How low can we really go?

[Dan Shafer]

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:

> Hi,
>
> I asked this question a while back and I don't think anybody responded 
> so,
> 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 
> master's
> project (an intro to Rev done in Rev), it was on 128 MB RAM PII 
> machines
> 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) 
> with
> 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 
> halt
> and refuses to play the media; quitting Rev and relaunching seems to 
> solve
> the problem, which doesn't occur/occur as frequently with a Mac with 
> 512
> 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 
> this
> 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.
>
> Judy
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>