|
| -----Original Message----- | [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Vern Hamberg | Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 11:27 AM | Y'all, this raises a concern I have - are we willing to put up with 1-2 | second response time when we had subsecond response time even in PC5250? | Just to get some "prettified" look? With regard to programming - no... I wish I'd saved scientific studies I read in the early 80's. Recall table that showed how programmer productivity varied as response time went from .2 second to 1 second and above (and seen more than one). It was logarithmic in the negative sense. Above one second, forget about any productivity whatsoever. I dunno how much this applies to other computer users, but all the bells and whistles in the world aren't gonna reverse this fact for programmers. Programmers need sub-second response time, the more sub- the better (at least in my experience, and what I've read.. ymmv).
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
