Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
Jan Panteltje
The source?
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/06/23/intel-dumps-vista
The nytimes:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/et-tu-intel/index.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&scp=1-b&sq=intel&st=nyt
In German heise:
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Intel-ruestet-nicht-auf-Windows-Vista-um--/meldung/110022
Hey, The Inquirer mentioned Linux!
Eeyore
Jan Panteltje wrote:
> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
Why change from XP ever ?
Graham
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
More than 3GB RAM
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London
Eeyore
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> > Jan Panteltje wrote:
> >
> >> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
> >
> > Why change from XP ever ?
>
> More than 3GB RAM
Why would you need that ?
Graham
Al
Microsoft has forbidden vendors from writing XP drivers for their
products. Apparently that is in their contract with computer component
suppliers.
Al
pant...@yahoo.com
I seriously doubt MS has the power to do that.
I have designed cards for in the PC, who will stop me
from writing an XP driver?
And with Intel moving away from Vista, sure Intel will want to sell
their chips.
If more people use XP then Vista they will provide XP drivers, no
matter what.
MS is just a con that charges big money for a 1$ DVD copy of bad
software,
they have no other power then that of money.
Anyways, even if MS sues and succeeds then they will go Unix.
The Asus eeePC, running Linux on Intel, already is such a big success
that it makes up 30% of Asus sales.
People want performance, not bloat.
Sign on the wall.
Eeyore
Al wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> > Jan Panteltje wrote:
> >
> >> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
> >
> > Why change from XP ever ?
> >
> > Graham
>
> Microsoft has forbidden vendors from writing XP drivers for their
> products. Apparently that is in their contract with computer component
> suppliers.
I sense an anti-trust suit here.
Maybe M$ coude be broken up like it should have been last time.
Graham
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
Why would anyone ever need more than 640K?
Anyway, a serious answer is multimedia editing.
Four years ago I though I would never need more than 1G. Now I hit the
limits on a regular basis. A few CAD programs active, with Open Office,
browsers etc and it disappears pretty fast. And if I want to play a game
without shutting that lot down...
Eeyore
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> > Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
> >> Eeyore wrote:
> >>> Jan Panteltje wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
> >>> Why change from XP ever ?
> >> More than 3GB RAM
> >
> > Why would you need that ?
>
> Why would anyone ever need more than 640K?
> Anyway, a serious answer is multimedia editing.
Why does that need Windows with all its overhead ?
I've seen brilliant editing at near broadcast standard done an 33MHZ 486
running 32 bit DOS.
You should see it with a 66MHz CPU !
Graham
David Lesher
>>> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
>>
>> Why change from XP ever ?
>More than 3GB RAM
Who would need more than 640K?
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Le Chaud Lapin
> I seriously doubt MS has the power to do that.
> I have designed cards for in the PC, who will stop me
> from writing an XP driver?
> And with Intel moving away from Vista, sure Intel will want to sell
> their chips.
> If more people use XP then Vista they will provide XP drivers, no
> matter what.
> MS is just a con that charges big money for a 1$ DVD copy of bad
> software,
> they have no other power then that of money.
> Anyways, even if MS sues and succeeds then they will go Unix.
> The Asus eeePC, running Linux on Intel, already is such a big success
> that it makes up 30% of Asus sales.
> People want performance, not bloat.
> Sign on the wall.
If, while using Vista, you get the same feeling that you get while
sitting on wicker chair...(yes, it holds you up, but still seems
flimsy), that has to do with an internal Class War going on inside
Microsoft. In one word...
.NET
If anything is to cause the disintegration of sound engineering
practices inside of Microsoft, it is .NET. .NET programmer population
has been growing faster than that of hard-core C/C++ programmers, and
they bring a mode of thinking that can only be described as
"frighteningly sloppy for an engineer" .NET programmers who fall
victim to this mode of thought are under the opinion that disciplined
thought in engineering (software or otherwise), is not really
necessary if you write the software so that you do not have to be
discplined while thinking. Everything is extensible. Everything is
changeable. Everything can communicate and indicate its whims and
needs to everthing else.
"Why can't we components just all get along?"
The result, as you can imagine, is a mess. Don Box was one of the
original proponents of COM, which started the mess, and it got worse
and worse, first with COM+, then DCOM, and now .NET, with all the .NET
junk that goes with it, like C#, C++/CLI (in which Microsoft tried
very hard to hi-jack C++ but failed), and VB.NET. Microsoft has been
dishonest in saying "It makes programming easier...", but the truth is
that it breaks down a certain regidity that is required of reusable
components in software. Actually, Microsoft would like to get away
from writing libraries for multiple languages because of the xN effect
in terms of cost.
If you want an analogy in hardware, imagine a capacitor that had no
specification, not even capacitance. You start with a base thing
called "capacitor" and reuse that thing over and other in all your
circuits. Then, *at run-time*, other components in the circuit have a
conversation with your generic do-it-all capacitor. "Are you
elecrolytic?" "What's your humidity range?"
If (out_of_range(humidity))
blink_red_warning_LED_to_notifiy_user();
I know this sounds absurd, but this is they way some .NET programmers
"write code." More conversations that might be had inside the
circuit:
1. WARNING - Humidity out of range for this type of capacitor.
2. WARNING - excessive noise detected.
3. WARNING - Zener diode used when normal diode should have been used.
4. WARNING - unrecognized bit pattern on demux...what should I do now?
5. WARNING - race condition detected, maybe, you might wanna check..
6. WARNING - input impedance too low, at least 5kohm expected since
this is my new-and-improved ciricuit
You get the idea - the code is *CONSTANTLY* having conversations with
the user. Note that I say "user", not making a distinction between the
engineer who designed the circuit, or the 5-year-old who is looking at
her play oven and wondering why so many red lights are flashing. It's
as if they forget that whole point was to engineer a finished product
that does not have humanized conversations with every user that walks
by. Absurd, isn't it?
Then, when they finish the product, they notice that the software
complains far too much to be let loose in the field, so out comes the
duct tape, which they wrap around the entire product (or catch all
exceptions for you Java/C++ folks), then the plaster, then they buff
it , paint it, shrink wrap it, and beef up the customer support
department because, after all, they do love to have conversations.
There are actually tens of thousands of programmers who seed nothing
wrong with this mode of thinking. If you propose to them that the
engineer might structure the systems so that absurd questions never
need be asked, that absurd statements never need be made, that all
those ridiculous WARNING diodes be done away with...that the device
simply be designed right..they regard you with contempt as if you do
not appreciate the benefit of a circuit being able to tell you if it
was designed poorly.
:))
-Le Chaud Lapin-
JeffM
>If, while using Vista, you get the same feeling that you get while
>sitting on wicker chair...(yes, it holds you up, but still seems
>flimsy), that has to do with an internal Class War going on inside
>Microsoft. In one word...
>
> .NET
...and, on a related note, Sun says that by year's end
they will make Java available as Free Software.
They just have to dig out the last proprietary bits
to which they don't hold full rights.
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/23/034213&threshold=5&mode=nested#23901319
...and, The IcedTea Project recently got the last 4%
of proprietary stuff out of their Java, so there is now an
independent,
Open Source implementation of the Java language available.
http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/06/19/1754255&threshold=5&mode=nested#23861467
.
.
Insert &no_d2=1 into the URLs if you surf with JavaScript disabled.
The Real Andy
I run multiple OS's in Virtual Machines, so I need it.
The Real Andy
Shame its a load of shit. How come I can still get my drivers
certified for XP?
BTW, MS has just announced that XP will be supported till at least
2014.
MooseFET
wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
>
> > Jan Panteltje wrote:
>
> >> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
>
> > Why change from XP ever ?
>
> More than 3GB RAM
If you have 4G Vista consumes an extra 1G of overhead, if you have 10G
it uses up 7G. It carefully makes sure you never come out ahead.
>
> --
> Dirk
>
> http://www.transcendence.me.uk/- Transcendence UK
Richard Henry
MS also just announced that Bill Gates is retiring.
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
> On Jun 26, 6:32 am, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bru...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Eeyore wrote:
>>
>>> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>>> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
>>> Why change from XP ever ?
>> More than 3GB RAM
>
> If you have 4G Vista consumes an extra 1G of overhead, if you have 10G
> it uses up 7G. It carefully makes sure you never come out ahead.
>
I seem to recall that you can turn off that feature.
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Guy Macon
MooseFET wrote:
>
>NeoPax >wrote:
>
>> Eeyore wrote:
>>
>> > Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>
>> >> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
>>
>> > Why change from XP ever ?
>>
>> More than 3GB RAM
>
>If you have 4G Vista consumes an extra 1G of overhead, if you have 10G
>it uses up 7G. It carefully makes sure you never come out ahead.
Do you have a source documenting the above claim? If it were true,
I expect that everybody would be compaining about it.
BTW, I consider my OS to be a critical business tool, so I don't
run XP *or* Vista.
My main OS is currently Slackware. I also have an Asus Eee with
the original version of Linux on it, and I plan to switch it to
running EeeXubuntu soon.
I never ran Windows 95 or 98. Instead I ran Windows NT Server.
I never ran Windows 2000. Instead I ran Windows 2000 Advanced Server.
I am now running Windows server 2003 x64 instead of XP or XP x64.
If I upgrade, it will be to Windows server 2008 x64, not Vista.
And I am doing as much work as possible -- on Linux and on Windows
-- inside of VMWare Workstation Virtual Machines.
Others appear to have come to the same conclusions that I came to
about Vista vs, Server 2008:
http://www.itwriting.com/blog/581-windows-server-2008-is-better-than-vista-but-why.html
http://www.itwriting.com/blog/596-vista-sp1-vs-server-2008-as-a-desktop-os-more-comparisons.html
http://rabdullin.com/using-windows-server-2008-64-bit-as-development-workstation/
--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.com/>
Jan Panteltje
Henry <pome...@hotmail.com> wrote in
<1b6ad1d0-9f6e-4657...@z24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>:
>MS also just announced that Bill Gates is retiring.
I have been thinking about MS future a lot the last days, and
one thought that keeps echoing in my head is: 'Is MS the new Enron?'
Now that may seem strange, but I remember in the very last days of Enron,
that the management went looking for _anything_ to make a quick profit,
and even tried to get foot in the porno industry.
At least that is one story I have read.
Now we see MS in a situation where Vista is failing, and many
other ventures they tried to make similar big profits also failed,
grabbing Yahoo failed, their game machine turned out more expensive due to
thermal design problems, they gambled wrong on Blu-Ray, leaving them
with a lot of HD-DVD players for that xbox..., many more failed projects.
Now I look upon an OS as a car, OS is in fact just an interface, or should be,
between the different hardwares and the applications, so applications can talk to
_one_ interface.
MS was not very strong in that either, only did x86 hardware...
But staying with XP and fixing remaining problems, would at least give them a
steady income, XP on every new computer that is sold.
But if indeed Intel, and today I did read also Daimler, wait for windows 7,
and, as Balmer stated, 'Windows 7 is Vista with touch screen support',
then, as new hardware comes, that XP cannot support, then that will sort of
force those companies to Unix.
Been looking at financial data from MS today, and although Balmer gets the share
price up, I did see the first negative numbers....
With Bill Gates leaving, what if investors lose faith, and start massively dumping
those shares, sure a boom-bust for Microsoft is a possibility by any means.
I do not see Balmer as an innovative person, I see him (and how incredible innovative you
would have to be to even come close to what happened in the seventies with Bill Gates
and that OS), as a man who waves his arms around with a lot of energy, the same sort of energy
'of the apes' that you use when running 100 meters, you think you achieved something
and feel really tired, but actually you have moved 100 meters only.
I think he cannot stop a 'bust'.
Those are just some thoughts *I* have, not sure they are right, and the effect on the US economy,
if MS was no more, could also be of significance....
Time will tell, I own no MS stock, I consider it extremely risky.
People do not want to give away control of their computers, how ever superficial
they may use those, Vista is a thread to them, special hardware LSI
that rules what is your and not, can, or request from some NSA IP send your
keyboard strokes to them, it is here, watch out.
Now the last thing is beyond most users capabilities to test for and prevent,
but on the software level keeping clear of something that takes over from you like Vista is,
is one thing people love.
And what they like sells, and that may well be Linux or some other Unix.
After all those years, in the seventies I first worked with Unix command line,
Unix is still here, maybe MS came, and MS went....
Unix is sound from the basis upwards.
Le Chaud Lapin
> I do not see Balmer as an innovative person, I see him (and how incredible innovative you
> would have to be to even come close to what happened in the seventies with Bill Gates
> and that OS), as a man who waves his arms around with a lot of energy, the same sort of energy
> 'of the apes' that you use when running 100 meters, you think you achieved something
> and feel really tired, but actually you have moved 100 meters only.
> I think he cannot stop a 'bust'.
I noticed the same.
One should not underestimate importance of vision when running a
company like Microsoft. And by vision, I mean the real kind where a
single individual retains precocious clairvoyance in technological
development, not the kind where bunch of me-too's lie on the floor in
a circle staring at the ceiling, "ideating". [This has to be one of
the most ridiculous words I have ever encountered.]
Bill Gates has it. Steve Balmer does not.
Microsoft might eventually go the way of Dell, where the #2 does a #2
on the integrity of the company, until the visionary is reminded that
he is not really replaceable, no matter how much he looks forward to
retirement. Especially in cases where the CEO's compensation is tied
to performance, there are are all kinds of tricks that can be done to
momentarily hit high numbers at the expense of long-term salvation.
Kevin Rollins did this to Dell, and so did 100's of others before
him.
But is it their fault? After all, the visionary/founder always has
history at his disposal. He _knows_ what will happen if the #2 is
allowed to take control. He knows in advance of the character of his
#2, that a brutally objective assessment would reveal the true
proclivity of the person who has shared an office with him for a
decade or more.
So one should probably blame the visionary/founder for making the
mistaking of hoping for the obviously impossible.
In some cases, the visionary CEO will return like a white knight on
black horse to salvage that which he has created, as in the case of
Michael Dell and Charles Schwab. In some cases, the visionary/founder
instictively understands that he must remain at the helm as long as
possible, for it is the essence of his personal character that makes
the company what it is, as in the cases of Warren Buffet of Berkshire-
Hathaway and Dave Thomas of Wendy's.
But all too often, the visionary/founder is to old, frail, too tired
to do anything but lie still and watch his baby get pimped.
-Le Chaud Lapin-
[The opinions herein are mine and mine alone.]
JeffM
>I have been thinking about MS future a lot the last days,
>and one thought that keeps echoing in my head is:
>'Is MS the new Enron?'
>
>Now that may seem strange,
>but I remember in the very last days of Enron,
>that the management went looking for _anything_ to make a quick profit,
>
Yup. The parallels are there.
>[. . .]
>Unix is still here, maybe MS came, and MS went....
>Unix is sound from the basis upwards.
>
I like this as an example of the M$-vs-Unix metaphor
with MSFT bouncing around like a pinball
compared to a platform with steady course:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:_p5hi-eQqWcJ:fvue.nl/wiki/Bash_and_Windows+*-*-*-*-*-tips+ported-to-*-*-*-*-Windows-*+*-*-knowledge-*-here-to-stay-since-1978+Windows.PowerShell+Windows.Scripting.Language+Don't-*-*-learn-*-another-Microsoft-scripting-invention+Meet.bash+rewrite+batch.files+VBScript+without-*-*-*-either-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*+*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-additional-*-programs&strip=1
Robert Baer
T
there...@nospam.com says...
I only run one VM, that's a Debian Etch install that I can do pen-
testing with. The tools available for that purpose in Windows pale in
comparison to what can be done with Linux.
I allocate 4GB of disk and 600MB of RAM and it runs perefectly.
Kevin Aylward
err...I can routinely be in the > several GB of waveform data in spice.
Unfortunately, I can't use SS on such occasions:-)
Kevin Aylward
kaEX...@kevinaylward.co.uk
www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice
Guy Macon
pant...@yahoo.com wrote:
>Al wrote:
>
>>Microsoft has forbidden vendors from writing XP drivers for their
>>products. Apparently that is in their contract with computer component
>>suppliers.
>
> I seriously doubt MS has the power to do that.
>
> I have designed cards for in the PC, who will stop me
> from writing an XP driver?
Are you a vendor who resells Windows on you OEM computers?
Or a subcontractor who sells cards to same? If not, you don't
fit into the "Microsoft vendor" classification mentioned above.
I have not been able to confirm the above claim about Microsoft
forbidding vendors from writing XP drivers, but I so know that
Microsoft has been forcing vendors to put "[company name]
recomends Microsoft Windows Vista" in their ads for a long time:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22recommends+microsoft+windows+vista%22
so it is not unreasonable to expect them to force the vendors to
do other things.
Joerg
Until one of them throws a hissy fit and drops a line to an attorney
general who is hungry for some media exposure.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.
JosephKK
<dirk....@gmail.com> wrote:
>Eeyore wrote:
>>
>> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>
>>> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
>>
>> Why change from XP ever ?
>
>More than 3GB RAM
That is a more a MoBo issue rather than a OS issue. The last time i
used XP it ran fine at 256 MB (employer provided box).
I tried Vista, the driver problems drove me nuts. Though they are
greatly reduced the non-support much older hardware and most
specialized (uncommon) hardware remains. And guess what, those
vendors are quite disinterested in jumping through the Vista hoops.
JosephKK
Good rant. You nearly hit the nail. Thimk about it.
JosephKK
<jaibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Amazing, that better expresses the bitterness i feel than i ever
could.
JosephKK
I am flagging internally that your post should not get by me, but it
does and that annoys me even more. Pointer please.
JosephKK
Nemesis inexorably and inevitably follows Hubris, looking for easy
prey.
James Beck
quiett...@yahoo.com says...
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:32:38 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
> <dirk....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Eeyore wrote:
> >>
> >> Jan Panteltje wrote:
> >>
> >>> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
> >>
> >> Why change from XP ever ?
> >
> >More than 3GB RAM
>
> That is a more a MoBo issue rather than a OS issue. The last time i
> used XP it ran fine at 256 MB (employer provided box).
>
What is a MOBO issue?
Martin Griffith
MOBO= motherboard
martin
Michael A. Terrell
JosephKK wrote:
>
> That is a more a MoBo issue rather than a OS issue. The last time i
> used XP it ran fine at 256 MB (employer provided box).
How many years ago? This XP computer has 1 GB and takes way too long
to boot. The patches and security updates take a lot more RAM than pre
service pack 2.
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
Sporadic E is the Earth's aluminum foil beanie for the 'global warming'
sheep.
James Beck
mart_in...@yah00.es says...
I know what a MOBO is, I want to know what "issue" is being attributed
to the MOBO.
Joerg
Amen!
>> ... .NET programmer population
The user is typically kept away from all that. To stay with your analogy
when the capacitor causes something to go haywire all the user would be
told is: "An unknown error has occurred - the system will shut down",
followed by endless trundling.
[...]
Tim Williams
news:-fqdnU9AKIEYjvTV...@earthlink.com...
> How many years ago? This XP computer has 1 GB and takes way too long
> to boot. The patches and security updates take a lot more RAM than pre
> service pack 2.
My computer is XP Professional SP2 and surprisingly, it booted up just fine
with 256MB RAM. I have 1.1GB in here right now. It takes about a minute to
reach the desktop and another minute to settle down (my laptop, on the other
hand, seems to take five minutes before it stops chattering).
Tim
--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
> to know what the guy is claiming the MOBO issue is. D'oh!
Sure you don't mean MOFO?
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 13:10:29 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> JosephKK wrote:
>>
>>> That is a more a MoBo issue rather than a OS issue. The last time i
>>> used XP it ran fine at 256 MB (employer provided box).
>>
>> How many years ago? This XP computer has 1 GB and takes way too long
>> to boot. The patches and security updates take a lot more RAM than pre
>> service pack 2.
>
>
> your box is OLD and SLOW.
Well, mine is old and slow AMD XP2400+, 1GB
I normally upgrade when the difference is >5x - which is about now.
Michael A. Terrell
Archimedes' Lever wrote:
>
> That claim is just plain retarded. If your box is starting XP slowly,
> your box is OLD and SLOW.
Yawn. You are old and slow. Why don't you upgrade yourself to
'HUMAN 1.0'?
John Larkin
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
>
>The source?
> http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/06/23/intel-dumps-vista
>
>The nytimes:
> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/25/et-tu-intel/index.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&scp=1-b&sq=intel&st=nyt
>
>In German heise:
> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Intel-ruestet-nicht-auf-Windows-Vista-um--/meldung/110022
>
>Hey, The Inquirer mentioned Linux!
Msoft has killed XP, but Vista is ludicrous as an embedded OS (I mean,
even more ludicrous than XP), so they just renamed XP to "Standard."
http://www.embedded.com/columns/technicalinsights/208801215?_requestid=15413
Classic Microsoft doublespeak. Have a compelling experience, y'all.
And Dell is offering the innovative "Windows Vista Bonus Edition",
which is...
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2008/06/30/dell_xp_channel/
John
Michael A. Terrell
Archimedes' Lever wrote:
>
> There is more human DNA in my feces
You are all feces, dimboob. THere is no DNA, just piles and piles of
stinking feces. You prove it with almost every post, LargeMarge.
Here is the recent sock puppet list for your ignorant crap:
Archimedes' Lever <OneBi...@InfiniteSeries.Org>
Bungalow Bill <Bugal...@AbbeyRoad.UKCOM>
ChairmanOfTheBored <RUB...@crackasmile.org>
Corbomite Carrie <Corb...@maneuver.org>
Do I really need to say? <ra...@thescree.org>
FatBytestard <FatByt...@somewheronyourharddrive.org>
LargeMarge <Large...@thetentwoposition.org>
HiggsField <higgd...@whutthableapduyoukno.org>
ItsASecretDummy <secreta...@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org>
Massiv...@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org"
<Massiv...@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org>
Mycelium <myceli...@underyourshrooms.org>
Phat Bytestard <PhatBy...@getinmahharddrive.org>
RoyLFuchs <RoyL...@urfargingicehole.org>
SkyPilot <some...@theedgeofspace.org>
SoothSayer <SayS...@TheMonastery.org>
StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt <Zarat...@thusspoke.org>
TheKraken <ReachUpandSuckYo...@yup.org>
UltimatePatriot <Ultimat...@thebestcountry.org>
Tim Williams
news:p4pi64tn1nfdn7uei...@4ax.com...
> Since motherboards accept memory in hex sized segments, I would venture
> to say that you have ONE GB of RAM, regardless of what your retarded
> motherboard choice is reporting to you.
128 is a "hex sized segment". I have 2 x 512 and 1 x 128. Which is why I
specified 1.1G.
Sorry but you're wrong again,
Rich Grise
> mart_in...@yah00.es says...
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:57:03 -0400, in sci.electronics.design James Beck
>> >> >> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Why change from XP ever ?
>> >> >
>> >> >More than 3GB RAM
>> >>
>> >> That is a more a MoBo issue rather than a OS issue. The last time i
>> >> used XP it ran fine at 256 MB (employer provided box).
>> >>
>> >What is a MOBO issue?
>> >
>> MOBO= motherboard
>>
> I know what a MOBO is, I want to know what "issue" is being attributed to
> the MOBO.
Presumably, the 3GB memory limit.
Cheers!
Rich
James Beck
ri...@example.net says...
Just trying to be clear, because that ISN'T a mobo issue.
It is an XP 32 bit issue.
4GB installed gives ~3.1GB free AND XP still only gives each program a
fixed 2GB memory space anyway. XP reserves room for memory mapped
devices like the video card. So, even if XP Pro could somehow map more
space into its' 32bit memory map, no application would get more than a
2GB chunk to work in anyway. If you want to address/install any memory
above 4GB you will need to use XP Pro 64 or Vista 64, assuming you want
to stick with M$ Windows.
Jim
Joel Koltner
news:MPG.22d44d642...@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...
> It is an XP 32 bit issue.
> 4GB installed gives ~3.1GB free AND XP still only gives each program a
> fixed 2GB memory space anyway.
...unless you boot Windows with the "/3GB" switch and the program
"IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE" bit is set in the process (easy to do), in
which case applications can get up to 3GB.
> If you want to address/install any memory
> above 4GB you will need to use XP Pro 64 or Vista 64, assuming you want
> to stick with M$ Windows.
Also not strictly true -- there is the physical address extension (PAE) API
that supports up to 64GB, but using it is a bit of a pain and thus very few
programs support it.
(http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx for
details); certainly going to XP-64 or Vista-64 is a much easier means to get
support for memories >4GB. (OK, and there's also a licensing issue... you
need the server versions of XP to be "allowed" to access memory >4GB...)
James Beck
zapwireD...@yahoo.com says...
> "James Beck" <j...@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.22d44d642...@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...
> > It is an XP 32 bit issue.
> > 4GB installed gives ~3.1GB free AND XP still only gives each program a
> > fixed 2GB memory space anyway.
>
> ...unless you boot Windows with the "/3GB" switch and the program
> "IMAGE_FILE_LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE" bit is set in the process (easy to do), in
> which case applications can get up to 3GB.
turns out. Most video drivers will not allow the 3GB switch to work. I
know for a fact any recent ATI driver will blow up with it on.
>
> > If you want to address/install any memory
> > above 4GB you will need to use XP Pro 64 or Vista 64, assuming you want
> > to stick with M$ Windows.
>
> Also not strictly true -- there is the physical address extension (PAE) API
> that supports up to 64GB, but using it is a bit of a pain and thus very few
> programs support it.
Ah, but it is an extension that plain jane software would be ignorant
of.
> (http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/server/PAE/PAEmem.mspx for
> details); certainly going to XP-64 or Vista-64 is a much easier means to get
> support for memories >4GB. (OK, and there's also a licensing issue... you
> need the server versions of XP to be "allowed" to access memory >4GB...)
XP Pro 64 doesn't allow access above the 4GB address space?
I have a copy of it, but never installed it.
Jim
Joel Koltner
> Try it with a high end video card sometime and let us know how THAT
> turns out. Most video drivers will not allow the 3GB switch to work. I
> know for a fact any recent ATI driver will blow up with it on.
Hmm, that's unfortunate to hear.
> XP Pro 64 doesn't allow access above the 4GB address space?
Sorry, I meant XP-32 doesn't allow access above 4GB because it's lacking the
license for it; you need, e.g., Windows Server 2003 (based on the XP-32 code
base) to actually make it happen.
The jist of your posts -- that regular old software on a regular old machines
isn't ever going to see more than 2GB -- is very much correct.
krw
rabbitsfriend...@hotmail.com says...
>
>
> Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
>
> > Eeyore wrote:
> > > Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
> > >> Eeyore wrote:
> > >>> Jan Panteltje wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
> > >>> Why change from XP ever ?
> > >> More than 3GB RAM
> > >
> >
> > Why would anyone ever need more than 640K?
> > Anyway, a serious answer is multimedia editing.
>
> Why does that need Windows with all its overhead ?
Because all my other software needs Win.
> I've seen brilliant editing at near broadcast standard done an 33MHZ 486
> running 32 bit DOS.
*Perhaps* with sufficient hardware assist. There is no way a 33MHz
486 is going to do video without a *lot* of help.
> You should see it with a 66MHz CPU !
No, I shouldn't.
--
Keith
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:15:05 -0500, "Tim Williams" <tmor...@charter.net>
> wrote:
>
>> "StickThatInYourPipeAndSmokeIt" <Zarat...@thusspoke.org> wrote in message
>> news:p4pi64tn1nfdn7uei...@4ax.com...
>>> Since motherboards accept memory in hex sized segments, I would venture
>>> to say that you have ONE GB of RAM, regardless of what your retarded
>>> motherboard choice is reporting to you.
>> 128 is a "hex sized segment". I have 2 x 512 and 1 x 128. Which is why I
>> specified 1.1G.
>>
>> Sorry but you're wrong again,
>>
>> Tim
>
>
It's pronounced "Jigger bites"
JosephKK
<j...@reallykillersystems.com> wrote:
>In article <91hf64pmie0eppllv...@4ax.com>,
>quiett...@yahoo.com says...
>> On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:32:38 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
>> <dirk....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Eeyore wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Intel rejects Vista, will stay with XP and wait for windows7
>> >>
>> >> Why change from XP ever ?
>> >
>> >More than 3GB RAM
>>
>> That is a more a MoBo issue rather than a OS issue. The last time i
>> used XP it ran fine at 256 MB (employer provided box).
>>
>
>What is a MOBO issue?
>
>
More than 3 GB ram.
JosephKK
Must be why i never noticed, when i jumped to dual core and 64-bit and
from 2 GB to 4 GB i initially installed XP-64. Only noticed the
driver issues. Oh well.
JosephKK
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>JosephKK wrote:
>
>>
>> That is a more a MoBo issue rather than a OS issue. The last time i
>> used XP it ran fine at 256 MB (employer provided box).
>
>
> How many years ago? This XP computer has 1 GB and takes way too long
>to boot. The patches and security updates take a lot more RAM than pre
>service pack 2.
Just earlier today. The sods still cheap out on the wrong things, its
has a fast SCSI disk and a high res dual monitor video card, and an
old 20 inch MF CRT.
JosephKK
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>Archimedes' Lever wrote:
>>
>> That claim is just plain retarded. If your box is starting XP slowly,
>> your box is OLD and SLOW.
>
>
> Yawn. You are old and slow. Why don't you upgrade yourself to
>'HUMAN 1.0'?
It won't run on the defective wetware.
Michael A. Terrell
Wetware? When did he upgrade from slimeware?
JosephKK
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>JosephKK wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:40:51 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Archimedes' Lever wrote:
>> >>
>> >> That claim is just plain retarded. If your box is starting XP slowly,
>> >> your box is OLD and SLOW.
>> >
>> >
>> > Yawn. You are old and slow. Why don't you upgrade yourself to
>> >'HUMAN 1.0'?
>>
>> It won't run on the defective wetware.
>>
>
>
> Wetware? When did he upgrade from slimeware?
Good point, he actively corrupts it himself.