S
Scott
thanatoid wrote:
>
> Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> wrote in
> news:tk42i2hb7bmd2j9l2r44nssbsg59qdfu4f@4ax.com:
>
> > thanatoid <waiting@the.exit.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>Pedro <someone@my-deja.com> wrote in
> >>news:ejmsh2pu0s87hbpl2mj9khlpb210037g5h@4ax.com:
> >>
> >>> We have a P2-350 Mhz with Win95b and 256 Mb RAM. I have
> >>> seen a few articles about the max ram that can be placed
> >>> in the mobo, for Win95. Some say 256, some say 512.
> >>>
> >>> Will it be okay to add another 256 Mb RAM ?
> >>>
> >>
> >>Okay but pointless. The 95B OS can not use more than 64 MB
> >>of RAM.
> >
> > NOT TRUE!! I think this myth comes from the fact that a lot
> > of motherboards built in the Win95 era couldn't cache more
> > than 64MB. You could still use more than 64MB, up to
> > whatever your motherboard supported (they didn't support
> > 4GB in those days). Access to memory over 64MB would be
> > slower than if it were cached, but still a *lot* faster
> > than the virtual memory file on your disk!
> >
>
> Yes, I've heard this 64MB 95 limit may not actually be true, but
> many apparently knowledgeable sources say it is. I once looked
> for a **definitive** answer (if there is any such animal in the
> computer zoo) and I think I found confirmation of it on a VERY
> respected site - sorry, can't remember which. It's been years.
>
> All I can say is I have been running a 95B machine for 9 years
> with 64 MB RAM with RAMpage installed (about 6 years ago) and it
> works just fine.
>
> Also, if anyone IS running 95, it's a fair bet they are running
> it on a machine built 10 or 12 years ago.
>
> It's sort of a moot point since from what I have read in NG's
> over the last few years, me and this guy are the only two people
> in the whole world still using 95. -#
Hey, I'm still using Win95 on my Gateway P5-90, which I bought new in 1994.
It still runs happily with an upgarded 200Mhz chip and 64MB of RAM. I run
Word 6 and Quicken 6 for my home business. Yes, I like the user interface of
Quicken 6, circa 1994. I do my bookkeeping and taxes on it. Win95 runs my
business' late 1970's DOS inventory/invoice program very handily. I get slower,
but reliable internet broadband access on my Charter 10mbs service. It also
networks beautifully with a standard Linksys router connecting my other Win98
and WinXP desktops and laptops. Best of all, Win95 never hiccups. It just keeps
on running. So Win95 is still a productive part of my home biz. But I will admit,
there's also some nostalgia involved
Scott
>
> Tim Slattery <Slattery_T@bls.gov> wrote in
> news:tk42i2hb7bmd2j9l2r44nssbsg59qdfu4f@4ax.com:
>
> > thanatoid <waiting@the.exit.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>Pedro <someone@my-deja.com> wrote in
> >>news:ejmsh2pu0s87hbpl2mj9khlpb210037g5h@4ax.com:
> >>
> >>> We have a P2-350 Mhz with Win95b and 256 Mb RAM. I have
> >>> seen a few articles about the max ram that can be placed
> >>> in the mobo, for Win95. Some say 256, some say 512.
> >>>
> >>> Will it be okay to add another 256 Mb RAM ?
> >>>
> >>
> >>Okay but pointless. The 95B OS can not use more than 64 MB
> >>of RAM.
> >
> > NOT TRUE!! I think this myth comes from the fact that a lot
> > of motherboards built in the Win95 era couldn't cache more
> > than 64MB. You could still use more than 64MB, up to
> > whatever your motherboard supported (they didn't support
> > 4GB in those days). Access to memory over 64MB would be
> > slower than if it were cached, but still a *lot* faster
> > than the virtual memory file on your disk!
> >
>
> Yes, I've heard this 64MB 95 limit may not actually be true, but
> many apparently knowledgeable sources say it is. I once looked
> for a **definitive** answer (if there is any such animal in the
> computer zoo) and I think I found confirmation of it on a VERY
> respected site - sorry, can't remember which. It's been years.
>
> All I can say is I have been running a 95B machine for 9 years
> with 64 MB RAM with RAMpage installed (about 6 years ago) and it
> works just fine.
>
> Also, if anyone IS running 95, it's a fair bet they are running
> it on a machine built 10 or 12 years ago.
>
> It's sort of a moot point since from what I have read in NG's
> over the last few years, me and this guy are the only two people
> in the whole world still using 95. -#
Hey, I'm still using Win95 on my Gateway P5-90, which I bought new in 1994.
It still runs happily with an upgarded 200Mhz chip and 64MB of RAM. I run
Word 6 and Quicken 6 for my home business. Yes, I like the user interface of
Quicken 6, circa 1994. I do my bookkeeping and taxes on it. Win95 runs my
business' late 1970's DOS inventory/invoice program very handily. I get slower,
but reliable internet broadband access on my Charter 10mbs service. It also
networks beautifully with a standard Linksys router connecting my other Win98
and WinXP desktops and laptops. Best of all, Win95 never hiccups. It just keeps
on running. So Win95 is still a productive part of my home biz. But I will admit,
there's also some nostalgia involved
Scott