Now you are being silly just to prove a point. Most people do not dual
boot and may who try find themselves in a world of pain.
As if you have a point. Who cares if most people don't? Most people
don't use Macs, but that doesn't stop you from using them.
You can dual boot between 32 and 64
Do you understand binary numbers, Tony? A 32-bit binary number cannot
go beyond 4,294,967,296 (4 gigabytes, 4*1024*1024*1024), so a 32-bit
system cannot address more than 4 GB.
Thank you,
Mark Snyder
-Original Message-
The 4gb memory limit is just a Windows licensing issue though.
I have 3.5.2 installed on a PC running XP, and, when it works, it works
fine. But every so often it just stops and sits there with an
hourglass icon for a minute or more. I can do other things on the PC,
and there don't appear to be any other processes running that would
cause a delay in the
I should have, for those who do not know binary numbers, shown how to
see this. Binary numbers are similar to base-10 numbers, in that each
digit to the left is 2-times as large as the digit to the right. In
base-10, each digit to the left is ten-times as large, for example 10
vs. 100. In
Mark is correct. 4 GB is a physical limitation of 32-bit kernels, which is
the best reason to go 64-bit: no real limitation to the amount of RAM you
can use, other than what the motherboard will support. However, I can
recall when 32-bit came around in the 90's, Wow! 4 GB of RAM! We'll never
Vista's problem wasn't 64 or 32bit related it was that drivers were not
written for vista until it had been out nearly a year. You can blame this
on MS only in that they may have not given the code to software writers soon
enough.
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 7:06 PM, TPiwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote:
My understanding of the Mess Vista got introduced to was yes it was
MS not releasing code and not allowing coders access to needed knowledge.
I remember a few of the antivirus folks complaining quite publicly about this.
Seems that they did a lot more work with 7.
Stewart
At 07:57 AM
My understanding of the Mess Vista got introduced to was yes it was
MS not releasing code and not allowing coders access to needed knowledge.
I remember a few of the antivirus folks complaining quite publicly about
this.
Seems that they did a lot more work with 7.
The anti-virus folks,
Vista's problem wasn't 64 or 32bit related it was that drivers were not
written for vista until it had been out nearly a year. You can blame this
on MS only in that they may have not given the code to software writers
soon
enough.
I don't even blame MS for that.
The Vista beta's were out
Thanks for the quick lesson. But it has nothing to do with what I
said. You probably missed the link Vicky gave which explains it better
than I can. Tom never actually told us if previous versions of 32 bit
Mac OS have been able to use more than 4gb ram, instead going off on a
rant.
That 32-bit
Tony, you are confusing schemes to virtually address modestly more than
the 32-bit limit by stretching it to a number some 4-16 times the actual
limit for a 32-bit binary number. Apple never played those virtual
address games with 32-bit operating systems (starting with MAC OS 7 or
7.1 in about
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Tony Bton...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't bother; it's just an ad for software. Oddly, it's software that
allows someone to run their PC on a Mac, which simply means a lot of
those figures Tom's quoting are probably inaccurate. I mean, if
someone buys a Mac and runs
...(Yes, I have gone to the tools menu and made all the changes, but
they have been ignored - it is as if the ability to change the
various options have all been locked out.) I am afraid that my only
choice may be to uninstall Firefox and start all over from scratch,
but I don't want to loose my
Thanks to all for your suggestions.
So far I've tried:
- Clearing the Safari Cache
- Clicking the renew the DHCP lease
- Adding DNS sites; and
- Reviewing the configuration of my modem.
Nothing so far has worked.
A curious tendency is for the web to get back to normal within the first five
How about turning off and on your wireless radio (on the computer) when you
see the signal strength fading?
- Original Message -
From: Arnold Kee a...@expandingthecircle.org
To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM
Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2009 1:04 PM
Subject: [CGUYS] Sudden MAC OS X
Before I send this new Intel mobo in for a replacement, could there be
something I'm overlooking?
It's got on board video, so I hooked up a monitor.
mouse and keyboard
3 power supply connections (long one, and the 4 pin on the other side)
memory
cpu
hard drive
But I get no POST. The +5 LED
Has anyone gotten a warning or seen anything about the Postcard virus?
A friend of mine forwarded a big panic about not opening anything in an
email entitled Postcard.
As a Mac user I guess getting emails like this are the greatest threat.
Here's what it says:
*checked with Norton Anti-Virus,
List members :
Does anyone have experience and an opinion about software
called Digital TV for PC2 , which is supposed to turn almost any
PC into a TV with thousands of channels ?
Thanks ,
If you really looked this up at Snopes, you sure didn't read very
well. If you trusted _someone else_ to look it up at Snopes and read
it, shame on you.
http://www.snopes.com/computer/virus/postcard.asp
Although the Postcard virus is real, it isn't a BIG VIRUS COMING
(it's already been around in
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_postcard_virus.htm
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Jordan jor17...@gmail.com wrote:
Has anyone gotten a warning or seen anything about the Postcard virus? A
friend of mine forwarded a big panic about not opening anything in an email
entitled Postcard.
It's an old hoax. Consider getting a new friend.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Jordanjor17...@gmail.com wrote:
Has anyone gotten a warning or seen anything about the Postcard virus? A
friend of mine forwarded a big panic about not opening anything in an email
entitled Postcard.
As a Mac
Tony B wrote:
If you really looked this up at Snopes, you sure didn't read very
well. If you trusted _someone else_ to look it up at Snopes and read
it, shame on you.
http://www.snopes.com/computer/virus/postcard.asp
I didn't say I looked it up at Snopes or anywhere else. I would have no
Kind of ironic..the mac guys are more worried then pc guys.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Jordan jor17...@gmail.com wrote:
Tony B wrote:
If you really looked this up at Snopes, you sure didn't read very
well. If you trusted _someone else_ to look it up at Snopes and read
it, shame on
I've tried international TV. Yes, there are probably that many
channels out there. Tuning them in when you want to watch them is
problematical. I believe there is freeware software available to
assist in this.
Sporadic claims of being able to watch a distant football game
occasionally. But for
Always looking up these things on Snopes before believing or
forwarding (or in many cases, reading), is a great idea. Over the
years, I think I've only seen one warning that was actually
legitimate. Snopes has helped keep me safe, as well as keeping me from
embarrassing myself with my friends.
On Aug 27, 2009, at 7:04 PM, mike wrote:
Kind of ironic..the mac guys are more worried then pc guys.
WFBs can't detect that they are being mocked.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy
http://thedailyvoice.com/voice/2009/08/microsoft-002225.php
Those miracle workers in Redmond have had a busy day. What will they
think of next?
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
t.piwowar wrote:
WFBs can't detect that they are being mocked.
Shh!
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/
Windows 7 Ultimate can support up to 192 GB of RAM. Less expensive
versions of Windows can go fish.
Snow Leopard can support a staggering 16 Tbytes.
WFB sez: Who needs RAM? I have 640K in my system and its fine.
*
**
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 8:01 PM, t.piwowart...@tjpa.com wrote:
Those miracle workers in Redmond have had a busy day. What will they think
of next?
Anything for a buck. Totally unacceptable. Vicious and
reprehensible advertising.
Steve
On Aug 27, 2009, at 1:04 PM, Arnold Kee wrote:
A curious tendency is for the web to get back to normal within the
first five minutes of use.and then steadily degrade...
I can see the signal strength fade once we get to about ten minutes
of use and longer.
This story suggests that a
The NY Times has David Pogue's review of Snow Leopard. It
looks like it is a review of the actual release and not the developer
preview like I've seen elsewhere.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/27/technology/personaltech/27pogue.html?ref=global-homepagewanted=all
There is a video of Snow
What the heck are you talking about? Since when is targeted
advertising (which is basically, all good advertising) vicious and
reprehensible?
You do know that ads like this are just make believe? This is not a
real life scene that's been altered because of racism.
Only an advertising idiot would
I've received many of them for some time now, several months, I think. They
never specify a sender, so I am suspicious and don't open them. If I turn my
virus checker on (which slows my machine down), it always reports them as
viruses and quarantines them. I just erase them.
Fred Holmes
At
On Aug 27, 2009, at 10:09 PM, Tony B wrote:
What the heck are you talking about? Since when is targeted
advertising (which is basically, all good advertising) vicious and
reprehensible?
Its not like they put white hoods on all the people sitting at the
table.
Reviewing Apple's tech notes I'm seeing many small changes and
improvements that I think will make Mac users far happier than flashy
new features. This may be the upgrade that finally fixes the Finder.
The Finder has been completely rewritten using the modern Cocoa
framework in Mac OS X,
Windows 7 Ultimate can support up to 192 GB of RAM. Less expensive
versions of Windows can go fish.
Snow Leopard can support a staggering 16 Tbytes.
1 TB of 2 GB 1066MHz DDR3 ECC memory modules from Apple will cost you
$50,000.
16 TB will cost $800,000.
The good news is that shipping is
I know every one loves a good conspiracy theory, but if you read the
article closely, the advertising was changed in Europe and they did
the whitening over in Europe.
It was not done in Redmond but in Europe.
Racism is alive and well all over the world.
Stewart
At 10:05 PM 8/27/2009, you
Then how do you explain the Windows/Mac crap?
Stewart
At 11:18 PM 8/27/2009, you wrote:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Rev. Stewart
Marshallpopoz...@earthlink.net wrote:
I know every one loves a good conspiracy theory, but if you read
the article
closely, the advertising was changed
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Rev. Stewart
Marshallpopoz...@earthlink.net wrote:
I know every one loves a good conspiracy theory, but if you read the article
closely, the advertising was changed in Europe and they did the whitening
over in Europe.
It was not done in Redmond but in
Well the bringing together only applies when you completely agree with the
MFB's.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:29 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall
popoz...@earthlink.net wrote:
Then how do you explain the Windows/Mac crap?
Stewart
At 11:18 PM 8/27/2009, you wrote:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:18
41 matches
Mail list logo
