How low can we really go?

[Marian Petrides]

Simply because I can not test at less than this configuration, the PC 
version of my software specifies PII at 300 mHZ and 64 meg RAM, running 
Win 95/98, XP or 2000  (couldn't test Win ME),  CD drive, 800X600 
resolution-higher preferred.

On Mac, again because I can't test lower:   G3 or G4 running OS 9 or X 
(someone actually tried it with 8.x and it worked, too) 64 meg RAM 
(lowest actually tested was 128 meg), CD drive, 800X600 
resolution-higher preferred).

Because most hospital IS managers discourage (actually often do not 
allow) installation of software on networked machines, the software is 
designed to run off CD and is loaded in relatively small but 
self-sufficient modules from CD, reducing the requirements 
considerably.

M


On Jul 18, 2004, at 3:37 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
>