VS .NET
-
Is everyone else finding that VS.Net runs like a dog on anything less than a 1gig machine. I have just removed it from my computer and put VS6 back on it , screw .NET .:(( What Intel gives, Microsoft will soon take away.
I was running Beta 1 on a P3 650, though it wasn't very stable it was livable. Since then I upgraded to a TBird 1GHz though :-D I've also increased how much RAM my computer had from 384MB to 1.5GB. James Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki "Smile your little smile, take some tea with me awhile. And every day we'll turn another page. Behind our glass we'll sit and look at our ever-open book, One brown mouse sitting in a cage." "One Brown Mouse" from Heavy Horses, Jethro Tull 1978
-
Is everyone else finding that VS.Net runs like a dog on anything less than a 1gig machine. I have just removed it from my computer and put VS6 back on it , screw .NET .:(( What Intel gives, Microsoft will soon take away.
I was running beta 2 on my 450MHz laptop, 128Mb RAM running W2K server and SQL Server 2000. Once it got up and running (you can do it! C'mon! load up!) it ran fine. I've now got it on a 850MHz with 256Mb and it's fine. No problems whatsoever. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Is everyone else finding that VS.Net runs like a dog on anything less than a 1gig machine. I have just removed it from my computer and put VS6 back on it , screw .NET .:(( What Intel gives, Microsoft will soon take away.
I have VS.NET Enterprise Architect on a AthlonXP 1800+, 512M ram and plenty of hard drive space on Windows XP. In my machine it runs way faster that VS6.
Eddie Velasquez: A Squeezed Devil (Don't you just love that anagram craze?)
Checkout GUIDGen.NET -
Is everyone else finding that VS.Net runs like a dog on anything less than a 1gig machine. I have just removed it from my computer and put VS6 back on it , screw .NET .:(( What Intel gives, Microsoft will soon take away.
Looks like just the thing my 1.6GHz 768Mb 80Gb Dell needs to bring it to its knees. :) /ravi "There is always one more bug..." http://www.ravib.com ravib@ravib.com
-
Is everyone else finding that VS.Net runs like a dog on anything less than a 1gig machine. I have just removed it from my computer and put VS6 back on it , screw .NET .:(( What Intel gives, Microsoft will soon take away.
I'm using it at home on a PIII 600MHz with 512MB ram, and at work on a P4 1.3GHz with 256 MB ram. Both places it runs perfectly good. Actually it runs a bit better on my home pc, but I guess that's because it have more ram, and some fast SCSI-disks :) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
I was running beta 2 on my 450MHz laptop, 128Mb RAM running W2K server and SQL Server 2000. Once it got up and running (you can do it! C'mon! load up!) it ran fine. I've now got it on a 850MHz with 256Mb and it's fine. No problems whatsoever. cheers, Chris Maunder
You ran Win2k Server on a laptop :omg:? I found it okay on my old 35mhz k6-2 (upgraded since, however). [edit] I mean my 350mhz k6-2. Now that would've been sloooowwwwww :D. -- Andrew.
-
Is everyone else finding that VS.Net runs like a dog on anything less than a 1gig machine. I have just removed it from my computer and put VS6 back on it , screw .NET .:(( What Intel gives, Microsoft will soon take away.
P4 1.6 Mhz 512 RAM But I have to restart it from time to time. If you are doing intense debugging (Mixed mode) with debug symbols insalled for all the system files debugging becomes very slow. So from time to time I have to remove debug symbols from g:\windows\system32 and copy them back
-
Is everyone else finding that VS.Net runs like a dog on anything less than a 1gig machine. I have just removed it from my computer and put VS6 back on it , screw .NET .:(( What Intel gives, Microsoft will soon take away.
I have noticed I've only got 128MB, do you think 600MHz and 128MB is a bad combination????????
-
I have noticed I've only got 128MB, do you think 600MHz and 128MB is a bad combination????????
Absolutely. 128 MB is hardly sufficient even for VS6. What OS are you using? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com
-
You ran Win2k Server on a laptop :omg:? I found it okay on my old 35mhz k6-2 (upgraded since, however). [edit] I mean my 350mhz k6-2. Now that would've been sloooowwwwww :D. -- Andrew.
I wrote CodeProject on this crusty old thing! :D cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Is everyone else finding that VS.Net runs like a dog on anything less than a 1gig machine. I have just removed it from my computer and put VS6 back on it , screw .NET .:(( What Intel gives, Microsoft will soon take away.
One thing is for sure - VS.NET is slooooooooow at checking dependencies (I was using Beta 2). On my dual Athelon /w 512mb, it took over a minute to check dependencies for a workspace of about 30 projects. X| Imagine waiting that long every time you hit the compile button... -Oz --- Grab WndTabs from http://www.wndtabs.com to make your VC++ experience that much more comfortable...
-
Is everyone else finding that VS.Net runs like a dog on anything less than a 1gig machine. I have just removed it from my computer and put VS6 back on it , screw .NET .:(( What Intel gives, Microsoft will soon take away.
Computer: 1.7G P4, 512M RAM I installed VS.NET Beta2 on an IDE drive (UltraATA/66, I think) and load times were tolerable. My brain then turned on, and I uninstalled and reinstalled it on my Ultra160 SCSI drive. Load time is now pretty much instantaneous. Moral of the story - disk access is as much a factor of load time as processor speed and memory size. Since IDE has to utilize CPU cycles to move data around, I'd say that it matters even more on a slower machine when you're loading a behemoth like VS.NET. But, of course, there's no way getting around the fact that VS.NET is monstrous ;) -- Russell Morris "WOW! Chocolate - half price!" - Homer Simpson, while in the land of chocolate.
-
Absolutely. 128 MB is hardly sufficient even for VS6. What OS are you using? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com