Now the machines we are forced to use are 2GB Ram, an Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 @ 3GHz processor ...
The policy inside the company is that everyone has the same computer, regardless of what and what they are on a three-year update cycle ... So, I will have this machine for the next 2 years ...: S
We complained like crazy, but they said they wanted to prove that upgrading the machines would provide exactly X-time savings before doing anything ... And with that, they only give us more RAM to the task ...
Even when you indicate that developer resources are much more expensive than hardware, they first say that they are leaving, and after a while they talk about it. How much they relate to the payment of wages comes from another bucket of money for cars and that they do not care (that is, people who can replace cars because wages are not paid out of their pockets) ...
So, how can I prove that a win in $ X will be obtained by spending $ Y on new equipment ...
The stack I'm working with is as follows: VS 2008, SQL 2005/2008. As responsibilities dictate, we are SQL admins as well as Web / Winform / WebService developers. Therefore, it is very typical to have 2 VS sessions and at least one SQL session at the same time.
Cheers Anthony