Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 80880	2007-07-08 01:02:00	Dell and Vista	joholdaway (12527)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
566899	2007-07-09 06:17:00	Vista won't let you enable all the fancy stuff with only 512mb RAM.	Greven (91)
566900	2007-07-09 06:29:00	Well Greven, I'm a bit naughty saying SC is talking out of a hole in his a**, however I'm getting pi**ed off with stupid comments from people popping sh*t out of their mouth when they know nough! Vista DOES NOT run on 512Mb without swapping to the hard-drive period!	SolMiester (139)
566901	2007-07-09 06:54:00	Well Greven, I'm a bit naughty saying SC is talking out of a hole in his a**, however I'm getting pi**ed off with stupid comments from people popping sh*t out of their mouth when they know nough! Vista DOES NOT run on 512Mb without swapping to the hard-drive period! Yeah and I'm getting sick of so called 'techs' saying they know better than someone who actually had a computer doing it in front of them. Have a look at some forums where people have actually run Vista on that amount of ram- note the difference between ones who have actually done it and ones who 'supposedly know someone who has tried it'. By the way- when did I ever say that it wasn't swapping to the HD? :mad: I was actually trying to help someone in this thread, dunno what you were doing.	Shortcircuit (1666)
566902	2007-07-09 07:08:00	Well, you all must have the patience of GOD, because I have had to suffer Vista Basic on a C2D with just 512Mb ram and just about threw the damn thing out the window. Enter an extra 1Gb and it is a different machine all together. Checking the task manager for memory showed 43% on the total 1.5Gb used, therefore when only 512Mb of ram, the pc was swapping to the hard drive and is therefore deemed underspec'd. No I don't have the patience of a GOD. I also havea C2D but I also have an extremely fast RAID0 setup with one partition for just a swap file that makes mince meat of any swaps. I am not saying it is perfect just that it works fine. Maybe it don't work on your machine but it certainly does on mine.	Big John (551)
566903	2007-07-09 07:49:00	Yeah and I'm getting sick of so called 'techs' saying they know better than someone who actually had a computer doing it in front of them . Have a look at some forums where people have actually run Vista on that amount of ram- note the difference between ones who have actually done it and ones who 'supposedly know someone who has tried it' . By the way- when did I ever say that it wasn't swapping to the HD? :mad: I was actually trying to help someone in this thread, dunno what you were doing . if you want to help someone, I suggest you keep your opinion on performance to yourself bud . A PC that swaps to the HDD IS NOT ok . Comments like (512Mb is fine with Vista) do not help people . The laptop in question was a DSE asus with Vista basic, i have over 16 yrs in the IT industry, so dont start with the so called tech business ok! :mad:	SolMiester (139)
566904	2007-07-09 07:53:00	No I don't have the patience of a GOD. I also havea C2D but I also have an extremely fast RAID0 setup with one partition for just a swap file that makes mince meat of any swaps. I am not saying it is perfect just that it works fine. Maybe it don't work on your machine but it certainly does on mine. BJ - For the love of GOD, will someone listen?.......A pc that swaps at idle is underspec'd period......While you may think thats fine and dandy, you are actually using more power (battery anyone), wear & tear etc etc.....With prices for RAM nowadays, anyone who runs their laptop without enough RAM is a fool.	SolMiester (139)
566905	2007-07-09 08:27:00	Comments like (512Mb is fine with Vista) do not help people . Try getting your version of things right Solmeister- I never said it is fine for other people to run Vista on 512mb ram . I said: my laptop ran fine on 512mb, before I stuck another 1gig in . I had no intention of running it permanently on 512mb . It is a fact, it is not opinion . If your Asus ran like a dog that's not my problem and there could be all sorts of reasons- HD speed/type, what sort of CPU, what services/programs you had running . . . I'm beginning to wonder if you even know about those things . Give it another 16 years and you'll be an expert :thumbs: PS- you get further if you try to help people, rather than dissing everything .	Shortcircuit (1666)
566906	2007-07-09 09:03:00	so i shouldnt have vista running on 512mb ram? cause thats what i have right now and i dont want to mess up my pc but then again i have it on my 2nd hdd so i dont really use it but i also installed home basic on my friends pc and he also only has 512mb should i remove it as soon as possible? everything seems to work fine but you never know right, sorry if im talking off topic.	deathracer (11825)
566907	2007-07-09 09:48:00	Simply looking at the amount of RAM used in the additional stick added is not necessarily proof that the machine NEEDED that extra RAM. A modern op system should use all the RAM it is given. Why not? It is seen as just another cache which should be filled up as quickly as possible. See here for info on Vista's strategy:- www.codinghorror.com	linw (53)
566908	2007-07-09 10:02:00	Try getting your version of things right Solmeister- I never said it is fine for other people to run Vista on 512mb ram . I said: my laptop ran fine on 512mb, before I stuck another 1gig in . I had no intention of running it permanently on 512mb . It is a fact, it is not opinion . If your Asus ran like a dog that's not my problem and there could be all sorts of reasons- HD speed/type, what sort of CPU, what services/programs you had running . . . I'm beginning to wonder if you even know about those things . Give it another 16 years and you'll be an expert :thumbs: PS- you get further if you try to help people, rather than dissing everything . Give it a rest SC, you said it was fine on 512mb, i'm calling shens . . . you also said the extra 1gb made no difference . As I said, your talking out of your ass!	SolMiester (139)
1 2 3 4