- Hp 4th Generation Laptop
- Difference Between 4th And 5th Generation Laptops 2017
- Intel 4th Generation Laptops
For the average user buying an ultrathin laptop to drive Office or a web browser, the difference between an 8th-gen laptop and 10th-gen laptop will mostly be incremental. The major difference between First Generation and Second Generation Computers is that in First Generation computers Vacuum tubes were used as an internal component and they were very huge in size while in Second Generation Computers Transistors were used as an internal component as they were smaller than first-generation computers. While fourth-generation programming languages are designed to build specific programs, fifth-generation languages are designed to make the computer solve a given problem without the programmer. This way, the user only needs to worry about what problems need to be solved and what conditions need to be met, without worrying about how to implement. Firstly, each generation of intel processors has codenames starting with Westmere (First Gen) upto Skylake (6th Gen). Every year Intel improves upon the process and the architecture of their processors as shown in the last column. Source: @http.
| X HP 250 G4 | X HP 250 G5 (Y0T74PA) Laptop (Core i3 5th Gen/4 GB/500 GB/DOS/2 GB) | X HP ProBook 450 G1 | X | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
multimedia | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
memory | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peripherals | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
networking | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
battery | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
others | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Publication: Information Resources Management JournalApril 1992 https://doi.org/10.4018/irmj.1992040103
- This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.Manage my AlertsPlease log in to your account Stenhoj maestro manual.
Save to Binder
Create a New Binder
The use of nonprocedural fourth generation languages created a revolution in the manner in which computer-based information systems are being constructed. These languages are being used extensively by end-users and by programmers in end-user departments. They are being also used, to a less extent, by traditional programmers whose major computing environment is the mainframe. Programmers' performance is a function of two major groups of variables: those that are related to the person his/her attributes and those related to the environment. This paper reports the results of a study that compared the attributes of programmers in a large centralized third generation mainframe environment to the attributes of fourth generation programmers in the same company. Significant differences were detected. Based on this finding, this paper suggests a procedure for matching an individual's attributes with the characteristics of different software environments.
- Abbey, S. G. (1984). 'COBOL Dumped,' Datamation, January, 108-114.Google Scholar
- Alspaugh, C.A. (1972). 'Identification of some components of computer programming aptitude,' Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, March, pp. 89-98.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bush, C. M. and Schkade, L. L. (1985). 'In Search of the Perfect Programmer,' Datamation, March 15, pp. 128-135. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Case, A. F. and Manley, J. H. (1986). 'Fourth Generation Languages Offers Pros and Cons,' Data Management, March, pp. 10-11.Google Scholar
- Dight, J. (1986). 'Grow Your Own Programmers,' Datamation, July 1, pp. 75-78. Google Scholar
- Evans, G. E. and Simkin, M.G. (1989). 'What Best Predicts Computer Proficiency?' Communications of the ACM, November, pp. 1322-1327. Google Scholar
- Friedman, A. and Greenbaum, J. (1984). 'Wanted: Renaissance People,' Datamation, September 1, pp. 134-144.Google Scholar
- Huff, S. L. and Rivard, S. (1983). 'The Amateur Data Processor: A New Organizational Role,' Business Quarterly, Winter, pp. 125-131.Google Scholar
- Klerer, M. (1987). User-oriented Computer Languages: Analysis and Design, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. Google Scholar
- Kolodziej, S. (1987). '4GLs Find a Home: Nonprocedural Languages Overcome MIS Disfavor Through Users,' Computerworld, May 6, pp. 47-54.Google Scholar
- Lehman, J. A. and Wetherbe, J.C. (1989). 'A Survey of 4GL Users and Applications,' Journal of Information Systems Management, Summer, pp. 44-52.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Licker P. S. and Miller, M. (1989). 'How Are DP/MIS Graduates Doing?' Journal of System Management, April, pp. 25-32. Google Scholar
- Lyons, M. (1985). 'The DP Psyche,' Datamation, August, pp. 103-110. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Martin, J. (1985). Fourth Generation Languages, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Google Scholar
- Matos, V. M. and Jalics, P. J. (1989). 'An Experimental Analysis of the Performance of Fourth Generation Tools on PCs,' Communications of the ACM, November, pp. 1340-1351. Google Scholar
- Miller, G. A. (1990). '4GL the Good,' Manufacturing Systems, July, pp. 46-49.Google Scholar
- Moncada, S. (1990). Working draft of dissertation. University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, 1990.Google Scholar
- Myers, I. B. and McCaulley, M. H. (1985). Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
- Oman, P. W. (1986). 'Identifying Student Characteristics Influencing Success in Introductory Computer Science Courses,' AEDS Journal, Winter/Spring, pp. 226-233. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Peterson, C. G. and Howe, T. G. (1979). 'Predicting Academic Success in Introduction to Computers,' AEDS Journal, Fall, pp. 182-191.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Williamson, M. and Maginnis, N. B. (1990). 'Breaking the Language Barrier,' CIO, January, pp. 44-52.Google Scholar
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.
![5th 5th](https://images.idgesg.net/images/article/2019/05/screenshot-2019-05-26-06.57.02-100797494-large.jpg)
Login options
Hp 4th Generation Laptop
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
Published in
In-Cooperation
Publisher
New dyno for mac 2017. IGI GlobalUnited StatesPublication History
Qualifiers
- article
Funding Sources
Article Metrics
- Total CitationsView Citations
- Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Other Metrics
Digital Edition
Difference Between 4th And 5th Generation Laptops 2017
View this article in digital edition.