TSNBDSC Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 ... any good memory programs out there ? ... have no viruses or spyware issues ... 2002 for norton ... running spybot and spywareblaster along with zone alarm ... have run hijack this ... tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 Low Memory Problems? oooops, I thought this was a bash BF thread, sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 Low Memory Problems? oooops, I thought this was a bash BF thread, sorry. 143600[/snapback] Aren't they all? Low memory? Stop hanging out with Ricky!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 ... any good memory programs out there ? ... have no viruses or spyware issues ... 2002 for norton ... running spybot and spywareblaster along with zone alarm ... have run hijack this ... tom 143599[/snapback] Try spysweeper at webroot.com. Best one out there, though only free for a trial period. Here's a pretty good list of Window's Processes. Compare them to what is running on your machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSNBDSC Posted December 3, 2004 Author Share Posted December 3, 2004 ... NFL Live had a good 10 minute spot on RW ... the weed has really taken over ( seriously ) ... no job, no money, getting sued, not supporting his children ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSNBDSC Posted December 3, 2004 Author Share Posted December 3, 2004 Try spysweeper at webroot.com. Best one out there, though only free for a trial period. Here's a pretty good list of Window's Processes. Compare them to what is running on your machine. 143603[/snapback] ... got it ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 What OS are you using? If it's Win 98 or ME, the best thing you can do is upgrade to eother Win2K or XP. It's not memory you're low on with Win 9x, but resources. They're related, but not the same, but WIndows reports them both as low memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 get more ram?? its cheap. If its low memory, then i'm going to venture to guess that you got a dell or HP computer about 3 years ago with XP home and it only has 128mb of ram. You can easily get 512mb of ram for $100 if you look. If you have win9x with low memory, then friend, its time for an upgrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 get more ram?? its cheap. If its low memory, then i'm going to venture to guess that you got a dell or HP computer about 3 years ago with XP home and it only has 128mb of ram. You can easily get 512mb of ram for $100 if you look. If you have win9x with low memory, then friend, its time for an upgrade. 143734[/snapback] haha - you nailed my problem!! I bought a Dell 3 years ago - a Dimension desktop... The bastards gave me 128mb of RDRAM - now when you try to upgrade the RDRAM they want to sell you is £600 (what thats over $1000 right?). I told them to screw it and picked some up on ebay for about $150. I got 640mb of RAM now, and while the idea of RDRAM originally sounded great, Dell shatf you when it comes to upgrade.... And despite RDRAM being completely overtaken by cheaper RAM options, DELL continue to ship it in their Dimension desktops the bastards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corp000085 Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 nick, i've had 5 people from work give me their computers to "fix". the only thing wrong with them was that they all had 128mb of ram, running XP. I increased the pagefile and all was well. However, why 128mb of ram? it makes no sense to me to give the BARE minimum when doubling the ram should only cost a little bit?? I got 256 mb of pc-133 SDRAM for like $45 a few weeks ago for one of my computers. i guess this is why i build my own computers, so i don't get stuck with this problem in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick in* england Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 nick, i've had 5 people from work give me their computers to "fix". the only thing wrong with them was that they all had 128mb of ram, running XP. I increased the pagefile and all was well. However, why 128mb of ram? it makes no sense to me to give the BARE minimum when doubling the ram should only cost a little bit?? I got 256 mb of pc-133 SDRAM for like $45 a few weeks ago for one of my computers. i guess this is why i build my own computers, so i don't get stuck with this problem in the future. 143783[/snapback] I shoulda built my own too... Dell really screw people with the cost of the memory they dole out - on new PCs, especially the Dimenson range they put in RDRAM (and that means a different motherboard) as it supposed to work much quicker than other types of ram as it accesses all the memory modules at the same time, rather than in sequence. The problem being, RDRAM is much more expensive - so it looks great on paper - but when you try to upgrade you are stung in the pocket because RDRAM means you have to buy 2 RIMM modules that match to have it work.... for 128mb you need 2x64mb modules. and so on. I just upgraded mine and the PC works much faster than any other I have been on... RDRAM is worth it if you can afford to invest the cash for higher memory and will last MUCH longer on lower resource than standard SDRAM or DDR. But it is hard to come by, expensive and only reccommended if you run high end packages. Incidentally - what do you normally set the pagefile at for a PC running 512mb RAM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts