Dekstop lifecycles

[MasterRacker]

What are people doing for lifecycles of their desktops these days?

In my case, way back, I used to try and get 5 years out of desktops. In the Win9x WinNT days, technology (both hardware and software) was moving fast enough that, for most users, we had to do about a 3 year churn. These days, I'm thinking that any machine purchased sufficiently large now, should last a good five years again. If Longhorn were closer, I might reduce that number, since that will require a lot of upgrades for MS shops. Otherwise I think hardware has gotten far enough ahead to handle any conceivable normal business use for quite a while.

As to whether smaller companies upgrade slower than larger ones - I think that really depends on the company. A small engineering firm will want the best possible hardware for engineers running solid-modeling packagages for example. Larger companies may have more budget but they also have more machines to replace so it's not necessarily easier to roll out upgrades. Really depends on what they're being used for.






Jeff
If your mind is too open your brains will fall out...

 

[benlinkknilneb]

Our IT department matches it to the needs of the particular user. I'm a .NET developer... I need a faster machine than, for instance, the receptionist. As a rule, they usually try to upgrade the farthest-behind... but it's totally subject to the job description as well. So, if my job doesn't require much change in capabilities, I'm relegated to a spot near the bottom.

Ben
A programmer was drowning. Lots of people watched but did nothing. They couldn't understand why he yelled "F1!"

 

[butchrecon]

What we do is recycle machines back out to users. We set standards like nothing below a PII 500. Older machines get Windows 2000 Pro and newer ones get Windows XP. We basically use a machine until...
A) To slow to run OS.
B) Cannot get parts for it.
C) Flat out dies.

We use a rotation cycle to bring in new PC's. Those with a need for speed get the newer ones. Everyone else gets older, unless we are phasing out a particular model then that user gets a new one.

James Collins
Help Desk Analyst
A+, MCP, MCSA, Network+

 

[Zelandakh]

we bring in a new one as new headcount arrives. Then we don't give it to them but to someone else and filter theirs downwards. Someone leaves and the slowest one drops out the bottom.

Repeat ad infinitum and you get everyone with a recently installed computer.

Another way we've worked is to bring them in en masse and use them until one of the Directors says its too slow then change the lot...

 

[rosieb]

We tend to thrash them 'til they die.

Current plan is to get on a 5 year life cycle, with the (ultimate) aim of a corporate desktop. But after years of non-investment, that's going to take a while.

We're local government, so money is tight. I'm, personally, currently trying to get all 15in monitors upgraded as a minimum, especially for admin staff who spend all day at their PC. My problem is that it's much easier to get approval for upgrades for senior staff (who make much less use of their PC).

Rosie

 

[theoxyde]

Management:
Problem - <insert any problem>
Solution - Buy a $2500 laptop to run Outlook and Acrobat Reader. Put &quot;old&quot; laptop in locker as a 'spare'.

non-Management:
Problem - <insert any problem>
Solution - Make do, we're over budget.

I do work for multiple companies around here and nearly every one of them is like this -- and not just with computers. Management always has to have the most functional computer / telephone / cellphone. If any non-Management has the same thing they have, Management &quot;needs&quot; an upgrade.

Perish the thought that users who could actually put technology to use actually be given that technology.

 

[Breadcrust]

the lifecycle of a pc really depends of what os you are using and sometimes crappy hardware. if you use the latest version of windoze then you are likely to need a new pc after 2-3 years. if you are using linux then you could go for at least 4 years and then after that it could still be used for things such as a server, test pc, terminal, etc.

[tt]
Breadcrust (aka J@red)

Web -

http://www.bcwebnet.tk

E-mail - net-head@softhome.net
Linux Reg. Number - 307180 (

http://counter.li.org)

[/tt]

 

[Tarwn]

Define computer...if we define it as a certain set of parts, than I have a new machine every couple months as I get a new piece f hardware and switch it out, then trickle the newer ones down. If we define it as a case...well, then I have a windows machine that has lasted well over 5 years and I'm actually reworking an old HP mid-tower to work as a windows machine, so I guess technically that means it's either brand new or ten years old...

If we're talking complete replacement of he computer than I'd be a little lost trying to figure it out...although I think I did get rid of a bunch of 33mhz and 66mhz mobo's with glued on chips not to long ago...
-T

_{01000111 01101111 01110100 00100000 01000011 01101111 01100110 01100110 01100101 01100101 00111111}
The never-completed website:

http://www.tiernok.com/

 

[infinitelo]

same here on corporate goal 5year replacement, not realized, i just replaced a pent 133 that ran 5 months with no fans working(the thing was in our most remote location *note:still would boot, just smelled funny).

i would like to see comments on the following plan

i have 10 corporate office computers and about 40 remotes.
i would like to replace 5 corporate computers every 3 years and cycle down. to roll them out i plan to clean, format reinstall software so remotes will start with clean install of os(win98 in this case)


if it is to be it's up to me

 

[Zelandakh]

I guy ex lease computers from a reputable dealer. P4 2Ghz, 512MB RAM, 30GB, XP Pro. Still get manuf warranty (well, 18 months that is left). Base unit like $400.

After 3 years I can still sell to staff for $80.

Better than $1,000 that will last 4 years and break down. Plus the bean counters are happier with the outlay on large purchases. Its the difference between YES and No.

 

[strongm]

Suffice it to say that my primary desktop system is still a 400MHz, 128MB machine. Which should say a lot about our lifecycles...

 

[Grenage]

We still have a p166 somewhere around here; running along as well as it ever did.

If it works we don't replace it, we are now switching over to 2000 though so any workstations which cannot run that will have to be scrapped.

At the end of the day though it seems pointless buying ultra fast machines for users who are still happy using office 97 and outlook 2000.

 

[lionelhill]

Vaguely relevant aside: I have a sneaky desire that software developers should, wherever possible, be forced to use old machines.

Most of us use a sub-optimal, fairly elderly system to run the software they develop. The fact their software ran blisteringly fast on the mega-machine they used is little consolation to the rest of us with a four-year-old machine and a rheumatic hard disk... We sit and twiddle our thumbs as the program takes five minutes to open a file, and we curse the company that sold us the thing. Not good for future sales.

I've got at least one example at the moment where locally we were able to carry out some statistical calculations better than ten times faster than a commercial program (and we're armed with only an old dos-based pascal compiler).

There is a window of calculation time between about 2sec and 30sec which is very important; less than 2 sec doesn't worry the user, more than 30sec he/she will leave it running and go and do something else. I am certain that our commercial example, using a smallish test-file, ran in a few sec on the developers' machines, so they left it as it was (good enough!). Unfortunately it hits several minutes on my machine with a larger (genuine) file. I'm uninclined to buy the product...

 

[pmrankine]

lionelhill,
Good point but the software that's developed should be tested on a PC that matches the users' spec.

pmrankine

 

[jwenting]

personally I've taken to using hardware until it either breaks or I need something more powerful to run a new piece of software.
At that point I do the minimal upgrade needed replacing the required parts with parts that are (at that time) about midrange.

So my PC has parts that varry in age between a few months and over 5 years.
The latest I got brandnew last summer, the oldest is a survivor that first saw use in about 1998 (and the newer parts have in my experience a life expectancy that's a lot shorter than the older parts...).

At work, systems are used until they're no longer economically feasible.
Once a new more powerful computer would earn itself back in increased productivity, it's purchased but no sooner (unless the old one breaks of course).
Exception would be changing to an entirely new line of hardware, in which case the increased cost of support from having several lines of hardware to support outweighs the cost of replacing machines that are not yet economically obsolete.

I too have noticed in many cases that management always gets the latest and greatest while the footfolk who could make real use of that tech are left with old equipment.
At its worst was a project where management had brandnew P200s with 128MB RAM and 17&quot; screens while the developers were still using 486DX50 machines with 32MB RAM and 14&quot; screens (some of them black and white). All the managers ever did was use Word, Lotus (DOS version), WP (DOS version) and email...
Luckily in my current job that's not the case.

 

[Zelandakh]

We have dual P4s that barely get above a processor flat line.

My current PC is a P3 with a duff PCI-X network card that I bought second hand 3 years ago (it saves the company money). Gets seriously clobbered every day.

2 of my domain controllers are from 1998 and are self built clones of P2 400, soft RAID IDE drives kind of thing.

Hopefully they will be retired really soon!

 

[jrbarnett]

A former employer of mine still has a couple of P120/P133 systems in use for testing software because the client's boxes aren't that quick; most development work is done on P2/P3 systems now and it generally runs until it breaks, or specific components get changed.

At home I tend to run them until they are too slow for me. My 1GHz box will be 3 years old next month, and it is still fine as far as I am concerned. My previous P166 lasted 4.5 years for me, and was reinstalled and given to my Aunt, where it is more than adequate for running Works, Outlook Express and IE over a dial up connection on Win95.

John

 

[dilettante]

jwenting,

&quot;I too have noticed in many cases that management always gets the latest and greatest while the footfolk who could make real use of that tech are left with old equipment.

&quot;At its worst was a project where management had brandnew P200s with 128MB RAM and 17&quot; screens while the developers were still using 486DX50 machines with 32MB RAM and 14&quot; screens (some of them black and white). All the managers ever did was use Word, Lotus (DOS version), WP (DOS version) and email...

&quot;Luckily in my current job that's not the case.&quot;

I've seen variations on this theme. A lot of small-biz owners will go buy a new H2 or Escalade and write it off as a &quot;company truck&quot; they just use for tooling around and personal travel. The guys actually having to cart mail and deliveries have an old rusted-out van with no heat, bad brakes, etc. because &quot;there is no money.&quot; Just try explaining this one to these guys.

 

[Grenage]

Is this not one of the perks of owning a company though?

 

[infinitelo]

It is a good idea to test new stuff on older computers, just to make sure your backward compatible. Anyone out there still have any 8088's running???
at home i have a 286, but it just sits in the closet mostly. i use a p133 for messing around with lynux, windows me for the kids machine (my youngest likes the lynux games), 1gig machine for ms office/vb.net

but at work in the office mostly 800mhz in the field(quick shops) mostly 200mhz.

as far as, Should the boss have a hot machine. I think yes, although others may need the power, impression of the company comes from the bosses office. so yes, the boss does need a good car, and a modern computer(even though neither have a direct impact on operations)



if it is to be it's up to me