 What machine do you own?, What am I developing for? |
  |
 Aug 6 2004, 07:30 PM
Post
#26
|
|
|
Man In The Machine  Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,264 Joined: 26-February 02 From: I-495 S Member No.: 1,105  |
Desktop: T-Bird 1.2 with 512 megs DDR ram
Laptop: Celron 300 with 128 megs SD ram |
 |
 
|
|
Aug 12 2004, 12:35 PM
Post
#27
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 637 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,528 |
On JAVA (developing in that Stuff since 1999):
- Get one of the current versions (1.4.2 i.e) - RAM, lot's of RAM. I take a PIII/800 with 512MB over a 1.2GHz machine any time - You can get a decent performance with machines from a PIII/800, 256MB onward (our current test unit) - JAVA is a rugged, stable language due to it's error handling abilities. And the "Write once, fail everywhere" is great. We write complex (3-tier, J2EE(EJB), 400+ classes) applications and as long as the database data is the same, I can reproduce every error the customer reports. Even though his server is a big SOLARIS Box and I use Windows XP and/or Linux. Great for debugging - Make sure that the Applet (if you use one) uses the JAVA Plugin, not the old integrated machine - JAVA is no excuse for lousy coding. Birdy |
|
|
|
|
Aug 19 2004, 10:04 PM
Post
#28
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 88 Joined: 22-August 03 From: Central New York Member No.: 5,531 |
I curse you all, I'm stuck with a laptop thats runing a 1 gig celeron, 256 ram.
|
|
|
|
|
Aug 26 2004, 05:21 AM
Post
#29
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 138 Joined: 1-September 02 From: France Member No.: 3,208 |
No JAVA please.
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 11 2004, 09:01 AM
Post
#30
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 392 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Hamburg, Germany Member No.: 1,270 |
And why's that? I always like to have arguments to back up oppinions... |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Sep 27 2004, 04:59 PM
Post
#31
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 639 Joined: 22-April 02 Member No.: 2,638 |
Sandman,
how's it going with your app? Did you make a final decision on language? [edit] oh... AMD-64 3400+ w/ 1GB RAM, 17" widescreen notebook :D [/edit] |
|
|
|
|
Oct 19 2004, 06:49 PM
Post
#32
|
|
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 11 Joined: 31-December 03 Member No.: 5,945 |
1.2GHz P4 processor, 512MB RAM, dual monitors. :-)
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 02:29 PM
Post
#33
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
looks like the "average" is a % of 7.7% on the poll.
The lowest 7.79% is a "Pentium 3 under 1 GHz, less then 256 MB RAM" Given the large amount of people who have "less then 256 MB RAM", seems like no matter the processor that you might look into building for lower RAM. Personally, I would build it for the "Pentium 3 under 1 GHz, less then 256 MB RAM". Everybody else would just enjoy ZOOM speed while at least the P3/1G/256-ers would be able to use it at normal speed. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 04:52 PM
Post
#34
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Er? By my count, there are only 16 people with under 256 megs of RAM as compared to 32 in the 2.0+GHz/512+MB RAM category alone.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 05:07 PM
Post
#35
|
|
|
Immoral Elf Group: Members Posts: 15,247 Joined: 29-March 02 From: Grimy Pete's Bar & Laundromat Member No.: 2,486 |
Put me down for the lower end of the spectrum. I'm on a laptop.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 05:16 PM
Post
#36
|
|
|
Shooting Target Group: Members Posts: 1,512 Joined: 16-August 03 From: Northampton Member No.: 5,499 |
Got an Athlon 2200+ with 512 Ram. So i clicked Pentium 4 with over 512.
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 27 2004, 05:22 PM
Post
#37
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 288 Joined: 3-December 03 From: Boston, Mass Member No.: 5,874 |
I remember in 1998 when the head of IT for the University of Texas at Arlington tried to convince us in our HTML class that PHP & all CGI were dinosaurs and would be over taken by Java.
Predictions are fun, especially when folks act like they know what there talking about. |
|
|
|
|
Oct 28 2004, 12:27 PM
Post
#38
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
Add up the %'s and divide by the amount of options that have more than 0 votes. The result is 7.7% A good way to go is to base on the lower versions so you get more people. In this case...you'd gain 16 more people. Us up in the sweet 32 area will always be capable of running what the lesser performance machines are so we won't lose anything and his program is more widely useable cross platform and cross performance wise. [edit]the numbers have since changed...and now you have 22 people in that braket[/edit] |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Oct 28 2004, 12:39 PM
Post
#39
|
|
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,008 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
It also depends on what OS they're running. Someone running System 6 with 64 megs of RAM will be flying, while the same RAM on OSX or XP is woefully insufficient.
~J |
|
|
|
|
Oct 28 2004, 12:44 PM
Post
#40
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 11-December 02 From: The other end of your computer screen Member No.: 3,724 |
What is your OS of choice? :grinbig:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 18th February 2025 - 10:17 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.