Virtual memory issues

[andicap]

Can someone tell me the best way to configure my virtual memory on my PC?
I have 384 mg of RAM.

This issue has always confused me.

[bigmack]

http://www.avid.com/onlinesupport/supportcontent.asp?productID=97&contentID=6999&browse

This helpful link brought to you by R2 - Throwing TD's and winning cold wars to the delight of all :lol:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/reagan_ronald/gfx/reagan_gipper_ap5916139.jpg

[xtb]

If you're using virtual memory, do yourself a favor and get another stick of RAM, at least 500mb. 384mb is not much these days. Virtual memory is only there to keep your machine from crashing if you run out of RAM but it will run extremely slow.

[headhawg]

andicap,

With 384 meg I would recommend using a fixed page file size of 512MB (or even 768 if you run a lot of programs at once). To do so, you want to set the Initial and Maximum size to that same value. (See Big Mack's link if you have XP.) You will get (slightly) better performance.

To make sure that the page file is not fragmented, you might want to turn off your virtual memory system, reboot, and then defrag your C: partition. Then set up the page file as above.

[andicap]

Thanks for all of your answers and help -- I just ordered more memory to bring it to 512 (its max -- an old PC). The system is running very slowly lately and there's no way I'm buying a new one until Windows Vista is out and embedded on the machine -- and then only after 6 months.
(Old joke: At Microsoft, quality is job 1.1.)

With only 20 gig of storage I usually run at more than 70% capacity which will also slow a machine down. (I had an external HD which crapped out -- probably because I kept dropping it. )

My laptop has also run more slowly than usual lately -- it has 512 mg and I run anti-virus, spyware, ccleaner, defrag, etc. routinely. I probably need 1 GIG of RAM but that would require buying two sticks of 512 and be pretty expensive.

[Tom]

Hey Andy.....update your blog BEFORE you switch to Vista! :lol:

[andicap]

Yeah, I've been negligent there -- was busy with some work for a few works and then was concentrating on the horses. The blog was costing me too much time handicapping -- found myself thinking about what I would write next instead of betting strategies.

Moreover, I'm keeping the homefront fires burning while my wife works out of the house. That's a great situation for me now with the horses and my writing work, but it means I've got to keep the house clean (well, cleanish) and take care of my daughter when she gets home from school, take her to swimming lessons, etc. Plus do all the food shopping, balance the checkbook, walkthe dog, etc.

At night I find I need time to update my betting records, keep my track profiles up to date via HTR, review the day's handicapping and start looking ahead to the next day. I can't bet many weekends because of family obligations (and a weakness for watching NFL games at a bar.)

Having a balky PC doesn't help matters any.

[richrosa]

I know this won't apply, but I'll chuck it here anyway.

Linux runs great on old laptops and desktops, even with 384MB of RAM. With a great distribution like Ubuntu you can have all the tools you need to do your daily computing. Add Wine or its commercial counterpart Crossover Office and you can run Microsoft Office natively on linux, or you could opt for the near-fully (except for features most of us don't use) compatible OpenOffice.

You won't get viruses, spyware, malware or other pests again.

Only at the end of this post will I mention that its all FREE. You don't have to wait for Vista.

[PaceAdvantage]

A little off topic, but riddle me this:

Why is Linux touted as immune (or nearly immune) to viruses? Is it because it is vastly superior to Windows in terms of security, OR is it that the assholes who create the viruses are doing the natural thing, and picking on the biggest, baddest kid on the block (Microsoft)?
If Linux had the highest market share, would it too be suffering from never ending viral attacks?

[cj]

Though I still think it is a better running O/S, Linux is far from perfectly secure and vulnerable to attacks. The smalll market share certainly keeps some from bothering. JMHO.

[cj]

I will also say that if you are running any kind of business, you are asking for a lot of aggravation if you give typical, everyday users Linux.

[Tom]

With the coming of Vista (the 5th horseman of the apocalypse?) which is expensive, dosen't add much, requires for many a new investment in hardware, will most likely not work for a year or so, and will force you to rely on MS security until the finally get around to releasing info to third part places like Norton, and makes you re-learn the whole OS, it might a good time to look at linux, open office, and other non-MS alternatives.
I certainly am going to give it a look see.

[Tom]

Andy,
I was thinking more along the lines of once you get Virsta, you won't be on line for a looooooooong time again! ;)

[BillW]

A little off topic, but riddle me this:

Why is Linux touted as immune (or nearly immune) to viruses? Is it because it is vastly superior to Windows in terms of security, OR is it that the assholes who create the viruses are doing the natural thing, and picking on the biggest, baddest kid on the block (Microsoft)?
If Linux had the highest market share, would it too be suffering from never ending viral attacks?

While the POSIX model (UNIX, HPUX, LINUX etc) is a well established design standard and has been used in some critical applications, it is not necessarily considered that strong in secure applications in Computer Science circles.(as compared to OS's designed specifically for critical applications). It is Windows that is extremely weak. Windows was actually patched to work with the internet, not designed for such use (The actual code in Windows for the TCP/IP stack is taken from Berkeley UNIX - not even designed at MS). Features such as ActiveX and running e-mail attachments as applications were understood as serious security problems in the industry far before MS implemented them as "Features". No Operating system is immune to bugs, but Linux does not have any features, implemented as part of the design that will allow a rogue website to erase the whole hard disk nor the ability to automatically run an e-mail attachment as a program and do damage to the system.

Bill