happyland440 wrote:

dude341 wrote:

happyland440 wrote:

dude341 wrote:

bybb wrote:

dude341 wrote:

happyland440 wrote:

Most people will be running projects with at least 4GB of RAM. It takes around 20 Chrome tabs on a Chromebook at my school in order to see any real slowdown, and that's only on 4GB of RAM. With 8GB becoming the standard, running what equates to one tab in a web browser won't be a problem on modern computers and even fairly old ones.

Chrome OS is completely different.

No it's not, do your research before saying things are completely different please.

Chrome OS is optimised for web browsing (well, at least I think it is, it's only actual function is to browse the internet so I would think it would be optimised), and also doesn't have any ability to run actual applications, so it doesn't have to worry about anything slowing it down.

Still, my dad's laptop running MacOS has 4GB of ram and runs 10+ Chrome tabs fine. I don't see why most computers couldn't handle another tab.

Also, some games use more RAM than one Chrome tab, and people have no problems running them (ex. Roblox, Minecraft).

Not everyone uses Chrome.

But they all use a similar amount of RAM. Chrome just uses slightly more.

The whole meme about web browsers using so much memory is all from extreme multitaskers with 30+ tabs open. Most people only have >10 tabs, so it shouldn't be an issue.

I didn't finish my post, sorry. However, firefox still takes up more than 100,000K of ram.

Not everyone uses Chrome. I use firefox, which can take up quite a lot of RAM.
It's not that much of an issue for me (I have 16GB) but it can be annoying sometimes.

dude341 wrote:

happyland440 wrote:

dude341 wrote:

happyland440 wrote:

dude341 wrote:

bybb wrote:

dude341 wrote:

happyland440 wrote:

Most people will be running projects with at least 4GB of RAM. It takes around 20 Chrome tabs on a Chromebook at my school in order to see any real slowdown, and that's only on 4GB of RAM. With 8GB becoming the standard, running what equates to one tab in a web browser won't be a problem on modern computers and even fairly old ones.

Chrome OS is completely different.

No it's not, do your research before saying things are completely different please.

Chrome OS is optimised for web browsing (well, at least I think it is, it's only actual function is to browse the internet so I would think it would be optimised), and also doesn't have any ability to run actual applications, so it doesn't have to worry about anything slowing it down.

Still, my dad's laptop running MacOS has 4GB of ram and runs 10+ Chrome tabs fine. I don't see why most computers couldn't handle another tab.

Also, some games use more RAM than one Chrome tab, and people have no problems running them (ex. Roblox, Minecraft).

Not everyone uses Chrome.

But they all use a similar amount of RAM. Chrome just uses slightly more.

The whole meme about web browsers using so much memory is all from extreme multitaskers with 30+ tabs open. Most people only have >10 tabs, so it shouldn't be an issue.

I didn't finish my post, sorry. However, firefox still takes up more than 100,000K of ram.

Not everyone uses Chrome. I use firefox, which can take up quite a lot of RAM.
It's not that much of an issue for me (I have 16GB) but it can be annoying sometimes.

Really? I only have 12GB, and I use Firefox as well, and both are to blame for using quite a bit of RAM (but Chrome is a bit better at managing it). With only 10 tabs open, plus Discord, Spotify, Skype, and a RAM heavy game like Minecraft open (2GB), I never peak above 8GB. Drop Minecraft for a 3D render, and my computer only uses 10-12GB.

I get that some people don't have a lot of RAM, but why can't they just close a few tabs. Plus, I can't imagine that the average person would even have as many programs open as me, cutting down on a lot of the RAM usage. Sure, they might hit 4GB, but I assume that any person closes programs when they are done with them.

I just simply can't see RAM as an issue. If your computer can't handle an extra browser tabs, why play a game on Scratch anyways?

happyland440 wrote:

dude341 wrote:

happyland440 wrote:

dude341 wrote:

happyland440 wrote:

dude341 wrote:

bybb wrote:

dude341 wrote:

happyland440 wrote:

Most people will be running projects with at least 4GB of RAM. It takes around 20 Chrome tabs on a Chromebook at my school in order to see any real slowdown, and that's only on 4GB of RAM. With 8GB becoming the standard, running what equates to one tab in a web browser won't be a problem on modern computers and even fairly old ones.

Chrome OS is completely different.

No it's not, do your research before saying things are completely different please.

Chrome OS is optimised for web browsing (well, at least I think it is, it's only actual function is to browse the internet so I would think it would be optimised), and also doesn't have any ability to run actual applications, so it doesn't have to worry about anything slowing it down.

Still, my dad's laptop running MacOS has 4GB of ram and runs 10+ Chrome tabs fine. I don't see why most computers couldn't handle another tab.

Also, some games use more RAM than one Chrome tab, and people have no problems running them (ex. Roblox, Minecraft).

Not everyone uses Chrome.

But they all use a similar amount of RAM. Chrome just uses slightly more.

The whole meme about web browsers using so much memory is all from extreme multitaskers with 30+ tabs open. Most people only have >10 tabs, so it shouldn't be an issue.

I didn't finish my post, sorry. However, firefox still takes up more than 100,000K of ram.

Not everyone uses Chrome. I use firefox, which can take up quite a lot of RAM.
It's not that much of an issue for me (I have 16GB) but it can be annoying sometimes.

Really? I only have 12GB, and I use Firefox as well, and both are to blame for using quite a bit of RAM (but Chrome is a bit better at managing it). With only 10 tabs open, plus Discord, Spotify, Skype, and a RAM heavy game like Minecraft open (2GB), I never peak above 8GB. Drop Minecraft for a 3D render, and my computer only uses 10-12GB.

I get that some people don't have a lot of RAM, but why can't they just close a few tabs. Plus, I can't imagine that the average person would even have as many programs open as me, cutting down on a lot of the RAM usage. Sure, they might hit 4GB, but I assume that any person closes programs when they are done with them.

I just simply can't see RAM as an issue. If your computer can't handle an extra browser tabs, why play a game on Scratch anyways?

Support.

People usually have 1-2 tabs open (if you're like me) and don't go crazy with about 15-35 tabs open. Some of my classmates at school have 3-5 tabs open when they use scratch and run chrome. Chrome, Firefox, Edge whatever, it won't take up 16GB of ram, and it won't peak over 16GB even with a ram heavy game like Minecraft (like you explained). k?

So, is it possible? or no… (kinda got lost in all the computer talk)
I support the idea of exporting/porting to exe (and/or other computer application extensions)

StrangeMagic32 wrote:

So, is it possible? or no… (kinda got lost in all the computer talk)
I support the idea of exporting/porting to exe (and/or other computer application extensions)

Completely possible, but the easiest way to do it could be quite annoying for people like me who care about how much RAM is used by programs.

dude341 wrote:

StrangeMagic32 wrote:

So, is it possible? or no… (kinda got lost in all the computer talk)
I support the idea of exporting/porting to exe (and/or other computer application extensions)

Completely possible, but the easiest way to do it could be quite annoying for people like me who care about how much RAM is used by programs.

If your reasoning is it uses too much RAM, just stop using Scratch.
I don't mean this in a bad way, but a browser will use a lot more RAM than an Electron app due to browsers normally having extensions installed (Schools normally have spyware extensions installed allowing them to see what users are doing) and being multi-tabbed. If you dislike the RAM usage of an electron app, you should also be arguing against Scratch in the browser entirely.

bybb wrote:

dude341 wrote:

StrangeMagic32 wrote:

So, is it possible? or no… (kinda got lost in all the computer talk)
I support the idea of exporting/porting to exe (and/or other computer application extensions)

Completely possible, but the easiest way to do it could be quite annoying for people like me who care about how much RAM is used by programs.

If your reasoning is it uses too much RAM, just stop using Scratch.
I don't mean this in a bad way, but a browser will use a lot more RAM than an Electron app due to browsers normally having extensions installed (Schools normally have spyware extensions installed allowing them to see what users are doing) and being multi-tabbed. If you dislike the RAM usage of an electron app, you should also be arguing against Scratch in the browser entirely.

Firefox takes up more than Electron apps, so you are correct and I do agree, but I never said it didn't - in fact, I already said Firefox takes up too much RAM (although I'm not going to stop using it, but when multiple applications take up too much RAM that's an issue)

dude341 wrote:

bybb wrote:

dude341 wrote:

StrangeMagic32 wrote:

So, is it possible? or no… (kinda got lost in all the computer talk)
I support the idea of exporting/porting to exe (and/or other computer application extensions)

Completely possible, but the easiest way to do it could be quite annoying for people like me who care about how much RAM is used by programs.

If your reasoning is it uses too much RAM, just stop using Scratch.
I don't mean this in a bad way, but a browser will use a lot more RAM than an Electron app due to browsers normally having extensions installed (Schools normally have spyware extensions installed allowing them to see what users are doing) and being multi-tabbed. If you dislike the RAM usage of an electron app, you should also be arguing against Scratch in the browser entirely.

Firefox takes up more than Electron apps, so you are correct and I do agree, but I never said it didn't - in fact, I already said Firefox takes up too much RAM (although I'm not going to stop using it, but when multiple applications take up too much RAM that's an issue)

quote train

dude341 wrote:

bybb wrote:

dude341 wrote:

StrangeMagic32 wrote:

So, is it possible? or no… (kinda got lost in all the computer talk)
I support the idea of exporting/porting to exe (and/or other computer application extensions)

Completely possible, but the easiest way to do it could be quite annoying for people like me who care about how much RAM is used by programs.

If your reasoning is it uses too much RAM, just stop using Scratch.
I don't mean this in a bad way, but a browser will use a lot more RAM than an Electron app due to browsers normally having extensions installed (Schools normally have spyware extensions installed allowing them to see what users are doing) and being multi-tabbed. If you dislike the RAM usage of an electron app, you should also be arguing against Scratch in the browser entirely.

Firefox takes up more than Electron apps, so you are correct and I do agree, but I never said it didn't - in fact, I already said Firefox takes up too much RAM (although I'm not going to stop using it, but when multiple applications take up too much RAM that's an issue)

So what's the solution? Scratch 3.0 is using JavaScript, and JavaScript must be run in a webpage. Therefore, the easiest and most viable way would be to package it with Electron. Sure, there are other ways to run JavaScript standalone, but is the extra effort really worth the <200MB RAM difference?

happyland440 wrote:

dude341 wrote:

bybb wrote:

dude341 wrote:

StrangeMagic32 wrote:

So, is it possible? or no… (kinda got lost in all the computer talk)
I support the idea of exporting/porting to exe (and/or other computer application extensions)

Completely possible, but the easiest way to do it could be quite annoying for people like me who care about how much RAM is used by programs.

If your reasoning is it uses too much RAM, just stop using Scratch.
I don't mean this in a bad way, but a browser will use a lot more RAM than an Electron app due to browsers normally having extensions installed (Schools normally have spyware extensions installed allowing them to see what users are doing) and being multi-tabbed. If you dislike the RAM usage of an electron app, you should also be arguing against Scratch in the browser entirely.

Firefox takes up more than Electron apps, so you are correct and I do agree, but I never said it didn't - in fact, I already said Firefox takes up too much RAM (although I'm not going to stop using it, but when multiple applications take up too much RAM that's an issue)

So what's the solution? Scratch 3.0 is using JavaScript, and JavaScript must be run in a webpage. Therefore, the easiest and most viable way would be to package it with Electron. Sure, there are other ways to run JavaScript standalone, but is the extra effort really worth the <200MB RAM difference?

Most people probably don't care, so you do have a point. But I still think unless the program really needs it, a program should not use more than 100 MB RAM.

dude341 wrote:

happyland440 wrote:

dude341 wrote:

bybb wrote:

dude341 wrote:

StrangeMagic32 wrote:

So, is it possible? or no… (kinda got lost in all the computer talk)
I support the idea of exporting/porting to exe (and/or other computer application extensions)

Completely possible, but the easiest way to do it could be quite annoying for people like me who care about how much RAM is used by programs.

If your reasoning is it uses too much RAM, just stop using Scratch.
I don't mean this in a bad way, but a browser will use a lot more RAM than an Electron app due to browsers normally having extensions installed (Schools normally have spyware extensions installed allowing them to see what users are doing) and being multi-tabbed. If you dislike the RAM usage of an electron app, you should also be arguing against Scratch in the browser entirely.

Firefox takes up more than Electron apps, so you are correct and I do agree, but I never said it didn't - in fact, I already said Firefox takes up too much RAM (although I'm not going to stop using it, but when multiple applications take up too much RAM that's an issue)

So what's the solution? Scratch 3.0 is using JavaScript, and JavaScript must be run in a webpage. Therefore, the easiest and most viable way would be to package it with Electron. Sure, there are other ways to run JavaScript standalone, but is the extra effort really worth the <200MB RAM difference?

Most people probably don't care, so you do have a point. But I still think unless the program really needs it, a program should not use more than 100 MB RAM.

Jumping back into my own thread XD
I disagree, RAM-heavy applications are everywhere today because RAM capacity is increasing:
I can get a 16 GB RAM kit for my PC for around 120 dollars, maybe 80 if it's DDR3,
Also, you say 100 MB is heavy but let's remember that this project that we hypothetically port won't be running all the time. Usually my PC (with 8 GB currently) has around 5 GB free all the time. Using a Scratch ported project will only take up, in the extreme case, 2% of my RAM. That's not exactly PC-killing…

Meowlithius wrote:

Let me ask you this…
http://u.cubeupload.com/Meowlit12/548Screenshot20181025at.png
if youtube uses 100mb just to work and still run fine with all of this (including Scratch 3) on a Chromebook why can't Scratch 3 on a Windows PC?

Because 100MB =~ 100,000KB, which is overweight for anything that isn't a video game at this point. Even Minecraft sucks less memory when played occasionally.

Porting a Scratch project to an EXE doesn't really align with our goals for Scratch. Scratch is designed to be an educational language, with the “source code” always accessible for viewing and tinkering (remixing). Locking the code up in an EXE format runs counter to those goals.

I don't think we have any objections to third parties making Scratch => EXE converters - but I don't see it as something we would would want to devote Scratch Team resources towards.