how to determine the minimum requirment?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Jassim Rahma - 13 Jul 2007 21:06 GMT

I have a C# application on my powerful notebook but I want to know what is
the minimum requirment to run the software on other PC in order to inform
the users?

Reply to this Message

PS - 13 Jul 2007 21:29 GMT

>I have a C# application on my powerful notebook but I want to know what is
>the minimum requirment to run the software on other PC in order to inform
>the users?

The minimum requirement to actually run and what the users will be happy
will probably be different. 1 Ghz processor / 512 Mb is a good minimum for
my application.

PS

Reply to this Message

Alex Meleta - 13 Jul 2007 21:33 GMT

Hi Jassim,

Base requirements are specified by .NET Framework (E.g. for 2.0 it is http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=0856EACB-4362-4B0D-8EDD
-AAB15C5E04F5&displaylang=en)

But only vendor of the application can tell you even min requirements to
start it, because it can use external resources, outside of framework.

Regards, Alex
[TechBlog] http://devkids.blogspot.com

> I have a C# application on my powerful notebook but I want to know
> what is the minimum requirment to run the software on other PC in
> order to inform the users?

Reply to this Message

Peter Duniho - 13 Jul 2007 21:39 GMT

> I have a C# application on my powerful notebook but I want to know what
> is the minimum requirment to run the software on other PC in order to
> inform the users?

"Minimum" is somewhat subjective. The most reliable method is to find
less-capable computers and run your program on them. Empirically
determine what the lowest-end hardware seems acceptable to you. Even this
is going to result in some disparity between user experiences: it is
impossible to describe in a simple way all of the characteristics of a
computer that affect its performance, and different users will have
different ideas of what's "acceptable".

For the same reason that even with some basic technical specifications
being identical, different computers will perform differently, you cannot
extrapolate from the computer you're using now to lower-end computers.
For example, you may have a long operation that on your computer takes 10
seconds, and you determine that it could take up to 30 seconds and still
be considered acceptable, but that doesn't mean that a computer with a CPU
one third the speed of that in your own computer will actually complete
the work in 30 seconds. There's just too much other stuff involved.

Pete

Reply to this Message

Andrew Meador - ASCPA, MCSE, MCP+I, Network+, A+ - 14 Jul 2007 12:53 GMT

I think this question should have a more defined answer than has
been given. I don't know how to find this minimum, but from the code
side, there should be a set of minumums you should be able to find. It
seems to me that when you look up the details for specific controls,
in the reference sections of the internal help files (maybe Books
Online) for the .net languages, that they tell you what OS and version
of the .net framework is required. I don't know of a specific tool to
use, but I'd imagine that there would be some kind of tool that could
parse your code and pull these details and then give a minimum
specification as far as what OS and framework versions would be
required. From this, you could look at what hardware requirements
these products have and get yourself a foundation to start with for
hardware minimums.
There may be other info in the reference sections too, possibly
when MDAC (and what version) is required and so on...
Like the others said, obviously the hardware will be harder to
determine as it will be a matter of determining acceptable minimum
performance, but from the code side there should be a way to determine
clearly what the minimums are. Check into tools that can parse the
code - if there is nothing, you may have to do it manually to
determine this. I have actually had this same question come to mind
myself, but I never bothered to look into a tool - I just kept track
of it manulally in a spreadsheet. However, my apps thus far have not
been that large or complicated.
Anyway, hopefully someone else can give further information than
what you have gotten so far.

Good luck!

> I have a C# application on my powerful notebook but I want to know what is
> the minimum requirment to run the software on other PC in order to inform
> the users?

Reply to this Message

PS - 14 Jul 2007 18:03 GMT

> I think this question should have a more defined answer than has
> been given. I don't know how to find this minimum, but from the code
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> performance, but from the code side there should be a way to determine
> clearly what the minimums are.

I believe the OP is asking about the hardware requirements not what version
of MDAC is required etc so your code based answers don't apply to the
original question.

PS

Check into tools that can parse the

> code - if there is nothing, you may have to do it manually to
> determine this. I have actually had this same question come to mind
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>> the minimum requirment to run the software on other PC in order to inform
>> the users?

Reply to this Message

Andrew Meador - ASCPA, MCSE, MCP+I, Network+, A+ - 14 Jul 2007 19:12 GMT

Matter of perspective I suppose - but I think the OP would be
speaking of both hardware and software as they both apply the last
time I checked. Its better than the 'suggestions' you gave. If the OP
was only speaking to hardware, then maybe I gave another side to think
about - or are we not supposed to do that here.

My app requires 3GHz quad Xeon pressessors with 64GB of RAM, but
they run quite well on 8MHz IBM XTs as well! (:<p)

> > I think this question should have a more defined answer than has
> > been given. I don't know how to find this minimum, but from the code
[quoted text clipped - 42 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Reply to this Message

Peter Duniho - 15 Jul 2007 00:19 GMT

On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 11:12:41 -0700, Andrew Meador - ASCPA, MCSE, MCP+I,
Network+, A+ <ameador1@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Matter of perspective I suppose - but I think the OP would be
> speaking of both hardware and software as they both apply the last
> time I checked.

The OP specifically mentioned his "powerful laptop", which strongly
implies that he's asking specifically about hardware requirements. Also,
software requirements are cut and dried. Either you have the necessary
software or you don't. Not much soliciting for advice anyone should need
on that topic.

I agree that the original post was somewhat ambiguous, but not enough IMHO
for you to read into it what you did.

> Its better than the 'suggestions' you gave. If the OP
> was only speaking to hardware, then maybe I gave another side to think
> about - or are we not supposed to do that here.

It seems to me that if you can offer "another side" without insulting
those who have already offered their advice, that would be better.

Nothing wrong with elaborating on the question or the answer, but when you
accuse others of failing to meet some standard of care, especially when
they in fact have not, that's where you cross the line.

Pete

Reply to this Message

PS - 15 Jul 2007 00:56 GMT

>> Matter of perspective I suppose - but I think the OP would be
>> speaking of both hardware and software as they both apply the last
>> time I checked.
>
> The OP specifically mentioned his "powerful laptop", which strongly
> implies that he's asking specifically about hardware requirements.

That's how I read it also.

Of course the OP actually responding to some of our posts might give us more
information to help them.

PS

Also,

> software requirements are cut and dried. Either you have the necessary
> software or you don't. Not much soliciting for advice anyone should need
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
> Pete

Reply to this Message

Andrew Meador - ASCPA, MCSE, MCP+I, Network+, A+ - 15 Jul 2007 04:29 GMT

On Jul 14, 7:19 pm, "Peter Duniho" <NpOeStPe...@nnowslpianmk.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 11:12:41 -0700, Andrew Meador - ASCPA, MCSE, MCP+I,
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> The OP specifically mentioned his "powerful laptop", which strongly
> implies that he's asking specifically about hardware requirements.

Actually the OPs original question was "what is the minimum
requirment to run the software...". This does not exclude software
such as OS, framework, etc...

> Also,
> software requirements are cut and dried.

Exactly - that is why I said if they could determine the minimum
OS, framework, MDACs, etc... They could in turn use the minimum
hardware specs from these items to clarify their applications minimum
hardware requirements as well.

>Either you have the necessary
> software or you don't. Not much soliciting for advice anyone should need
> on that topic.

I was in the position of this poster a year or so ago, when I
bought a top of the line laptop with all the bells and whistles, and I
had the exact same question myself. I bought this machine because I
wanted it to handle whatever I threw at it, but when I asked myself
"what would be the minimum requirements for my software to run on
other systems?" I did not consider this an issue of hardware alone. If
I used certain controls, I limited the application to running on
certain OS's. If I used others, it would determine which framework
would need to be installed. As I said in my first post, if you could
track the controls used (or parse it with a utility that would do it
for you), you could then find the true minimum hardware AND software
requirements (the minimum OS, framework, etc... would also clarify
the minimum hardware) - this would thus be the ground level of system
to start testing to determine the prefered performance. And I also
pointed out that I agreed with you guys on the point that minimum
performance would then be a matter of personal preference, but at
least you could use my suggestions to try to find the true minimum. I
would consider it an automatically known issue that performance will
vary from machine to machine so long as true minimum requirements are
met. Prefered performance will always be a matter of personal
preference and I would assume that the OP would know this. It is not
known to me how to quickly find the minimum requirements, as I have
suggested, for my applications without having to track every control I
used, manually. I also, as most of my background is in hardware and
systems engineering, am always very interested in making sure the
hardware, OS, and such are at required minimums before I install or
buy stuff to put on it - so it follows, to me, that the OP would like
to be able to tell his potential users those same specs so they could
ignor the app, upgrade (hardware and/or software) to be able to run
the app, or whatever; not so he could tell them "I haven't tested your
exact configuration so I don't know for sure how it will perform".

> I agree that the original post was somewhat ambiguous, but not enough IMHO
> for you to read into it what you did.

As the other poster that 'got my goat' brought up, I do have some
experience with issues in software design, as well as the hardware and
networking side, so I rely on that experience to read questions - I
didn't think I was reading into this, I thought everyone else was
stating the obvious and not answering the question as to how to find
the true minimum requirements. Maybe I'm off on this but I don't think
so. I stick to my position on this - the OP did not ask how to
determine recommended requirements - he asked how to determine minimum
requirements for the app to run.

> > Its better than the 'suggestions' you gave. If the OP
> > was only speaking to hardware, then maybe I gave another side to think
> > about - or are we not supposed to do that here.
>
> It seems to me that if you can offer "another side" without insulting
> those who have already offered their advice, that would be better.

True... However - the only 'insult' that was made to start with was
"I think this question should have a more defined answer than has
been given". In response I have PS tell me that the supporting OS and
framework components of the application are irrelevant in determining
true minimum hardware requirements!?! I say BS, and that is when I
made the sarcastic remark about the hardware requirements for 'my
application' as he did to the OP in his first post. Again I will stand
by what I said. Posters should post something that may help other than
the totally obvious that solves nothing. These responses are like
seeing someone come crawling out of the desert and asking them if they
are thirsty and then giving them a drop of water.

> Nothing wrong with elaborating on the question or the answer, but when you
> accuse others of failing to meet some standard of care, especially when
> they in fact have not, that's where you cross the line.

I have explained my point on this above. I do see you point - and I
will agree that I entered this issue on the aggitated side and it
showed. I will try better not to do that, but this only comes from
reading SO MANY posts, and posting so many times myself, where re-
posting (sometimes 2 and 3 re-posts) was required to actually get an
answer because people are so quick to point out the obvious while
ignoring the core question - it's maddening. Tell me, what did PS's
first post accomplish in helping the OP? Nothing. At least in your
response you gave suggestions, not just a quick BS comment that will
get nobody anywhere. If posters can't contribute an idea of where to
look, direct insight, etc... why bother posting? Leave it for someone
else to answer that has something to contribute.

> Pete

P.S. I appologize for upsetting everyone so much - I know peoples
posts and time are given freely on here and the intention is just to
help each other - but great intentions mean nothing if they don't
result in anything worthwhile. I recognize you calmness and tone here.
I really do see your point, I hope you see mine and understand that
I'm not just trying to be a prat, but I must say I think the comment I
made about this issue not being clarified better was handled more
poorly by those it was directed at.

Reply to this Message

Heywood Jablomey BSc MSc PhD CSC AHOLE A+ Z- DKHD - 14 Jul 2007 18:10 GMT

I think that people should have answered this question better personally
although I have no f'ing clue what the answer is. But still it should have
been answered better although I am just going to say this a few times and
really give you no help in finding the answer. I guess all these letters at
the end of my name should make me appear smart and therefore I will answer
with a really long reply but really say nothing that is any use to you.
Maybe I spend my time getting qualifications rather than having real world
experience. Did I say that I think the answers provided should have been
better?

H Jablomey BSc MSc PhD CSC AHOLE A+ Z- DKHD

>I have a C# application on my powerful notebook but I want to know what is
>the minimum requirment to run the software on other PC in order to inform
>the users?

Reply to this Message

Andrew Meador - ASCPA, MCSE, MCP+I, Network+, A+ - 14 Jul 2007 19:00 GMT

I include my qualifications as I have posted many questions in many
news groups and have had people give over over/under detailed answers.
It assists people give help at an appropriate level instead of wasting
their time with irrelevant details or me habing to repost asking for
more details.

I do have some experience with this issue as I said - assuming you
can handling reading more than a two line post.

If you write code on one machine and move it to another - obviously
the hardware isn't the only thing that changes. Versions of
controls, .net framework, MDACs, etc... are very relevant. From my
perspective minimum requirements means - will the software be ABLE to
run on the system - not if the performance is to my liking. If you can
match the minimum requirements then you know it will work - the better
your hardware specs over the minimum requirement the better the
performance. They are related, but not necessarily the same.

People like you are why I try to give more information and why I
get irritated when you post your two liner replies that don't do any
good, other than clutering the post.

I may not have solved the OPs problem, but I gave some ideas and at
least took my time to answer seriously in what I wrote - not just
shooting off at the mouth and being nothing but a smarta$$.

On Jul 14, 1:10 pm, "Heywood Jablomey BSc MSc PhD CSC AHOLE A+ Z-
DKHD" <hjablo...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> I think that people should have answered this question better personally
> although I have no f'ing clue what the answer is. But still it should have
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Reply to this Message

Peter Duniho - 15 Jul 2007 00:22 GMT

On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 11:00:29 -0700, Andrew Meador - ASCPA, MCSE, MCP+I,
Network+, A+ <ameador1@hotmail.com> wrote:

> [...]
> I may not have solved the OPs problem, but I gave some ideas and at
> least took my time to answer seriously in what I wrote - not just
> shooting off at the mouth and being nothing but a smarta$$.

Please do not feed the trolls.

Leaving aside the question of whether there's any point listing a long
list of "credentials" in one's posting information, the post to which you
replied was clearly aimed strictly at getting your goat. It's not worth
responding to.

Pete

Reply to this Message

Peter Duniho - 15 Jul 2007 00:53 GMT

I wrote:

> [...] It's not worth responding to.

Though, it probably is worth pointing out the striking similarity between
the two message headers copied below (noting in particular the matching
NNTP-Posting-Host field, the similarly-formed Message-ID, and the matching
source in the Path field). I leave it to the reader to decide for
themselves whether they want to continue reading posts from someone acting
so immaturely. IMHO, an apology is in order from the forger; that sort of
behavior is uncalled for.

A childish troll:

Xref: sn-us microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp:476535
From: "Heywood Jablomey BSc MSc PhD CSC AHOLE A+ Z- DKHD"
<hjablomey@hotmail.com>
References: <63345CCE-683C-47C1-B993-108DC19069C1@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: how to determine the minimum requirment?
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:10:42 -0400
Lines: 19
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
Message-ID: <u0SScnjxHHA.1484@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-71-125-19-63.nycmny.fios.verizon.net 71.125.19.63
Path:
sn-us!sn-feed-sjc-04!sn-us!sn-feed-sjc-01!sn-xt-sjc-10!sn-xt-sjc-06!sn-xt-sjc-12!supernews.com!postnews.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder3.cambrium.nl!feeder5.cambrium.nl!feeder2.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!193.201.147.68.MISMATCH!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed.freenet.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!207.46.248.126.MISMATCH!TK2MSFTFEEDS01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl

A relatively well-known newsgroup regular:

Xref: sn-us microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp:476534
From: "PS" <ecneserpegats@hotmail.com>
References: <63345CCE-683C-47C1-B993-108DC19069C1@microsoft.com>
<1184414028.925106.66490@m3g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: how to determine the minimum requirment?
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 13:03:00 -0400
Lines: 49
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Message-ID: <OLH3IjjxHHA.404@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp
NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-71-125-19-63.nycmny.fios.verizon.net 71.125.19.63
Path:
sn-us!sn-feed-sjc-02!sn-us!sn-feed-sjc-03!sn-xt-sjc-11!sn-xt-sjc-08!sn-xt-sjc-12!supernews.com!postnews.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.news2me.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!msrtrans!TK2MSFTFEEDS01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP01.phx.gbl!TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl

Reply to this Message

Andrew Meador - ASCPA, MCSE, MCP+I, Network+, A+ - 15 Jul 2007 04:30 GMT

On Jul 14, 7:22 pm, "Peter Duniho" <NpOeStPe...@nnowslpianmk.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 11:00:29 -0700, Andrew Meador - ASCPA, MCSE, MCP+I,
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Pete

True enough - I will do better ;)

Reply to this Message

how to determine the minimum requirment?

Free Magazines