Home – New Forums Tell me straight… Technophobes (and Geeks) wanted! Reply To: Technophobes (and Geeks) wanted!

#1172163
Lion IT
Member
  • Total posts: 4
Up
0
::

Hi Craig,
thanks for your review! And sorry if I’ll put more questions on the plate here :)

Craig.Smith, post: 199906 wrote:
Step 2)
There are 3 options Professional, Gaming, Multimedia and I can only select one option. What if I needed a machine which consisted of a bit of all these scenarios (personal computer for home), how would I know which one to select.

Yeah, I suspected that could generate confusion. Thanks for raising it.
The reason behind such a defined and hard separation is that some components are too specific; think at the Nvidia Quadro series professional graphic cards, waste of money on an home or gaming PC, but gold on a CAD workstation.

Many components are common to all three use scenarios but the priorities are different too so the need of this solution to generate only builds really appropriate to what the user will do with his/her system.

“Multimedia” (the rightmost option) perfectly suits a home PC, characterized by a variable workload with more weight on internet and multimedia content fruition and creation.
This choice offers a good processor, memory and graphic processing power and big hard drives to accommodate huge collections of films, photos and music. It also gives preference to contained (small cases, suitable for HTPC use) and silent builds (with the lowest possible power consumption and thermal output).
While the focus is on multimedia capabilities it wouldn’t preclude a professional use. I would advice against it for other reasons like “my son did something here, it doesn’t boot and I have all my invoices on this drive”…but that’s another story :)

Do you think that having clear application examples here like “3D Modeling, CAD Drawing, Photo & Video Editing” instead of a plain “Professional” could help?

And as a bonus question, have you used the tooltips (the small question marks near the various options)? These explain a little better what the options offers, but I now suspect that these should be more evident.

Craig.Smith, post: 199906 wrote:
Step 3)
I found some odd behavior with using a varied slider. At one point I was showing a build and I increased my budget but it returned a machine with a lower price. I increased my budget even more, and it returned a machine which was over my budget. I guess you need to make a decision that if I put in a budget of $2500, should you be returning a machine which costs say $2600 i.e. the budget is a hard constraint or a soft constraint.

These are the reviews I love!
The database contains near 300 components (and growing) but even with so many possibilities and a fine grained tuning sometimes is needed to spend a few dollars more to obtain a sensible performance jump. I’ll work on limiting that behavior.
The jump back to a lower budget after a slider increase will be fixed ASAP.

Craig.Smith, post: 199906 wrote:
I think the upgrade/downgrade options could a little nicer, I would prefer to see a slider so I can see all the options, rather than just an upgrade or downgrade button.

I really like this idea! Never thought about something similar. I’ll work to implement it!

Craig.Smith, post: 199906 wrote:
In terms of SEO, it would appear there has been no effort put into optimising yet. The website is very light on content and doesn’t address any of the technical side of SEO.

SEO was left out of the project. Is not something I plan to rely heavily upon, either now or in the near future. Definitely I can optimize it more to be more Google friendly.

Thank you again for the time you put reviewing it.
I’ll gladly offer you a free consultation about your “IT ecosystem” should you need it!
If something can be done more reliably and efficiently we’ll achieve it!