"Bruce Chambers" wrote in message
...
Andy Fish wrote:
with respect, that's not an explanation at all - let alone a sensible one


On the contrary, it's precisely the correct answer.


if i was using a lot of memory hungry programs and I didn't understand
virtual memory concepts, that would be a reasonable solution



Actually, it's be sensible if you truly *did* understand virtual "memory
concepts." This post of yours demonstrated the exact opposite, though.


as I said in the orignal post, I was not using memory heavy programs -
the committed memory was mostly in use by vista's cache. this is just not
sensible behaviour for an operating system.


Well, feel free to design your own "sensible" operating system, then.
We'll all be waiting with bated breath. In the meantime, though, try to
remember that your personal likes/dislikes/opinions/superstitions (or
whatever) have no bearing on the technical answers to technical questions.


--

Bruce Chambers


Bruce,

This reminds me of a thread two or three years ago in which
the OP was trying to do something impossible in XP, and it
didn't work. I can't remember what the issue was. The replies
unanimously stated that it couldn't be done, with reasons why.
After some thick headed discussion, the OP's final response
was that he though that it should be able to be done the way
he wanted, and that he wanted someone to tell him how to do it.
That terminated that thread.

ID