Ummm help??

[Trippy]

Also, I have a 4GB, 32-bit vista ultimate machine.  You allocate the remainder to act as a window for the graphics card, so it's not wasted.

It is wasted.

[tkinnun0]

If you like Vista's UAC prompts but would like to have more of them you'll love Ubuntu.

[Trippy]

You are doing it wrong.

[Endie]

Also, I have a 4GB, 32-bit vista ultimate machine.  You allocate the remainder to act as a window for the graphics card, so it's not wasted.

It is wasted.

I could explain to you why it is not, but why should I be any less of an arrogant and unhelpful jerk than you are being?

[Trippy]

I could explain to you why it is not, but why should I be any less of an arrogant and unhelpful jerk than you are being?

You could try but you would still be wrong. Sorry if my short answer wasn't enough to make you think that maybe you should do a little research on your own to figure out why you are wrong.

[Predator Irl]

I have linux and windows (vista and xp) machines running for various purposes, and each has their uses.  But it's disingenuous to suggest that someone's life won't be a crapload more awkward if they swap their games machine to a linux distro.

No I didnt suggest it for a games machine, which is why I suggested a dual-boot. But for normal use of a computer then there are numerous linux distro's out there that are far more reliable than windows, easier to install and you don't have problems such as ninja was having with a virus. If you put a computer illiterate person in front of one windows machine and one linux distro, I know which one they would pick, hands down!

Also, I have a 4GB, 32-bit vista ultimate machine.  You allocate the remainder to act as a window for the graphics card, so it's not wasted.  

Its totally wasted! OK, ultimate edition allows you to allocate to the graphics card, but a huge chunk of your RAM is taken up by the OS needlessly in the first place. I'd go as far as saying to Vista users, get rid of it and install XP, at least it utilises your hardware better than Vista.

[tkinnun0]

You are doing it wrong.

I get two less UACs a month on Vista from patching alone. Seriously, every time I look at my Ubuntu something needs patching so there's a UAC. And the Ubuntu sits there as a webserver, I don't actually use it. On Vista I browse, watch videos, play WoW, do programming and graphics and I still get less UACs.

[Trippy]

I could explain to you why it is not, but why should I be any less of an arrogant and unhelpful jerk than you are being?

You could try but you would still be wrong. Sorry if my short answer wasn't enough to make you think that maybe you should do a little research on your own to figure out why you are wrong.

Here I'll help you out. I just typed in "32-bit vista 4 GB RAM" into Google (without the quotes) and this is the top link:

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000811.html

Note the paragraph right above the address space diagram.

Just in case you don't believe that guy you can download and read this:

http://download.intel.com/support/motherboards/desktop/dp35dp/sb/d88103001us.pdf

Go to section 2.1.1 and read it.

Also look closely at the label on the address space diagram that says "Top of usable DRAM (memory visible to the operating system)". Notice how the PCI area is *above* that line. I.e. the OS can't even *see* that space as usable RAM, it's not that the OS is explicitly "reserving" that area for a video card or whatnot and can change its mind on how it wants to use that space.

[Jayce]

Wow, my attempt to inflame the thread succeeded above my wildest dreams.

edit: in an attempt to actually add content, my last romp with Linux was a weeklong attempt to figure out how to install SUSE.  Finally I found out that the default filesystem doesn't really, y'know, work. Then I remembered that I had a life.

That said, I like Linux and Macs as much as windows, but I enjoy inflaming zealots even more than experimenting with operating systems.

you don't have problems such as ninja was having with a virus.

I have a term for this I like to use.  It's the same reason you don't see a lot of Mac viruses.  I like to call it "Security by abject failure in the marketplace".

[Trippy]

You are doing it wrong.

I get two less UACs a month on Vista from patching alone. Seriously, every time I look at my Ubuntu something needs patching so there's a UAC. And the Ubuntu sits there as a webserver, I don't actually use it. On Vista I browse, watch videos, play WoW, do programming and graphics and I still get less UACs.

Well okay then, if for some reason you are constantly running apt-get or whatnot then yeah you'll have to keep typing in your password. Or you could just do it once a month like Microsoft does for its updates. Or you could get rid of the stuff you don't use so it won't bother trying to update that stuff. On my Ubuntu server box with a minimal install I've run apt-get 27 times in the last 12 months which is roughly twice a month which is only slightly more than you are getting with Vista.

[Endie]

I could explain to you why it is not, but why should I be any less of an arrogant and unhelpful jerk than you are being?

You could try but you would still be wrong. Sorry if my short answer wasn't enough to make you think that maybe you should do a little research on your own to figure out why you are wrong.

BCDEDIT /SET PAE ForceEnable

[Endie]

/leans back

/sips mojito

[lac]

You would still need a 64bit processor/motherboard, I'm afraid.

from here

[Endie]

You would still need a 64bit processor/motherboard, I'm afraid.

Two things about that.  One is that that's not what we're discussing: we're talking about 32-bit Vista.  The other is that you're actually wrong: you can do this with anything back to the (32-bit) Pentium Pro so long as you use a 36-pin mobo (obviously, so long as the BIOS is up to scratch).  We first did it on a Royal Mail contract I did for corporate mail compliance.

[xorx]

The memory hole no longer exists, you can use PAE to address more in a 32 bit OS because the size of the page table entry becomes 8 bytes rather than 4 bytes for non-PAE. This essentially halves the size of the page table (which is still fixed at 4KB), but you've started to use 64 bit addresses rather than 32 bit addresses). To get round this a level of indirection to page addresses is added; and arguably there is therefore an effective performance compromise by enabling it (you now have 64bit page addresses, but a smaller page table, thus you reference it indirectly from the register, rather than directly).

tl;dr:  The old saw of 'you can't address 4G' is no longer true, but is replaced by 'all memory access to the whole 4G is potentially slower - both for minor and major page faults'.

That said, I am not a hardware guy (IANAHG?).

 

[Trippy]

I could explain to you why it is not, but why should I be any less of an arrogant and unhelpful jerk than you are being?

You could try but you would still be wrong. Sorry if my short answer wasn't enough to make you think that maybe you should do a little research on your own to figure out why you are wrong.

BCDEDIT /SET PAE ForceEnable

Very nice. Thank you for correcting me, I was wrong.

Unfortunately that mode slows down your memory access by 33%. I would not recommend anybody run it just to get back that 512 - 768 MB of memory. If you *really* need that extra memory, switch to a 64-bit OS.

[Trippy]

You would still need a 64bit processor/motherboard, I'm afraid.

from here

That's not a problem these days, though. Both AMD and Intel have been selling 64-bit desktop CPUs for a while now. Also that page is a red herring (I saw that too and I got tripped up by it cause it says it requires 64-bit OS).

This one is the applicable page:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929580

[Predator Irl]

Just as a matter of interest, is anyone running the 64-bit version of vista and if so, how does it perform compared to the 32-bit. Any problems with application compatibility?

[Endie]

You're right, of course, that the real answer is to spend the :10bux: (I think MS still do that offer?) and get the 64-bit version, especially if you get driver issues under PAE (which can still be an issue, though nowhere near as bad as before).  Of course, there are potential speed issues with 32-bit code on 64-bit Vista, too, so it's all down to a tremendously-complex set of judgement calls what is best for a particular set of tasks (ie finger-in-the-air, grimace, suck air through teeth...).

[lac]

Thank god it isn't a complicated issue and it's explained so very clearly on the microsoft pages.

[Trippy]

Just as a matter of interest, is anyone running the 64-bit version of vista and if so, how does it perform compared to the 32-bit. Any problems with application compatibility?

Applications are generally fine. It's the drivers that still can give people problems. The NVIDIA 64-bit drivers were especially bad in the past. Supposedly they were causing 30% of the crashes back in 2007 (not clear which part of the year).

[Jayce]

Any time an architecture changes you're likely to see some issues.

At a super high level, I suspect they are mostly caused by people circumventing APIs or making use of undocumented features.  Usually an OS manufacturer (or community in the case of open source) should provide an abstraction layer to keep the details of the architecture out of application code, but people circumvent it and the problems thus caused are summarily blamed on the operating system.

[Endie]

Any time an architecture changes you're likely to see some issues.

At a super high level, I suspect they are mostly caused by people circumventing APIs or making use of undocumented features.

This was the cause of a lot of errors when PAE was first introduced.  Developers were merrily coding away - usually on drivers, as Trippy says - making incorrect assumptions about the address range of the memory they were dealing with.

[tkinnun0]

Well okay then, if for some reason you are constantly running apt-get or whatnot

I'm running whatnot every time I click the "your machine is not up-to-date" icon, the same as on Vista. Seems only fair.

[Predator Irl]

Well okay then, if for some reason you are constantly running apt-get or whatnot

I'm running whatnot every time I click the "your machine is not up-to-date" icon, the same as on Vista. Seems only fair.

Whatever about the updates, I mean software is inherently insecure or bugged and to a certain extent, I welcome updates. However, what I don't like is Microsoft's "forcing" you to download updates and restarting your computer without even asking. Before anyone even says it, yes I have changed my update options, but Vista ignores my settings from time to time.

[Endie]

As a counterpoint to this, I want Microsoft to go as far as possible in forcing you to update your machine, given what you say you do with it!  I don't appreciate a million zombie machines sending spam around the globe...

[Predator Irl]

Hey my machine doesn't spam the globe... I save all my spam for this forum!

[Jayce]

Before anyone even says it, yes I have changed my update options, but Vista ignores my settings from time to time.

It's never done that to me.  Maybe there's a PEBCAK.

Also I would expect more updates from Microsoft.  The corollary of my earlier law is that EVERYONE targets MS OSes so they better be on top of security like no other.

[Amarr HM]

I've been running vista for the last year and a half my machine has bluescreened maybe twice, some small games compatibility issues but in comparison to it's predecessors my experience is it's the most stable. I really hated XP I am not as technically inclined as most people in this thread so perhaps for more advanced use I'd face problems with Vista but I don't. The reason I won't switch to Linux is the concerns I have about program/game availability compatibility I know you suggested partitioning but nah fuck that I ain't having problems so why bother ( I only have 3 gigs of ram which for me is enough RAM).

[lac]

I'm sticking with xp for the same reason you are on vista. It does what it needs to be doing for me and I'm happy with it.
I can't really think of any feature in vista I miss by running xp but I'll switch to vista as soon as I think I'm missing out on something. DX10 maybe or ultimate's use of 4gig ram, as I learned today :p

Vista generated a lot of bad press at launch because it was sold on pc's that couldn't run it well enough, machines with 1gig of ram and a crappy onboard videocard, couple that with crap drivers from a lot of major suppliers and you end up with hordes of unhappy customers. I remember a guy with a vista sony vaio that had costed him 2k€ and ran noticeably slower than his 4 year old xp laptop...

[Jayce]

I'll agree that about Vista.  I stayed away from it for a year, until after SP1 and it's a lot better than the pre-SP1 stories I heard.

In terms of features, I can't think of any that I love over XP.  The Aero glass interface is pretty neat but I could live without it, but why not when you have a fast cpu and lots of RAM.  I mainly got it because it was the path of least resistance when I got a new PC.

IMO because I don't have a lot of extra time and I'd rather be gaming than tweaking my system, an OS should do its job and stay out of your way.  Vista does that but my limited experience with Linux is not exactly the same.  Maybe one day I'll install some distro if I feel like climbing that particular learning curve.

[apocrypha]

Strangest EVE thread ever. For real.

Edit: OK, 2nd strangest. I forgot about Winger Dick Girl.

[Predator Irl]

Strangest EVE thread ever. For real.

Edit: OK, 2nd strangest. I forgot about Winger Dick Girl.

Meh, its a break from the norm and an opportunity for us to show what real nerds we are lol

[lac]

Can't believe nobody mentioned how awesome his mac is.

[Yoru]

Can't believe nobody mentioned how awesome his mac is.

My Mac is awesome. I just don't use it to play EVE, because it's shit at that.