Forum Moderators: phranque
I will be using programs such as Photoshop, Fireworks, Flash, Dreamweaver. A lot of times I use these programs simultaneously (not to mention that my Outlook is always running).
They set me up with a P3 600 MHz PC with 128 MB ram and it is already starting to lag. I complained a little bit and the best they can do is upgrade my ram with 256 MB more. I'm also used to working with two monitors and I am currently set up with one.
For those of you in a similar situation as myself, web designers working for a small to medium sized company, how powerful are your machines?
I am sorry but for web design 2 monitors is so not needed. The only time I have ever seen a real need for that is high end retouching and video editing.
2 monitors certainly helps with any position (not only web design) when you are using three, four, five programs at the same time.
I may be forced to just purchase a laptop myself and use that. I think that's a bit ridiculous though, but whatever makes me more efficient I guess.
Also, the rest of us here had computers in the 850mhz range to 1.2ghz. We have all since upgraded to 2.8ghz w/ 512 - 1gig of ram. HUGE improvement in productivity. With computers running around $350 apiece for a decent system, your boss would be a fool not to upgrade. Send ONE nice email explaining how it's killing your productivity, (Bosses LOVE productivity haha) and show him an option. I'd bet that for around $450-$500 you could get a fast new system, an extra monitor, and a video card to run the monitors.
Good luck.
[edited by: SEOMike at 2:08 pm (utc) on Aug. 26, 2004]
For me the most important thing is the monitor - obviously the bigger the better, but as long as you have at least a 17", running at something *over* 1024x768, and have a refresh rate of over 85Hz, you probably haven't got any real grounds for complaints. Unless everybody else's computers are much better, of course...
Do bear in mind that you're the new person there - as such you are probably last in the queue for decent hardware!
it depends on what programs you are going to be using i mean for complex flash animations having 1 monitor is just about impossible to work on. dreamweaver, photoshop - yeah it's certainly faster workflow but not necessary.
You'll need to make a comprehensive argument based on documented evidence that the company needs to supply you with a tool appropriate for the tasks it expects you to do. You don't need to go all out and ask for a dual-processor monster or a G5, just a reasonable beige-box machine with a good processor and a great big glob of RAM. Compared to your salary costs, the investment will be trivial - it depends on how you approach things.
But, today is the big day. My new Sony Vaio VGN A-190 (laptop) will arrive with a Pentium M (1.7), 80 Gig Hard Drive and all sorts of other goodies. I'm sooooo excited! And, I'll have Windows XP, woohoo. Been using Windows 98 for what seems forever.
Always strikes me as odd how companies can pay full salaries for only a fraction of a worker's potential productivity, especially when the cost of a basic "lag-less" systems is becoming increasing trivial.
Possible explanations:
My PC refuses to post his specs out of respect for his elders; namely, your PC.
On the bright side, your 'puter is still more powerful than my phone, which does not support Photoshop.
bateman_ap, are you or have you ever been a web designer?2 monitors certainly helps with any position (not only web design) when you are using three, four, five programs at the same time.
Yeah, I do web design at the moment as well as everything else! Used to do Mac artwork as well where maybe 2 monitors would have been handy but never found it stopped me working to my potential.
The problem with giving you what you want is as soon as you get it everyone in the entire office will want exactly the same. And once that starts happening it is bloody hard to keep everyone happy. It will cause resentment and bring everyones productivity down.
And at the end of the day remember you are web designing, as someone earlier said you are working at 72dpi, not the huge hundreds of megabye photoshop files my studio used to work with. Your PC should be fine to cope.
I'm valued by my boss so when I have technical needs they're more often than not taken care of in a way that satisfies his bottom line and my needs. However I do know of people elsewhere that don't have that luxury. It's a shame because as mentioned, copmuters cost nothing compared to the cumulative hours lost waiting for software to load up on a slow machine. That's aside from the cost of lost prouctivity to failed parts on old machines as well...
we're only talking about a resolution of 72 or 96 dpi.
Most designers work at higher res and only reduce to 72dpi for final output. Take a look at the output from a complex filter or lighting effect over multiple layers at 72dpi, then do the same at 288dpi and a final reduction afterwards to 72dpi and you'll see why.
If you're on a creative flow, the last thing you need to be doing is waiting for something. The software should be as transparent as possible so as not to get in the way of the creative process, and a decent machine definitely helps with that.
If you're topping and tailing graphics etc, sure, no problem. A 486 would do the trick. If you're trying to realise a "vision" the PC must not get in the way.
Decent graphics card and "neutral" monitor (in terms of colour) are also a really useful luxury.
TJ
When you bump against a ceiling of resistance, do not fight it. Go another direction. I would go out and buy MY OWN SYSTEM. You get what you want instantly. Shows initiative and gumption. As for recouping the cost - either invoice the company at a later date or write it off come tax time.
A non-traditional and self-empowered approach can do wonders. IMHO
Good Luck,
KOB
I would go out and buy MY OWN SYSTEM.
Many companies wouldn't let you plug it in in the office, the risk from insurance to liability would be too great.
I would go out and buy MY OWN SYSTEM.Many companies wouldn't let you plug it in in the office, the risk from insurance to liability would be too great.
I second that - I don't let employees bring in computers from home. This network has been specifically configured to disallow the activity - MAC addresses are registered, and if your network card's MAC isn't on the list you can't get an IP address. This prevents people from bringing in laptops, PDA's, etc.
My reasons were more for the sake of network security than insurance/liability, but at least both are successfully accomplished.
But anyway to get back on topic, everyone is running the same 2 Ghz system with 1 GB RAM and dual monitors.
The problem with giving you what you want is as soon as you get it everyone in the entire office will want exactly the same. And once that starts happening it is bloody hard to keep everyone happy. It will cause resentment and bring everyones productivity down.
If the rest of the office is also doing graphic design, then you have a point, and this becomes an ROI issue. But if we are talking job specific in this case, and the rest are doing data entry but want a faster machine for solitaire, then this point is irrelevant.
I would go out and buy MY OWN SYSTEM.
Many companies wouldn't let you plug it in in the office, the risk from insurance to liability would be too great.
I second that - I don't let employees bring in computers from home. This network has been specifically configured to disallow the activity - MAC addresses are registered, and if your network card's MAC isn't on the list you can't get an IP address. This prevents people from bringing in laptops, PDA's, etc.
My reasons were more for the sake of network security than insurance/liability, but at least both are successfully accomplished.
But anyway to get back on topic, everyone is running the same 2 Ghz system with 1 GB RAM and dual monitors.
Well what if I request that a new machine be purchased for me at my own expense? I will let the MIS guys here conform it to company policies in regards to security. If I do take this route though, it would make the company feel cheap, no?
I'm also just thinking of riding it out for a week or so and when they see the level of work I put out, they'll be happy to meet my requests.
Well what if I request that a new machine be purchased for me at my own expense? I will let the MIS guys here conform it to company policies in regards to security. If I do take this route though, it would make the company feel cheap, no?I'm also just thinking of riding it out for a week or so and when they see the level of work I put out, they'll be happy to meet my requests.
A more important question though is why would you want to do this? To me this is an example of what's wrong with America, and why dumb greed-driven T.V. shows like "The Apprentice" are so popular. You are more than your job, aren't you? It is not your responsibility to buy your own workstation - if the tools you've been given aren't efficient enough to do your job, then the company is going to have to accept that things are going to take you longer to do.
Why they wouldn't upgrade is beyond me, considering they can probably get a brand new system for less than what you make in a week, but it's still a management decision. If for some reason I didn't want to (or couldn't afford to) buy a new system, if an employee approached me with a request to buy their own computer, the answer would still be no. It wouldn't make me feel cheap, and wouldn't make the employee look any more dedicated than the next guy, I just wouldn't want to have privately owned computers in the building.
I don't let employees bring in computers from home
Quite right too.
everyone is running the same 2 Ghz system with 1 GB RAM and dual monitors.
Not that they'd have any reason to, anyway!
geoapa, I hope you're not seriously considering buying your own kit. Why not offer to work overtime 7 days a week and refuse to collect your paycheck at the same time? If the company can't invest as little as $600 on a more modern machine so you can do your job properly, then I would seriously worry.
Oh, and I use 4 screens usually - virtually, of course. How you Windows users get by without multiple desktops is beyond me!
How you Windows users get by without multiple desktops is beyond me!
I've done this in Windows since Win95 - I once saw a similiar setup in Win3.1
How you Windows users get by without multiple desktops is beyond me!
I used to be a Linux nut and loved my multiple desktops but in the end I either ended up forgetting what was on the other ones or only used one.
I use a tabbed browser and long taskar for the other programs. Keeps me happy :) Having fewer things on the go at once cuts down on my mistakes.
Most of our office comps have a reasonable amount of RAM. Prefer to spend a little more on the comps and less on getting them fixed, plus the faster people can get the work done the more I can give them to do!
The processor speed isn't as important, though it's nice to have > 1.5 gigahertz, that's what I have and I really can't see anything that could happen much faster than it does already.
