Never not listen to your RAM
-
@blakeyrat said in Never not listen to your RAM:
Chrome, I believe possibly, if you use it like an asshole and just open like 574 tabs at all times instead of bookmarking shit like a normal person.
Pretty rich coming from the guy who keeps his browser tiny instead of making it a reasonable size like a normal person.
-
@Weng said in Never not listen to your RAM:
@anotherusername Functionally no different than turning off swap.
I remember trying that circa 2000 on a win98 machine. I had just upgraded it to an outrageous 512 MB or something. Everything ran so fast. Until I tried to start Quake 2, which wouldn't start due to insufficient swap. I had to turn on 32MB (iirc) swap just for that game.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Never not listen to your RAM:
One of these days I'm going to see if Windows 98 can still connect to the internet... Probably a Tuesday.
In around 2000, for ... reasons that I don't care to explain, mostly because I can't imagine what they were ... I put a copy of Windows 95 OSR2 on a blank machine and connected to the Internet. This was the version with built-in Internet Explorer 3 but not Active Desktop.
I connected to Microsoft's own site to try downloading a newer IE. They refused to let me in because they didn't want to have to understand what the HTTP/0.9 was that it requested.
I laughed so hard I disturbed the neighbours.
-
@Zemm you probably would've had exactly the same result if you'd just upgraded the RAM and left the swap alone, except that when you finally did run out of memory, instead of applications crashing with out of memory errors it'd just start swapping and get slower.
-
@anotherusername said in Never not listen to your RAM:
@Zemm you probably would've had exactly the same result if you'd just upgraded the RAM and left the swap alone, except that when you finally did run out of memory, instead of applications crashing with out of memory errors it'd just start swapping and get slower.
The problem was that Quake 2 explicitly requested swap space instead of some memory. Since its requirement was on the order of 16MB or so: having 512 was a huge amount in those days. Heck, only a few years earlier I was still rocking a 386 with 8MB RAM and 120MB HDD space.
I remember it swapping even though there was a large percentage free, which is why I turned off swap in the first place. I mean, minimised windows, etc.
