SPONSORED LINKS
At 09:55 AM 8/9/96 EDT, Robert Dewar wrote: >Don asks > >"Just out of curiosity, is it because you all need the extra few pixels and >megahertz enough to shell out, or is it one of those corporate pecking order >things" >I can certainly answer for myself that it is both the screen real estate >and raw speed that are important. I do major compiler development work, >"I think I would have a tough time going to my accountant and explaining that >I bought 6 different model laptops over the course of a year at $5-7K each for >business use and sold each 2 months later for half what I paid and that it made >good business sense." > >Well first of all, even if you are keeping at the cutting edge, it is more >like two or at most three a year, not six a year. My 755CD (remember those?) was the fastest IBM had to offer 7 months ago. Now I think it's been supplanted 3 times. That doesn't even count jumping between brands as one or the other has more chache' (pardon the pun). > Second, the questoin of >whether spending 15-20K $ to improve the productivity of person X is worth >while depends on person X! It's also a matter of figuring what the productivity enhancement will be, generally somewhat less than the system speed enhancement, which is in turn somewhat less than the processor speed enhancement. >Finally we do not sell our old thinkpads, there >are other people who need a machine and do not have the same computing >requirements who can make good use out of older machines. At that point, you are implicity depreciating it to the price at which the guy with less requirements could buy a used machine that meets his needs. You save the overhead of actually buying and selling, but it's sort of the same. -Don Perley perley@cadence.com