cores), and it's supposed to be around
$200 or so. I don't really think extra cores are a
"deal-maker" in this case. What you want is some
clock-rate, and that's actually pretty hard to get.

The 9600K is a bit older, but it has Intel Graphics
so you don't need a video card. The motherboard you use
with it, has the video connectors on the back. (Make sure
it has the connectors your monitor uses.)

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us...-4-60-ghz.html

It's not that, particularly, it's cost effective to do it
that way. But in terms of cutting out the riff-raff at the
Dells and HPs, it would be worth it to just be able to
buy the part that needs upgrading.

Paul

"Paul" wrote

| You know, I took a look, but I really couldn't believe what
| a dogs breakfast of stuff I was offered.
|
| Tiny ****boxes for hundred more than I expected.
|

I was in Microcenter the other day and saw PCs for
$1,400+. I didn't know anything cost that much anymore.
But I think that if I were going to actually use Win10 I'd
just buy a Compaq. There's always a model for about
$400. I might build it myself if I could get Win7, but there's
no longer hardware for XP, and Win7 is not easy to come by.

On 19 Jun 2020, Mayayana wrote
(in article ):

"Paul" wrote

You know, I took a look, but I really couldn't believe what
a dogs breakfast of stuff I was offered.

Tiny ****boxes for hundred more than I expected.

I was in Microcenter the other day and saw PCs for
$1,400+. I didn't know anything cost that much anymore.
But I think that if I were going to actually use Win10 I'd
just buy a Compaq. There's always a model for about
$400. I might build it myself if I could get Win7, but there's
no longer hardware for XP, and Win7 is not easy to come by.

Compaq’s been dead for a very long time. For a while some systems were
marketed as ‘HP-Compaq’, but those have been gone for a good bit as well.

"Wolffan" wrote

| Compaq's been dead for a very long time. For a while some systems were
| marketed as 'HP-Compaq', but those have been gone for a good bit as well.
|

I saw some in Staples last week in the $400-500 range.
I thought at least one was Compaq, but maybe it was HP.
Staples has generally had something in that price
range for a long time. Looking around I see that the cheap
ones now are generally HP and Lenovo. I hadn't noticed that
Compaq was gone.

Mayayana wrote:
"Wolffan" wrote

| Compaq's been dead for a very long time. For a while some systems were
| marketed as 'HP-Compaq', but those have been gone for a good bit as well.
|

I saw some in Staples last week in the $400-500 range.
I thought at least one was Compaq, but maybe it was HP.
Staples has generally had something in that price
range for a long time. Looking around I see that the cheap
ones now are generally HP and Lenovo. I hadn't noticed that
Compaq was gone.



This one is pretty cheap. For a refurb. It's one of those
tool-less ones, so has that stupid plate to hold the PCI
cards in place. That's not the most serviceable box, as the
PSU is likely hard to find as an exact replacement. I like
the larger cases, where a regular ATX PSU fits.

https://www.staples.com/refurbished-...roduct_2431148

It's poorly specified, and it's hard to say whether
someone has "toyed" with it too much.

It only has USB2, and if you wanted USB3, you would be
looking at an add-on card, Chipset claims to be Q65. That's
one past my Optiplex 780 and its Q45.

That machine might have a quad core CPU, suitable for usage
with Windows 10.

Paul

On 6/19/2020 6:44 AM, micky wrote:
Well, the computer has continued to crash, mostly with the same 4
problems. Other times, it's frozen.

So I need a new one. I haven't had a new one since the PCJr.

1) This time I want 16 gigs of RAM, or do I want even more?????

The reason for more than 8 gigs is that I tend to open way too many FF
tabs and the computer slows and eventually FF stops. Won't more RAM
make that take a lot longer to happen?

Well, yes, 16 GB will result in fewer memory issues than 8 GB, but my
current machine has 16 GB and it previously had 8 GB, and I really
didn't need to upgrade it, I just did it because "I could", and the
memory was on sale that day.

I'd say anything above 16 GB is overkill, so anything between 8 and 16
is just right these days. So even 12 GB is good enough, albeit a bit
unbalanced, as that won't be taking advantage of dual-channel RAM
architecture. Don't be shy to get 8GB again though.

2) And maybe I should get a SSD for the PC??? One page said that
READing the drive over and over won't wear it out, only writing to it.
Right?

So if I had another harddrive for data, that would solve the wearing
out, except I've separated the email data and the Usenet data from the
programs, but isn't it much harder to separate the Firefox data? And
that gets rewritten all the time.

Yeah, but I wouldn't worry about writing to an SSD either, people have
overblown how fragile they are. They will outlast HDD's for longevity,
even while doing mondo writing! My oldest SSD is over 4 years old, it's
had over 32 TB of lifetime writes (it's only a 240 GB drive, so that's a
lot of writes to it), and its internal SMART lifetime counter is showing
that it's still got 96% of its life left to go. That's like an average
of around 1% per year, so I'm nearly 100 years away from its end of life.

3) Brand. I suppose if I get a name brand, I'll get the latest
technology on the SSD, but a) aren't lesser brands a lot cheaper. b)
don't they use the older technology where there is a difference, because
once better is invented, the name brands like Dell generally don't use
it anymore. In practice does this make a difference for me? Is the
previous design of SSDs so much not as good as the latest design?

I have to post this before the computer freezes.

I have an XP laptop and a win7 laptop. I'll unbury one of them if need
be.

I'm still running my 2011 Win 7 laptop, with Win 7 still on it. I has a
free Win 10 update allocated to it, but a few of the Toshiba apps
designed for this laptop have not be upgraded for running on Windows 10,
so I don't want to lose them, the laptop is nearly unusable without them.

Anyways, back to SSD's and brands. I'll give you my history with SSD's.
I've owned 4 of them, between two machines. One SSD is on my laptop, a
120 GB Adata, been stable there for 3 years. On my desktop, I got two
SSD's, a 240 GB Corsair (4 years old) for my C drive, and a brand new
500 GB Western Digital (a few months old) for my D drive. Both of these
are stable too.

In between, I had another 500 GB SSD on my desktop system, which was
serving as my D drive, this one is from Adata (the same mfg as my
laptop's SSD). This one was a nightmare drive. The first one I had of
it, died in 2 weeks literally. They replaced it under warranty, just had
to pay to ship it out to them. The replacement died after 2 months, and
I replaced it again. Then that replacement died after 2 months too, then
it's replacement died after 2 months, I finally replaced it the final
time, I replaced it with the Western Digital, and I put the final drive
in an external enclosure as a temporary drive, use it only when
necessary. These drives had an overheating problem. So despite the high
reliablity in my laptop, the later SSD's were PoS. They must have
switched their component suppliers in between. They replaced the drives
without fuss, but I think that's because they knew they had crap here
and there was no point in fighting it.

So I would go with a known brand name, but I wouldn't necessarily go
with the highest brand names like Intel or Samsung. I've had good
success with this Western Digital, so mid-tier mfg's are fine too.

Yousuf Khan

On 6/19/2020 10:11 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"Wolffan" wrote

| Compaq's been dead for a very long time. For a while some systems were
| marketed as 'HP-Compaq', but those have been gone for a good bit as well.
|

I saw some in Staples last week in the $400-500 range.
I thought at least one was Compaq, but maybe it was HP.
Staples has generally had something in that price
range for a long time. Looking around I see that the cheap
ones now are generally HP and Lenovo. I hadn't noticed that
Compaq was gone.

HP still owns the Compaq name, so it probably uses it to sell cheaper
crap at various locations around the world. HP uses the Omen name (which
it also bought) to sell higher-end gaming computers, which are still
crap pretty much.

Yousuf Khan

Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 6/19/2020 6:44 AM, micky wrote:
Well, the computer has continued to crash, mostly with the same 4
problems. Other times, it's frozen.

So I need a new one. I haven't had a new one since the PCJr.

1) This time I want 16 gigs of RAM, or do I want even more?????

The reason for more than 8 gigs is that I tend to open way too many FF
tabs and the computer slows and eventually FF stops. Won't more RAM
make that take a lot longer to happen?

Well, yes, 16 GB will result in fewer memory issues than 8 GB, but my
current machine has 16 GB and it previously had 8 GB, and I really
didn't need to upgrade it, I just did it because "I could", and the
memory was on sale that day.

I'd say anything above 16 GB is overkill, so anything between 8 and 16
is just right these days. So even 12 GB is good enough, albeit a bit
unbalanced, as that won't be taking advantage of dual-channel RAM
architecture. Don't be shy to get 8GB again though.


It will actually. That's Flex memory at work.

| |
4GB X === high memory, 4GB, has single channel bandwidth
| |
4GB 4GB === low memory, 8GB, has dual channel bandwidth

I got the source code for memtest, many years ago, and added
about three lines of code, to measure the bandwidth as a function
of the address space. And I could see the above behavior on
an NForce2 chipset. At the time, it might have been 900MB/sec
in the slow section, and 1400MB/sec in the fast section.

The question is, whether you can "feel" this configuration at work,
when using the machine. The machine I was testing on, had its own
video card and video card memory, so video performance was not
dependent on system memory operation directly.

Paul

In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Fri, 19 Jun 2020 21:01:35 -0400,
"Mayayana" wrote:

"Paul" wrote

| You know, I took a look, but I really couldn't believe what
| a dogs breakfast of stuff I was offered.
|
| Tiny ****boxes for hundred more than I expected.
|

I was in Microcenter the other day and saw PCs for
$1,400+. I didn't know anything cost that much anymore.
But I think that if I were going to actually use Win10 I'd
just buy a Compaq. There's always a model for about
$400. I might build it myself if I could get Win7, but there's
no longer hardware for XP, and Win7 is not easy to come by.

If you precisely google a store, so that it comes up first, a box on the
right gives interesting info about the store, like average number of
people there any specific hour of the week, and the "actual" number
there this hour, if they're open then. (based on cell phones)

For Microcenter it had two interesting lines:

In-store shopping
In-store pickup

Wait, aren't those the normal methods? Nothing changed for the virus.
Even though they have a detailed online catalog and really big shopping
carts so they could bring it out to you.

Maybe I could negotiate it in advance. Or maybe somoene checked the
wrong boxes.