Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!nntp.coast.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!jnedzel
From: jnedzel@netcom.com (Jared Nedzel)
Subject: Re: Is VisualAge a dead product?
Message-ID: <jnedzelDoIr3E.5Dw@netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
References: <9603192047.AA26341@kmglmail.wipsys.soft.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 14:33:14 GMT
Lines: 21
Sender: jnedzel@netcom8.netcom.com

In article <9603192047.AA26341@kmglmail.wipsys.soft.net> "A.Raghavendra" <araghu@KMGLMAIL.WIPSYS.SOFT.NET> writes:
>        I have just started using VisualAge 2.0 for SmallTalk on a 486 with
>16Mb RAM and 520Mb harddisk.The development time environment is very slow.If
>I want to save the image or add an insatance variable, it takes atleast 10
>mins.My image file size is 12Mb.Is it due to this?If so how to reduce image
>file size?Is version 3.0 faster?


Your problem is that your system is not sufficient to adequately run the
development environment.  IBM recommends 24 Mb of RAM.  I recommend a Pentium
with 32Mb.  If you have a fast 486 (e.g., 66Mhz or greater), you can 
probably do okay by adding another 16Mb of memory.  If you have a slow
486 (e.g., 486sx 25Mhz), you 'll be better off just getting a new Pentium
based machine.


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jared Nedzel  					jnedzel@netcom.com
MRC Partners

Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean there isn't someone out to get me
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
