Added memory HAS made a difference

Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

Just figured I'd mention in a follow-up that going from 256 to 512 MB for my
Dell Dim 24 HAS made a difference. No longer does the drive suddenly start
whirling and everything slowing down.

I thought the problem was due to indexing, but I'm not sure. Does indexing
use RAM???

Anyway, I might not bother disabling it at the moment.

Mel
19 answers Last reply
More about added memory made difference
  1. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    yep one of the most efficient and cheapest improvements to a system.
    I have always wonder why Dell and others ships many of their systems with
    256 meg.
    If I know that windows XP runs better with 512 or more of memory, they know.

    "MB_" <mel@prodigy.invalid.net> wrote in message
    news:LURSe.2750$tc7.533@fe03.lga...
    > Just figured I'd mention in a follow-up that going from 256 to 512 MB for
    > my Dell Dim 24 HAS made a difference. No longer does the drive suddenly
    > start whirling and everything slowing down.
    >
    > I thought the problem was due to indexing, but I'm not sure. Does indexing
    > use RAM???
    >
    > Anyway, I might not bother disabling it at the moment.
    >
    > Mel
    >
  2. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    IF you're happy, leave things alone. THat's my philosohpy.

    TOm
    "MB_" <mel@prodigy.invalid.net> wrote in message
    news:LURSe.2750$tc7.533@fe03.lga...
    > Just figured I'd mention in a follow-up that going from 256 to 512 MB for
    > my Dell Dim 24 HAS made a difference. No longer does the drive suddenly
    > start whirling and everything slowing down.
    >
    > I thought the problem was due to indexing, but I'm not sure. Does indexing
    > use RAM???
    >
    > Anyway, I might not bother disabling it at the moment.
    >
    > Mel
    >
  3. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    Because they have to sell to a price point. We're all at fault for the drop
    in service. Demanding $300 computers means there is no money for tech
    support.

    Tom
    "BigJIm" <woody10277@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:K4idnUmS1cMz3YHeRVn-pA@comcast.com...
    > yep one of the most efficient and cheapest improvements to a system.
    > I have always wonder why Dell and others ships many of their systems with
    > 256 meg.
    > If I know that windows XP runs better with 512 or more of memory, they
    > know.
    >
    > "MB_" <mel@prodigy.invalid.net> wrote in message
    > news:LURSe.2750$tc7.533@fe03.lga...
    >> Just figured I'd mention in a follow-up that going from 256 to 512 MB for
    >> my Dell Dim 24 HAS made a difference. No longer does the drive suddenly
    >> start whirling and everything slowing down.
    >>
    >> I thought the problem was due to indexing, but I'm not sure. Does
    >> indexing use RAM???
    >>
    >> Anyway, I might not bother disabling it at the moment.
    >>
    >> Mel
    >>
    >
    >
  4. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    hey tom, the business that dell does and the amount of memory they purchase
    should bring the price of memory down to a reasonable expense for the
    customer.

    "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote in message
    news:z%XSe.13384$xl6.5298@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
    > Because they have to sell to a price point. We're all at fault for the
    > drop in service. Demanding $300 computers means there is no money for
    > tech support.
    >
    > Tom
    > "BigJIm" <woody10277@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:K4idnUmS1cMz3YHeRVn-pA@comcast.com...
    >> yep one of the most efficient and cheapest improvements to a system.
    >> I have always wonder why Dell and others ships many of their systems with
    >> 256 meg.
    >> If I know that windows XP runs better with 512 or more of memory, they
    >> know.
    >>
    >> "MB_" <mel@prodigy.invalid.net> wrote in message
    >> news:LURSe.2750$tc7.533@fe03.lga...
    >>> Just figured I'd mention in a follow-up that going from 256 to 512 MB
    >>> for my Dell Dim 24 HAS made a difference. No longer does the drive
    >>> suddenly start whirling and everything slowing down.
    >>>
    >>> I thought the problem was due to indexing, but I'm not sure. Does
    >>> indexing use RAM???
    >>>
    >>> Anyway, I might not bother disabling it at the moment.
    >>>
    >>> Mel
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  5. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    It used to be worse! Dell once shipped Dimension 2400's with 128MB and XP. But
    Dell is competing on sticker price, and people buy all the time without any idea
    of what is under the hood. And, of course, HP, Gateway and all the rest sell
    entry-level systems with 256MB.

    No problemo. An aftermarket 256MB upgrade generally costs less than having it
    added at the "factory"... Ben Myers

    On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 08:57:18 -0400, "BigJIm" <woody10277@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >yep one of the most efficient and cheapest improvements to a system.
    >I have always wonder why Dell and others ships many of their systems with
    >256 meg.
    >If I know that windows XP runs better with 512 or more of memory, they know.
    >
    >"MB_" <mel@prodigy.invalid.net> wrote in message
    >news:LURSe.2750$tc7.533@fe03.lga...
    >> Just figured I'd mention in a follow-up that going from 256 to 512 MB for
    >> my Dell Dim 24 HAS made a difference. No longer does the drive suddenly
    >> start whirling and everything slowing down.
    >>
    >> I thought the problem was due to indexing, but I'm not sure. Does indexing
    >> use RAM???
    >>
    >> Anyway, I might not bother disabling it at the moment.
    >>
    >> Mel
    >>
    >
    >
  6. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    Ben et. al:

    When I bought my Dim 2400, it listed 128 MB but the special at the time
    included a free upgrade to 256 MB. Two years ago, I thought that was plenty.

    I am still surprised that I needed more since my computer needs are
    relatively simple. But, I guess over time little things get added, etc.

    INCIDENTALLY, I also noticed that my computer seems to boot faster and shuts
    off quicker. I didn't think the extra memory would impact those items, too!!

    Overall, it was well worth the $25.

    Mel


    <ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
    news:431c4e80.3282011@nntp.charter.net...
    > It used to be worse! Dell once shipped Dimension 2400's with 128MB and
    > XP. But
    > Dell is competing on sticker price, and people buy all the time without
    > any idea
    > of what is under the hood. And, of course, HP, Gateway and all the rest
    > sell
    > entry-level systems with 256MB.
    >
    > No problemo. An aftermarket 256MB upgrade generally costs less than
    > having it
    > added at the "factory"... Ben Myers
    >
    > On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 08:57:18 -0400, "BigJIm" <woody10277@hotmail.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>yep one of the most efficient and cheapest improvements to a system.
    >>I have always wonder why Dell and others ships many of their systems with
    >>256 meg.
    >>If I know that windows XP runs better with 512 or more of memory, they
    >>know.
    >>
    >>"MB_" <mel@prodigy.invalid.net> wrote in message
    >>news:LURSe.2750$tc7.533@fe03.lga...
    >>> Just figured I'd mention in a follow-up that going from 256 to 512 MB
    >>> for
    >>> my Dell Dim 24 HAS made a difference. No longer does the drive suddenly
    >>> start whirling and everything slowing down.
    >>>
    >>> I thought the problem was due to indexing, but I'm not sure. Does
    >>> indexing
    >>> use RAM???
    >>>
    >>> Anyway, I might not bother disabling it at the moment.
    >>>
    >>> Mel
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
  7. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    Well, if you buy the Microsoft hype (and I'll sell you the Brooklyn Bridge),
    Windows XP runs in 128MB. Runs, yes. Runs poorly.

    I have long held to the guideline that 256MB is the minimum for Windows 2000,
    and 512MB is the minimum for Windows XP, a really really bloated and tarted up
    Windows 2000. Despite occasional claims of wonderous success running Windows
    with less memory, I've stuck to my ground.

    The "free" upgrade offer to 256MB from Dell put a marketing spin on the obvious
    inadequacy of 128MB. I'm sure many owners of Dimension 2400s with 128MB bitched
    a lot... Ben Myers

    On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 10:23:10 -0400, "MB_" <mel@prodigy.invalid.net> wrote:

    >Ben et. al:
    >
    >When I bought my Dim 2400, it listed 128 MB but the special at the time
    >included a free upgrade to 256 MB. Two years ago, I thought that was plenty.
    >
    >I am still surprised that I needed more since my computer needs are
    >relatively simple. But, I guess over time little things get added, etc.
    >
    >INCIDENTALLY, I also noticed that my computer seems to boot faster and shuts
    >off quicker. I didn't think the extra memory would impact those items, too!!
    >
    >Overall, it was well worth the $25.
    >
    >Mel
    >
    >
    ><ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
    >news:431c4e80.3282011@nntp.charter.net...
    >> It used to be worse! Dell once shipped Dimension 2400's with 128MB and
    >> XP. But
    >> Dell is competing on sticker price, and people buy all the time without
    >> any idea
    >> of what is under the hood. And, of course, HP, Gateway and all the rest
    >> sell
    >> entry-level systems with 256MB.
    >>
    >> No problemo. An aftermarket 256MB upgrade generally costs less than
    >> having it
    >> added at the "factory"... Ben Myers
    >>
    >> On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 08:57:18 -0400, "BigJIm" <woody10277@hotmail.com>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>yep one of the most efficient and cheapest improvements to a system.
    >>>I have always wonder why Dell and others ships many of their systems with
    >>>256 meg.
    >>>If I know that windows XP runs better with 512 or more of memory, they
    >>>know.
    >>>
    >>>"MB_" <mel@prodigy.invalid.net> wrote in message
    >>>news:LURSe.2750$tc7.533@fe03.lga...
    >>>> Just figured I'd mention in a follow-up that going from 256 to 512 MB
    >>>> for
    >>>> my Dell Dim 24 HAS made a difference. No longer does the drive suddenly
    >>>> start whirling and everything slowing down.
    >>>>
    >>>> I thought the problem was due to indexing, but I'm not sure. Does
    >>>> indexing
    >>>> use RAM???
    >>>>
    >>>> Anyway, I might not bother disabling it at the moment.
    >>>>
    >>>> Mel
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >
    >
  8. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    I'm sure it does. But you have to know that their margins on cheap machines
    are thin, thin, thin
    "BigJIm" <woody10277@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:1sKdnQbR26m-GIHeRVn-vg@comcast.com...
    > hey tom, the business that dell does and the amount of memory they
    > purchase
    > should bring the price of memory down to a reasonable expense for the
    > customer.
    >
    > "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote in message
    > news:z%XSe.13384$xl6.5298@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
    >> Because they have to sell to a price point. We're all at fault for the
    >> drop in service. Demanding $300 computers means there is no money for
    >> tech support.
    >>
    >> Tom
    >> "BigJIm" <woody10277@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    >> news:K4idnUmS1cMz3YHeRVn-pA@comcast.com...
    >>> yep one of the most efficient and cheapest improvements to a system.
    >>> I have always wonder why Dell and others ships many of their systems
    >>> with 256 meg.
    >>> If I know that windows XP runs better with 512 or more of memory, they
    >>> know.
    >>>
    >>> "MB_" <mel@prodigy.invalid.net> wrote in message
    >>> news:LURSe.2750$tc7.533@fe03.lga...
    >>>> Just figured I'd mention in a follow-up that going from 256 to 512 MB
    >>>> for my Dell Dim 24 HAS made a difference. No longer does the drive
    >>>> suddenly start whirling and everything slowing down.
    >>>>
    >>>> I thought the problem was due to indexing, but I'm not sure. Does
    >>>> indexing use RAM???
    >>>>
    >>>> Anyway, I might not bother disabling it at the moment.
    >>>>
    >>>> Mel
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    You can go one step further and disable the paging file. Everything above
    512MB RAM allows you - as a speed option- to disable it, allowing the system
    only to use RAm instead of laying some on the HDD. I have 1024 and tried it,
    but when videoediting or using really large files it will bother more than
    it helps. But for Office and such stuff, even games I only can recommend
    that. Indexing is by default disabled on every computer I own/ owned. There
    seems to be now great use, maybe in MS Vista we will experience something
    better.

    just my 2cents
  10. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    "Kevin Rengo" <k.rengo@europe.com> wrote in message
    news:431c8b61$1@news.uni-rostock.de...
    > You can go one step further and disable the paging file. Everything
    > above 512MB RAM allows you - as a speed option- to disable it, allowing
    > the system only to use RAm instead of laying some on the HDD. I have 1024
    > and tried it, but when videoediting or using really large files it will
    > bother more than it helps. But for Office and such stuff, even games I
    > only can recommend that. Indexing is by default disabled on every computer
    > I own/ owned. There seems to be now great use, maybe in MS Vista we will
    > experience something better.
    >
    > just my 2cents
    >

    Personally I think 512MB is too little to disable paging. It only uses it
    if it needs it anyway. I have 1GB and don't disable it (although I edit
    12mp images almost daily).

    Tom
  11. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:S81Te.10307$p_1.9106@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...

    > Personally I think 512MB is too little to disable paging. It only uses it
    > if it needs it anyway. I have 1GB and don't disable it (although I edit
    > 12mp images almost daily).
    >
    > Tom

    Hm, I made the experience, that XP is trying to put more on HDD than it
    should need. Away from the home I try to
    leave the HDD off whenever possible so I keep low power settings and timers
    down to three minutes. But when enabled
    paging AND defragmentig when idle the harddisk will power on alone although
    I didn't made a command.
    Also I haerd some people saying that 512MB is just right for XP and more or
    less are not recommended. I realized that
    myself in day to day use, ore than 512MB RAM do not really do give more
    speed. Only in very intensense computing sessions
    -video editing and such- you can 'show off' with it.
    Youre sure it only uses when needed?
  12. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    "Kevin Rengo" <k.rengo@europe.com> wrote in message
    news:431cb7fb@news.uni-rostock.de...
    >
    > "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    > news:S81Te.10307$p_1.9106@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
    >
    >> Personally I think 512MB is too little to disable paging. It only uses
    >> it if it needs it anyway. I have 1GB and don't disable it (although I
    >> edit 12mp images almost daily).
    >>
    >> Tom
    >
    > Hm, I made the experience, that XP is trying to put more on HDD than it
    > should need. Away from the home I try to
    > leave the HDD off whenever possible so I keep low power settings and
    > timers down to three minutes. But when enabled
    > paging AND defragmentig when idle the harddisk will power on alone
    > although I didn't made a command.
    > Also I haerd some people saying that 512MB is just right for XP and more
    > or less are not recommended. I realized that
    > myself in day to day use, ore than 512MB RAM do not really do give more
    > speed. Only in very intensense computing sessions
    > -video editing and such- you can 'show off' with it.
    > Youre sure it only uses when needed?
    >

    That's the design. They 'stole' the paging concepts from DEC's VMS.
    Can't guarantee it, but running without it is just completely impractical
    for me.

    Tom
  13. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    Stole paging from VMS? Not quite. Hired (Stole?) Dave Cutler away from DEC,
    where he was the designer and chief architect of VMS. Makes me wonder why DEC
    never sued Microsoft for theft of intellectual property. Probably because DEC
    did not have the foresight to copyright various concepts embodied into VMS.

    Of course, VMS was not the first system to have paging. Anybody remember
    Multics, the operating system designed at MIT for the GE 600 computers? Lotsa
    good paging there, fully supported by the hardware which consisted of early
    integrated circuits, just past the vacuum tube stage. IBM's 360 also had a
    model with hardware-supported paging... Ben Myers

    On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 01:25:05 GMT, "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> wrote:

    >
    >"Kevin Rengo" <k.rengo@europe.com> wrote in message
    >news:431cb7fb@news.uni-rostock.de...
    >>
    >> "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    >> news:S81Te.10307$p_1.9106@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
    >>
    >>> Personally I think 512MB is too little to disable paging. It only uses
    >>> it if it needs it anyway. I have 1GB and don't disable it (although I
    >>> edit 12mp images almost daily).
    >>>
    >>> Tom
    >>
    >> Hm, I made the experience, that XP is trying to put more on HDD than it
    >> should need. Away from the home I try to
    >> leave the HDD off whenever possible so I keep low power settings and
    >> timers down to three minutes. But when enabled
    >> paging AND defragmentig when idle the harddisk will power on alone
    >> although I didn't made a command.
    >> Also I haerd some people saying that 512MB is just right for XP and more
    >> or less are not recommended. I realized that
    >> myself in day to day use, ore than 512MB RAM do not really do give more
    >> speed. Only in very intensense computing sessions
    >> -video editing and such- you can 'show off' with it.
    >> Youre sure it only uses when needed?
    >>
    >
    >That's the design. They 'stole' the paging concepts from DEC's VMS.
    >Can't guarantee it, but running without it is just completely impractical
    >for me.
    >
    >Tom
    >
    >
  14. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    Tom Scales wrote:

    > "Kevin Rengo" <k.rengo@europe.com> wrote in message
    > news:431cb7fb@news.uni-rostock.de...
    >
    >>"Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    >>news:S81Te.10307$p_1.9106@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
    >>
    >>
    >>>Personally I think 512MB is too little to disable paging. It only uses
    >>>it if it needs it anyway. I have 1GB and don't disable it (although I
    >>>edit 12mp images almost daily).
    >>>
    >>>Tom
    >>
    >>Hm, I made the experience, that XP is trying to put more on HDD than it
    >>should need. Away from the home I try to
    >>leave the HDD off whenever possible so I keep low power settings and
    >>timers down to three minutes. But when enabled
    >>paging AND defragmentig when idle the harddisk will power on alone
    >>although I didn't made a command.
    >>Also I haerd some people saying that 512MB is just right for XP and more
    >>or less are not recommended. I realized that
    >>myself in day to day use, ore than 512MB RAM do not really do give more
    >>speed. Only in very intensense computing sessions
    >>-video editing and such- you can 'show off' with it.
    >>Youre sure it only uses when needed?
    >
    > That's the design. They 'stole' the paging concepts from DEC's VMS.

    How old is VMS? First paging I remember hearing about was Burroughs'
    virtual storage sometime in the 50s. Didn't catch on in the world of
    mainframe computers until IBM made it available on their S/370 series
    (1972-ish).
  15. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    Kevin Rengo wrote:
    > "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    > news:S81Te.10307$p_1.9106@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
    >
    >
    >>Personally I think 512MB is too little to disable paging. It only uses it
    >>if it needs it anyway. I have 1GB and don't disable it (although I edit
    >>12mp images almost daily).
    >>
    >>Tom
    >
    >
    > Hm, I made the experience, that XP is trying to put more on HDD than it
    > should need. Away from the home I try to
    > leave the HDD off whenever possible so I keep low power settings and timers
    > down to three minutes. But when enabled
    > paging AND defragmentig when idle the harddisk will power on alone although
    > I didn't made a command.
    > Also I haerd some people saying that 512MB is just right for XP and more or
    > less are not recommended. I realized that
    > myself in day to day use, ore than 512MB RAM do not really do give more
    > speed. Only in very intensense computing sessions
    > -video editing and such- you can 'show off' with it.
    > Youre sure it only uses when needed?
    >
    >
    On both my laptop and desktop I disable my page file in XP (but I do
    keep a swap partition in Linux). Actually I like how Linux handles RAM
    a bit more; I almost always find it's all in use (mostly as cache,
    etc.) but it does a good job of syncing what's in cache to disk rather
    than touching the swap file when it doesn't need to. Also there's a
    setting called swapiness that can be set to control how swap happy the
    kernel will be. I also love using RAM disks when emerging small
    programs in Gentoo; I use a little script which mounts /var/tmp/portage
    as tmpfs with about half my RAM, compiles the program, writes to the
    real disk, then unmounts.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    Nicholas Andrade wrote:

    > Kevin Rengo wrote:
    >
    >> "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    >> news:S81Te.10307$p_1.9106@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
    >>
    >>
    >>> Personally I think 512MB is too little to disable paging. It only
    >>> uses it if it needs it anyway. I have 1GB and don't disable it
    >>> (although I edit 12mp images almost daily).
    >>>
    >>> Tom
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Hm, I made the experience, that XP is trying to put more on HDD than
    >> it should need. Away from the home I try to
    >> leave the HDD off whenever possible so I keep low power settings and
    >> timers down to three minutes. But when enabled
    >> paging AND defragmentig when idle the harddisk will power on alone
    >> although I didn't made a command.
    >> Also I haerd some people saying that 512MB is just right for XP and
    >> more or less are not recommended. I realized that
    >> myself in day to day use, ore than 512MB RAM do not really do give
    >> more speed. Only in very intensense computing sessions
    >> -video editing and such- you can 'show off' with it.
    >> Youre sure it only uses when needed?
    >>
    > On both my laptop and desktop I disable my page file in XP (but I do
    > keep a swap partition in Linux). Actually I like how Linux handles RAM
    > a bit more; I almost always find it's all in use (mostly as cache,
    > etc.) but it does a good job of syncing what's in cache to disk rather
    > than touching the swap file when it doesn't need to. Also there's a
    > setting called swapiness that can be set to control how swap happy the
    > kernel will be. I also love using RAM disks when emerging small
    > programs in Gentoo; I use a little script which mounts /var/tmp/portage
    > as tmpfs with about half my RAM, compiles the program, writes to the
    > real disk, then unmounts.

    I forgot to mention I have a gig on each, which I find as more than
    enough for almost all my purposes. In fact there's been times where I
    went out of my way to try and hit the swap file (like opening a
    6000x4000 pixel picture in GIMP, as I'm compiling two programs
    simultaneously and browsing with Mozilla SeaMonkey, Firefox, & Konqueror
    while compressing WAV's to MP3 in Audacity), and only then did I begin
    begin to hit swap.
  17. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    Oh I know that. I was using the short form :)


    <ben_myers_spam_me_not @ charter.net (Ben Myers)> wrote in message
    news:431d09d6.51247625@nntp.charter.net...
    > Stole paging from VMS? Not quite. Hired (Stole?) Dave Cutler away from
    > DEC,
    > where he was the designer and chief architect of VMS. Makes me wonder why
    > DEC
    > never sued Microsoft for theft of intellectual property. Probably
    > because DEC
    > did not have the foresight to copyright various concepts embodied into
    > VMS.
    >
    > Of course, VMS was not the first system to have paging. Anybody remember
    > Multics, the operating system designed at MIT for the GE 600 computers?
    > Lotsa
    > good paging there, fully supported by the hardware which consisted of
    > early
    > integrated circuits, just past the vacuum tube stage. IBM's 360 also had
    > a
    > model with hardware-supported paging... Ben Myers
    >
    > On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 01:25:05 GMT, "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>"Kevin Rengo" <k.rengo@europe.com> wrote in message
    >>news:431cb7fb@news.uni-rostock.de...
    >>>
    >>> "Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    >>> news:S81Te.10307$p_1.9106@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
    >>>
    >>>> Personally I think 512MB is too little to disable paging. It only uses
    >>>> it if it needs it anyway. I have 1GB and don't disable it (although I
    >>>> edit 12mp images almost daily).
    >>>>
    >>>> Tom
    >>>
    >>> Hm, I made the experience, that XP is trying to put more on HDD than it
    >>> should need. Away from the home I try to
    >>> leave the HDD off whenever possible so I keep low power settings and
    >>> timers down to three minutes. But when enabled
    >>> paging AND defragmentig when idle the harddisk will power on alone
    >>> although I didn't made a command.
    >>> Also I haerd some people saying that 512MB is just right for XP and more
    >>> or less are not recommended. I realized that
    >>> myself in day to day use, ore than 512MB RAM do not really do give more
    >>> speed. Only in very intensense computing sessions
    >>> -video editing and such- you can 'show off' with it.
    >>> Youre sure it only uses when needed?
    >>>
    >>
    >>That's the design. They 'stole' the paging concepts from DEC's VMS.
    >>Can't guarantee it, but running without it is just completely impractical
    >>for me.
    >>
    >>Tom
    >>
    >>
    >
  18. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    "Sparky Spartacus" <Sparky@universalexports.org> wrote in message
    news:SbcTe.11506$OT1.273@fe09.lga...
    > Tom Scales wrote:
    >
    >> "Kevin Rengo" <k.rengo@europe.com> wrote in message
    >> news:431cb7fb@news.uni-rostock.de...
    >>
    >>>"Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    >>>news:S81Te.10307$p_1.9106@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Personally I think 512MB is too little to disable paging. It only uses
    >>>>it if it needs it anyway. I have 1GB and don't disable it (although I
    >>>>edit 12mp images almost daily).
    >>>>
    >>>>Tom
    >>>
    >>>Hm, I made the experience, that XP is trying to put more on HDD than it
    >>>should need. Away from the home I try to
    >>>leave the HDD off whenever possible so I keep low power settings and
    >>>timers down to three minutes. But when enabled
    >>>paging AND defragmentig when idle the harddisk will power on alone
    >>>although I didn't made a command.
    >>>Also I haerd some people saying that 512MB is just right for XP and more
    >>>or less are not recommended. I realized that
    >>>myself in day to day use, ore than 512MB RAM do not really do give more
    >>>speed. Only in very intensense computing sessions
    >>>-video editing and such- you can 'show off' with it.
    >>>Youre sure it only uses when needed?
    >>
    >> That's the design. They 'stole' the paging concepts from DEC's VMS.
    >
    > How old is VMS? First paging I remember hearing about was Burroughs'
    > virtual storage sometime in the 50s. Didn't catch on in the world of
    > mainframe computers until IBM made it available on their S/370 series
    > (1972-ish).

    I didn't mean to imply VMS invented paging -- clearly it did not. My point
    was what Ben pointed out that they hired the chief designer of VMS so many
    of the approaches are nearly identical.

    Tom
  19. Archived from groups: alt.sys.pc-clone.dell (More info?)

    Tom Scales wrote:

    > "Sparky Spartacus" <Sparky@universalexports.org> wrote in message
    > news:SbcTe.11506$OT1.273@fe09.lga...
    >
    >>Tom Scales wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>"Kevin Rengo" <k.rengo@europe.com> wrote in message
    >>>news:431cb7fb@news.uni-rostock.de...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>"Tom Scales" <tomtoo@softhome.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    >>>>news:S81Te.10307$p_1.9106@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Personally I think 512MB is too little to disable paging. It only uses
    >>>>>it if it needs it anyway. I have 1GB and don't disable it (although I
    >>>>>edit 12mp images almost daily).
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Tom
    >>>>
    >>>>Hm, I made the experience, that XP is trying to put more on HDD than it
    >>>>should need. Away from the home I try to
    >>>>leave the HDD off whenever possible so I keep low power settings and
    >>>>timers down to three minutes. But when enabled
    >>>>paging AND defragmentig when idle the harddisk will power on alone
    >>>>although I didn't made a command.
    >>>>Also I haerd some people saying that 512MB is just right for XP and more
    >>>>or less are not recommended. I realized that
    >>>>myself in day to day use, ore than 512MB RAM do not really do give more
    >>>>speed. Only in very intensense computing sessions
    >>>>-video editing and such- you can 'show off' with it.
    >>>>Youre sure it only uses when needed?
    >>>
    >>>That's the design. They 'stole' the paging concepts from DEC's VMS.
    >>
    >>How old is VMS? First paging I remember hearing about was Burroughs'
    >>virtual storage sometime in the 50s. Didn't catch on in the world of
    >>mainframe computers until IBM made it available on their S/370 series
    >>(1972-ish).
    >
    >
    > I didn't mean to imply VMS invented paging -- clearly it did not. My point
    > was what Ben pointed out that they hired the chief designer of VMS so many
    > of the approaches are nearly identical.

    Thanks, Tom, I saw Ben's post after my post.
Ask a new question

Read More

Dell Memory Computers