Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

"True" System Requirements

Aug 6, 2012 2:02 PM

I am using Adobe Captivate 5.5 and my current computer specs are:

 

Intel Pentium D 3.00GHz

3G RAM

WIndows XP

(No video card)

 

I am experiencing long save times and very long times for files to open and publish files.

 

When I look at the system requirements for Captivate it says:

 

1GHz or faster processor

WIndows XP, Vista, 7, etc.

1GB minimum RAM (2 recommended)

1024x576 16 bit video card

 

I am trying to justify a faster computer but with my current system being "better" than what Adobe recommends, I am unsure how to proceed.

 

I have asked for a more powerful computer but since I am said to be exceeding the requirements, I am having trouble convincing my IT folks.

 

Can anyone out there help me out with an argument for a faster system?

 

Thanks,

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 6, 2012 7:46 PM   in reply to jsm201

    Are these project files on a network LAN or your local hard drive.

     

    If you are trying to work on Captivate project files that are saved on a network LAN drive, move them onto your local hard drive.  Not only should your save times come down markedly, but you also won't be risking disaster from corrupted projects.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 7, 2012 12:36 AM   in reply to RodWard

    I work with an ASUS G73S intel I7 8 core processor, 8 gigs of memory, Nvidea Gforce 1.5gig ddr 3 graphic card, two 500 gig hard drives and can finally avoid shaving my beard between publishing and opening new projects if you know what I mean...

     

    If I have more than 3 projects open and don't restart my computer before republishing Captivate says that the publishing has failed due to lack of memory???????

     

    So yes, IMO, the minimum requirements have been placed there to say that you will be able to open Captivate witht that machine. Actually making it work, wel thats a different story.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 16, 2012 1:19 PM   in reply to RodWard

    We have found that loading shared files from network share saves time.  Also I have spoke to Adobe support about this and they said it is supported and the recomended solution for shared Captivate projects.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 16, 2012 2:45 PM   in reply to jsm201

    jsm201 wrote:

     

    I am using Adobe Captivate 5.5 and my current computer specs are:

     

    Intel Pentium D 3.00GHz

    3G RAM

    WIndows XP

    (No video card)

     

    I am experiencing long save times and very long times for files to open and publish files.

     

    When I look at the system requirements for Captivate it says:

     

    1GHz or faster processor

    WIndows XP, Vista, 7, etc.

    1GB minimum RAM (2 recommended)

    1024x576 16 bit video card

     

    I am trying to justify a faster computer but with my current system being "better" than what Adobe recommends, I am unsure how to proceed.

     

    I have asked for a more powerful computer but since I am said to be exceeding the requirements, I am having trouble convincing my IT folks.

     

    Can anyone out there help me out with an argument for a faster system?

     

    Thanks,

    I would make this argument..

     

     

    " When I produce files on my system it becomes pretty much unusable during that time because of Captivate hijacking the CPU and Memory and it takes an inordinate amount of time to complete. So all of that is lost productivity because I can't even work on other projects when its publishing. A faster system will greatly speed things up, make them more stable and allow me to work on projects while its rendering. It really is about productivity"

     

    Cheers

    Steve

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 16, 2012 8:22 PM   in reply to StevePixel

    I'll say that Captivate is the most resource intensive app I've ever used. I'm running it on a Mac Mini at home with 8 gig of ram, and it often chokes, and always has CPU at a minimnum of 95%. I'm using it on a Mac Pro at work with 32 gigs of ram, and it works on that machine fine.

     

    I couldn't fathom using it on your setup. Your IT kids sound like d!cks. I'd get system screen shots and show them what it's doing to your machine. I'd also let the grownups know that you're not going to be able to get much done, have numbers and facts to back it up.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 16, 2012 11:52 PM   in reply to Number73

    Loading Captivate project files from a network share might be "supported" in that it will work...some of the time...but it is DEFINITELY NOT recommended practice.  Do so at your own peril.

     

    Not only should you ONLY load project files from your own hard drive (copy the network share files to your hard drive first and then open from local) but you should also check that your IT dudes have not set Captivate to point to a virtualised My Documents folder.  This means your My Documents folder, where your Captivate project cache files are trying to be saved, is NOT on your local drive either, and you risk disaster if there is ever a network glitch while you are working on Cp and it tries to save back to the source.

     

    In your Captivate Preferences, check the paths set for General > Default Locations.  Both of the fields there should be set to point to local folders on your hard drive.

     

    If any of these are not done in your case, this might help explain your performance issue.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 5:44 AM   in reply to RodWard

    Hi all

     

    Hopefully Rod won't mind my offering an analogy here. It's one I've developed to explain to my class participants why a network drive is a bad idea.

     

    Imagine that Captivate is like working in your kitchen. In Captivate, we have all sorts of objects we insert and use. When we are ready, we compile a SWF or create a Video that contains all the elements we have added. That action is very similar to mixing ingredients in the kitchen and baking a cake or a pie.

     

    Normally, when we work in our kitchen and create a dish, if we need to add an ingredient, or put the mixing bowl aside for a short while, we open our fridge or our pantry and grab the ingredient. And if the bowl needs time to sit, it may need to be refrigerated. So we open the fridge and insert the bowl.

     

    Now the Fridge and the Pantry are our real world equivalent of a local hard drive. I have immediate access to either. And the real world equivalent to a network server is the grocery store.

     

    Sure, if I want, I can keep all my ingredients as well as that chilled mixing bowl at the grocery store. But it means that if I need to add an ingredient, I have to stop what I'm doing, get in my vehicle, drive to the store, purchase the ingredient, drive back home, then add the ingredient. Lots of delay there. In network terms, we call that "latency". And it's precisely that latency that is our culprit here and why we always advise against working this way.

     

    With the "driving to the store" analogy, if my mixing bowl is on the counter, my large dog might put her paws up on the counter and knock the bowl over. That would corrupt the process, no? Or in the process of bringing the egg back from the store, it might be dropped or banged into something else and render it unusable. These are the examples of corruption.

     

    So the question is, are you comfortable with the delays and slow operation and possible corruption or do you want to work efficiently? It's totally your choice.

     

    Cheers... Rick

     

    Helpful and Handy Links

    Captivate Wish Form/Bug Reporting Form

    Adobe Certified Captivate Training

    SorcerStone Blog

    Captivate eBooks

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 17, 2012 6:51 PM   in reply to jsm201

    I'm running Cp6 as both 64bit and 32bit on my 3 yr old DELL Studio 1737 laptop (64bit).  It has a T9550 chip @ 2.66 Ghz and 8 Gig of RAM.

     

    So far it's running fine and doesn't appear to use more than a couple of hundred megs of RAM.  But your mileage may differ...

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points