On Jul 18, 2005, at 5:54 pm, Michael Winter wrote: > On Jul 18, 2005, at 11:24 AM, SW wrote: >> >> What is going to cost you less.... losing a day or a day and a half >> wiping and reinstalling things, or the the money for a new computer >> already (partially) set up? >> >> This may lead to a different conclusion if you are paid a lot of >> money for your time. > > The only time saved is the time it takes to erase the drive and > install the OS. I'd estimate less than an hour to get to "factory" > condition. Compare this with the time to select, purchase and set up > new hardware. Either way you have to re-install all apps etc. I don't > see any time saved by buying a new computer. About half of my work is fixing PCs for home users - the other half being fixing them for small businesses. What you're not accounting for is that the average home user simply isn't comfortable reinstalling Windows - many don't even know how to back up their photos to CD! Installing Windows XP can easily take a couple of hours, especially on systems a year or two old - many PCs are _still_ sold with 256meg or less of RAM - and that's not counting Office, Service Pack 2, internet setup, accounts for the kids &c &c. If I can take the computer home & leave it running - I back-up the whole hard-drive and install any additional software in addition to the above - I tend to charge the full job out at a fixed price of 3 hours work or £114. There are so many factors that come into this, it hard to surmise, but for machines of more than 2 years old replacement may not be a bad upgrade. In the last year, since I've been doing this, I've discovered that I absolutely hate working on anything without Windows XP and almost anything less than a Pentium 4 - it bugs me when people spend money on fixing hardware that is worth less than my time. Stroller.