Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Windows XP - the end approaches......  (Read 27095 times)
W8JX
Member

Posts: 7187




Ignore
« Reply #90 on: May 24, 2013, 08:16:53 AM »


Tell that to NASA.  Laptops on the International Space Station are going to be fitted with Debian 6.  Windows is done on the ISS.


Not for reasons you think. They can modify and tweak Debian code for their needs and not windows and they have ability to write custom apps for it. This is far beyond average user ability.

Logged

--------------------------------------
You can embrace new computer/tablet technology and change with it or cling tightly to old XP or even 7 technology and fall further behind everyday....
WW7KE
Member

Posts: 134




Ignore
« Reply #91 on: May 24, 2013, 08:53:42 AM »


Tell that to NASA.  Laptops on the International Space Station are going to be fitted with Debian 6.  Windows is done on the ISS.

Not for reasons you think. They can modify and tweak Debian code for their needs and not windows and they have ability to write custom apps for it. This is far beyond average user ability.

Yes, you're correct.  I had heard some stories about a virus issue, but that's not substantiated.

But that's an advantage of using Linux over Windows.  Not everybody needs it, of course, but some do, including my employer, an office phone systems company.  We use both Windows Server and Linux in our products, and Windows will be going away in the next year or so due to high licensing costs.  That's another Linux advantage, especially in business (but not in the consumer space, where Windows is preinstalled on PCs and the lower single-machine licensing costs are factored in).
Logged
KA6MLE
Member

Posts: 99




Ignore
« Reply #92 on: February 18, 2015, 08:19:04 AM »

My Windows XP still receives new security updates from Microsoft often!  Grin
Logged
VK6IS
Member

Posts: 143




Ignore
« Reply #93 on: February 19, 2015, 05:16:32 AM »

My Windows XP still receives new security updates from Microsoft often!  Grin

Just fixed up a win_xp PC today,
& it received Nine Updates, - once it was connected to 'net.

- it's old, & has insufficient Ram to run SP3 correctly,
so - it's quite slow.

suggested that the cheapest fix, was to up the Ram, so it's closer to 1Gb,
or buy a tablet   Sad
But - the tablet wouldn't do everything that they could on the PC,
& a notebook would be even more expensive.

- the OP can't afford much.
maybe one of their children ( grown up ) can buy them win_10,
- when it comes out ??
doubtful, at best.

- there is a surprising amount of OPs like that, around the place,
and they can't afford to keep "upgrading"  Shocked
so - they haven't.
Logged
G8YMW
Member

Posts: 324




Ignore
« Reply #94 on: February 19, 2015, 05:48:32 AM »

Ram chips are cheap enough, you just need to get the correct chips. If the computer is a bought unit, Google the model for the specs and "Slam in the ram" up to 4 Gigs (assuming the XP is 32 bit which is by far the most common).
Logged

73 de Tony
The value of  not being made to feel like putting a fist through the monitor? PRICELESS!!!
W8JX
Member

Posts: 7187




Ignore
« Reply #95 on: February 19, 2015, 10:01:54 AM »

Ram chips are cheap enough, you just need to get the correct chips. If the computer is a bought unit, Google the model for the specs and "Slam in the ram" up to 4 Gigs (assuming the XP is 32 bit which is by far the most common).

Actually a 32 bit OS will only see about 3.2 gigs so expanding beyond 3 is kinda pointless. As far as it helping, long ago I found XP gained nothing past 2 gig but Vista and 7 gained going past 2 gig. 
Logged

--------------------------------------
You can embrace new computer/tablet technology and change with it or cling tightly to old XP or even 7 technology and fall further behind everyday....
G8YMW
Member

Posts: 324




Ignore
« Reply #96 on: February 19, 2015, 11:17:18 AM »

Yes I'm aware of that although IIRC it does vary up to about 3.5 Gig. The advantage is he will have options if he decides to change O/S.
Next time I'm at home, I'll have a look at my desktop
Logged

73 de Tony
The value of  not being made to feel like putting a fist through the monitor? PRICELESS!!!
KK4GGL
Member

Posts: 496




Ignore
« Reply #97 on: February 19, 2015, 11:21:13 AM »

Ram chips are cheap enough, you just need to get the correct chips. If the computer is a bought unit, Google the model for the specs and "Slam in the ram" up to 4 Gigs (assuming the XP is 32 bit which is by far the most common).

Actually a 32 bit OS will only see about 3.2 gigs

... which is why the 6 gigs in my 32 bit Debian system is recognized.

so expanding beyond 3 is kinda pointless. As far as it helping, long ago I found XP gained nothing past 2 gig but Vista and 7 gained going past 2 gig. 

Maybe that has to do with OS bloat.
Logged

73,
Rick KK4GGL
W8JX
Member

Posts: 7187




Ignore
« Reply #98 on: February 19, 2015, 11:39:05 AM »


... which is why the 6 gigs in my 32 bit Debian system is recognized.


Oh how blind.  The OS CANNOT see/use more than about 3.2 gig period. The only way it an use any of it is by paged bank switching. It CANNOT see or use more than 3.2 gig contiguous. You would know this if you knew anything bout 32 bit OS's but obviously you do not no surprise. 32 bit servers of days past used bank switching and a special Xeon CPU with a 48 bit address register that allowed it to track and bank switch on fly several gig of memory.   
Logged

--------------------------------------
You can embrace new computer/tablet technology and change with it or cling tightly to old XP or even 7 technology and fall further behind everyday....
AG6WT
Member

Posts: 492




Ignore
« Reply #99 on: February 19, 2015, 01:19:52 PM »

Through Physical Adress Extension (PAE), a 32-bit OS on x86 CPUs could address more than 4Gb of RAM.  The 32-bit Linux kernel has had PAE support for a number of years now and can handle up to 64Gb.  Windows XP had it initially but due to numerous driver problems they limited 32-bit XP, Vista, 7, and 8 to 4Gb.  If you have more RAM you have to use 64-bit Windows.

PAE was first implemented in 1995 with the Pentium Pro.

So, 32-bit Debian can use 6Gb.  However, the virtual address space is limited to 4Gb so a single process can't use more than 4Gb.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension
Logged
AG6WT
Member

Posts: 492




Ignore
« Reply #100 on: February 19, 2015, 01:25:08 PM »

My Windows XP still receives new security updates from Microsoft often!  Grin

Just fixed up a win_xp PC today,
& it received Nine Updates, - once it was connected to 'net.

- it's old, & has insufficient Ram to run SP3 correctly,
so - it's quite slow.

suggested that the cheapest fix, was to up the Ram, so it's closer to 1Gb,
or buy a tablet   Sad
But - the tablet wouldn't do everything that they could on the PC,
& a notebook would be even more expensive.

- the OP can't afford much.
maybe one of their children ( grown up ) can buy them win_10,
- when it comes out ??
doubtful, at best.

- there is a surprising amount of OPs like that, around the place,
and they can't afford to keep "upgrading"  Shocked
so - they haven't.


For a system that old with that little amount of RAM, I recommend installing a light weight, currently supported, Linux such as Xubuntu 14.04.  I'm using Xubuntu 14.04 on a computer with 1 Gb RAM and Intel Atom CPU and it works just fine with Firefox, Chrome, and Libre Office.
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 7187




Ignore
« Reply #101 on: February 19, 2015, 03:16:46 PM »

Through Physical Adress Extension (PAE), a 32-bit OS on x86 CPUs could address more than 4Gb of RAM.  The 32-bit Linux kernel has had PAE support for a number of years now and can handle up to 64Gb.  Windows XP had it initially but due to numerous driver problems they limited 32-bit XP, Vista, 7, and 8 to 4Gb.  If you have more RAM you have to use 64-bit Windows.

PAE was first implemented in 1995 with the Pentium Pro.

So, 32-bit Debian can use 6Gb.  However, the virtual address space is limited to 4Gb so a single process can't use more than 4Gb.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

Your are wrong here as addressing and using is two different things which you do not understand. You must bank switch/page memory with 32 bit OS past 3.2 gig period... You CANNOT use as contiguous or flat memory access more than 3.2 gig at a time!!  It was not until the birth of 64 bit OS was FLAT memory access possible past 3.2 gig. Wishing will never change this. One of the driving factors to move to 64 bit it to smash the 3.2 gig flat memory barrier. 
Logged

--------------------------------------
You can embrace new computer/tablet technology and change with it or cling tightly to old XP or even 7 technology and fall further behind everyday....
AG6WT
Member

Posts: 492




Ignore
« Reply #102 on: February 19, 2015, 09:16:23 PM »

Through Physical Adress Extension (PAE), a 32-bit OS on x86 CPUs could address more than 4Gb of RAM.  The 32-bit Linux kernel has had PAE support for a number of years now and can handle up to 64Gb.  Windows XP had it initially but due to numerous driver problems they limited 32-bit XP, Vista, 7, and 8 to 4Gb.  If you have more RAM you have to use 64-bit Windows.

PAE was first implemented in 1995 with the Pentium Pro.

So, 32-bit Debian can use 6Gb.  However, the virtual address space is limited to 4Gb so a single process can't use more than 4Gb.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

Your are wrong here as addressing and using is two different things which you do not understand. You must bank switch/page memory with 32 bit OS past 3.2 gig period... You CANNOT use as contiguous or flat memory access more than 3.2 gig at a time!!  It was not until the birth of 64 bit OS was FLAT memory access possible past 3.2 gig. Wishing will never change this. One of the driving factors to move to 64 bit it to smash the 3.2 gig flat memory barrier. 

I have to make a correction here wrt 32-bit Linux with PAE.  In this case a single process can only address 3Gb with the remaining 1Gb of the 4Gb address space reserved for the kernel.  If you tweak the kernel settings you give more space to user space processes but I think 3.5Gb is the practical limit.  With 32-bit Linux PAE with more than 4Gb physical RAM, the OS can use that extra RAM for multiple processes, each restricted to 3Gb.  This is why the above mentioned 32-bit Debian can use 6Gb.  The advantage here is that if I have several processes running at 2Gb each on a 8-16Gb computer, the OS can keep them in RAM and won't have to resort to disk swap.  If I do hit the swap limit, I can add more RAM up to a total of 64Gb.

To get above the 3Gb per process limit, one must migrate to 64-bit Linux.

In contrast, 32-bit Windows desktop (but not some server editions) won't allocate more than 3.2Gb for all user processes.  RAM beyond 4Gb is inaccessible.
Logged
VK6IS
Member

Posts: 143




Ignore
« Reply #103 on: February 22, 2015, 07:58:28 AM »

Ram chips are cheap enough, you just need to get the correct chips. If the computer is a bought unit, Google the model for the specs and "Slam in the ram" up to 4 Gigs (assuming the XP is 32 bit which is by far the most common).

PCs of this vintage, generally won't recognise anything above about 2Gb ram.
- the OP is a pensioner & won't be able to pay that much, anyway.

they are favourable to the idea &  it will cost around $80 or so for a pair of 512Mb cards.
- it's also a laptop, which makes the upgrade even more expensive.

also moving to a Linux O/S which would be  desirable,
may not work, as the OPs 'net connection is a 3g dongle,
which may also be an issue with anything other than a heavy weighted Linux O/S.
- the lightweight DEs cut out support for 3g modems.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2015, 08:02:38 AM by VK6IS » Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 7187




Ignore
« Reply #104 on: February 22, 2015, 08:05:29 AM »

Through Physical Adress Extension (PAE), a 32-bit OS on x86 CPUs could address more than 4Gb of RAM.  The 32-bit Linux kernel has had PAE support for a number of years now and can handle up to 64Gb.  Windows XP had it initially but due to numerous driver problems they limited 32-bit XP, Vista, 7, and 8 to 4Gb.  If you have more RAM you have to use 64-bit Windows.

PAE was first implemented in 1995 with the Pentium Pro.

So, 32-bit Debian can use 6Gb.  However, the virtual address space is limited to 4Gb so a single process can't use more than 4Gb.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension

Your are wrong here as addressing and using is two different things which you do not understand. You must bank switch/page memory with 32 bit OS past 3.2 gig period... You CANNOT use as contiguous or flat memory access more than 3.2 gig at a time!!  It was not until the birth of 64 bit OS was FLAT memory access possible past 3.2 gig. Wishing will never change this. One of the driving factors to move to 64 bit it to smash the 3.2 gig flat memory barrier. 

I have to make a correction here wrt 32-bit Linux with PAE.  In this case a single process can only address 3Gb with the remaining 1Gb of the 4Gb address space reserved for the kernel.  If you tweak the kernel settings you give more space to user space processes but I think 3.5Gb is the practical limit.  With 32-bit Linux PAE with more than 4Gb physical RAM, the OS can use that extra RAM for multiple processes, each restricted to 3Gb.  This is why the above mentioned 32-bit Debian can use 6Gb.  The advantage here is that if I have several processes running at 2Gb each on a 8-16Gb computer, the OS can keep them in RAM and won't have to resort to disk swap.  If I do hit the swap limit, I can add more RAM up to a total of 64Gb.

To get above the 3Gb per process limit, one must migrate to 64-bit Linux.

In contrast, 32-bit Windows desktop (but not some server editions) won't allocate more than 3.2Gb for all user processes.  RAM beyond 4Gb is inaccessible.

Yes it is possible to bank switch with 32 bit OS but I see little point because the CPU can only use on chunk at a time with 32 bit and tasks in other chunks are paused until that page is active. I see no reason to use a 32 bit OS with more than 3 gig. The whole reason behind 64 bit OS is flat continue memory  access. Page swapping is a poor runner up.
Logged

--------------------------------------
You can embrace new computer/tablet technology and change with it or cling tightly to old XP or even 7 technology and fall further behind everyday....
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!