Thanks for the input.
Only Crucial did not have the PC2-4200. The others did. If Stewart's
perspective is accurate, maybe Crucial moves out older, slower memory
faster.
I can remember when Crucial's prices were higher than others, but I
expect price competition online has driven their prices
Crucial guarantees their memory selections to work in your computer
which takes the worry out of the whole process.
Richard P.
Only Crucial did not have the PC2-4200. The others did. If Stewart's
perspective is accurate, maybe Crucial moves out older, slower memory
faster.
Check out Newegg they do have some.
Stewart
At 08:38 AM 1/9/2009, you wrote:
Thanks for the input.
Only Crucial did not have the PC2-4200. The others did. If Stewart's
perspective is accurate, maybe Crucial moves out older, slower memory faster.
I can remember when Crucial's prices were
I'm sure Newegg is good too. I usually get computer stuff from OWC, but
I purchased from Crucial this time.
I've never had any trouble finding the right memory, and never had a
problem with what I got. But I've only managed about 10 computers in the
last few years, almost all Macs, so my
Crucial guarantees their memory selections to work in your computer
which takes the worry out of the whole process.
Just about everybody does.
When DataMem once sold me the wrong memory for a printer they very
quickly and diligently researched the correct type, FedExed the right
memory to me,
I was looking at upgrading the memory for my wife's 1.67GHz PowerBook
G4. Crucial recommends DDR2 PC2-5300, while OWC and DMS both have the
DDR2 PC2-4200, which is the type of the memory that is in her computer now.
Does anyone know why this variation is OK?
I don't know how it would come out
PC2-5300 is actually faster than 4200. Memory can slow itself for
the buss but can never speed itself up to match a buss speed.
I also am not sure that they sell PC2-4200 memory much anymore. Most
of what I see starts at 5300 and it is relatively cheap.
Stewart
At 06:22 PM 1/8/2009, you
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 19:22:51 -0500, Jordan wrote:
I was looking at upgrading the memory for my wife's 1.67GHz PowerBook
G4. Crucial recommends DDR2 PC2-5300, while OWC and DMS both have the
[. . .]
I don't know how it would come out including shipping costs, but
Crucial's price was as good
Larry
What is the kernal memory dump? unselected options wherever I was are: full mem
dump or short mem dump or none. Is this something that the system needs to do
or what?
I did a search for this
%SystemRoot%\MEMORY.DMP
and it brought up Memory.dmp
When I clicked on it, I got this error
I have an older desktop computer for my daughter's use which was
adequate until she is now in high school. She complains that she can't
play on-line games because the computer is too slow. I'm wondering if
additional RAM would help, and if so whether it is worth buying for such
an old
You've got a bigger problem. To _really_ come up to speed, she needs
all the niceties in WinXP (or Vista). You can throw a gig or two of
ram at that Win2k install but you'll never get it up to today's
standards.
This system would make a nice internet enabled backup for guests, but
it's too aged
Simply yes!
2000 likes 512 MB minimum. It loves 1 GB. (Similar engine to XP)
Crucial shows max memory of 1 GB with 512 SDRAM 133 simms.
Now to be honest is it worth that money to bump the memory up or is
it time tog et a new computer, as this is old technology. (At least
3 cycles old by my
I just got a slot-loading CRT iMac G3/500 that, naturally, doesn't have
enough memory.
Is there any place I can get 2x512MB at a price that's not 3X more than
what I paid for the iMac [$20]? Specs call for PC100 SDRAM DIMMs. Can I
use PC133? [yes, it will ignore the extra 33MHz, I have PC133
er, what's the problem with Flash?
John DeCarlo wrote:
On 8/6/07, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a Firefox plug-in to control the execution of Flash. Tools
Add-ons Extensions Get Extensions etc.
The big culprit is Flash. I hate it where web sites use Flash when HTML
As stated earlier in this thread, it's a huge CPU hog, among other
things. Turn on a CPU monitor and then go to a web page that has it and
watch you computer work, hard.
Judy Cosler wrote:
er, what's the problem with Flash?
But, would the flash things running overnight on a Mozilla type
browser cause OSX to close?
Looks like there may be more than one thing amiss. Need to clear
things
out to get a better picture of what is causeing your CPU problem.
This shutting down of OSX is happening EVERY night now but
Have you tried to run X on another account? As admin, you'll be
able to use your files. Does the second account crash? Which
maintenance utilities have you used? I've fou
No I haven't tried that Betty. I will make a new account and see
what happens.
Paula
IN/USA
Life should NOT be a
Have you checked your logs to see what time it's doing it? Same time every
night? What programs are running, any errors before it shuts down in the
log?
Mike
On 8/8/07, Paula Minor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But, would the flash things running overnight on a Mozilla type
browser cause OSX
At this point I would start by letting it run all night with NO
applications running. If it still has problems , then you've eliminated
a lot of questions.
If it did still have problems, I'd install OS X on an external HD and
see how that runs. I have a little partition on a Firewire HD just in
Have you checked your logs to see what time it's doing it? Same
time every
night? What programs are running, any errors before it shuts down
in the
log?
Where do I find the logs?
Paula
IN/USA
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an
0pen a Finder window and search for logs.
There are some in Mac HD/Library/Logs and others in (your name)/Library/Logs
Paula Minor wrote:
Have you checked your logs to see what time it's doing it? Same time
every
night? What programs are running, any errors before it shuts down in
the
log?
Where do I find the logs?
Run Console from the Utilities menu.
Click on the Logs icon in the toolbar.
* == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in ==
* == the body of an email send 'em to: [EMAIL
Re: Memory question.Tom?
But, would the flash things running overnight on a Mozilla type
browser cause OSX to close?
Looks like there may be more than one thing amiss. Need to clear
things out to get a better picture of what is causeing your CPU
problem.
This shutting down of OSX is
But, would the flash things running overnight on a Mozilla type
browser cause OSX to close?
Looks like there may be more than one thing amiss. Need to clear things
out to get a better picture of what is causeing your CPU problem.
But, would the flash things running overnight on a Mozilla type browser cause OSX to close?
Mozilla's browsers have had a memory leak bug on and off for a long
time. The leak can cause the browser to crash, but I haven't seen it
crash OS X. [Mozilla doesn't install anything in root.] Running
I'm maxed on RAM with 2.5 gb. I don't really understand how Mac
handles ram tho. It always looks like I'm almost out of it and am
using a lot of virtual rameven when I'm not running much.
Do you have a PPC or an Intel Mac? If it is an Intel Mac you should check
in Activity Monitor that
There is a Firefox plug-in to control the execution of Flash. Tools
Add-ons Extensions Get Extensions etc.
The big culprit is Flash. I hate it where web sites use Flash when HTML
or any other video works better--and there's no alternate path. Might not be
Paula's problem, but I've had trouble
On 8/6/07, Tom Piwowar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is a Firefox plug-in to control the execution of Flash. Tools
Add-ons Extensions Get Extensions etc.
The big culprit is Flash. I hate it where web sites use Flash when HTML
or any other video works better--and there's no alternate
Woke up this a.m. to find OSX had quit again. It seems to happen
every night now. I don't have any backups running then. I do set
the computer to sleep after about 1/2 hr. I did forget to restart it
in safemode when I went to bed.
Right now, with only mail running the CPU is running
Today I downloaded a version of Flashblock that finally works with
SeaMonkey. I've used Flashblock with Firefox for ages, but it's not my
primary browser. Best thing is that it worked immediately--before
quitting and restarting the program! [I'd better back it up before it
breaks]
Happy
It seems you have no shortage of good advice here but:
If I were you I'd look closer at each CPU hog and see what it's doing or
if there are settings you could change to stop this behavior. For
example, there are certainly setting in Camino you could alter, but I'd
start by closing one tab at
Paula, lose the widgets. Set up a larger swap file for Photoshop.
Mine's on a separate drive [it's in the prefs somewhere; in my ps
you can select up to 4 swap disks]. Does Camino have a memory leak
like other Moz browsers? I use some beta versions just so I can
have a debug menu. Can you
If I were you I'd look closer at each CPU hog and see what it's
doing or if there are settings you could change to stop this
behavior. For example, there are certainly setting in Camino you
could alter, but I'd start by closing o
Thanks, Jordman. I've dumped Camino as it seemed to have a
It seems you have no shortage of good advice here but: If I were you
I'd look closer at each CPU hog and see what it's doing or if there
are settings you could change to stop this behavior. For example,
there are certainly setting in Camino you could alter, but I'd start
by closing one tab at
Well, initially it wouldn't start up in safe mode. It hung at the
white screen with the apple logo and the spinning dial. So I shut it
down after about 5 mins and started again. It took almost 5 min. but
did finally start up.
At that point it was doing a disk repair and it lools like you
Now I'm starting to think you are pulling my leg. Do you routinely
drive
your car through ditches and then complain about the rough ride?
I'm chuckling here. g I do run my truck thru ditches from time to
time but I don't complain. I do expect it to perform as it was
intended. ;-)
Yes, I
I left it open overnight with Lightroom with several hundred
thumbnails open in the library, Photoshop CS2 with 2 large photo
files open, mail, Camino with 8 tabs, Palm Desktop,(thought it might
be the problem) , system preferences, dashboard with several widgets
and iTunes all running.
What I was thinking about was OS X 10.4.10 Update v1.1
Tom Piwowar wrote:
I thought that X.4.11 is only for the intell Macs.
It is not out yet, so you should not be thinking anything yet.
* ==
Well that explains the high load. Maybe you should try your streaming
with iTunes?
Also have Photoshop CS2 with 2 photos open and iTunes.
PS is a memory hog. How big are the photos? If big then you should follow
Adobe's instructions on memory management.
And all of my widgets are running
It's almost always Camino with the the most CPU usage and that's
generally after it's been running for a few days.
You should not leave anything running for a few days. Errors accumulate.
Mail and Camino should not be using 61% of a fast new Mac. On my much
slower 800MHz Mac I'm running
I thought that X.4.11 is only for the intell Macs.
It is not out yet, so you should not be thinking anything yet.
* == QUICK LIST-COMMAND REFERENCE - Put the following commands in ==
* == the body of an email
What happens when you run from a safe boot (Shift key down on Mac's
startup)?
Well, initially it wouldn't start up in safe mode. It hung at the
white screen with the apple logo and the spinning dial. So I shut it
down after about 5 mins and started again. It took almost 5 min. but
did
My iMac G5 iSite has been having frequent blue screen
equivalents.the transparent gray box that tells me OSX has quit
and I have to shut down. I thought I had found the problem when I
unplugged 2 of the 4 external hd's I have on it. But I got up this
a.m. to a new error msg. Instead
My iMac G5 iSite has been having frequent blue screen
equivalents.the transparent gray box that tells me OSX has quit
and I have to shut down.
Is there any info in panic.log?
Did you update to X.4.10? If yes you'll have to hope that X.4.11 fixes
it. What I read about X.4.11 suggests
Some time ago I bought a 2GB USB memory stick /thumb drive / flash drive from
Micro Center, and it was a plain 2GB flash memory drive that just worked. Just
what I wanted.
Today I bought another one. The case is a different color and slightly
different configuration -- not a problem. The
U3 USB may not install drivers on the local machine in the sense of not putting
commands in the registry to load drivers (whether the U3 drive is attached or
not) and not writing the driver files to the local machine hard drive, but the
U3 package does have drivers (dlls, etc.) in it which are
I recently had to download and install some updated net files from MS
(netdot or similar) for my U3 to function properly.
These memory sticks have two portions and will load two drives on
your PC. One is the virtual CD drive that the U3 portion resides on
and the other is the memory stick
The security setup on the public computers at my library (part of the
Fairfax County system) doesn't allow U3 flash drives to work. Just
the cd portion of the drive appears. Recently, there have been a
few students with dead printers at home who were unable to print
their last minute
48 matches
Mail list logo
