This morning, I arrived at work, booted my machine and launched the core applications I need before even thinking of starting to work: Outlook, so that I can read the e-mail I might have received, Chrome, to see what is new in JIRA, and of course Eclipse which will be used for all development.
Can you guess how long it took to boot and launch only those three? 10 or 15 minutes. Not so much. Just a quarter of an hour lost before even beginning working.
And even once all this was finally up (Eclipse easily took three full minutes), just reading and answering e-mail was a pain. Opening a new tab in Chrome made me wait twenty seconds before I could begin typing in the omnibar, my input for a new message in Outlook had a delay of several seconds, …
It is my (maybe not-so-humble, sorry) opinion that when a developer is faster than his/her machine, there is a problem.
At home, booting1 takes two minutes (half of it being after Windows started). That is already undoubtedly faster than what I have at work, but applications launch in a few seconds too, and they never lag once they are up. Admittedly, I have a killer machine (there was a reason for buying it, even if it is gone now).
But that gives some thinking: lost time is lost money for a company. Which is the most advantageous between losing developer time or buying a efficient machine?