[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Subject: Re: RB2006r1 VERY VERY Slow
From: "Daniel L. Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 19 Feb 2006 17:44:56 -0800
My $ 0.02 on this issue...
* I (within reason) couldn't care less about the size of the final
application I'm building. Broadband is dominant, HD's are HUGE, and
computers are shipping with 512 and 1 GB of RAM. 9 MB of one-time growth due
to the 200x framework is nothing in today's computing environment. A
compiler that does a better job of stripping unused framework objects would
be nice, but it's not the priority level of the speed issue and bugs.
The following is on IMHO:
if the application is huge it is becaus it was not been optimized.
if the application was not optimized (and so is huge, have a large footprint),
it became fat and slow.
if the application is fat and slow, it needs faster computer, faster hard disk,
larger internet speed, ....
you see what I mean.
Do you remember AppleWorks ? The one who rans in the Apple II computers ? The
one who was running in a 800KB floppy disk with enough room to add the OS
(ProDOS) and enough room to save data in the same floppy ?
In some way I compare Apple and Oranges since that AppleWorks didn't have a
graphical interface, but the other AppleWorks (AppleWorks GS) had a graphic
interface and ran on a less than 3MHz computer and needed only 1MB of RAM...
For the record, it was the team that wrote AppleWorks GS who wrote the Macintosh
AppleWorks 1 version... Do you remember the size of that version ? (less than
1MB)...
Cheers,
Emile
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
