Posted 29 July 2007 - 07:08 AM
I haven't done it, but I have run 2gB on Vista with XP in a Virtual Machine (without any issues). I'd suspect that this would be dependent upon which programs and how much RAM they actually took up. With 72 processes running, I'm using about 1.4 gB of RAM currently (on my 4gB system).
With XP you can get along with 512 mB, but 1 gB is (IMO) a better option for a mature copy of the OS. The benefit of the extra memory is that you don't have to worry about each little thing that's added to your system - so periodic maintenance is less intensive with 1 gB than it is with 512 mB. FWIW - There's still a bunch of people out there using 256 mB on their XP systems!
I'm starting to suspect that Vista will suffer from the same "bloat" as XP - but that the numbers are higher (depending upon the version). Home Basic works fine out of the box with 512 mB, but add a few programs and watch it slow down rapidly. 1 gB will help this, but the speed with which the slowdown occurs makes me suspect that it won't stop with 1 gB - and that 2 gB will be necessary for long term use (at acceptable speeds).
Unfortunately, there's not much anyplace to go after this. You can upgrade to 3 or 4 gB - then you're stuck by the 32 bit OS limit. So, I'd suspect that 64 bit OS's are the future for everyone within the next 5 to 10 years.
My browser caused a flood of traffic, sio my IP address was banned. Hope to fix it soon. Will get back to posting as soon as Im able. - John
(my website: http://www.carrona.org/
)**If you need a more detailed explanation, please ask for it. I have the Knack
. ** If I haven't replied in 48 hours, please send me a message. My eye problems have recently increased and I'm having difficult reading posts. (23 Nov 2017)FYI - I am completely blind in the right eye and ~30% blind in the left eye.
<p>If the eye problems get worse suddenly, I may not be able to respond.If that's the case and help is needed, please PM a staff member for assistance.