|
| | | | Post in reply to: Canuck57
No it doesn't!
But it doesn't run MS-Windows rootkits if that is what you
What a stupid ignorant statement! Oh, I forgot...you're a lying linux MS
hating troll.
Nothing truthful coming from you.
Frank
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Frank
From Franks diary..
"Oohhh that was a tasty pig!" Frank exclaimed gleefully while licking his
chops and looking at the empty can of luncheon meat with the label "SPAM" on
it. "I wonder if it was wearing lipstick when they killed it and put it in
the can?".
Frank squints some more, making his old face look even more wrinkled in an
effort to see the small letters on the label of the can of SPAM. "Nope, it
was not made in Redmond!'. Frank tosses the can away in trash.. a rattle
sounds as it lands
among countless other SPAM cans....
"Its not easy being such a spammer.. he things to himself and starts
chuckling... " NOW BACK TO WORK!
The vista.general newsgroup needs supervision!!!
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Frank
From Franks diary..
"Oohhh that was a tasty pig!" Frank exclaimed gleefully while licking his
chops and looking at the empty can of luncheon meat with the label "SPAM" on
it. "I wonder if it was wearing lipstick when they killed it and put it in
the can?".
Frank squints some more, making his old face look even more wrinkled in an
effort to see the small letters on the label of the can of SPAM. "Nope, it
was not made in Redmond!'. Frank tosses the can away in trash.. a rattle
sounds as it lands
among countless other SPAM cans....
"Its not easy being such a spammer.. he things to himself and starts
chuckling... " NOW BACK TO WORK!
The vista.general newsgroup needs supervision!!!
news:0lbLt7qIHA.1952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Frank
From Franks diary..
"Oohhh that was a tasty pig!" Frank exclaimed gleefully while licking his
chops and looking at the empty can of luncheon meat with the label "SPAM" on
it. "I wonder if it was wearing lipstick when they killed it and put it in
the can?".
Frank squints some more, making his old face look even more wrinkled in an
effort to see the small letters on the label of the can of SPAM. "Nope, it
was not made in Redmond!'. Frank tosses the can away in trash.. a rattle
sounds as it lands
among countless other SPAM cans....
"Its not easy being such a spammer.. he things to himself and starts
chuckling... " NOW BACK TO WORK!
The vista.general newsgroup needs supervision!!!
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Clear Windows
Hm, I originally thought you replied to me then I remember I added Frank
to the Kill File.
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Frank
But it's not meant to run at that small amount and no companies make
computers with small RAM for today's operating systems.
And a Ferrari won't run on 50 octane fuel either.
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Little Billy
128 GB is a small amount?
If you actually had 128 GB, I'm sure Vista would try to use it all. I
don't know if it actually could, however. It would depend on whether or
not you routinely loaded up 128 GB of apps and data. If you did, then yes
Vista would eventually use it all, with prefetch and cache.
But again, Vista doesn't really NEED that much RAM. In fact it will run in
512 megs (I have personally done this). Vista just uses RAM that is
available to speed up the whole system, rather than let it sit empty.
Unused RAM is wasted RAM. You don't want RAM sitting empty "waiting for
you to load apps", any more than you want the CPU cache sitting empty
"waiting for you to load apps". Since the RAM cache is easily (and
instantly) released when/if you really need it, there is no problem.
So, Vista can/will use "a lot of memory". This is a good thing. Vista
does not NEED a lot of memory, however.
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Little Billy
HUH? Reading comprehension problems?
Alias
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Post in reply to: Alias
Yes, thought he wrote 128KB haha I was running XP on that and it worked.
But yes, resources are meant to be used although I never heard of a machine
with 128 GB. But are tremendous amounts of RAM necessary? Would 128 GB be
any faster than 4GB? The largest I've seen on home PC's is 8GB with 64 bit
and quad processor.
|
| |
| | | | | Post in reply to: Bob Campbell
Probably, since Windows always has been a brain dead OS that hogs
memory and often switches things in and out of it foolishly making
Windows way more sluggish than it needs to be.
Often heard baloney. If certain blocks of memory are currently being
"used" by Windows and it needs to use this memory for something else
it first needs to move whatever is there to make room. This takes up
CPU cycles. So you have resources first being used by Windows to load
X into memory, then resources to move X out of memory then resources
to move Y into memory. The gullible will always claim this is
efficient. Common sense confirms it isn't.
If one memory page was simply switched with another, memory to memory,
it won't be that big a deal. That isn't how Windows works. Windows
will use Virtual memory which means memory pages are switched
constantly with what is stored on your hard drive. This shuffling if
excessive can be heard as your hard drive trashing. How often and to
what extent you might hear this varies.
You can watch the process from Task Manager. Go to Task Manager,
Processes tab. Watch the Page Faults column. Click on this column
heading so it sorts processes with the most page faults appearing at
top.
A "Page Fault" is when Windows can't find what it needs in physical
memory and is forced to go out to Virtual Memory which is on your hard
drive. Obviously the higher the number, the dumber.
Wow, guess what. I just checked mine, the top three offenders were all
internal parts of Vista itself; sidebar.exe, explorer.exe and dwm.exe.
Now what were you saying about Vista using memory efficiently?
|
| |
| |
|