We can infer from this survey that at least 42% of the developers on codeproject are on a 64 bit operating system. I would hazard a guess that some of the remaining 58% are also on a 64 bit operating system.
You can only really infer that 3.19% are on a 64 bit system. Everyone that said "16 GB or fewer" might only have 640k. Since that option obviously includes all the others, I was tempted to click that one rather than expend the effort to move my browser window 3 inches to the left so I could see my conky display that says how much RAM I have.
I still said 8GB or less, although the Windows XP VM that I use for Visual Studio only gets 2GB of that.
I got an improve to 6 Gb just because my VM was complaining about the virtual memory when I started to work in a project with a really huge HMI with SQL running in the background.
But with my (until last week) 4 GB RAM I was more than happy, I was compiling faster than other collegues with 8GB RAM just because I have an SSD (2 Laptops compiling the very same project, mine needed 3 mins and about 20 secs, the other guy needed almost 7 mins)
So... forget about RAM and get an SSD, you will increase 90% of the processes in more than 50% of performance.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpfull answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
My work rig has 8 GB, which is more than enough for running multiple web browsers (for add-on testing), email client, 1-3 instances of VS, and more without breaking a sweat, the issue is that my hard drive is only 75 GB
At home I've got 16 GB RAM and another 2 GB in the graphics card, which is far more than I need. But then again, my home computer isn't about need, it's about want (which is why I opted for the "gaming" RAM that included fans to cool the RAM ).
I usually have about 3 open VS 2010 instances, four browser instances (one with several tabs) for preview and of course the usual suspects: mail client, notepad++, vlc for music... I am also running a IIS with SQL 20008, of course.
If I'm going to test in a VM, another 2Gigs are needed... (which is what the client has to have)
I can have a lot of apps open and running and not even crack 5 gig...including VS 2010.
It's nice, real nice, but we all know that we have to develop to the masses and not to ourselves.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011) "No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"But you probably have the smoothest scrotum of any grown man" - Pete O'Hanlon (2012)
In previous jobs I've had to get by with a 2-4Gb Core Duo for tasks ranging from deleting mails to running a VM with SharePoint or BizTalk server. The latter scenario is so soul-destroyingly frustrating that I'm sure the CIA use it as an enhanced interrogation technique. It amazed me that my then employers expected me to be able to work productively with so few resources. What amazed me even more is that when I showed them the 30 minute boot time and 5 minutes waiting for a context menu their answer was simply "OK, we see the issue.. you'll just have to get on with it". Me waiting for my hardware to catch up all day (and therefore being barely billable) is fine, but as soon as there's a 5 minute discrepancy between the burndown chart in TFS and our billing system you call all of the team in (5 developers) for an hour long meeting about "doing things correctly". WTF.
My current employer is considerably more enlightened when it comes to stuff like this, I've now got an i7 with an SSD, 1Gb dedicated graphics and 8 Gb RAM. Anything remotely server-y gets put on an ESX VM, including Database Servers, ArcGIS Server and the like. These days I don't have to wait for anything much to catch up.
The funny thing is that I moved from a huge multinational with over 22,000 employees to a much smaller company with say 400 employees, albeit an ESRI partner. This taught me quite an important lesson: big companies sound great and all, but in reality you're just another number to them. They don't really give a toss what happens as long as the billable hours keep getting logged.
So I have 4GB of RAM on my work pc and 6GB running on my home pc.. But in that I am running both Delphi and VS... Needless to say it gets hectic. I want to have VMs for what the clients would be using but then my poor baby at work will probably grind to a halt if I kick up 2 or more VMs...
Strangely enough, I can run multiple VMs on my home pc running both IDEs multiple times (never mind my pc @ home is an I7 and has about 9TB of space on it *innocent smile*... Imagine that!!!
"You cannot code for stupidity"
I eventually managed to nag, beg, and whine my way to 8gb; so far none of my dev coworkers have succeeded in this.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
Well I did, since I also have my development SQL servers running on my labtop, I need the memory the keep the data HOT Its not for showing of.
And what does 20 Gb of RAM even cost today, almost nothing, so why not
The most expensive thing is the SSD overpriced if you ask me.
With great code, comes great complexity, so keep it simple stupid...
I can get as much as I like.
I have to share with my colleagues though, who have a virtual workplace on the same machine.
I recently got a bit extra, because I do all the heavy work
I believe (yes, I am not sure, hardware never really was my thing) it is 4GB at the moment, which is the same as I have at home.
I actually find that clever. Most of us programmers are just small nerds inside. Having a big bad computer makes us all warm and fuzzy inside. Hence we get happy and therefore a lot more efficient/constructive.
Hardware costs are nothing compared to the extra development time generated by frustrated programmers (come one, do you really take time to find the best approaches when you have to swear over your computer every day?).
Absolutely - I guess this was also the idea my boss had. Maybe I should mention that he himself is a programmer - and a nerd. He always has the lates iPad, iPhone, the biggest Mac etc.. And he thinks that if we want to create good code we should have everything we need. And honestly, if you compare the costs of a 27'' Mac with 16GB to the costs of a 'normal' PC you will find room for a lot of memory.
My colleagues are also happy - one has a nice SSD, he compiles now 10 times faster, another one has a second 27'' display attached to his 27'' Mac and so on..
And the result is in deed: We all are happy and have a lot of fun doing our work
(I used to have such a Mac, but since I do mainly Windows development my boss 'allowed' me to change).
I agree - that could be fun. Personally I need a small truck to transport my laptop - and a trailer for the power supply which is almost just as heavy as the laptop itself...
I blame myself for wanting 17 inches (screen size that is) - 14 had been more than enough seeing that I'm using an external monitor anyway.
Why can't I be applicable like John? - Me, April 2011 ----- Beidh ceol, caint agus craic againn - Seán Bán Breathnach ----- Da mihi sis crustum Etruscum cum omnibus in eo! ----- Just because a thing is new don’t mean that it’s better - Will Rogers, September 4, 1932