Preserved Topic: Computer oddity (Page 1 of 1) |
|
---|---|
Maniac (V) Inmate From: PA |
posted 07-14-2001 02:16
Check this out. |
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist From: Belgrade, Serbia |
posted 07-14-2001 02:44
Does those numbers really represent percentage of free RAM memory, or you confused this with free system resources (you know, user, GDI, etc.) If those numbers actually represent free system resources, then that's a well-known problem with Windows 9x OS. No matter how much RAM memory you have, free system resources will get very very low under Windows 9x (more info about this can be found here). Situation is much different with Windows NT/2000, because it doesn't have any system resources limitations... |
Paranoid (IV) Inmate From: New Jersey, USA |
posted 07-14-2001 03:16
I was under the impression that Win98 wouldn't even properly use that much RAM in the first place. |
Maniac (V) Inmate From: PA |
posted 07-14-2001 04:16
Windows 98 doesn't support that much RAM but SE does. |
Maniac (V) Mad Scientist From: Belgrade, Serbia |
posted 07-14-2001 10:02
That's not true, *all* versions of Windows 9x (95/98/Me) can handle maximum 512MB of RAM memory ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/14967.html ). On the other hand, under Windows NT/2000 there's no such limitation. |
Maniac (V) Inmate From: under the bed |
posted 07-14-2001 14:30
well, really, windows 9x doesn't 'properly' use much of anything |
Paranoid (IV) Inmate From: New Jersey, USA |
posted 07-14-2001 14:51
Sure it does DL |