Morals and Memory
-
Over the weekend, I was asked by a friend to take a look at his computer, since it seems to have been getting slower recently. I immediately assumed the worst: a spyware infestation of biblical proprtions, but it was even more sinister than that.... The machine itself is a fairly old, but capable system, for what he uses it for (email, internet, light word-processing etc): Windows XP SP1, 2.5Ghz Celeron, 40Gb HD, USB2, CD/RW etc. Unfortunately, it only had 128Mb RAM - 8 of which was "shared-memory" for the graphics card - leaving only 120Mb to run Windows XP! Now I realize that Microsoft states that 128Mb is the minimum requirement[^], but for what? To just boot the machine and watch the starfield screensaver? I am wondering about the legal and moral issues of selling a computer that is so clearly hobbled, right from the day it was purchased. It's not like he's now needing more memory because he wants to run Flight Sim X or something - the software that is on the machine is basically the same as the day it was bought, and yet it is virtually unusable! How can these companies (Compaq in this case) sell this stuff to people, knowing full well it is almost useless!? To save $50 on another 128Mb of memory that would have made this machine perform *far* better? On another note, I must say that I'm thoroughly enjoying Vista Ultimate on my 2Gb Laptop :laugh:
Sunrise Wallpaper Project | The StartPage Randomizer | A Random Web Page
-
Over the weekend, I was asked by a friend to take a look at his computer, since it seems to have been getting slower recently. I immediately assumed the worst: a spyware infestation of biblical proprtions, but it was even more sinister than that.... The machine itself is a fairly old, but capable system, for what he uses it for (email, internet, light word-processing etc): Windows XP SP1, 2.5Ghz Celeron, 40Gb HD, USB2, CD/RW etc. Unfortunately, it only had 128Mb RAM - 8 of which was "shared-memory" for the graphics card - leaving only 120Mb to run Windows XP! Now I realize that Microsoft states that 128Mb is the minimum requirement[^], but for what? To just boot the machine and watch the starfield screensaver? I am wondering about the legal and moral issues of selling a computer that is so clearly hobbled, right from the day it was purchased. It's not like he's now needing more memory because he wants to run Flight Sim X or something - the software that is on the machine is basically the same as the day it was bought, and yet it is virtually unusable! How can these companies (Compaq in this case) sell this stuff to people, knowing full well it is almost useless!? To save $50 on another 128Mb of memory that would have made this machine perform *far* better? On another note, I must say that I'm thoroughly enjoying Vista Ultimate on my 2Gb Laptop :laugh:
Sunrise Wallpaper Project | The StartPage Randomizer | A Random Web Page
You are totally correct, and I am sure that you have seen the new machines out there with Vista and 512 or 1 GB (at best) from the "Big Guys". :mad: it really is absured that they sell machines like that. I am running Vista on a desktop and enjoy the system, but I am also running 3 GB of ram. :-D
DB_Cooper1950 Either enjoy life, Or Hate Life, Just quit SITTING ON THE FENCE!
-
Over the weekend, I was asked by a friend to take a look at his computer, since it seems to have been getting slower recently. I immediately assumed the worst: a spyware infestation of biblical proprtions, but it was even more sinister than that.... The machine itself is a fairly old, but capable system, for what he uses it for (email, internet, light word-processing etc): Windows XP SP1, 2.5Ghz Celeron, 40Gb HD, USB2, CD/RW etc. Unfortunately, it only had 128Mb RAM - 8 of which was "shared-memory" for the graphics card - leaving only 120Mb to run Windows XP! Now I realize that Microsoft states that 128Mb is the minimum requirement[^], but for what? To just boot the machine and watch the starfield screensaver? I am wondering about the legal and moral issues of selling a computer that is so clearly hobbled, right from the day it was purchased. It's not like he's now needing more memory because he wants to run Flight Sim X or something - the software that is on the machine is basically the same as the day it was bought, and yet it is virtually unusable! How can these companies (Compaq in this case) sell this stuff to people, knowing full well it is almost useless!? To save $50 on another 128Mb of memory that would have made this machine perform *far* better? On another note, I must say that I'm thoroughly enjoying Vista Ultimate on my 2Gb Laptop :laugh:
Sunrise Wallpaper Project | The StartPage Randomizer | A Random Web Page
Back in the day that he bought this PC, judging from the fact that it is SP1, it was not at all uncommon for bottom of the barrel systems to be sold with 128MB of RAM. Remember too, that our definition of "unusably slow" is very different from what normal people are willing to put up with. The fact that it works at all is enough for most people. Take my father in law for example: he recently bought an XP notebook with 1GB ram and all the fixings, yet he still frequently uses his P3/400 desktop running ME. Why? I have no earthly idea. Edit: By the way, when I saw the subject, I thought it was going to be a question along the lines of: "If I can't remember that I did it, is it still immoral?"
Faith is a fine invention For gentlemen who see; But microscopes are prudent In an emergency! -Emily Dickinson
-
You are totally correct, and I am sure that you have seen the new machines out there with Vista and 512 or 1 GB (at best) from the "Big Guys". :mad: it really is absured that they sell machines like that. I am running Vista on a desktop and enjoy the system, but I am also running 3 GB of ram. :-D
DB_Cooper1950 Either enjoy life, Or Hate Life, Just quit SITTING ON THE FENCE!
IT really comes down to what you're doing with it. I've got a c1d1.73 1gb laptop running vista. Running mirc, opera, and boinc I'm not hitting the swapfile. If I was trying to do nontrivial software development, or game on it I'd probably need to upgrade, but I'm not, so it's perfectly usable. Given the 700megish total ram load I've got 512 would probably still be usable, and given the level of crapitude someone upgrading to a 512mb machine is probably coming from it'd still be a major improvement over what they were using before.
-- CleaKO The sad part about this instance is that none of the users ever said anything [about the problem]. Pete O`Hanlon Doesn't that just tell you everything you need to know about users?
-
Over the weekend, I was asked by a friend to take a look at his computer, since it seems to have been getting slower recently. I immediately assumed the worst: a spyware infestation of biblical proprtions, but it was even more sinister than that.... The machine itself is a fairly old, but capable system, for what he uses it for (email, internet, light word-processing etc): Windows XP SP1, 2.5Ghz Celeron, 40Gb HD, USB2, CD/RW etc. Unfortunately, it only had 128Mb RAM - 8 of which was "shared-memory" for the graphics card - leaving only 120Mb to run Windows XP! Now I realize that Microsoft states that 128Mb is the minimum requirement[^], but for what? To just boot the machine and watch the starfield screensaver? I am wondering about the legal and moral issues of selling a computer that is so clearly hobbled, right from the day it was purchased. It's not like he's now needing more memory because he wants to run Flight Sim X or something - the software that is on the machine is basically the same as the day it was bought, and yet it is virtually unusable! How can these companies (Compaq in this case) sell this stuff to people, knowing full well it is almost useless!? To save $50 on another 128Mb of memory that would have made this machine perform *far* better? On another note, I must say that I'm thoroughly enjoying Vista Ultimate on my 2Gb Laptop :laugh:
Sunrise Wallpaper Project | The StartPage Randomizer | A Random Web Page
Given the subject line, my subconscious first saw the word "biblical" and "spyware" and I thought this was going to be a post about spyware/adware put out by bible thumpers and the questioning the morality of that. Well, back to reality... I've installed XP on a 128MB machine with similar specs and it ran fine. In fact, the processor specs were a lot lower than what your friend has. I can get the footprint down to around 100MB. In fact, it was snappier than the Win98 OS it was replacing. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
Back in the day that he bought this PC, judging from the fact that it is SP1, it was not at all uncommon for bottom of the barrel systems to be sold with 128MB of RAM. Remember too, that our definition of "unusably slow" is very different from what normal people are willing to put up with. The fact that it works at all is enough for most people. Take my father in law for example: he recently bought an XP notebook with 1GB ram and all the fixings, yet he still frequently uses his P3/400 desktop running ME. Why? I have no earthly idea. Edit: By the way, when I saw the subject, I thought it was going to be a question along the lines of: "If I can't remember that I did it, is it still immoral?"
Faith is a fine invention For gentlemen who see; But microscopes are prudent In an emergency! -Emily Dickinson
Well, Your Honor, I don't recall that being immoral at the time...
-
Over the weekend, I was asked by a friend to take a look at his computer, since it seems to have been getting slower recently. I immediately assumed the worst: a spyware infestation of biblical proprtions, but it was even more sinister than that.... The machine itself is a fairly old, but capable system, for what he uses it for (email, internet, light word-processing etc): Windows XP SP1, 2.5Ghz Celeron, 40Gb HD, USB2, CD/RW etc. Unfortunately, it only had 128Mb RAM - 8 of which was "shared-memory" for the graphics card - leaving only 120Mb to run Windows XP! Now I realize that Microsoft states that 128Mb is the minimum requirement[^], but for what? To just boot the machine and watch the starfield screensaver? I am wondering about the legal and moral issues of selling a computer that is so clearly hobbled, right from the day it was purchased. It's not like he's now needing more memory because he wants to run Flight Sim X or something - the software that is on the machine is basically the same as the day it was bought, and yet it is virtually unusable! How can these companies (Compaq in this case) sell this stuff to people, knowing full well it is almost useless!? To save $50 on another 128Mb of memory that would have made this machine perform *far* better? On another note, I must say that I'm thoroughly enjoying Vista Ultimate on my 2Gb Laptop :laugh:
Sunrise Wallpaper Project | The StartPage Randomizer | A Random Web Page
If all you do is surf the web, write emails and to light word-processing, the machine you describe is adequate. With a little trimming of services you can still get by. There is moral issue. People want to buy cheap stuff, Compaq (and others) accommodate them. If it bugs the user, he can purchase more memory and a slightly better video card. It will cost him a few hundred and has to ask himself, though, whether its worth it. For me it would be, but for someone else they may have better things to do with their money. (Heck, I have a 900Mhz Celeron system for a second home system; it has 256MB of memory a good video card, but lame everything else. It works for what it's for, but I avoid using it unless forced to.)
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
Over the weekend, I was asked by a friend to take a look at his computer, since it seems to have been getting slower recently. I immediately assumed the worst: a spyware infestation of biblical proprtions, but it was even more sinister than that.... The machine itself is a fairly old, but capable system, for what he uses it for (email, internet, light word-processing etc): Windows XP SP1, 2.5Ghz Celeron, 40Gb HD, USB2, CD/RW etc. Unfortunately, it only had 128Mb RAM - 8 of which was "shared-memory" for the graphics card - leaving only 120Mb to run Windows XP! Now I realize that Microsoft states that 128Mb is the minimum requirement[^], but for what? To just boot the machine and watch the starfield screensaver? I am wondering about the legal and moral issues of selling a computer that is so clearly hobbled, right from the day it was purchased. It's not like he's now needing more memory because he wants to run Flight Sim X or something - the software that is on the machine is basically the same as the day it was bought, and yet it is virtually unusable! How can these companies (Compaq in this case) sell this stuff to people, knowing full well it is almost useless!? To save $50 on another 128Mb of memory that would have made this machine perform *far* better? On another note, I must say that I'm thoroughly enjoying Vista Ultimate on my 2Gb Laptop :laugh:
Sunrise Wallpaper Project | The StartPage Randomizer | A Random Web Page
This cracks me up. They sold it with 128mb of RAM, yet it's THEY"RE fault your idiot friend bought it this way. I'm sorry, that dawg just don't hunt. The margins on pre-assembled PCs is micro thin as it is, and getting people to notice their hardware in such a competitive market is pretty hard. So guess what everyone is doing? Cutting prices by reducing capability.
Miszou wrote:
the software that is on the machine is basically the same as the day it was bought
So what did he change? Being "basically the same" is most assuredly NOT *exactly* the same.
Miszou wrote:
How can these companies (Compaq in this case) sell this stuff to people, knowing full well it is almost useless!?
Your idiot friend probably ignored the "Configure me" button.
Miszou wrote:
To save $50 on another 128Mb of memory that would have made this machine perform *far* better?
I'm sure memory prices that were in force when the machine was bought new were significantly higher.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
This cracks me up. They sold it with 128mb of RAM, yet it's THEY"RE fault your idiot friend bought it this way. I'm sorry, that dawg just don't hunt. The margins on pre-assembled PCs is micro thin as it is, and getting people to notice their hardware in such a competitive market is pretty hard. So guess what everyone is doing? Cutting prices by reducing capability.
Miszou wrote:
the software that is on the machine is basically the same as the day it was bought
So what did he change? Being "basically the same" is most assuredly NOT *exactly* the same.
Miszou wrote:
How can these companies (Compaq in this case) sell this stuff to people, knowing full well it is almost useless!?
Your idiot friend probably ignored the "Configure me" button.
Miszou wrote:
To save $50 on another 128Mb of memory that would have made this machine perform *far* better?
I'm sure memory prices that were in force when the machine was bought new were significantly higher.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
This cracks me up. They sold it with 128mb of RAM, yet it's THEY"RE fault your idiot friend bought it this way. I'm sorry, that dawg just don't hunt.
Yeah, but occasionally we've all bought something[^] that was crap, because we weren't very well informed... Oh, and it's "their", not "they're". Just FYI.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
I'm sure memory prices that were in force when the machine was bought new were significantly higher.
Probably, but I already took a rough guess at that, since today you can buy 512Mb (of the same DDR memory) for $30.
Sunrise Wallpaper Project | The StartPage Randomizer | A Random Web Page
-
Over the weekend, I was asked by a friend to take a look at his computer, since it seems to have been getting slower recently. I immediately assumed the worst: a spyware infestation of biblical proprtions, but it was even more sinister than that.... The machine itself is a fairly old, but capable system, for what he uses it for (email, internet, light word-processing etc): Windows XP SP1, 2.5Ghz Celeron, 40Gb HD, USB2, CD/RW etc. Unfortunately, it only had 128Mb RAM - 8 of which was "shared-memory" for the graphics card - leaving only 120Mb to run Windows XP! Now I realize that Microsoft states that 128Mb is the minimum requirement[^], but for what? To just boot the machine and watch the starfield screensaver? I am wondering about the legal and moral issues of selling a computer that is so clearly hobbled, right from the day it was purchased. It's not like he's now needing more memory because he wants to run Flight Sim X or something - the software that is on the machine is basically the same as the day it was bought, and yet it is virtually unusable! How can these companies (Compaq in this case) sell this stuff to people, knowing full well it is almost useless!? To save $50 on another 128Mb of memory that would have made this machine perform *far* better? On another note, I must say that I'm thoroughly enjoying Vista Ultimate on my 2Gb Laptop :laugh:
Sunrise Wallpaper Project | The StartPage Randomizer | A Random Web Page
Miszou wrote:
of selling a computer that is so clearly hobbled,
whether personally, or professionally, when I recommend a computer, I ask questions on purpose of intended use, frequency of use, programs that are run, etc. People are often surprised. I have a trusting face, so usually they tell me, sometimes too much info, but that is another story. I believe in getting a computer that fits the intended purpose, and lasts for expected time, barring no unforseen changes, or problems. Obviously, even this approach has its limits, kind of like predicting the future. Still, my girlfriend was surprised to find out when everything was in her computer and running (I built it for her), she joked about her having "almost" as fast a machine as mine... I told her to be honest, hers is faster. Mine barely has more storage, but she wanted to start making videos and is doing so. Video editing is rather intense. So she has, for the first time, a machine that will do what she wants to do, and I didn't deliberately cripple it simply to keep mine in the lead. The customer, or the girlfriend, is always right. :laugh:
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Miszou wrote:
of selling a computer that is so clearly hobbled,
whether personally, or professionally, when I recommend a computer, I ask questions on purpose of intended use, frequency of use, programs that are run, etc. People are often surprised. I have a trusting face, so usually they tell me, sometimes too much info, but that is another story. I believe in getting a computer that fits the intended purpose, and lasts for expected time, barring no unforseen changes, or problems. Obviously, even this approach has its limits, kind of like predicting the future. Still, my girlfriend was surprised to find out when everything was in her computer and running (I built it for her), she joked about her having "almost" as fast a machine as mine... I told her to be honest, hers is faster. Mine barely has more storage, but she wanted to start making videos and is doing so. Video editing is rather intense. So she has, for the first time, a machine that will do what she wants to do, and I didn't deliberately cripple it simply to keep mine in the lead. The customer, or the girlfriend, is always right. :laugh:
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:
The customer, or the girlfriend, is always right
or, rephrased for the married men among us: Happy Wife, Happy Life
image processing toolkits | batch image processing | blogging
-
Over the weekend, I was asked by a friend to take a look at his computer, since it seems to have been getting slower recently. I immediately assumed the worst: a spyware infestation of biblical proprtions, but it was even more sinister than that.... The machine itself is a fairly old, but capable system, for what he uses it for (email, internet, light word-processing etc): Windows XP SP1, 2.5Ghz Celeron, 40Gb HD, USB2, CD/RW etc. Unfortunately, it only had 128Mb RAM - 8 of which was "shared-memory" for the graphics card - leaving only 120Mb to run Windows XP! Now I realize that Microsoft states that 128Mb is the minimum requirement[^], but for what? To just boot the machine and watch the starfield screensaver? I am wondering about the legal and moral issues of selling a computer that is so clearly hobbled, right from the day it was purchased. It's not like he's now needing more memory because he wants to run Flight Sim X or something - the software that is on the machine is basically the same as the day it was bought, and yet it is virtually unusable! How can these companies (Compaq in this case) sell this stuff to people, knowing full well it is almost useless!? To save $50 on another 128Mb of memory that would have made this machine perform *far* better? On another note, I must say that I'm thoroughly enjoying Vista Ultimate on my 2Gb Laptop :laugh:
Sunrise Wallpaper Project | The StartPage Randomizer | A Random Web Page
I installed Windows XP on a PII 350mhz system with only 64meg of ram and a TNT 2 16 meg video card. It ran well and I used it to play Half-Life and Unreal. It seemed pretty fast at the time. It just depends on which programs you run. Back in the day they would tell you that a Celeron 500 was good for email, internet, word processing and a 1gz machine was good for high end gaming. Now if you have a 3ghz P4 its good for internet and word-processing and the Core 2 Duo with 6gb of memory is what you need for gaming. :rolleyes:
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██