Re: OT: views on Windows XP system requirements sought

[Dov Isaacs <isaacs@xxxxxxxxx>]

Roger,

The good news is that it really doesn't take much to have a
Windows 2000 or XP-based computer configuration that works well
(i.e., no lack of resources and snappy performance) with all 
Adobe applications concurrently with use of email, web-browsing,
and other "enterprise applications" (such as classical word 
processors).

Any Pentium 3 or 4 processor 500 mhz or better will typically
work well which means that ANY processor in any current PC model
being sold should be quite adequate, even with InDesign. The only
thing that would tilt towards the highest speed processors would
be use of very graphically complex and/or long InDesign documents
and very large / high image images being processed with Photoshop.

Memory is critical. Microsoft's recommendation of a 128 megabyte
minimum notwithstanding, 256 megabytes is a more reasonable 
Windows 2000 / XP mimumum. 512 megabytes is an appropriate minimum
for the workload described above. For desktop systems, I would
even go for 1 gigabyte.

Disk space depends on what you need to store. For the software and
operating system itself, you can "get away with" 20 gigabytes or
so. But "content is king" and you must seat the king someplace!
70 gigabyte and larger IDE ATA/ATAPI disk drives are relatively 
inexpensive. On the other hand, high performance / high capacity
SCSI (i.e., 10000 or 15000 rpm, 72 gigabyte, Ultra 160 SCSI)
drives are very pricey and only worth it under very demanding
conditions.

To put this in perspective of what I personally use, my notebook
system that I use on the road is an IBM ThinkPad A21p with 850 mhz
Pentium 3, 512 megabytes of memory, and 32 gigabyte IDE disk. At
this point, it handles all I can throw at it without a problem.
For my desktop system, I use a two year old, dual-processor 
933 megahertz Pentium 3 system with a gigabyte of memory and two
10000 rpm, 36 gigabyte Ultra 160 SCSI disk drives. Again, rarely
is this a limitation in any way whatsoever.

Bottom line is that except for the typical "default" memory
configurations, the run-of-the-mill computers sold in retail today
pretty much exceed the needs of the current generations of
graphic arts and enterprise software except under very demanding
workloads. Note that of all such software, FrameMaker is actually
one of the least demanding in terms of system hardware resources!

        - Dov



At 6/13/2002 10:26 AM, Roger Jones wrote:
>Dear Fellow Framers
>
>Now that the dust is settling after the arrival of Windows XP, I'm coming out of hiding and building up to the purchase of a new system. I've hung on with 98SE, not only to let the dust settle but also in light of my experience with a friend's XP system, the most salient feature of which seems to be its slow speed. Can't recall which chip he has, but it's a brand new Dell and I'm sure it's well over 1Gb, with 128 RAM. I also recall that I discovered a comparative test that drew attention to the slower speed of XP compared with 2000 (I think I publicized that on this list).
>
>So, I now wonder what combination of XP, chip and RAM will take me one step forwards without going two steps back in terms of speed -- RAM configuration as well as amount (i.e. dual-channel, DDR, whatever). I run FM 6 (upgrading shortly), Photoshop 9 (ditto), Illustrator 9 (ditto) and Acrobat 4 (ditto) daily, InDesign 1.5 (upgrade to 2 yet to be installed) weekly, and of course e-mailer (Eudora), browser (both IE and Netscape) and word processor (WordPerfect and Word) all the time.
>
>I know, I know: fastest possible chip and maximize RAM, but at what point does the law of diminishing returns really set in and, in any case, which RAM mode is likely to leave me least frustrated?
>
>All the best
>Roger Jones at Terra Publishing


** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **