hilarious picture
The point was (which I elaborated on in a later post) that the IT equipment is never anywhere near approaching the largest expense involved in employing someone, if you replace kit every 3 years. If someone doesn't need a laptop, don't give them a laptop. But don't hand out some heavy plastic £400 heap of garbage and wonder why people don't get much done. £1300 over 3 years is £36 per month, which is around the cost of a phone contract. It's not a huge expense.
ITs job is to bring value to the business, not to spend as little as possible.
The point was (which I elaborated on in a later post) that the IT equipment is never anywhere near approaching the largest expense involved in employing someone, if you replace kit every 3 years. If someone doesn't need a laptop, don't give them a laptop. But don't hand out some heavy plastic £400 heap of garbage and wonder why people don't get much done. £1300 over 3 years is £36 per month, which is around the cost of a phone contract. It's not a huge expense.
ITs job is to bring value to the business, not to spend as little as possible.
But you wouldn't provide an employee with a company phone if they didn't require one, would you?
Besides, £25/month (the difference between a £1300 and £400 laptop) x 50 is £1,250/month, or enough for an extra employee @ £15k (which is around what you'd pay a bottom of the ladder admin/data entry person).
Would 50 people with i7/16GB/SSD/dedicated GPU be able to do more data entry than 51 people with i3/6GB/mechanical drive/integrated graphics?
(Hint: I doubt the hardware is the bottleneck)
All you need for the average business machine is an i5 CPU and integrated graphics.
I would argue that for your average productivity worker who spends their day in Office and maybe a couple of LOB applications, an i5 is way OTT.
I'm not advocating workstations for everyone. But saving £100 to get a spinning disk is at best short-sighted.
The £1300 figure that people are getting hung up on is including stuff like 3 years of Dell ProSupport as well, it's not all pure hardware cost.
Of course if you spent £850 less per laptop you could afford to have a couple of spares ready for deployment, meaning you wouldn't need the pro-support![]()
You can't buy a decent machine for £450, this is a pointless discussion.
Well...whilst I see where you're coming from, I disagree. Unless you have a very large team with members specifically managing the building and maintaining of the spares (trying to balance this on a busy service desk is a nightmare sometimes) then realistically that isn't feasible.
We would keep 10 spare laptops in stock, ready to swap out to people if needed then had Dell come in on a next day repair service for any hardware failures. They then got their laptop back usually within 24hrs. The support is still essential.
It's also a valid reason to refresh the machines, to keep them in warranty.
Depends on the size of your user base surely? If you only have 20-30 users then it's perfectly feasible to "self support" any hardware failures.
Obviously if you have 2-300 then I agree, it becomes a bit more difficult![]()
I would argue that for your average productivity worker who spends their day in Office and maybe a couple of LOB applications, an i5 is way OTT.
Really? You can buy a perfectly usable for a couple of hundred if you just want to browse the net and do office work![]()
Clearly your opinion of a 'decent' machine is completely different from many others.
Also, there is a big difference between 'decent' and 'surplus to requirement'
If you're employing 50 new staff and can't afford 50 good (£1300) laptops then you can't afford the staff.