A good answer will have dates, operating systems, processors, memory, CPUs - as much detail as possible!
- For some context, both this and http://qanda.digipres.org/212/criteria-should-consider-determining-hardware-imaging-station came out of my comment/question at #digpres14 which was both an actual and a meta question. I was curious how "info seeking" we want to allow questions to be.
In this instance, I was building an imaging-only workstation (not a FRED, but a built-from-scratch custom machine for use imaging floppies, zip/jaz, external/internal drives, cards, etc) and wanted to aggregate hardware specs, processor, OSes, "features" (like # of ports), etc, and costs from multiple institutions that have built ad-hoc forensic workstations.
I had 3 or 4 examples from research and conversation -- enough to demonstrate a variability in balancing price/performance/functionality that suggested more documented cases would help me (and others) in picking/choosing and decision-making. Thus, it is a bit of "fishing" question -- not seeking a specific answer, but multiple answers to better document what institutions are doing in order to assist others looking to do the same. Such info would be better documented here than elsewhere (was my general thinking). But I acknowledge a wariness of listicle-type questions ("Check Out the Specs on the Summer's Top 25 Hottest Digital Forensics Workstations!") on this site.
I think we determined asking those/these types of questions is okay. In this case, the related question Andy mentions is a closer to the spirit of the actual question.