Development machine recommendations ...

[craig]

This is a little off topic, but I thought it couldn't hurt to ask...

I am about to purchase a new development laptop computer. Before I do, I
thought I might ask the C# development community if there are any
recommendations for a good Visual Studio development machine. Is there any
machine or brand out there that has come to be preferred within the
development community???

Thanks!

[Frans Bouma [C# MVP]]

craig wrote:

This is a little off topic, but I thought it couldn't hurt to ask...

I am about to purchase a new development laptop computer. Before I do, I
thought I might ask the C# development community if there are any
recommendations for a good Visual Studio development machine. Is there any
machine or brand out there that has come to be preferred within the
development community???

I'd never recommend a laptop for development, the harddisks in a laptop
are simply too slow. And harddiskspeed is what matters most after ram.

So first, grab the fastest harddisk solution you can find, and second
grab that solution with as much ram you can find. To get that on a
laptop will be very hard. So I'd recommend to you a workstation with
RAID 0 striped scsi harddisks on a 66mhz pci bus together with at least
1GB of ram.

Frans

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get LLBLGen Pro, productive O/R mapping for .NET: http://www.llblgen.com
My .NET blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma
Microsoft MVP (C#)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Dan Baker]

From my experience (depending on what you are developing) you will want to
concentrate on items which increase you machine speed. Seems like most
developers always have loads of applications running (IDE, email ...).

I would recommend just a few items:
at least 1 Gig of RAM (Which makes everything run faster)
Any HyperThreaded CPU (Because all future machines will be multi-core, and
you need to get used to programming for it)

DanB
"craig" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:uq******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP15.phx.gbl...

This is a little off topic, but I thought it couldn't hurt to ask...

I am about to purchase a new development laptop computer. Before I do, I
thought I might ask the C# development community if there are any
recommendations for a good Visual Studio development machine. Is there
any machine or brand out there that has come to be preferred within the
development community???

Thanks!

[Joe Fawcett]

"Dan Baker" <dbmail> wrote in message
news:OF******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...

From my experience (depending on what you are developing) you will want to
concentrate on items which increase you machine speed. Seems like most
developers always have loads of applications running (IDE, email ...).

I would recommend just a few items:
at least 1 Gig of RAM (Which makes everything run faster)
Any HyperThreaded CPU (Because all future machines will be multi-core, and you
need to get used to programming for it)

DanB

I have a different point of view, I like to develop on a poor machine. It's all
to easy to write poor code that runs fine because you've got a super fast
machine with lots of memory. If you write something that runs well on a poor
machine you've propbably got it right and it can only get better if the users
have top quality work stations and/or high quality servers.

Stirring it up :)
--

Joe (MVP)

https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pr...8-8741D22D17A5

[Sean Hederman]

"Joe Fawcett" <jo********@new sgroups.nospam> wrote in message
news:uB******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...
[Snip]

I have a different point of view, I like to develop on a poor machine.
It's all to easy to write poor code that runs fine because you've got a
super fast machine with lots of memory. If you write something that runs
well on a poor machine you've propbably got it right and it can only get
better if the users have top quality work stations and/or high quality
servers.

Stirring it up :)
But if my machine slows my productivity down by 10%, then I'm wasting my
clients money. I always prefer having a UAT machine available from the start
which is representative of the lower end of the target machine
specifications. Then I can code at my happy high speed, and the testing
quickly shows performance problems. Oh yeah, goes without saying that you
test all your stuff on the UAT machine, often.
--

Joe (MVP)

https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pr...8-8741D22D17A5

[OHM \( Terry Burns \)]

I agree: Develop on the best you can get, using the best practice coding, if
the target machine is below average, they should upgrade it.

--
OHM ( Terry Burns )

http://TrainingOn.net


"Sean Hederman" <us***@blogentr y.com> wrote in message
news:d2******** **@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net. ..

"Joe Fawcett" <jo********@new sgroups.nospam> wrote in message
news:uB******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...
[Snip]

I have a different point of view, I like to develop on a poor machine.
It's all to easy to write poor code that runs fine because you've got a
super fast machine with lots of memory. If you write something that runs
well on a poor machine you've propbably got it right and it can only get
better if the users have top quality work stations and/or high quality
servers.

Stirring it up :)

But if my machine slows my productivity down by 10%, then I'm wasting my
clients money. I always prefer having a UAT machine available from the
start which is representative of the lower end of the target machine
specifications. Then I can code at my happy high speed, and the testing
quickly shows performance problems. Oh yeah, goes without saying that you
test all your stuff on the UAT machine, often.

--

Joe (MVP)

https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pr...8-8741D22D17A5

[JiangZemin]

Or you could run a Virtual PC image within your good machine and hobble it
by only allocating 128MB RAM.. also set resolution within that VPC to be
640x480 or something sick like that

"OHM ( Terry Burns )" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:Ou******** ********@tk2msf tngp13.phx.gbl. ..

I agree: Develop on the best you can get, using the best practice coding,
if the target machine is below average, they should upgrade it.

--
OHM ( Terry Burns )

http://TrainingOn.net


"Sean Hederman" <us***@blogentr y.com> wrote in message
news:d2******** **@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net. ..

"Joe Fawcett" <jo********@new sgroups.nospam> wrote in message
news:uB******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...
[Snip]

I have a different point of view, I like to develop on a poor machine.
It's all to easy to write poor code that runs fine because you've got a
super fast machine with lots of memory. If you write something that runs
well on a poor machine you've propbably got it right and it can only get
better if the users have top quality work stations and/or high quality
servers.

Stirring it up :)

But if my machine slows my productivity down by 10%, then I'm wasting my
clients money. I always prefer having a UAT machine available from the
start which is representative of the lower end of the target machine
specifications. Then I can code at my happy high speed, and the testing
quickly shows performance problems. Oh yeah, goes without saying that you
test all your stuff on the UAT machine, often.

--

Joe (MVP)

https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pr...8-8741D22D17A5

[JiangZemin]

Or you could run a Virtual PC image within your good machine and hobble it
by only allocating 128MB RAM.. also set resolution within that VPC to be
640x480 or something sick like that

"OHM ( Terry Burns )" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:Ou******** ********@tk2msf tngp13.phx.gbl. ..

I agree: Develop on the best you can get, using the best practice coding,
if the target machine is below average, they should upgrade it.

--
OHM ( Terry Burns )

http://TrainingOn.net


"Sean Hederman" <us***@blogentr y.com> wrote in message
news:d2******** **@ctb-nnrp2.saix.net. ..

"Joe Fawcett" <jo********@new sgroups.nospam> wrote in message
news:uB******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...
[Snip]

I have a different point of view, I like to develop on a poor machine.
It's all to easy to write poor code that runs fine because you've got a
super fast machine with lots of memory. If you write something that runs
well on a poor machine you've propbably got it right and it can only get
better if the users have top quality work stations and/or high quality
servers.

Stirring it up :)

But if my machine slows my productivity down by 10%, then I'm wasting my
clients money. I always prefer having a UAT machine available from the
start which is representative of the lower end of the target machine
specifications. Then I can code at my happy high speed, and the testing
quickly shows performance problems. Oh yeah, goes without saying that you
test all your stuff on the UAT machine, often.

--

Joe (MVP)

https://mvp.support.microsoft.com/pr...8-8741D22D17A5

[Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]]

As another posted stated, get the fastest CPU (hyperthreading ), the fastest
disk, and at least 1 GIG of RAM.
Aside from that, notebook prices are so low now you can get this from many
reliable discounters for $1000 US or less.
Peter

"craig" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:uq******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP15.phx.gbl...

This is a little off topic, but I thought it couldn't hurt to ask...

I am about to purchase a new development laptop computer. Before I do, I
thought I might ask the C# development community if there are any
recommendations for a good Visual Studio development machine. Is there
any machine or brand out there that has come to be preferred within the
development community???

Thanks!

[Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]]

As another posted stated, get the fastest CPU (hyperthreading ), the fastest
disk, and at least 1 GIG of RAM.
Aside from that, notebook prices are so low now you can get this from many
reliable discounters for $1000 US or less.
Peter

"craig" <[e-mail]> wrote in message
news:uq******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP15.phx.gbl...

This is a little off topic, but I thought it couldn't hurt to ask...

I am about to purchase a new development laptop computer. Before I do, I
thought I might ask the C# development community if there are any
recommendations for a good Visual Studio development machine. Is there
any machine or brand out there that has come to be preferred within the
development community???

Thanks!