Rob,
Your explanation sounds like a very reasonable one. I am sure that your
bringing up the issue is appreciated by all on the forum - some of whom
might very well be effected.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob Geraghty
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 1:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Scanning and memory limits in
Windows
Laurie wrote:
> Funny, I have two systems with more than 512 MB of RAM
> installed on them and using Win 98 and have not
> experienced any problems of the sort you describe.
The Q page on Microsoft's site says "...you *may* experience one or more
of the following symptoms..." (my emphasis). The article doesn't enlighten
as to why some systems might and others might not. My guess is that the
hardware (eg. motherboard, what cards are plugged in etc) has a lot to do
with it. The article also notes that the problem may occur "more readily"
with AGP graphics adapters in the system.
I simply thought "power users" of RAM in this forum might like to know about
the issue. As I mentioned earlier - I'd upgrade to Win2K today if I knew
all the devices and software would still work. I'm reasonably positive
they wouldn't. If all I was doing was scanning and editing pictures, I
would already be running Win2K.
Rob
Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wordweb.com
