[quote=22862:@Norman Palardy]This reply simply tells me that you don’t understand the issues involved in having “multi core built in” - its not just something you turn on and do. If we just do multi core with cooperative threads its pointless. So we have to do preemptive threads.
[/quote]
You misunderstood Norman.
Please explain to me where you think I said it was like turning on or off something?
Also show me where I mentioned the differences of thread types (cooperative vs. pre-emptive) and that I suggested using one or the other?
I never said it was something like flipping on or off a switch .
I wonder where you get these ideas from thinking I wrote them?
For a long time now there’s been a feedback report on this where it’s been discussed in more detail which I read a long time ago. So yes I do or did understand the differences between the thread types and the complexity of the situation but I don’t need to waste my time refreshing my memory by re-reading the details of the problem because it’s not my job to do that and I don’t have time to dedicate to things that aren’t critical to my life right now. I’m very busy with my own coding problems and my personal life
What you should of understood from my post is that this is something that customers want and have wanted for years and so far no progress has been made towards a solution. I believe part of Karen’s point was instead of putting a lot of time towards an IDE that works worse than what we previously had, she, I, and others would of much more appreciated the energy spent on providing more important modern features like multi-core support, and other things.
There were complaints of the new IDE in beta testing. What happened?
For the other post that mentions server architectures isn’t really applicable here.
Why?
Because those modern tools are much more efficient and have much less draw on the server or desktop computer so running many multiple instances is not much of an issue when the choice was to not use multi-core support. That isn’t how xojo apps are. Xojo apps use a lot of ram and cpu so running many instances of them cripples the server’s ability in comparison to the other technologies. This problem magnifies with the more xojo instances you need such as in a server environment.
So the people running many WE instances (like Wayne) trying to make up for the lack of proper multi core support and other issues are losing a lot of server ability in comparison to modern architectures. Forum member Wayne mentioned he’s using either 4 or 5 servers to handle about 4,000 users. That’s more servers than other technologies would need. Wayne could probably use 1 server with alternate technologies unless all of those users are doing something highly intensive like real time chat and even still he’d be able to use less servers. He never answered my question of what those users are doing and nobody’s provided any performance tests so the assumption is fairly clear but inexact.
Norman I appreciate your responses but many times you seem to miss the point or say incorrect things in my opinion. Rather than create a side discussion I often let them go. For example in another thread recently I mentioned other tools have drag and drop layout ability and you replied something like “not like this they don’t.”
I have no idea what you mean. Not like what? How is Xojo’s drag and drop layout ability different than other application’s drag and drop layout ability?
Even though I’ve become more aware of Xojo’s web edition limitations and have been suffering numerous bugs I still may purchase it if the bugs get fixed because it still may fit my needs for some projects.
Norman you seem to have a personal bias against me and it comes out in your writing.