URGENT - 4GB of RAM not recognized in Win XP Pro

[John O]

Go argue with Tyan then. I assume they know what they are doing and

since
that explanation fits every other article or discusson that I've seen I'll
believe them. This is not unique to XP - this same discussion came up on
the Win 2003 Server group.

A friend running 8GB of RAM on OSX thinks this is a riot. "And you're trying
to tell me that XP is a high-performance OS?" LOL, he's got a point there.


-John O

 

[Mike Hall - MS MVP Windows Shell/User]

What point might that be?.. that OSX requires more memory to run well than
Windows?..

 

[Guest]

I am advised that, legally, is a reasonable person concludes, based on "the
plain meaning" Microsoft's words that a user can access the full 4GB on any
machine, their statements are misleading.

As we are all aware, this would not be the first time MS ran afoul of the
law and engaged in unfair business practices.

 

[Bob I]

It would appear that you're misunderstanding the difference of using 4
GB memory and Windows using 4 GB memory addressing and that is where the
problem is. Please read thru this for an explanation of what is where
and how it's used.

Memory Management: What Every Driver Writer Needs to Know
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/driver/kernel/mem-mgmt.mspx

 

[Mike Hall - MS MVP Windows Shell/User]

Is the wording 'can access' or is it 'supports'?

 

[Leythos]

I am advised that, legally, is a reasonable person concludes, based on "the
plain meaning" Microsoft's words that a user can access the full 4GB on any
machine, their statements are misleading.

As we are all aware, this would not be the first time MS ran afoul of the
law and engaged in unfair business practices.

"Can Access" seems clear enough to me, I don't see where it states that
"Users will have 4GB of memory for applications" anywhere.