), but earlier?
I'm trying to assemble system Requirements for a completed project.
TIA,
Joe Wilkins
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences
Hi Mark,
Thanks for your response; so a 3.0 RunRev stack may run OK on Windows
98 or later?
TIA,
Joe Wilkins
On Sep 29, 2008, at 12:33 AM, Mark Schonewille wrote:
Hi Joe,
A standalone may be able to start up on Win 3.11 but will be rather
useless. A lot of features won't work. You
Ooops! I meant this to go to the list.
This is a stack that will target young children, so it is quite
possible they will have older machines still running 95, but I think
most will have probably moved up to at least 98 since it was such a
wide spread success; so I'm going to try setting
How old a Windows OS will run RunRev stacks with Stack Runner? 95, 98,
2000, XP (of course), but earlier?
I'm trying to assemble system Requirements for a completed project.
It depends on the version of StackRunner you're using - take a look at the
bottom of the web page to tell you what
trying to assemble system Requirements for a completed project.
It depends on the version of StackRunner you're using - take a look
at the
bottom of the web page to tell you what version of the Rev engine it
was
built in, and then you can check RunRev's site for requirements.
For example
Anyone who knows:
How old a Windows OS will run RunRev stacks with Stack Runner? 95, 98,
2000, XP (of course), but earlier?
I'm trying to assemble system Requirements for a completed project.
TIA,
Joe Wilkins
___
use-revolution mailing list
use
Richard Gaskin wondered about which distributions Rev apps will run on.
Almost certainly any that any customer would have. I've run them on DSL,
Mandriva One KDE, Debian and the extraordinaily minimalist SliTaz, and one or
two other live distros. No-one is running anything below 2.4 kernel
Kevin Miller wrote:
Its in chapter 1 of the manual, which is available within the product or
under Support - Documentation on the web site.
Thank, Kevin. I was able to find them.
Have you considered adding them to the Downloads page like most vendors do?
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World
On 4/4/08 01:28, Richard Gaskin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Modern versions of Linux
Right - what does that mean?
Are there limitations with specific window managers, or specific
versions of them?
I'm releasing a pubic beta of my first Linux version of one of my
products, and I'm finding
I couldn't find the system requirements for Rev 2.9 on the new site -
where are they?
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Media Corporation
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FourthWorld.com
This is all I find, and Classic still isn't possible with 2.9.0 as
far as I can tell: (but you're right, it doesn't list the system
requirements to use Rev)
Revolution is the only development tool that enables anyone to create
true standalone applications for:
Mac OS X, including Leopard
Joe Lewis Wilkins wrote:
Modern versions of Linux
Right - what does that mean?
Are there limitations with specific window managers, or specific
versions of them?
I'm releasing a pubic beta of my first Linux version of one of my
products, and I'm finding myself using some very flexible
the system requirements
to use Rev)
Revolution is the only development tool that enables anyone to create
true standalone applications for:
Mac OS X, including Leopard
Mac OS Classic
Windows Vista, XP, 2000, and 98SE
Modern versions of Linux
Joe Wilkins
On Apr 3, 2008, at 6:04 PM, Richard
as in
Rev 2.6.1.
Joe Lewis Wilkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This is all I find, and Classic still isn't possible with 2.9.0
as far
as I can tell: (but you're right, it doesn't list the system
requirements
to use Rev)
Revolution is the only development tool
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Joe Lewis Wilkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, I must be doing something else wrong, since the Build for: Mac OS
can't be set. Looks as if it could be, but can't be. And I'm running from
Leopard.
I haven't tried building, but I can check the Mac OS check box
Very strange, Sarah. It's definitely 2.9.0, Build 610. And I can't
check the Mac OS box.
Joe Wilkins
On Apr 3, 2008, at 7:04 PM, Sarah Reichelt wrote:
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Joe Lewis Wilkins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Well, I must be doing something else wrong, since the Build
Well, guys and gals, I feel kind of stupid; maybe I can attribute it
to my poor eyesight, but it seems to me that most of the time, when
you want to set a check box, you click on either the box or the words.
I normally click on the box. In this case that does not work. You have
to click on
Hi Chris,
I no longer know, as we don't make revBrowser anymore. My guess is it should
work with Win2000 and above w/out problems, but the Mac is much more
squirrelly as Apple's constantly changing WebKit. Perhaps only Panther and
above...perhaps even Tiger and above. I doubt it works anymore in
Hi Chris,
I believe both Mac and PC versions depend on the installation of Safari and
Internet Explorer respectively.
best, Chipp
___
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
Thanks Chipp. How about the min versions of the OSs supported? Win
2000? Win XP? Panther? Tiger?
On Dec 21, 2007, at 2:26 AM, Chipp Walters wrote:
Hi Chris,
I believe both Mac and PC versions depend on the installation of
Safari and
Internet Explorer respectively.
best, Chipp
Maybe I'm just totally missing them somewhere, but can someone tell me
the requirements for the revBrowser object? I need to know min
versions of both Windows and OS X it'll run on. Are the requirements
in the docs somewhere? If not, would be very helpful. :-)
Thanks,
Chris Sheffield
Read
Hi, Mark,
Thanks for responding to my question. The new Studio doesn't make OS9
standalones, and I have found that Rev 2.1 stacks are rather unreliable
with regard to printing. Most printers work, but in others the
print-out is sometimes a mess. The new Studio seems to have solved this
Regarding what to write on the CD packaging with regard to system
requirements, my program is a single stack with nothing more complicated
than one photo of the desert. No quicktime or anything else. It will run
on windows on my Mac with a very old version of Virtual PC running
windows -- maybe
Tom,
The publishers' techies are wrong. In my previous e-mail, I wrote
that you need a color depth of at least thousands of colours (16
bit). 256 colours will cause problems.
If you have such a simple application, why don't you include a Mac OS
9 version on the Mac OS X CD-rom?
Best,
. Otherwise the application will crash. I think this it no
longer necessary to include this in the list of system requirements,
since most computers have much more memory nowadays.
You might want to add a required colour depth of thousands of
colours, because Revolution cannot render pictures
On 15 Jun 2006, at 10:30, Mark Schonewille wrote:
To use image core effects, you need a G4 or G5 with altivec.
Actually, to use Core Image effects you need a CI-capable graphics
card as it doesn't use the CPU...
Although it will drop down to Altivec on the CPU (and require a G4/
G5) if
That makes sense, Ian. Thanks for correcting me.
Mark
--
Economy-x-Talk
Consultancy and Software Engineering
http://economy-x-talk.com
http://www.salery.biz
Download ErrorLib at http://economy-x-talk.com/developers.html and
get full control of error handling in Revolution.
Op
Mark Schonewille wrote:
Hi,
The requirements on the runrev homepage are really old. Most platforms
in that list are currently unsupported.
The standalone builder sets the SIZE resource of standalones for Mac OS
9 to 15MB by default, not 4 as suggested by the web site. Since
Revolution
I want to distribute OSX and Windows versions of my software made with
Rev 2.1 with the standalones made with the new studio.
What do people write for system requirements? 95, 98, XP 2000, Mac OSX?
And is there a standard blurb for speed and disk space requirements?
What are people writing
Thomas Cole wrote:
I want to distribute OSX and Windows versions of my software made with
Rev 2.1 with the standalones made with the new studio.
What do people write for system requirements? 95, 98, XP 2000, Mac OSX?
And is there a standard blurb for speed and disk space requirements?
What
After reading James/Cazzj's comments to the SERUG Google Group about Mac
vs Windows for Second Life (SL, http://www.secondlife.com, where we plan
to hold virtual meetings), I borrowed my dad's new 3.2 GHz HP laptop to
see if it really was so much better. I regret to announce that it is.
But
a publisher who wants to distribute a CD with my rev standalones.
Previously, when I used HyperCard for Mac and Toolbook for Windows, the
system requirements on the CD read:
Windows 386/33 processor with 8 MB RAM
Windows 95 or higher
Single-speed CD ROM
256-color display at 640x48
and for Mac:
Apple
I have a publisher who wants to distribute a CD with my rev standalones. Previously,
when I used HyperCard for Mac and Toolbook for Windows, the system requirements on the
CD read:
Windows 386/33 processor with 8 MB RAM
Windows 95 or higher
Single-speed CD ROM
256-color display at 640x48
On Mar 1, 2004, at 10:45 AM, Thomas Cole wrote:
I have a publisher who wants to distribute a CD with my rev
standalones. Previously, when I used HyperCard for Mac and Toolbook
for Windows, the system requirements on the CD read:
Windows 386/33 processor with 8 MB RAM
Windows 95 or higher
On Monday, March 1, 2004, at 11:45 AM, Thomas Cole wrote:
Could someone kindly tell me what the minimum processor speed and RAM
requirements are for Rev standalones? Is the rest all right? What are
developers putting on their cd's?
Perhaps the system requirements for the Revolution product can
machine is an old laptop, and the Mac is a dual-G4
workstation with quartz extreme and 1GM of RAM. The Mac is *way* more
powerful than the laptop!!
Is this typical of what others are seeing, or is there something I can
do on OS X to ease up the system requirements?
Alex Rice [EMAIL PROTECTED
extreme and 1GM of RAM. The Mac is *way* more
powerful than the laptop!!
Is this typical of what others are seeing, or is there something I can
do on OS X to ease up the system requirements?
Alex Rice [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Mindlube Software |
http://mindlube.com
what a waste of thumbs
On Dec 27, 2003, at 11:05 AM, Geoff Canyon wrote:
This doesn't address the underlying point, but you could import the
image once, and then reference it by setting the icon of six buttons.
Thanks- that does reduce the resource usage significantly. But yes the
different between windows and os x
Are you using Aqua colored throbbing buttons? For some reason that
sucks all available CPU cycles.
Kee
On Dec 27, 2003, at 12:39 PM, Alex Rice wrote:
On Dec 27, 2003, at 11:05 AM, Geoff Canyon wrote:
This doesn't address the underlying point, but you could import the
image once, and then
On Dec 27, 2003, at 7:52 PM, kee nethery wrote:
Are you using Aqua colored throbbing buttons? For some reason that
sucks all available CPU cycles.
Kee
Nope - in fact, using no controls, just 6 image objects.
Alex Rice [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Mindlube Software |
http://mindlube.com
what a waste of
HI Chris
Yes the PPC engine runs on 8.5. There is a 68K engine for even older systems
if required.
Monte
Can someone tell me what the system requirements are
for a Rev stand-alone? I can't find them anywhere.
I'm particularly interested in finding out if one will
run on Mac OS 8.5 or 8.6
41 matches
Mail list logo
