Jump to content
|Topic||Stats||Last action by|
|Send Fart in a Jar, only $10||
|Windows Update in Windows XP||
|Yemeni group hacks 3,000 Saudi govt computers to reveal top secret docs – report||
|Should people be afraid of doing online banking?||
|My computer has been hacked.||
Posted 13 April 2013 - 15:15
Posted 13 April 2013 - 15:54
It's already in the thread. Over 4GB is not supported by the OS and hacking it in would be against MS' license restrictions, which makes it something we can't help with.
where is the vast array of expertise when after 5 pages the subject of the thread is not even grasped.?
Posted 13 April 2013 - 16:14
Posted 13 April 2013 - 17:28
To the OP: Can't use more than 4GB RAM with a 32-bit OS. If you want to use more, you'll have to dump that dinosaur of an OS you seem hell bent on using.
Posted 13 April 2013 - 17:53
Windows XP x64 was blazing fast compared to XP x86 and Vista. I actually dual booted with XP x64 because of the issues and lack of polish with Vista. After SP1, I went fully over to Vista, but still enjoyed using XP x64. The only real issues with it was trying to get TES: Oblivion to run.
I was trying to suggest to the op to upgrade his machine and use XP x64 because he is probably still obsessed with using XP.
scared for whom? srsly
pae is automatically enabled on xp sp3 + x86_64 processors... this thread is about going beyond 4gb... where is the vast array of expertise when after 5 pages the subject of the thread is not even grasped.?
Posted 13 April 2013 - 18:28
I won't deny it was fast, but it suffered from numerous compatibility issues, due to not actually being "XP" at its core. It was Server 2003 dressed up with the XP UI and most of the server components removed.
You're the one not grasping a lot of things.
1. If by some miracle you become capable of using more than 4 GB in Windows XP 32-bit, there will be literally no performance benefit. You're already wasting your relatively modern hardware by running that old eXPired OS.
2. Your perceptions of performance compared to more modern OS's is laughably wrong. 7 and 8 easily outperform XP on modern hardware. Why not simply install 7 or 8 x64 and install XP in a VM if you want to use it so much?
Posted 13 April 2013 - 18:36
Posted 13 April 2013 - 18:44
Well, maybe, yes.
Might I just add Greenwizard, your app isn't really a productivity app, some might contend it does the exact opposite
Posted 13 April 2013 - 18:45
Posted 13 April 2013 - 19:26
5) 'Windows XP Professional x64 Edition (XP x64) isn't bad at all. Windows XP 64-bit Edition (XP 64-bit) on the other hand had isn't all that good because it wasn't supported well.' They're the same thing, there was no 64-bit XP home edition, there were 2 XP 64 bit editions, one was professional for x32-64 and the other was for ia64 itanium-2.
Posted 14 April 2013 - 01:39