|
|
Welcome to Vista Banter. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to ask questions and reply to others posts, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support. |
|
|||||||
| General Vista Help and Support The general Windows Vista discussion forum, for topics not covered elsewhere. (microsoft.public.windows.vista.general) |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
August 31st 06, 03:48 AM
posted to microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
|
|||
|
|||
missing meg of ram
I downloaded and installed 5536 without any major issues.
only problem is vista shows that i have 1023 meg of ram not 1024 anyone else loose a meg? xp and xp x64 as well as pclinuxos show the real 1024 
|
|
August 31st 06, 04:08 AM
posted to microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
|
|||
|
|||
|
missing meg of ram
Mine does the same thing. Thinking about submitting a bug report on it.
-Luke warpsix wrote: I downloaded and installed 5536 without any major issues. only problem is vista shows that i have 1023 meg of ram not 1024 anyone else loose a meg? xp and xp x64 as well as pclinuxos show the real 1024
|
|
August 31st 06, 02:55 PM
posted to microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
|
|||
|
|||
|
missing meg of ram
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:08:07 -0400, Luke Fitzwater
wrote: Mine does the same thing. Thinking about submitting a bug report on it. -Luke warpsix wrote: I downloaded and installed 5536 without any major issues. only problem is vista shows that i have 1023 meg of ram not 1024 anyone else loose a meg? xp and xp x64 as well as pclinuxos show the real 1024 It might be the Base 0 numbering thing. Does 1 meg difference really matter  these days?Is there even a Vista capable Motherboard out there that will accept as little as 64M memory sticks? I agree, consistency would be nice, but reliability is high on *my* priority wish list.
|
|
September 1st 06, 01:17 AM
posted to microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
|
|||
|
|||
|
missing meg of ram
Like I said I was thinking about it... I have so many other glitches to
report first, like the graphical abnormalities in minesweeper. j/k Mostly some weird connection problems. At least IE is stable on the latest build that it doesn't open double browsers when you launch a new site. -Luke Steve Urbach wrote: On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:08:07 -0400, Luke Fitzwater wrote: Mine does the same thing. Thinking about submitting a bug report on it. -Luke warpsix wrote: I downloaded and installed 5536 without any major issues. only problem is vista shows that i have 1023 meg of ram not 1024 anyone else loose a meg? xp and xp x64 as well as pclinuxos show the real 1024 It might be the Base 0 numbering thing. Does 1 meg difference really matter these days?Is there even a Vista capable Motherboard out there that will accept as little as 64M memory sticks? I agree, consistency would be nice, but reliability is high on *my* priority wish list.
|
|
September 1st 06, 03:27 AM
posted to microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
|
|||
|
|||
|
missing meg of ram
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 23:48:27 -0400, warpsix wrote:
}anyone else loose a meg? I am running 2 GB of dual channel memory. Vista shows 2047 so the loss gets a little smaller as the amount of ram goes up.
|
Linear Mode
