it wasn't an attack, just a gentle nudge.
I'm not 1337 in the least. I do like to get decent framerates in games I play, but that's far from whiz bang. The growth of the 3d accelerator market has slowed the need to get the latest and greatest processor and widened the margin for a useful machine.
With the right software, my system (pentium pro) suffices for my needs.
It's just a little slow for new software. That's why I obliquely recommended an upgrade. Sorry if it rubbed you the wrong way, but you might find that adding 10-20% (or a couple hundred) to the speed of your machine might save you more time than it costs. It certainly has for me. For the record, I run a celeron 500 and a tnt2, both of which can probably be had for less than a $100. I get decent framerates on anything I wish to throw at it, most software runs quickly, although I do agree, both Mozilla and NS6 have some serious rough points. Considering what they are trying to do and where along the developement cycle they are
I loathe most 3D games; ugly as hell ... except for some classics (descent, castle wolfenstein 3d, doom, stunts, stunt car racing - and all of them run on a 80386!).
Please, go look at this. Sometimes there's something to be said for visually appealing entertainment. Other activies inlcuding video of various sorts, audio, image editing, burning, etc. can all benefit from the added horsepower. What I'm saying is I don't see much reason to take such a hardline against upgrading.
And on a quick off-topic sidenote, as far as compying with Moore's law with it devastating your pocketbook goes. I try to stay at about half to the top market speed. When I go to upgrade I look for the fastest machine I can find, cut the speed it half, double the RAM, back-up and jump. This happens about every year and a half (plenty of time for Christmas and birthdays for you younger folks).
Fail to Obey?
[ Parent ]