I want to build a new computer for my father in law. He now has a 7 or 8
year old Best Buy something or other. The monitor, speakers, and keyboard
are ok, so we just need to get him a new system and optical mouse. My son
and I have built several systems in the past, but the last was about 2 years
ago, and I haven't kept up with the chip or mb types or terminology.
So, I would appreciate some advice on the components to buy. I would most
likely buy at Newegg, as I have always been treated well there. We are just
looking for a basic system to do email, view photos, simple games, etc. We
don't need any special extra power. He has a dial up connection only, so
we'll need a modem, although I guess we can use the 56k modem he has, unless
newer ones have some advantage.
"Jack Bruss" <jbruss@wi.rr.com> wrote in message
news:woj7h.18664$fh.3281@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>I want to build a new computer for my father in law. He now has a 7 or 8
>year old Best Buy something or other. The monitor, speakers, and keyboard
>are ok, so we just need to get him a new system and optical mouse. My son
>and I have built several systems in the past, but the last was about 2
>years ago, and I haven't kept up with the chip or mb types or terminology.
>
> So, I would appreciate some advice on the components to buy. I would most
> likely buy at Newegg, as I have always been treated well there. We are
> just looking for a basic system to do email, view photos, simple games,
> etc. We don't need any special extra power. He has a dial up connection
> only, so we'll need a modem, although I guess we can use the 56k modem he
> has, unless newer ones have some advantage.
>
> Thanks for any thoughts,
>
> Jack
>
The modem he has should do fine and most MBs have onboard sound that is
actually quite good these days and should work fine with his current
speakers. As far as processors and MBs go, the Intel Core 2 Duos are very
good and inexpensive ($225 or so for the lower end but still very good
performance) and the I965 chipset boards would be fine. DDR2 will be
necessary, a gig would probably suit his needs. 2gigs would be better if he
is ever going to use Windows Vista. On-board video is not bad for what he is
doing, so you can save a few bucks there if you get a board with it.
Gigabyte and Asus are my favorite boards at this time. You can look around
at Newegg and find the board that will suit your needs. Some of the major
changes since you built your last system is the change to S775, for Intel
(the best perfomance/price ratio right now) and the prevalance of SATA HDs.
One large drive should be fine. I usually use Western Digital, but most
makes are fairly good today. Storage is pretty cheap now with 250gb drives
going for a bit over $100 or so. A couple of 120gb drives might be good for
him leaving a drive for backups of his photos etc. As far as the mouse, I
use a Logitech MX Lazer wireless with a recharger/transmitter that is very
reliable and functional. I don't have to keep batteries around anymore. Good
luck with the build. Feel free to email if I can help any.......
Jack Bruss wrote:
> I want to build a new computer for my father in law. He now has a 7 or 8
> year old Best Buy something or other. The monitor, speakers, and keyboard
> are ok, so we just need to get him a new system and optical mouse. My son
> and I have built several systems in the past, but the last was about 2 years
> ago, and I haven't kept up with the chip or mb types or terminology.
>
> So, I would appreciate some advice on the components to buy. I would most
> likely buy at Newegg, as I have always been treated well there. We are just
> looking for a basic system to do email, view photos, simple games, etc. We
> don't need any special extra power. He has a dial up connection only, so
> we'll need a modem, although I guess we can use the 56k modem he has, unless
> newer ones have some advantage.
>
> Thanks for any thoughts,
>
> Jack
>
>
What kind of budget ?
I take it you're getting a new case and power supply ? Current
motherboards use a 2x2 ATX12V power cable, which the old computer
might not have.
budget, mid-range, and high-end buyer's guides. note they lean toward
gamer video, so if not a gamer then choose a video card from the lower end
guide to go w/ a higher-end system. Vista will be better w/ a better
video card tho, so don't go too cheap.
these "system" buyer's guides are actually component buyer's guides.
good recomendations, a good site. There are others, google for 'em.
but Anand is clear and concise, hard to beat...
--------
Finally, if you need new software too, buying an already built complete
system _WILL_ be cheaper, but you won't get as good a set of components,
nor the experience or pleasure of building it yourself. Treat it as a
hobby, not a $$ saver. Many new systems sold from here on out (late oct
06) will inculde a "upgrade coupon" for some version of Vista. Note Vista
Home Basic is not really worth having tho, don't value that particular
coupon too much [Home Premium and up are a much better value].
We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 - $400.
"Paul" <nospam@needed.com> wrote in message
news:ejklpg$kvd$1@aioe.server.aioe.org...
> Jack Bruss wrote:
>> I want to build a new computer for my father in law. He now has a 7 or 8
>> year old Best Buy something or other. The monitor, speakers, and
>> keyboard are ok, so we just need to get him a new system and optical
>> mouse. My son and I have built several systems in the past, but the last
>> was about 2 years ago, and I haven't kept up with the chip or mb types or
>> terminology.
>>
>> So, I would appreciate some advice on the components to buy. I would
>> most likely buy at Newegg, as I have always been treated well there. We
>> are just looking for a basic system to do email, view photos, simple
>> games, etc. We don't need any special extra power. He has a dial up
>> connection only, so we'll need a modem, although I guess we can use the
>> 56k modem he has, unless newer ones have some advantage.
>>
>> Thanks for any thoughts,
>>
>> Jack
>
> What kind of budget ?
>
> I take it you're getting a new case and power supply ? Current
> motherboards use a 2x2 ATX12V power cable, which the old computer
> might not have.
>
> Paul
Jack Bruss wrote:
> We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 - $400.
>
> "Paul" <nospam@needed.com> wrote in message
> news:ejklpg$kvd$1@aioe.server.aioe.org...
>
>>Jack Bruss wrote:
>>
>>>I want to build a new computer for my father in law. He now has a 7 or 8
>>>year old Best Buy something or other. The monitor, speakers, and
>>>keyboard are ok, so we just need to get him a new system and optical
>>>mouse. My son and I have built several systems in the past, but the last
>>>was about 2 years ago, and I haven't kept up with the chip or mb types or
>>>terminology.
>>>
>>>So, I would appreciate some advice on the components to buy. I would
>>>most likely buy at Newegg, as I have always been treated well there. We
>>>are just looking for a basic system to do email, view photos, simple
>>>games, etc. We don't need any special extra power. He has a dial up
>>>connection only, so we'll need a modem, although I guess we can use the
>>>56k modem he has, unless newer ones have some advantage.
>>>
>>>Thanks for any thoughts,
>>>
>>>Jack
As much as I love to build my own systems I second the Acer deal at
Best Buy. It would fit your needs and you won't be able to build one for
that price. Not with a new case, PSU, MB, CPU, and memory.
"Jack Bruss" <jbruss@wi.rr.com> wrote in message
news:woj7h.18664$fh.3281@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>I want to build a new computer for my father in law. He now has a 7 or 8
>year old Best Buy something or other. The monitor, speakers, and keyboard
Since your father-in-law needs a low performance system, there's no point in
building one. Plus, you haven't kept up with technology. Just buy one. For
$300, I'd buy a Dell on Ebay.
*** rude top-posting corrected ***
Fred wrote:
> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Jack Bruss wrote:
>>>
>>> We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 -
>>> $400.
>>
>> top-posted, thus ignored.
>
> Unlikely he actually gives a flying red fuck what you ignore.
That's entirely up to him. However he may now have some idea that
he is contravening normal usenet usage.
--
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Yep, unlikely that obsessive fools like that will ever take any noticed.
kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 12:17:16 +1100, "Fred" <fred@fred.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Unlikely he actually gives a flying red fuck what you ignore.
>>
>
>
> ... and that much less the rebuttals to his comment?
Jack Bruss wrote:
> We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 - $400.
>
Just some rough pricing.
For a processor, you can select a Celeron D if you want, as those
can be had for as little as $55. The processor I selected here is
a Pentium 4, with Hyperthreading, which will make the desktop
a little smoother. You could also go for an AMD processor, and
save a few bucks by using a Venice 3200+ S939 for $66.99, but
then you don't have Hyperthreading (two virtual processors in
one physical processor). My P4 system is just a little smoother,
compared to an equally powerful AMD system. 3GHz is a good
target for a "no complaints" user experience.
For memory, 512MB (2x256MB DDR2 memory) would be the minimum.
With integrated graphics, using dual channel memory mode would
be best. If a video card upgrade was used, then the pressure is
off, and a one or a two stick configuration could be used.
A single stick would leave room for a future upgrade. I'll
assume integrated graphics usage for now.
Still needs mouse and OS to install. If you are trying to reuse
a copy of Win98, then that may "steer" the hardware sslection
approach. I haven't factored OS selection into the motherboard
selection above. I'd have to "squeeze the fat" out of the
motherboard/cpu choice, to make room for the purchase of
an $80-$90 OS.
I think you can come up with something to build.
Just buying a beige box at Walmart wouldn't be as much fun for you :-)
There are also much cheaper motherboard/CPU/memory bundles you can
get at places like Tigerdirect. I selected the above components
as a compromise - hoping for less chance of a dead computer after
delivery.
Paul
> "Paul" <nospam@needed.com> wrote in message
> news:ejklpg$kvd$1@aioe.server.aioe.org...
>> Jack Bruss wrote:
>>> I want to build a new computer for my father in law. He now has a 7 or 8
>>> year old Best Buy something or other. The monitor, speakers, and
>>> keyboard are ok, so we just need to get him a new system and optical
>>> mouse. My son and I have built several systems in the past, but the last
>>> was about 2 years ago, and I haven't kept up with the chip or mb types or
>>> terminology.
>>>
>>> So, I would appreciate some advice on the components to buy. I would
>>> most likely buy at Newegg, as I have always been treated well there. We
>>> are just looking for a basic system to do email, view photos, simple
>>> games, etc. We don't need any special extra power. He has a dial up
>>> connection only, so we'll need a modem, although I guess we can use the
>>> 56k modem he has, unless newer ones have some advantage.
>>>
>>> Thanks for any thoughts,
>>>
>>> Jack
>> What kind of budget ?
>>
>> I take it you're getting a new case and power supply ? Current
>> motherboards use a 2x2 ATX12V power cable, which the old computer
>> might not have.
>>
>> Paul
>
>
"CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:455E6BFA.EDCF0420@yahoo.com...
> *** rude top-posting corrected ***
> Fred wrote:
>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Jack Bruss wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 -
>>>> $400.
>>>
>>> top-posted, thus ignored.
>>
>> Unlikely he actually gives a flying red fuck what you ignore.
>
> That's entirely up to him. However he may now have some idea that
> he is contravening normal usenet usage.
>
> --
> A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
>
>
Jack Bruss wrote:
> "CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> Fred wrote:
>>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> Jack Bruss wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 -
>>>>> $400.
>>>>
>>>> top-posted, thus ignored.
>>>
>>> Unlikely he actually gives a flying red fuck what you ignore.
>>
>> That's entirely up to him. However he may now have some idea that
>> he is contravening normal usenet usage.
>
> Is this better?
Much. Thanks for co-operating. Bottom posting is NEVER wrong.
--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
bottom posting is always wrong when TOLD to do it by a turd
damn usenet nazi, GFY
"CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:455F09F1.84B0AD90@yahoo.com...
> Jack Bruss wrote:
> > "CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> Fred wrote:
> >>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>> Jack Bruss wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 -
> >>>>> $400.
> >>>>
> >>>> top-posted, thus ignored.
> >>>
> >>> Unlikely he actually gives a flying red fuck what you ignore.
> >>
> >> That's entirely up to him. However he may now have some idea that
> >> he is contravening normal usenet usage.
> >
> > Is this better?
>
> Much. Thanks for co-operating. Bottom posting is NEVER wrong.
>
> --
> Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
> Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
> <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
>
Or he's never given a flying red fuck about what prats like you demand.
There is no such animal as 'normal usenet usage'
CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> *** rude top-posting corrected ***
> Fred wrote:
>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Jack Bruss wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 -
>>>> $400.
>>>
>>> top-posted, thus ignored.
>>
>> Unlikely he actually gives a flying red fuck what you ignore.
>
> That's entirely up to him. However he may now have some idea that
> he is contravening normal usenet usage.
CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Jack Bruss wrote:
>> "CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> Fred wrote:
>>>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Jack Bruss wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 -
>>>>>> $400.
>>>>>
>>>>> top-posted, thus ignored.
>>>>
>>>> Unlikely he actually gives a flying red fuck what you ignore.
>>>
>>> That's entirely up to him. However he may now have some idea that
>>> he is contravening normal usenet usage.
>>
>> Is this better?
>
> Much. Thanks for co-operating. Bottom posting is NEVER wrong.
On Sat, 18 Nov 2006 08:07:11 -0800, "JAD" <JOHN DOE@PORN_
ADDY_ HARVESTER.com> wrote:
>bottom posting is always wrong when TOLD to do it by a turd
>damn usenet nazi, GFY
>
Nope. It's a bit like littering in your yard. Do it once
and it's no big deal, but keep doing it and have your
neighbors do it too, and it becomes a mess.
The only reason people think shunning usenet conventions is
not a big deal is that for the most part, usenet works
because people DON'T shun them, because the majority of the
conventions were still being used. The more you make it an
anything-goes environment without consistency, the worse it
works. Since we, as-in everyone reading usenet, has an
interest in being able to do so, it is senseless to argue
against the very conventions that make it the medium you
chose to use. If you wanted email or a web forum instead,
go use those!
Is it being a nazi to mention postings? If nobody mentions
the conventions, how will they be maintained when some are
too thick to notice them? It's not as though an observant
person can't see usenet is a bottom-posting medium with
exception of a few groups which cling desperately to
Microsoft's deficient email reader for the wrong task.
kony <spam@spam.com> wrote
> JAD <JOHN DOE@PORN_ADDY_ HARVESTER.com> wrote
>> bottom posting is always wrong when TOLD
>> to do it by a turd damn usenet nazi, GFY
> Nope.
Yep.
> It's a bit like littering in your yard.
Nope, NOTHING like.
> Do it once and it's no big deal, but keep doing it and
> have your neighbors do it too, and it becomes a mess.
Mindlessly silly. There are many situations in which top posting
makes more sense than bottom posting, most obviously when
the quoted material covers quite a bit of space. With top posting
you see the new material immediately, with bottom posting you
have to scroll thru the quoted material to see the new material.
And dont try to claim that the posted material should be trimmed,
with modern high bandwith systems it makes a lot more sense to
not trim so the entire context is immediately available in the post
if its required.
> The only reason people think shunning usenet conventions
There is no such 'convention', just mindless prats that demand things
be done they way they prefer to see them done. Always mindlessly.
> is not a big deal is that for the most part, usenet
> works because people DON'T shun them,
usenet actually works because both approaches
have their place. Interleaved comments in spades.
> because the majority of the conventions were still being used.
Wrong again. Email sees top posting more
common than not, and it works fine anyway.
> The more you make it an anything-goes environment
Thats ALWAYS been what usenet has always been.
Its as close to pure anarchy as you will ever see.
> without consistency, the worse it works.
Mindlessly silly with something like top posting or quoting.
> Since we, as-in everyone reading usenet, has an interest
> in being able to do so, it is senseless to argue against the
> very conventions that make it the medium you chose to use.
Completely off with the fucking fairys as always. usenet isnt
useful because so many bottom post, its useful because of
the content, stupid. The different approaches people take
with posting has nothing to do with how useful it is.
I personally prefer interleaved posting the bulk of the time,
but I'm not stupid enough to try demanding that everyone
should post like that because it aint gunna happen.
> If you wanted email or a web forum instead, go use those!
If I decide that top posting is appropriate, I will use it and
make an obscene gesture in the general direction of silly
little prats that dont actually have a clue about anything at all.
> Is it being a nazi to mention postings?
Its certainly being a nazi to demand that everyone who top posts
stop doing that. Thats all that prat ever does, never even makes
any contribution what so ever on anything else at all, ever.
> If nobody mentions the conventions, how will they be
> maintained when some are too thick to notice them?
They wont, and things will carry on fine regardless, stupid.
And you're the one so thick that you cant even manage
to grasp that top posting can be appropriate and that
usenet is a close to pure anarchy as you well ever see.
> It's not as though an observant person can't
> see usenet is a bottom-posting medium
Corse it isnt. Plenty interleave post.
> with exception of a few groups which cling desperately
> to Microsoft's deficient email reader for the wrong task.
There's plenty that top post that dont use that particular usenet reader.
>> The only reason people think shunning usenet conventions
>
> There is no such 'convention',
Since probably USENET's beginning, posting in context is not just a
convention here, posting in context distinguishes USENET from other
forums. Even more than post threading, posting in context makes
USENET outstanding. Posting in context can be extremely useful in
technical help groups like this one, and especially if you're the
person in need of help.
(now we return you to Rod Speed's regularly scheduled zealous
anti-convention convention)
Oh yeah?
You get no say to tell him he gets no say whatsoever on what is
'wrong'.
So there.
Path: newssvr12.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm05.news.prodigy. com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon 04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!b order1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!new sfeed.iinet.net.au!newsfeed.iinet.net.au!per-qv1-newsstorage1.iinet.net.au!per-qv1-newsstorage1.iinet.net.au!per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au!not-for-mail
From: "Fred" <fred fred.com>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware,alt. comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
References: <woj7h.18664$fh.3281 tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com> <ejklpg$kvd$1 aioe.server.aioe.org> <S%m7h.18676$fh.17515 tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com> <455E2CB8.CFCF077E yahoo.com> <455e5f1c$0$28179$5a62ac22 per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au> <455E6BFA.EDCF0420 yahoo.com> <_sD7h.18717$fh.2870 tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com> <455F09F1.84B0AD90 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: New Computer Build
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 07:45:45 +1100
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <455f70fc$0$28220$5a62ac22 per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 203.206.255.32
X-Trace: 1163882749 per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au 28220 203.206.255.32
Xref: prodigy.net alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt:225822 alt.comp.hardware:323645 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:479157
You get no say what so ever on what is 'wrong'
CBFalconer <cbfalconer yahoo.com> wrote:
> Jack Bruss wrote:
>> "CBFalconer" <cbfalconer yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> Fred wrote:
>>>> CBFalconer <cbfalconer yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Jack Bruss wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 -
>>>>>> $400.
>>>>>
>>>>> top-posted, thus ignored.
>>>>
>>>> Unlikely he actually gives a flying red fuck what you ignore.
>>>
>>> That's entirely up to him. However he may now have some idea that
>>> he is contravening normal usenet usage.
>>
>> Is this better?
>
> Much. Thanks for co-operating. Bottom posting is NEVER wrong.
John Doe <jdoe@usenetlove.invalid> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa gmail.com> wrote
>> kony <spam spam.com> wrote
>>> The only reason people think shunning usenet conventions
>> There is no such 'convention',
> Since probably USENET's beginning, posting in context is not just a convention
> here, posting in context distinguishes USENET from other forums.
That is a completely silly claim. Virtually all the
other forums had/have posting in context as well.
And that is a separate matter entirely to what is actually being discussed,
the three alternatives, bottom posting, top posting and interleaved posting.
> Even more than post threading, posting in context makes USENET outstanding.
Just as true of the other forums too.
And context is only relevant in SOME circumstances anyway.
> Posting in context can be extremely useful
> in technical help groups like this one,
Yes. But usenet isnt the only place you see posting in context.
> and especially if you're the person in need of help.
Its actually more useful for other than the OP, essentially because the
OP will always be aware of the context. Its those coming across the thread
in groups.google or just reading newsgroups that need the context more.
And that is a separate matter entirely to what is actually being discussed,
the three alternatives, bottom posting, top posting and interleaved posting.
> (now we return you to Rod Speed's regularly
> scheduled zealous anti-convention convention)
Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag, or even
manage to work out what is actually being discussed either.
No surprise that it needs to cower behind that pathetic excuse for a nick.
kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 07:45:00 +1100, "Fred" <fred@fred.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Or he's never given a flying red fuck about what prats like you
>> demand.
>>
>> There is no such animal as 'normal usenet usage'
>
>
> Are you claiming to be ignorant?
Nope, just rubbing your nose in that fact, stupid.
Fred wrote:
> kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 07:45:00 +1100, "Fred" <fred@fred.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Or he's never given a flying red fuck about what prats like you
>>>demand.
>>>
>>>There is no such animal as 'normal usenet usage'
>>
>>
>>Are you claiming to be ignorant?
>
>
> Nope, just rubbing your nose in that fact, stupid.
>
>
how does the trolling go, demented nitwit??
Jack Bruss wrote:
> We're looking for a low cost system - I'm thinking around $300 - $400.
With that price, you'd have to salvage a lot of parts.
And at 8 years old, the list is short.
Maybe:
Case, Kinda depends, You'll have to look.
Yes:
modem
sound card, if PCI
Ethernet card if PCI.
Optical drives, yes, but they're aging
No
Hard drive (aging, and the new standard is SATA, not IDE)
RAM, now DDR, not pc 100/133.
Processor.
Motherboard.
Power supply
Video card (new standard is PCIe, not AGP)
At that price you're better off buying a budget PC. But avoid the
emachines. They're a false economy, as they don't live that long.
Another way to obtain a newer PC at that price is secondhand, check
EBAY, some pretty powerful systems can be had at that price. Just pay
attention to what you're buying.
Dell, and some of the other manufacturers sell refurbished PCs, and
scratch and dent new ones at a good price, too. So check that out.
Jack Bruss wrote:
> I want to build a new computer for my father in law. He now has a 7 or 8
> year old Best Buy something or other. The monitor, speakers, and keyboard
> are ok, so we just need to get him a new system and optical mouse. My son
> and I have built several systems in the past, but the last was about 2 years
> ago, and I haven't kept up with the chip or mb types or terminology.
>
> So, I would appreciate some advice on the components to buy. I would most
> likely buy at Newegg, as I have always been treated well there. We are just
> looking for a basic system to do email, view photos, simple games, etc. We
> don't need any special extra power. He has a dial up connection only, so
> we'll need a modem, although I guess we can use the 56k modem he has, unless
> newer ones have some advantage.
>
> Thanks for any thoughts,
>
> Jack
>
>
Hi Jack,
I don't know if you've selected your system yet (this was posted about 5
days ago) but 300-400 is plenty reasonable for the system that you want.
I just spent $495 at newegg.com; everything but a new monitor, and my
new system is fast, efficient, and looks great, too. I got an AMD
socket 754 Sempron chip, a Biostar mobo with onboard video and sound,
case with built-in 450-W ps, 1G DDR memory, Samsung CD/DVDdrive/burner,
SATA Seagate 250G hdd. I already had a floppy drive (I still have lots
of doc's and lists of engineering tables on floppy discs so I need one),
had a few ethernet cards so used one of those, and I got a new USB2 hub
to replace my USB1 hub. The case has 2 usb rear and 2 usb front ports,
and a firewire port in the front as well. Got an IR mouse and new
keyboard, oh yeah, and some logitech speakers w/a subwoofer that for the
price kicks butt (I don't listen to it too loud, but I like the quality
better than the standard desktop cheap speakers). I use this system for
3D modeling, work, email, analysis (matlab/mathematica, statistics,
etc), photos, watching movies, very little gaming and no
processor-intensive games. Right now this system would probably cost
more, a few of my components were on sale, but you can do REALLY well at
newegg. It was also the first one i built completely by myself, and it
was way simple, everything fit, worked great first time.
newegg is definitely the way to go.
regards,
karinne
New Computer Build 
Linear Mode
