Aside from the pain of tracking down 64-bit drivers - why not go 64-bit? Apple has already gone almost completely 64-bit OS with Snow Leopard and it's been around in *nix circles for a long time.
--------------------------- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation <http://www.secureworldfoundation.org> Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:35 PM, DSinc <[email protected]> wrote: > Tim, > In your "business" position I get this. Should you choose this position > personally, that is fine. Please accept that there are many folk everywhere > that just do NOT yet see the need for a 64-bit OS. JMHO. > Best, > Duncan > > > > Tim Lider wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> Man explaining it and reading the explanation can make your brain hurt. >> Let's just say for the original poster it's not enough and should upgrade >> to >> 64-bit OS. >> >> Regards, >> >> Tim Lider >> Sr. Data Recovery Specialist >> Advanced Data Solutions, LLC >> http://www.adv-data.com >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- >>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Greg Sevart >>> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 12:24 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [H] More than 4GB of ram and VM question >>> >>> It isn't as much of a mystery as people make it out to be. By default, >>> on a >>> 32-bit system with 4GB of RAM, 2GB is available for user space, and 2GB >>> is >>> reserved for exclusive use by the kernel--which would include kernel >>> mode >>> drivers. You are also correct in that some of this upper space is >>> reduced by >>> various system devices, some of which might not make much sense. The >>> reason >>> that systems differ is because of varying chipsets, their maximum >>> addressable memory, the ability of the chipset and BIOS to remap memory >>> above system-reserved spaces, and, of course, the devices installed. >>> >>> Using the /3GB switch will shift the division to 3GB of userland and >>> 1GB of >>> kernel memory, but keep in mind that each individual 32-bit address >>> will >>> still be limited to 2GB of memory unless it was compiled with >>> LARGE_ADDRESS_AWARE. It gets much more complicated when you're using >>> PAE >>> (Physical Address Extensions) and AWE (Address Windowing Extensions), >>> but >>> that realm is only relevant if you're running Server Enterprise or >>> better. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- >>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Winterlight >>>> Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 1:00 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [H] More than 4GB of ram and VM question >>>> >>>> This is not how I understand it to work, not that there seems to be >>>> any kind of consensuses on this, but I read in Maximum PC that 32 bit >>>> supports 4GB of RAM addressing. You start out with 4GB of RAM and >>>> then windows starts knocking off for addresses already used by your >>>> video card, your network card, whatever. This is why some people show >>>> 3.2GB some, just 3GB. To add to the confusion, Maximum PC has >>>> reported that MS has stated that windows can actually use some of >>>> that undressed RAM for things such as drivers. >>>> >>>> >>>> At 07:24 AM 9/18/2009, you wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello Brian, >>>>> 32-bit is really locked to 3GB of RAM, it's just Windows is >>>>> >>>> reporting >>> >>>> the >>>> >>>>> 3.6GB of RAM. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >>
