G
George Macdonald
A few years ago, I was working for Chevron when they entered into an
agreement to buy 30,000 (yes, thirty-thousand) desktop systems from
HP. All of the systems were the same, and HP agreed as part of the
contract to make them EXACTLY the same. It took the best part of one
full year to roll out all of the new desktops, and the last system
delivered cost exactly the same as the first one -- imagine how much
the prices would have declined over the cost of a year, if not locked
in. However, the way Chevron management had it figured, the desktop
systems were going to last for 3 years, and the cost of support was
$300 per month, so the initial hardware costs were insignificant
compared to the support costs.
Happy day for HP and their sales guy. I *know* that there are people at
Chevron who enjoy performance jumps and that kind of policy, if enforced
globally, would kinda leave them in the lurch... maybe they get exceptions?
It would seem grossly myopic, IMO, to provide your average
memo-writer/spread-sheet jockey with the same hardware as the guy who's
planning the future of the company with a seismic analysis or a 10K row LP
model!
If you look at where we were a year ago and how far we've come, the
performance has just leapt ahead: with AMD, e.g., we've got commodity mbrds
which take Athlon64s, which are also freely available... and the A64s
themselves have gone from socket 754 to 939 (i.e. single to dual channel
memory), with a reduction in design metrics which *has* reduced (as opposed
to Intel) temperatures considerably on similar CPU performance. I can
hammer my Athlon64 3500+ 90nm all day and it runs at 52C or so.
And this $300 a month support cost was already taking into account the
savings associated with every desktop being EXACTLY the same, and the
only real support you got was, "You've got a problem, we'll re-image
your PC."
Yeah well that kind of "support" tends to breed users who are creative or
err, meddlers.