F
Frank
Guest
Re: is Vista for real
+Bob+ wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:15:11 -0400, "Dan" <someone@somewhere.here>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Not really. Vista will USE all of your ram to advantage (unlike XP, where
>>more than about 1 GB is a waste, because XP will not use it).
>
>
> You have documentation of that XP assertion?
Try using XP, the proof is "in the pudding" as the saying goes.
>
>
>>But I have a
>>laptop with 1 GB (all it can take) that runs Vista just fine. Yes more
>>would be nice, but it is NOT necessary.
>
>
> Not necessary unless you want it to run as fast as the XP machine you
> retired. Then you need twice the CPU and twice the memory for Vista.
Bullshit!
+Bob+ wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:15:11 -0400, "Dan" <someone@somewhere.here>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Not really. Vista will USE all of your ram to advantage (unlike XP, where
>>more than about 1 GB is a waste, because XP will not use it).
>
>
> You have documentation of that XP assertion?
Try using XP, the proof is "in the pudding" as the saying goes.
>
>
>>But I have a
>>laptop with 1 GB (all it can take) that runs Vista just fine. Yes more
>>would be nice, but it is NOT necessary.
>
>
> Not necessary unless you want it to run as fast as the XP machine you
> retired. Then you need twice the CPU and twice the memory for Vista.
Bullshit!