A Windows 98 & ME forum. Win98banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Win98banter forum » Windows 98 » Setup & Installation
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Max performace settings (swap/cache) with 256/512 mb ram?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old November 5th 04, 12:34 AM
SFB - KB3MM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Which app eats your resources.

"FACE" wrote in message
...
Just a note here.......

I am running Win98 SE. This morning I decided that I have had all i can
stand and am going to get Windows XP when possible.

The reason is quite pragmatic and simple: System resources.

My understanding is that they are statically allocated in Win 98 and
dynamically allocated as needed in Win XP. At least 4 times a week
I run out of them. After the warning message, if I can't catch it quick
enough then the whole machine locks up and requires a reset.

Other than that, I have nothing at all against Win 98.

Consider this if the machines are going to be used for internet a lot.

FACE

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:28:06 -0400, 98 Guy in
microsoft.public.win98.performance wrote:

I'm replacing about 1/2 dozen office PC's (each being a P-3, 600 to
850 mhz, 128 mb ram each) to 2.6 ghz Celeron's with 512 mb ram, DVD-rw
(LG 8x) and CD-rw drives, 80 gb Seagate Barracuda drives (very quite),
Zalman copper CPU heatsink AND zalman 400 watt power supply. Very
fast, very quite machines.

They're getting Win 98 (1 master drive is being cloned with Ghost).
Full install of Microsoft office 2000 premium, and all sorts of other
goodies from the MSDN (map point, etc). DVD burning / copying
software (DVD decrypt, DVD shrink, etc).



  #52  
Old November 5th 04, 02:56 AM
FACE
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 4 Nov 2004 23:34:25 -0000, "SFB - KB3MM" in
microsoft.public.win98.performance wrote:

Which app eats your resources.


It appears that the most voracious is to run IE and Netscape simultaneously
-- which I do for particular preferences of each. That, combined with a few
shockwave and Flash files in the pages -- and the few popups with the same
flavor of GDI intensive files that get through IE with numeric IPs or
one-time appearances -- seems to be worst.

(Although I have always used Netscape for email, I have recently begun to
use the browser more intensely.)

I believe it is the GDI that runs out. My Agent newsreader icons go black,
the analog third party clock goes solid....

Also, I run Spyguard in the background, as well as running Spybot S&D and
Adaware daily.

There does not appear to be "unauthorized" activity going on.


FACE

"FACE" wrote in message
.. .
Just a note here.......

I am running Win98 SE. This morning I decided that I have had all i can
stand and am going to get Windows XP when possible.

The reason is quite pragmatic and simple: System resources.

My understanding is that they are statically allocated in Win 98 and
dynamically allocated as needed in Win XP. At least 4 times a week
I run out of them. After the warning message, if I can't catch it quick
enough then the whole machine locks up and requires a reset.

Other than that, I have nothing at all against Win 98.

Consider this if the machines are going to be used for internet a lot.

FACE

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:28:06 -0400, 98 Guy in
microsoft.public.win98.performance wrote:

I'm replacing about 1/2 dozen office PC's (each being a P-3, 600 to
850 mhz, 128 mb ram each) to 2.6 ghz Celeron's with 512 mb ram, DVD-rw
(LG 8x) and CD-rw drives, 80 gb Seagate Barracuda drives (very quite),
Zalman copper CPU heatsink AND zalman 400 watt power supply. Very
fast, very quite machines.

They're getting Win 98 (1 master drive is being cloned with Ghost).
Full install of Microsoft office 2000 premium, and all sorts of other
goodies from the MSDN (map point, etc). DVD burning / copying
software (DVD decrypt, DVD shrink, etc).



  #53  
Old November 5th 04, 04:56 AM
SFB - KB3MM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think they are always dynamically allocated.

WIN9X systems only have a fixed size area 64 KB so the amout of RAM is
static.

There's no limit in the NT family.

"FACE" wrote in message
...
Just a note here.......

I am running Win98 SE. This morning I decided that I have had all i can
stand and am going to get Windows XP when possible.

The reason is quite pragmatic and simple: System resources.

My understanding is that they are statically allocated in Win 98 and
dynamically allocated as needed in Win XP. At least 4 times a week
I run out of them. After the warning message, if I can't catch it quick
enough then the whole machine locks up and requires a reset.

Other than that, I have nothing at all against Win 98.

Consider this if the machines are going to be used for internet a lot.

FACE

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:28:06 -0400, 98 Guy in
microsoft.public.win98.performance wrote:

I'm replacing about 1/2 dozen office PC's (each being a P-3, 600 to
850 mhz, 128 mb ram each) to 2.6 ghz Celeron's with 512 mb ram, DVD-rw
(LG 8x) and CD-rw drives, 80 gb Seagate Barracuda drives (very quite),
Zalman copper CPU heatsink AND zalman 400 watt power supply. Very
fast, very quite machines.

They're getting Win 98 (1 master drive is being cloned with Ghost).
Full install of Microsoft office 2000 premium, and all sorts of other
goodies from the MSDN (map point, etc). DVD burning / copying
software (DVD decrypt, DVD shrink, etc).



  #54  
Old November 5th 04, 03:45 PM
XMan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"SFB - KB3MM" wrote in message
...
WIN9X systems only have a fixed size area 64 KB so the amout of RAM is
static.


Windows 9x actually has five fixed-size resource-heaps. Three are 2MB and two are
64KB. It's the 64KB heaps that cause the problem with low resources. If either one
runs out, you can't allocate any further resources on any of the five heaps. However,
as long as free resources are kept above 10% there shouldn't be any problems. If
you're constantly running out of resources, run fewer programs at once. If you still
run out, you have a resource leak (a program isn't releasing reources when it's done
with them). Trial and error will soon identify the culprit(s).

There's no limit in the NT family.


Actually, there is a physical limit (resources are not infinite). However the limits
are so far in excess of most people's needs they are effectively unlimited.


  #55  
Old November 5th 04, 05:58 PM
FACE
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

OK. Perhaps i misused a word. :-)
On the subject of System Resources, I think we pretty well thrashed it out
in a thread last August found at:
http://www.google.com/groups?safe=of...n&num=30&hl=en

Sorry, but Tinyurl does not seem to be working completely right now -- I
have no doubt that it will be soon though.

FACE

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 03:56:21 -0000, "SFB - KB3MM" in
microsoft.public.win98.performance wrote:

I think they are always dynamically allocated.

WIN9X systems only have a fixed size area 64 KB so the amout of RAM is
static.

There's no limit in the NT family.

"FACE" wrote in message
.. .
Just a note here.......

I am running Win98 SE. This morning I decided that I have had all i can
stand and am going to get Windows XP when possible.

The reason is quite pragmatic and simple: System resources.

My understanding is that they are statically allocated in Win 98 and
dynamically allocated as needed in Win XP. At least 4 times a week
I run out of them. After the warning message, if I can't catch it quick
enough then the whole machine locks up and requires a reset.

Other than that, I have nothing at all against Win 98.

Consider this if the machines are going to be used for internet a lot.

FACE

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:28:06 -0400, 98 Guy in
microsoft.public.win98.performance wrote:

I'm replacing about 1/2 dozen office PC's (each being a P-3, 600 to
850 mhz, 128 mb ram each) to 2.6 ghz Celeron's with 512 mb ram, DVD-rw
(LG 8x) and CD-rw drives, 80 gb Seagate Barracuda drives (very quite),
Zalman copper CPU heatsink AND zalman 400 watt power supply. Very
fast, very quite machines.

They're getting Win 98 (1 master drive is being cloned with Ghost).
Full install of Microsoft office 2000 premium, and all sorts of other
goodies from the MSDN (map point, etc). DVD burning / copying
software (DVD decrypt, DVD shrink, etc).



  #56  
Old November 6th 04, 01:49 AM
XMan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"FACE" wrote in message
news
OK. Perhaps i misused a word. :-)
On the subject of System Resources, I think we pretty well thrashed it out
in a thread last August found at:
http://www.google.com/groups?safe=of...n&num=30&hl=en

Sorry, but Tinyurl does not seem to be working completely right now -- I
have no doubt that it will be soon though.


Seems to be working fine:
http://tinyurl.com/3k4bk



On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 03:56:21 -0000, "SFB - KB3MM" in
microsoft.public.win98.performance wrote:

I think they are always dynamically allocated.

WIN9X systems only have a fixed size area 64 KB so the amout of RAM is
static.

There's no limit in the NT family.

"FACE" wrote in message
. ..
Just a note here.......

I am running Win98 SE. This morning I decided that I have had all i can
stand and am going to get Windows XP when possible.

The reason is quite pragmatic and simple: System resources.

My understanding is that they are statically allocated in Win 98 and
dynamically allocated as needed in Win XP. At least 4 times a week
I run out of them. After the warning message, if I can't catch it quick
enough then the whole machine locks up and requires a reset.

Other than that, I have nothing at all against Win 98.

Consider this if the machines are going to be used for internet a lot.

FACE

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:28:06 -0400, 98 Guy in
microsoft.public.win98.performance wrote:

I'm replacing about 1/2 dozen office PC's (each being a P-3, 600 to
850 mhz, 128 mb ram each) to 2.6 ghz Celeron's with 512 mb ram, DVD-rw
(LG 8x) and CD-rw drives, 80 gb Seagate Barracuda drives (very quite),
Zalman copper CPU heatsink AND zalman 400 watt power supply. Very
fast, very quite machines.

They're getting Win 98 (1 master drive is being cloned with Ghost).
Full install of Microsoft office 2000 premium, and all sorts of other
goodies from the MSDN (map point, etc). DVD burning / copying
software (DVD decrypt, DVD shrink, etc).




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Money 99 and Regional Settings problem David General 0 October 5th 04 02:41 PM
Importing (some) settings from 98 to fresh install of 98SE Michele Dondi Setup & Installation 11 July 24th 04 08:42 PM
ActiveX settings Wade Koehn Monitors & Displays 0 July 21st 04 04:54 PM
lan settings joe Networking 1 June 25th 04 10:50 AM
Put Documents and Settings on D partition? Clark G General 1 June 11th 04 06:01 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 Win98banter.
The comments are property of their posters.