Slashdot Mirror
Prioritizing Computer Replacements?
cuzality asks: "The public library I work for is (hopefully) going to get some money in the coming months to replace some of our computers. Since we can't replace all of them at the same time, we need to decide which machines to replace first. We have begun working on a survey instrument to help us accomplish this, but since this is the first time we are replacing computers (most were bought in 1999), this is also the first time we have tried to put together a survey for this purpose. What kind of criteria have you used to prioritize replacement of computers? Examples of surveys you have used would also be very helpful..."
at least that's what we always do....
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
To know how to replace the computers, you're doing a survey. But to do the survey, you're surveying slashdot. But you needed a computer to do that.
Is it for the general public using the computers? Or workers for the library?
If it's for the public, perhaps leave some photocopies with a few simple questions.
"What are you using this system for"
"What software would you like to see offered"
Etc..
I push to get mine replaced first...
a public library with computers built in 1999? i thought all libraries had to have a minimum of 15 year-old technology. count your blessings.
Now quite frankly.. what kind of stupid question is that?
1. Are there broken computers or computers which are beginning to show critical signs of wear?
2. Are the computers sufficiently fast for the tasks assigned to them?
How many hours a week is each computer used?
What functions does each computer perform (surfing web, accessing custom library application, etc.) and what's the breakdown of those functions in percentages?
Assemble a list of all functions the computers are used for, determine how each function would benefit from running on newer hardware.
What new functions would the library like to incorporate utilizing newer computrs? Assemble a wish list, and then determine through a panel which of those functions are likely to be implemented in the next year if new computing resources are available.
With this information you should be able to determine which computers will benefit most from an upgrade. Other factors to consider are that it's more estheticly pleasing to have similar computers together (mild preference for grouping computers of the same type). Publicly usable computers that are upgraded can make a positive statement to library patrons (preference for visibility).
---
I support spreading santorum
If you ask the public, they'll probably want Dual-64bit processors and the latest GFX card or something else they don't need.
Please note that you need not just "replace" but you could also move old computers to less demanding tasks.
Ideally your survey would end with a number of scores; the suitability for the task it is used for and the importance of that particular system to the library.
I assume you have some sort of server in the library, if so then you should consider how the CPU power, files and other "resources" are distributed across your network.
You might want to ask around what the problems are that the users are facing, perhaps they'll tell you that they want more than 16 colors; get better graphics hardware. Perhaps they'll complain they can't fit their files on a floppy; get a bigger harddisk. At the very least it'll give you some indication of the factors involved in making the decision.
Also try planning for the future a bit, whether this means buying overpowered systems or buying systems which barely do the task depends on things as expected future budget, the ability to move around systems, etc.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
- Figure out what you are doing or want to do with the computers. Is that what the survey is for?
- Figure out what you would replace them with (including networking, licenses for proprietary software, etc.) and figure out what it will cost and thus how many you can buy.
- Figure out which of your current machines are serving you the least in this capacity. If you have a bunch of unstable Win95 or Win98 machines that crash a lot, I'd say those are good candidates. If you have older machines that are stable, consider leaving them alone if it will allow you to replace more of the unstable ones.
- Go over the list you make, poke holes in it, and start again. When you're done, show it to others and don't look at it for a week, then come back to it and see what you think of your logic.
There. Any other part of your job you'd like us to do for you? I mean, how hard was that?While some machines are broken, or so slow that they need replacing, the time taken to replace other machines is often non-trivial for a benefit that is minimal. Sometimes, simple upgrades have much more effect for the amount of time and money spent. A common one is more RAM, but a lot of users would benefit a lot from a new monitor or a flat screen - or a second screen even. Little things, like replacing ball mice with optical ones go down well.
You might also look at some the infrastructure. If everything is slow because the network is overloaded, replacing machines won't make any difference.
In a lot of firms, the top people get new kit regularly (which they don't need), and the bottom people suffer with old cast-offs. Look at the entire setup, and see where people are needing upgrades the most, then replace those parts.
-- Steve
It would probably be cheaper to buy enough new ones at one time to replace all of your old ones, even if you don't do the actual replacing for many of them for a while. You can find nice price cuts in bulk, and the bigger the bulk, the bigger the cut. If you replace half now and half later, you'll spend a whole lot more in the long run. Better to get them all now and slowly phase the new ones in over time, even if this process takes a year or more. If all your users will be doing is some casual web browsing and word processing, you probably won't have to worry about the new ones becoming outdated in your storage room. As someone else here mentioned, public library computers can have a longer life than those used for heavier applications.
FWIW, I used to be automation consultant for a regional library system, and we generally recommended folks look at things in this order:
:)
...brig
PUBLIC machines first
As much for PR reasons as any.
SHARED STAFF MACHINES second
Usually most cost-effective distribution.
DEDICATED STAFF MACHINES third
Meaning the director's desktop usually gets upgraded last!
Within each category, we then looked at how old the BIOS was and how much RAM each machine had. Then we looked at budget issues.
These are, of course, general guidelines... sometimes things are done differently because you either have a funding source wanting to push a particular program or service... sometimes you have a machine which fails or is unreliable. Common sense should always override a plan, if it hasn't already been incorporated within the plan.
-- When I grow up I'd like to be a systems defenestrator.
How about you do your own fscking job? What are they paying you for?
This is such a difficult job that you need to ask what old computers to throw out?
Boy that's such a hard problem...
1. Director/Commissioner/Board Members
2. You or other IT staff
3. Other important people
4. Supplement computers in busy areas
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
A new computer every 3 months works for me. ;-)
Well, first of all it depends on what machines you have now and what they are being used for. I'm going to assume you have PII 233-400ish systems as I seem to remember those being the mid range back then.
Assuming the systems are not optimal for what they're needed for, I would:
1. Replace any broken machines.
2. Before replacing machines, determine if you need MORE machines than you have. In that case I would buy new machines but not use them to replace anything. I would just add them to the network.
3. If you have enough machines, and no desire/space for extra ones I would phase out the slowest systems and replace them.
4. I would either put the slowest systems in the children's wing (if they break them, who cares) or as word processors. Or, if you have no desire/space for that, wipe the old systems and either give them to needy families or sell them at your book auctions (most public libs do those).
IMHO, 90% of the operations office staff and library patrons perform do not require specialized, personal PC's. Diskless "thin" clients are by far the least problematic with respect to hardware failure or OS maintenance.
Unless you absolutely require Windows clients, which I highly doubt given that most Library databases are searchable via Internet or Intranet sites, stay away from them. If the recent IE exploits hadn't scared you away yet, nothing will.
assert(expired(knowledge));
1. What are the computers being used for?
If they are Public Access, you pretty much only need a web browser and possibly an office suite. As long as they are physically robust enough and can be effectivly secured, you don't necessarily need the latest and greatest hardware.
If they are Internal use, you need to consider what you will be running. For most offices, it means an office suite, a web browser, and maybe some proprietary software. Again, the latest and greatest may not be needed.
2. What are the current conditions?
If you have broken computers, then these should be at the top of the list to be fixed or replaced. If you have computers that are working fine and doing the job, then you may not need to replace them.
3. Do you have specific OS requriements?
Are you running any proprietary software that is OS or OS-version specific? For example, if you have an accounting package that only runs on Windows 95, your hands may be tied for some of the computers. Can you reduce the cost by moving to Open Source solutions like Linux? Again, if they are publically accessible computers, you need to assess what access and features they will provide.
4. Are all your OS's the same?
Can you standardize on one OS and one OS version? It certainly makes management easier if you can keep your OS's to one single type or version. Try to get away from having many "specialized" OS's for different purposes. It'll drive up maintenance costs
My mom always said, "Jim, you're 1 in a million." Given the current population, there are 7000 of me. God help us all!
Replace your webserver, you're about to be slashdotted.
1) Look at replaceing the ones which run processes where the speed of the processor matters more than the ram. Or ones that will benifit from better video cards etc.
2) take the ram out of the replaced ones and max out any of the remaining ones you can.
3) See how much the ram boost made a difference in step 2.
Decide if the ones with little effect are hampered by the processor, graphics card, or nature of the programs they run.
If it's the processor or graphics card, replace the computer.
If it's the program, don't bother replacing that computer, you're wasting money.
You should approach a point where the computers that need upgrading have been upgraded, those that don't have been singled out, and all should be well.
For each of these factors, assign a numerical value, say from 0-9 or 1-5 or something. Then, create a calculation that summarizes these factors into categories like:
The calculations should be a sum of each of the important factors where each is multiplied by a number (which may be positive, negative, or zero) indicating its importance. Multiply factors together only if you have hard units for categories (i.e. megabytes, or watts).
The summaries aren't intended to be compared to eachother, only to the same values for other machines. Sorting the list by the last factor, "how important is it to address changes to this machine?" will yield a list of the machines to examine first.
Of course, this is all speculation and is probably wrong. I've done assessments like this for other kinds of things and the temptation is to adjust the calculations so the results are as expected. I would try to avoid this, by examining any unusual cases and see if the calculation is working as you'd expect--consider both the outlying case and the calculation instead of just assuming the calculation is wrong.
--- Jason Olshefsky
Karma: Poser (mostly affected by adding this line long after everyone else did)
Try this list of priorities
Priority 1: Computers that have stopped working
Priority 2: FIFO (oldest first)
Priority 3: Computers too slow to do their current work.
Or you can be as illogical as ODOT and reverse the above priorities- the plus side is that this frees up some faster machines for redeployment onto slower machines.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Pop the cases open, look and see if the have the infamous IBM "deathstar" Hard Drives in them, however, it seems like most of them that are going to die quick deaths already have. I've been running a 30GB DTLA since Jan 2001 with no problems, but I personally saw 2 crap out in a week at work in late '01.
09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
This doesn't apply to all situations, but are you sure replace is the right option? If all the public machines are busy most of the time (or you have no public machines) perhaps you are better off getting some more tables and adding computers.
Depending on who has what needs, you might replace a staff machine and put it in the public areas. If people start looking for fast machines you might need to start asking why they need speed and give those who really need speed the faster machines, but this is complex and hopefully unneeded.
who decided which department got the new computers based on how nice the department head was to her. It worked for her, why not you?
...add this to one or more of the new computers?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
Replace the machines lottery-style.
Randomly assign numbers to the machines (perhaps the IP address or last 3 digits of the serial number) and hold a raffle-like event. Getting all managerial and trying to "optimize" who gets what first is just a lot of wasted effort that makes you feel important but doesn't really improve anyone's productivity, least of all yours. Just start replacing machines.
You're actually kind of lucky. Most library-computer-admin types are barraged by viruses, protect-the-kiddies issues, idiots clicking yes on a pop-up activex thing or any of the other 900 ways computers can get messed up by daily use in a public environment. If you have time to worry about prioritizing new hardware installation, you are in an enviable position!
...but prefer the "be nice to me, and you'll get a new machine before the rest of the office" approach.
Haul off any broken/unwanted electronic stuff to Officemax -- they're having a promotional recycling offer.
'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman