[Luna] Vista requirements (beating a dead horse)

[Ryan Carrico]

I disagree with the assessment of code optimization and developer  
mentality.

Architectural optimization does matter to the developers however  
there are generally two major issues to contend with regarding the  
creation, maintenance, and subsequent distribution of optimized code.  
The first is 'the purse' business units generally do not want to  
invest in the build out and support for a new compile cluster for  
audience groups (architecture profiles or configuration subsets  
thereof)  B, C, D, etc. when the binaries generated for audience A  
will suffice within reasonable limits. You must also take into  
account additional hidden costs for additional compile clusters and  
their subsequent output which also include quality assurance testing,  
post compile management, and post release patch management of the  
final product(s). This is an issue of basic bottom line economics  
especially for a company which has public stock. Essentially, these  
issues regarding quality will persist as long as the consumer  
population is willing to endure 'Memory is cheap' scenarios where  
companies adhere to a profit maximization versus a customer quality  
doctrine.

But what do I know.

Ryan C.

On Nov 14, 2006, at 11:13 AM, Patrick Fleming, EA wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
>
> Andrew Roazen wrote:
>
>
>> There's been a lot of FUD about Vista's requirements. AFAIK it  
>> will run
>> in 512Mb RAM, albeit not optimally. As a guy with a 256Mb laptop  
>> running
>> Ubuntu/XP, 1Gb ought to be a base requirement for most new computers
>> until such time as code optimization actually matters to runtime
>> developers. Memory is cheap.
>
> I don't know about FUD. MS states that you can run Vista on 512mb RAM
> with a 800mhz processor. But with that you have essentially "ugly XP"
>
> A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:
>
>     * 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor1.
>     * 1 GB of system memory.
>     * Support for DirectX 9 graphics with a WDDM driver, 128 MB of
> graphics memory (minimum)2, Pixel Shader 2.0 and 32 bits per pixel.
>     * 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
>     * DVD-ROM Drive3.
>     * Audio output capability.
>     * Internet access capability.
>
> So to me that means you will have to have at least those minimums  
> to run
> it "properly". A new basic computer these days will almost support  
> that
> with the exception of the video card (from what I've seen).
>
>>
>> More importantly, 1Gb is mandatory for frameworks like Xen, and if  
>> the
>> hype's to be believed, Xen is going to be a pretty big deal in  
>> both the
>> MS/GNU worlds over the next few years.
>
> If what you are talking about is http://www.xensource.com/ it looks to
> me like a server product, although many a developer and everyday geek
> will install it. And the minimums for Xen look to be 1.5Ghz cpu 1g  
> RAM,
> with 2g the recommendation.
>
> I would think that Scott's approach is to look to the needs of the
> spreadsheet jockey/administrative assistant/office grunt to see that a
> 1Ghz machine means lots of landfill. Especially when you consider that
> many would have bought bottom end machines to run XP or even 2k on.
> These machines are now obsolete for upgrade purposes but are  
> perfect for
> today's *nix installs, for dumb terminals or even to run as servers
> depending upon load and applications.
>
>> The major issue down
>> the road is how successfully MS will be able to get people to abandon
>> Vista once its replacement is ready: their track record on this is
>> pretty awful compared to personal/business *nix users (OS X  
>> included).
>> In the case of Apple, this is helped strongly by the amount of  
>> software
>> (commercial and FOSS) which doesn't support OSes more than one  
>> release
>> behind current if even that.
>>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFFWgdbIFnqWH4u/3MRAijDAJ4z8GLzePEAiIk5qwSCODkPDItuDACgqqJo
> TzIvoyB7JAVfEzbp6a+emQ0=
> =hSYz
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Luna mailing list
> Luna at lists.flaglug.org
> http://lists.flaglug.org/mailman/listinfo/luna

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 478 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.flaglug.org/pipermail/luna/attachments/20061125/21ec4cb2/attachment.bin