+- The Lurker Lounge Forums (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums)
+-- Forum: The Lurker Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: Is 768 an unlucky number? (/thread-8837.html)
Is 768 an unlucky number? - Nantuko_Primus - 04-22-2004
I've been hearing a few rumours about Windows 98SE not being able to handle 768 MB of ram. Does anyone know anything about this?
--Nantuko_primus
Is 768 an unlucky number? - Walkiry - 04-22-2004
768 Mb is the limit of what Windows 98 can handle. Hear the details from Microsoft themselves:
Microsoft Knowledge Database.
As you can see, nothing too drastic is needed to solve the issue.
Is 768 an unlucky number? - --Pete - 04-22-2004
Hi,
As you can see, nothing too drastic is needed to solve the issue.
Looks to me that after the "fix" your system only has access to 768 MB. One presumes that if you have a system with more (normally 1 GB is the next step up), you would like to use it all. Throwing away a quarter of your memory is pretty "drastic" to me, YMMV.
--Pete
Is 768 an unlucky number? - Walkiry - 04-22-2004
Pete,Apr 22 2004, 04:10 PM Wrote:Looks to me that after the "fix" your system only has access to 768 MB.Ah. Yes, of course, you're right. What I was referring to is that it's easy to get your system to work with Windows 98 (a simple .ini file editing). I wasn't trying to imply it's not sloppy or wasteful :)
Is 768 an unlucky number? - --Pete - 04-22-2004
Hi,
I wasn't trying to imply it's not sloppy or wasteful
Too true. A typical Microsquish solution -- inelegant, wasteful, sloppy and poorly conceived. I wonder if they do head amputations for headaches at the Microsquish infirmary/ :)
--Pete