How low can we really go?
revdan at danshafer.com
Sun Jul 18 17:35:15 CDT 2004
I think the issue of how low you can go is, in part at least, a
function of the product you build and the market(s) you target.
In one of my clients' case, e.g., he is willing to say that his
customers need an OS X system and must set their display resolution at
1024x768 or better. I wouldn't necessarily recommend that minimum combo
for consumer software.
On Jul 18, 2004, at 12:37 PM, Judy Perry wrote:
> I asked this question a while back and I don't think anybody responded
> at the risk of being a supreme annoyance, I'm going to ask again.
> What does everyone -- especially those who actually ship commercial
> products done with Rev -- believe to be the lowest common denominator
> hardware/software configuration for adequate performance?
> My question is prompted by two things. First, when demo-ing my
> project (an intro to Rev done in Rev), it was on 128 MB RAM PII
> running Windows2000. And performance really sucked. The same thing
> on a
> G4 128MB RAM Mac in OS 9.2 was tolerable/sucked much less. Also, I've
> noticed that students' files on their PC laptops (unknown processor)
> 128 MB RAM run less well than on our lab Macs described above.
> Additionally, on said lab Macs, I've noticed that when students are
> working on multimedia-intensive stacks, that if they run the
> animation/sound/QT movie enough times, the stack simply grinds to a
> and refuses to play the media; quitting Rev and relaunching seems to
> the problem, which doesn't occur/occur as frequently with a Mac with
> MB RAM and OS 10.x.
> Second, knowing what this lowest common denominator is is important for
> deployment in education (and if anyone wonders why I keep harping on
> market, notice that Rev's ONLY ed bulk license deal on their website is
> for K-12/pre-higher ed). I note that Rev's website notes that compiled
> apps can run under Windows 3.11, which I find extremely difficult to
> believe. Even if it does, my experience with 128 MB RAM/PII/Win2000 is
> that nobody in their right mind would *want* it to.
> Mind you, I'm not *complaining* that it doesn't run well under Win3.11,
> merely that it shouldn't be oversold such that people (maybe middle
> schools with PI or PII machines running Win95/98) don't buy it
> thinking it
> will be an ideal solution and then be thoroughly disgusted with its
> performance or lack thereof. The other thing is that I don't see any
> reference at all to required processor.
> I'd like to do whatever I can to make Rev embraceable to the K-12 and
> teacher ed community, so understanding just how low we can *reasonably*
> go is critically important.
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
More information about the use-livecode