Re: Is 64MB enough?
On Sat 21 May 05, 8:37 AM, Johan Kullstam <kullstj-ml@comcast.net> said:
> "John Moore" <john7919@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> > Thanks but the old clunker's motherboard is not expandable to 256M
> > :-(
>
> Star/Open-Office is not going to be pleasant. TeX, on the other hand,
> will run like a treat.
TeX always runs like a treat. But I have to disagree with OO. It's always
slow. But I don't think it'll be particularly slower at 64MB as long as the
system isn't loaded down (but perhaps that's what you meant).
> > >
> > >in that case you'd need more memory. 256MB is cheap these days.
>
> As you know, It's not as cheap if you need 72-pin EDO SIMMs memory.
Not all memory is cheap, as I unfortunately recently learned. Ironically,
old DIMMs --- I'm talking about the slow single density PC100 sticks you'd
put in a Pentium II computer --- are more expensive than the DDR memory
you'd put into a modern Athlon system.
The reason, I've read, is that it takes more silicon wafer surface material
to generate single density DIMMs.
Pete
--
Every theory is killed sooner or later, but if the theory has good in it,
that good is embodied and continued in the next theory. -- Albert Einstein
GPG Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D
Reply to: