On Mon, Dec 20, 1999 at 05:55:52PM -0800, noisebrain wrote:
>
> Aren't we forgetting something in this discussion?
>
> Average PC has 64M, you want to write an application that runs
> on this PC, your dev environment (JBuilder or whatever)
> has, in addition to the application, a compiler, the I
Aren't we forgetting something in this discussion?
Average PC has 64M, you want to write an application that runs
on this PC, your dev environment (JBuilder or whatever)
has, in addition to the application, a compiler, the IDE, a debugger...
...your development environment is probably going to
Nathan,
>Whoa, Kornel... we disagree on very little, if anything. You're welcome
>to point out deficiencies in the sample implementation, and I hope I'm
>welcome to point out that it *is* a sample implementation (which is why
>there's a market for companies like TowerJ to create *real*
>implement
kornel c wrote:
>
> Dear Nathan,
>
> >But, such considerations aside, it is useful to understand what problems
> >are inherent versus what are implementation details. Some of Java's
>
> I do understand memory management. I just don't necessarily want to have to
> care about it in Java: Java is
Dear Nathan,
>But, such considerations aside, it is useful to understand what problems
>are inherent versus what are implementation details. Some of Java's
I do understand memory management. I just don't necessarily want to have to
care about it in Java: Java is advertised as an environment whic
kornel c wrote:
>
> Dear Nathan,
>
> >Be careful of getting too hung up on the numbers. Memory management is a
> >bit of an art, and different JDKs take different approaches to fitting
>
> It wasn't me who got hung up on the numbers, it was my OS. Hey, I wouldn't
> have even noticed the memory
Dear Nathan,
>Be careful of getting too hung up on the numbers. Memory management is a
>bit of an art, and different JDKs take different approaches to fitting
It wasn't me who got hung up on the numbers, it was my OS. Hey, I wouldn't
have even noticed the memory requirements for long had it not
quot;Hello World" until I tweaked it down to 4 MB manually.
>
> -kornel
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Nathan Meyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Brian Pomerantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
. On Solaris each intance
took up 20 MB for a "Hello World" until I tweaked it down to 4 MB manually.
-kornel
- Original Message -
From: Nathan Meyers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Brian Pomerantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
S
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 09:01:17PM +, Nicholas Wright wrote:
> Hi
>
> Re: 128MB minimum memory - JBuilder was a big application on Windows... what
> makes you think it would be smaller written in Java?
Actually JBuilder Foundation is more efficient than the previous
versions because we had
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 02:34:27PM -0800, Nathan Meyers wrote:
> Java is a memory hog... it's not JBuilder, it's Java. I've found that
> my system was pretty much useless for any Java work at 64M. When Linux
> JDKs catch up with some of the improvements now being enjoyed in other
> environments (l
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 03:34:01PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
> The success of any product depends on the advantages it offers and failure
> always depends on restrictions it imposes. Most of the users will be using 64MB
> RAM systems. For JBuilder on Linux should they add more me
>
> To: José Romildo Malaquias <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: Adam Ambrose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Blackdown JDK vs Sun/Inprise
> Mail-Followup-To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9_Romildo_Malaquias?=
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adam Ambrose <[EMAIL PRO
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 01:47:18PM -0500, Alan Hazelton wrote:
>
> I agree with your surprise though. It seems quite outrageous to require so
> much memory for an application. I think the JBuilder team should have spent
> a bit more time trimming the memory requirements before rushing the produ
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 01:47:18PM -0500, Alan Hazelton wrote:
>
> José Romildo Malaquias wrote:
>
> > The recommended minimum memory is 128MB! Is that really need? I have
> > only 64MB. Would it be worth downloading and experimenting? Is anybody
> > else using JBuilder under Linux with less tha
Hi,
The success of any product depends on the advantages it offers and failure
always depends on restrictions it imposes. Most of the users will be using 64MB
RAM systems. For JBuilder on Linux should they add more memory? I do not agree
with you. If it is not on Linux the product would have gon
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 04:10:05PM -0200, José Romildo Malaquias wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 09:37:51AM -0800, Adam Ambrose wrote:
> > Yes, you just need to fill out a million forms to get it, but you can
> > get it for free from the Inprise web site:
> > http://www.inprise.com/jbuilder/found
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 01:26:56PM -0200, José Romildo Malaquias wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 04:40:47PM -0500, Alan Hazelton wrote:
> > I've got a Redhat 6.1 system with the Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 RC3
> > installed. I installed the Borland Jbuilder 3 foundation IDE. It runs
> > ok except for a
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 04:10:05PM -0200, José Romildo Malaquias wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 09:37:51AM -0800, Adam Ambrose wrote:
> > Yes, you just need to fill out a million forms to get it, but you can
> > get it for free from the Inprise web site:
> > http://www.inprise.com/jbuilder/found
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 01:47:18PM -0500, Alan Hazelton wrote:
>
> José Romildo Malaquias wrote:
>
> > The recommended minimum memory is 128MB! Is that really need? I have
> > only 64MB. Would it be worth downloading and experimenting? Is anybody
> > else using JBuilder under Linux with less tha
José Romildo Malaquias wrote:
> The recommended minimum memory is 128MB! Is that really need? I have
> only 64MB. Would it be worth downloading and experimenting? Is anybody
> else using JBuilder under Linux with less than the recommended 128MB?
I tried it with 48MB and it was almost unusable.
> On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 09:37:51AM -0800, Adam Ambrose wrote:
> > Yes, you just need to fill out a million forms to get it, but you can
> > get it for free from the Inprise web site:
> > http://www.inprise.com/jbuilder/foundation/
>
> The recommended minimum memory is 128MB! Is that really need
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 09:37:51AM -0800, Adam Ambrose wrote:
> Yes, you just need to fill out a million forms to get it, but you can
> get it for free from the Inprise web site:
> http://www.inprise.com/jbuilder/foundation/
The recommended minimum memory is 128MB! Is that really need? I have
onl
On Fri, Dec 17, 1999 at 01:26:56PM -0200, José Romildo Malaquias wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 04:40:47PM -0500, Alan Hazelton wrote:
> > I've got a Redhat 6.1 system with the Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 RC3
> > installed. I installed the Borland Jbuilder 3 foundation IDE. It runs
> > ok except for a
On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 04:40:47PM -0500, Alan Hazelton wrote:
> I've got a Redhat 6.1 system with the Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 RC3
> installed. I installed the Borland Jbuilder 3 foundation IDE. It runs
> ok except for a few little annoyances. [...]
Is there a downloadable version of JBuilder 3 for
Alan Hazelton wrote:
>
> I've got a Redhat 6.1 system with the Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 RC3
> installed. I installed the Borland Jbuilder 3 foundation IDE. It runs
> ok except for a few little annoyances. One of which is the fact that
> the "Exit" item is missing from the File menu and the Window m
Brian Pomerantz wrote:
> It is a solution to the problem, though. The Sun JDK doesn't have
> that problem with JBuilder. I also found it to be more responsive
> running JBuilder than the Blackdown JDK is.
Speaking of advantages to the Sun/Inprise JDK, anybody know about how it
handles older or
On Wed, Dec 15, 1999 at 04:40:47PM -0500, Alan Hazelton wrote:
> I've got a Redhat 6.1 system with the Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 RC3
> installed. I installed the Borland Jbuilder 3 foundation IDE. It runs
> ok except for a few little annoyances. One of which is the fact that
> the "Exit" item is miss
I've got a Redhat 6.1 system with the Blackdown JDK 1.2.2 RC3
installed. I installed the Borland Jbuilder 3 foundation IDE. It runs
ok except for a few little annoyances. One of which is the fact that
the "Exit" item is missing from the File menu and the Window manager's
Close item doesn't do a
29 matches
Mail list logo
