Switched Archives
June 2012
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
Blackberry 101 | Best Tablets | Best iPhone 4 Case | Color App | Facebook Questions | NCAA Brackets | Lady Gaga at Google | Facebook Deals | Animated GIF | Anonymous | Amazon Appstore | April Fools' Day | Google Blogger | Rebecca Black Friday | Nintendo 3DS | Vimeo iPhone App | Video Game Emulators | Private Browsing | Mark Bao | Julian Assange | What is 4G? | Bronx Zoo Cobra | iPad 2 Review | Google 1 | New York Times Paywall
- Terrence O'Brien
Watching Twitter tonight has taught me one thing, Phillies fans are a bunch of whiny dicks. But it's ok, every tank needs a bottom feeder.
- Terrence O'Brien
And I thought I wanted to hug Johan last week. I think I'm officially in love.
- Warren Riddle
Listening to Ra, glance at the notes and there's @AliveRecords. Nice cover, Mr. Boissel! @TheGloryFires #magiccityjams http://t.co/uT0M77VJ
Gadget News
- Avengers Blu-ray preorders listed, including massive 10-disc Marvel Cinematic Universe set
- Google: Ice Cream Sandwich now accounts for 7.1 percent of Android user base
- Chipworks, iFixit tear down the Galaxy S III for all to see, spot iPhone 4S' camera sensor hanging around
- ComScore: Android's US share dips ever so slightly, iPhone slowly marching up
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
(Unverified)Jan 27th 2010 2:21PM
I'm wondering, given the analogy, at what point does RAM cease to be usable. I believe there actually IS a limit to the amount of RAM that Windows, at least, can even use. Taking the analogy of a larger filing cabinet in my office, at some point I basically end up with a remote archive which is just as cumbersome as the vault down in the basement - except that it's physically closer to the point of use. Or, to take the desktop analogy a step further, I can only "see" so many documents at a time, so at what point is it pointless to be able to put more stuff on my desktop (or in RAM)?
Terrence OBrienJan 27th 2010 7:07PM
@Cooper, excellent question -- in 32-bit versions of Windows the maximum amount of RAM that can be addressed is 4GB, however in reality that is often much lower thanks to basic components of processors and operating systems being designed long before we had broken the 10MB mark when measuring RAM. If you're interested you can read all about it here -- http://www.dansdata.com/askdan00015.htm
64-bit versions of Windows correct this error, and are able to access more memory just by nature of being 64-bit. Things get messy here though. Theoretically a 64-bit system can address 16 Exabytes of RAM, that 16.3 million Terabytes. However Microsoft places artificial limits on how much memory its OS can access, they are as follows:
* Starter: 8GB
* Home Basic: 8GB
* Home Premium: 16GB
* Professional: 192GB
* Ultimate: 192GB
When it comes to Linux and OS X things are a little less concrete -- You can buy a Mac Pro with 32 GB of RAM and an Xserve with 48, but what the limitations of the OS are isn't clear. Linux is also a bit of a mystery, the most recent figure I could find was from 2005 when 64 Unix and Linux were capable of addressing 1TB or physical RAM.