not enough ram to launch photoshop

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 23:02:47 -0600, stmayhem
scribbled:

i double click the icon and i get a little pop up that says not enough memory (ram) to launch photoshop 5.5

i’m currently running windows 98se with 700+ mbs of ram and over 5 gbs of free space on my drive.

See if this solves your problem:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;253912

Hello All,

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.
Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that is irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

out of memory errors reference:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q253912

Regards,
Davin
www.davin-photography.com

"stmayhem" wrote in message

i double click the icon and i get a little pop up that says not enough memory (ram) to launch photoshop 5.5

i’m currently running windows 98se with 700+ mbs of ram and over 5 gbs of free space on my drive.

the problem happened after i reinstalled msvcrt.dll (accidently deleted it while uninstalling macromedia shockwave).

it worked fine up until that point but now it doesn’t run the program. but imageready runs just fine.

i’ve already tried uninstalling and reinstalling the program changing my memory limit to 999 on msconfig advanced

i’ve also been told i could delete the prefereces .psp… but for some reason that file is not showing up on my system when i file search…
any solutions?

stmayhem
———————————————————— ———— Posted via http://www.forum4designers.com
———————————————————— ———— View this thread: http://www.forum4designers.com/message32332.html

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 06:47:51 GMT, "Davin"
scribbled:

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.
Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that is irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

This is complete and utter bullshit. Windows 9x can
address up to four GIGs of RAM (2 physical, 2 virtual).
I don’t know where this idiotic "Windows 9x can’t
address more than 256 megs of ram started, but it’s
entirely crap.

Hello All,

You are entitled to your opinion be it right or wrong, as am I. It can be tweaked/modified to run over 512MB’s of RAM.
If it was designed to run that amount of RAM – we would not need to be tweaking it after installing it – and that is so it recognises the RAM – it does not say it will use it.
I base my information on work, experience and research.

Due to windows 9x memory handling problems etc etc anything over 256MB’s is not very useful.

http://www.iamnotageek.com/showthread.php?t=4364
"Basically, Windows95 (and even 98 and ME) do work with more than 128MB, but they don’t actually benefit much from more RAM because they had very bad memory management that allowed memory leakage.

No matter how much RAM than 128MB you had, that memory leakage would happen and mess Windows up after running many applications for a while. With Windows95 memory addressing, some segments would remain locked even though programs that were using them actually finished.

That’s why with Win95/98/ME, after working for a while (a day or two), you would always need to reboot to fully get back free memory".

http://zurich.csail.mit.edu/hypermail/thinkpad/2003-01/0104. html

"With even larger amounts of RAM (approaching 1GB), you may experience system instability even with the above setting change. Basically, Windows 9x/Me were never designed to handle this amount of RAM – see this knowledge base article,
http://support.microsoft.com/search/preview.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q304943 and this one
http://support.microsoft.com/search/preview.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q311871 .. If you want or need this much RAM, you should really be using Windows 2000 or XP, which do not have such problems with large amounts of RAM".

As stated by microsoft below

"Out of Memory" Error Messages with Large Amounts of RAM Installed The information in this article applies to:
Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition
Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition
Microsoft Windows 98
Microsoft Windows 95

This article was previously published under Q253912
If this article does not describe your hardware-related issue, please see the following Microsoft Web site to view more articles about hardware: http://support.microsoft.com/support/windows/topics/hardware /hwddresctr.asp

SYMPTOMS
If a computer that is running any of the versions of Windows that are listed above contains more than 512 megabytes (for example, 768 megabytes) of physical memory (RAM), you may experience one or more of the following symptoms: You may be unable to open an MS-DOS session (or command prompt) while Windows is running. Attempts to do so may generate the following error message:
There is not enough memory available to run this program. Quit one or more programs, and then try again.

The computer may stop responding (hang) while Windows is starting, or halt and display the following error message:
Insufficient memory to initialize windows. Quit one or more memory-resident programs or remove unnecessary utilities from your Config.sys and Autoexec.bat files, and restart your computer.

CAUSE
The Windows 32-bit protected-mode cache driver (Vcache) determines the maximum cache size based on the amount of RAM that is present when Windows starts. Vcache then reserves enough memory addresses to permit it to access a cache of the maximum size so that it can increase the cache to that size if needed. These addresses are allocated in a range of virtual addresses from 0xC0000000 through 0xFFFFFFFF (3 to 4 gigabytes) known as the system arena.
On computers with large amounts of RAM, the maximum cache size can be large enough that Vcache consumes all of the addresses in the system arena, leaving no virtual memory addresses available for other functions such as opening an MS-DOS prompt (creating a new virtual machine). WORKAROUND
To work around this problem, use one of the following methods: Use the MaxFileCache setting in the System.ini file to reduce the maximum amount of memory that Vcache uses to 512 megabytes (524,288 KB) or less. For additional information about how to use the MaxFileCache setting, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base: 108079 32-Bit File Access Maximum Cache Size

Use the System Configuration utility to limit the amount of memory that Windows uses to 512 megabytes (MB) or less.For additional information about how to use the System Configuration utility, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base: 181966 System Configuration Utility Advanced Troubleshooting Settings

Reduce the amount of memory that is installed in your computer to 512 MB or less.

STATUS
Microsoft has confirmed that this is a problem in the Microsoft products that are listed at the beginning of this article.
MORE INFORMATION
Vcache is limited internally to a maximum cache size of 800 MB. This problem may occur more readily with Advanced Graphics Port (AGP) video adapters because the AGP aperture is also mapped to addresses in the system arena. For example, if Vcache is using a maximum cache size of 800 MB and an AGP video adapter has a 128-MB aperture mapped, there is very little address space remaining for the other system code and data that must occupy this range of virtual addresses.

Use these commands

32-Bit File Access Maximum Cache Size
The information in this article applies to:Microsoft Windows for Workgroups Microsoft Windows 95

This article was previously published under Q108079
SUMMARY
When you use Microsoft Windows for Workgroups 3.11 with 32-bit file access, the maximum amount of memory that can be set in the 386 Enhanced dialog box in Control Panel is 24 megabytes (MB)(or 24,576 kilobytes [K]). Microsoft Windows 95 does not provide a user interface to change the 32-bit file access cache size.
MORE INFORMATION
Although the user interface is limited to 24 MB, the theoretical maximum size of the cache is actually 2GB. This cache size is using physical RAM; therefore, the cache size is limited to the amount of RAM on your computer. Setting the cache size greater than the physical amount of RAM available results in the following error message when re-entering the Virtual Memory settings in the 386 Enhanced dialog box:
32-bit file access was unable to run. Your hard disk(s) may not be compatible with 32-bit file access.
Steps to Manually Increase or Decrease the Cache Size for Windows for Workgroups 3.11 and Windows 95
Open the System.ini file in a text editor, such as Microsoft Windows Notepad.
Go to the [VCache] section.
Change the MinFileCache= and the MaxFileCache= settings to the desired value.
NOTE: The value for these settings are in kilobytes. For example, if you want to create a 50-MB cache that cannot exceed 55 MB, the lines would be as follows:

[VCache]
MinFileCache=51200
MaxFileCache=56320

Please note that Microsoft’s testing did not include cache sizes greater than 40MB. Microsoft makes no guarantees that the cache size will operate correctly when increased above the user interface. Microsoft is not responsible for data loss or data corruption due to a cache size larger than the user interface".

Regards,
Davin
www.davin-photography.com

"Voivod" wrote in message

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 06:47:51 GMT, "Davin"
scribbled:

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.
Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that

is

irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

This is complete and utter bullshit. Windows 9x can
address up to four GIGs of RAM (2 physical, 2 virtual).
I don’t know where this idiotic "Windows 9x can’t
address more than 256 megs of ram started, but it’s
entirely crap.

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:43:41 GMT, "Davin"
scribbled:

You are entitled to your opinion be it right or wrong, as am I.

No, you’re wrong, accept it, move on.

It can be tweaked/modified to run over 512MB’s of RAM.

It’s a simple fix, one change, poof, it works flawlessly.

If it was designed to run that amount of RAM – we would not

MS never expected people to cram 9x boxes full of
very expensive RAM in the same way that BIOS
manufacturers never expected people to want to
install incredibly large IDE drives. Well guess what,
prices dropped, and people did and fixes were
needed and made.

need to be tweaking it after installing it – and that is so it recognises the RAM – it does not say it will use it.

It uses it, accept that you’re wrong and move on.

I base my information on work, experience and research.

I base mine on using the fix several times as well as
the several MS MVP’s I’ve spoken with over the
years. Your ‘reasearch’ is beliving what web pages
not related to the people who make the product tell you.

There was no need to quote the entire MS article.

"Davin" wrote in
news:rC5Nb.59$:

Hello All,

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.

Yes, and while we’re at it, may I suggest a tourniquet around your neck for the next papercut you receive?

Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that is irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

And the cow jumped over the moon. It was easy because the world is really flat, and cows have little rockets built into their butts.

out of memory errors reference:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q253912

Say, Davin – why did you ignore the quick and easy solution that actually adresses the root of the problem:

"Use the MaxFileCache setting in the System.ini file to reduce the maximum amount of memory that Vcache uses to 512 megabytes (524,288 KB) or less."

Since VCACHE only needs about 1/8 total system memory, this makes all kinds of sense. Or is that the problem?

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:38:58 GMT, Eric Gill
scribbled:

"Davin" wrote in
news:rC5Nb.59$:

Hello All,

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.

Yes, and while we’re at it, may I suggest a tourniquet around your neck for the next papercut you receive?

Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that is irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

And the cow jumped over the moon. It was easy because the world is really flat, and cows have little rockets built into their butts.

Well… they DO generate a LOT of methane…. 🙂

out of memory errors reference:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q253912

Say, Davin – why did you ignore the quick and easy solution that actually adresses the root of the problem:

"Use the MaxFileCache setting in the System.ini file to reduce the maximum amount of memory that Vcache uses to 512 megabytes (524,288 KB) or less."
Since VCACHE only needs about 1/8 total system memory, this makes all kinds of sense. Or is that the problem?

Hello All,

Eric:
It maybe a quick and easy solution – with the side effect of system instability.
Thus I do not consider this to be a solution.

I don’t believe everything I read on the web – thought these links and the information
contained therein were credible.
Microsoft states on numerous occassions that one (1) of the Resolution/Workaround solutions is to Reduce the amount of memory that is installed in your computer to 512 MB or less. (
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;253912 )

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;311871

SYMPTOMS
If your computer has 1 gigabyte (GB) or more of random access memory (RAM) with shared video memory, the computer may boot to a blue screen error when you try to start Windows Millennium Edition (Me) or Windows 98.

CAUSE
Windows Me and Windows 98 are not designed to handle 1 GB or more of RAM. 1 GB or more of RAM can lead to potential system instability.

RESOLUTION
To work around this problem, reduce the amount of memory that is installed in your computer to 512 megabytes (MB) or less.

The information in this article applies to:
Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition
Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition
Microsoft Windows 98

Microsoft itself states that Win9x is not designed to handle 1 GB or more or RAM – it leads to system instability – it says to use 512MB or less.

Guess the bottom line here, is this is a photoshop newsgroup – he was having problems with photoshop – I gave him a solution. That does not mean it is the only solution. That does not mean he has to use it.

stmayhem – now has a possible use of two (2) solutions – I hope that one of them solves his problem.

Regards,
Davin
www.davin-photography.com

"Voivod" wrote in message

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 14:38:58 GMT, Eric Gill
scribbled:

"Davin" wrote in
news:rC5Nb.59$:

Hello All,

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.

Yes, and while we’re at it, may I suggest a tourniquet around your neck

for

the next papercut you receive?

Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that is irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

And the cow jumped over the moon. It was easy because the world is really flat, and cows have little rockets built into their butts.

Well… they DO generate a LOT of methane…. 🙂

out of memory errors reference:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;q253912

Say, Davin – why did you ignore the quick and easy solution that actually adresses the root of the problem:

"Use the MaxFileCache setting in the System.ini file to reduce the

maximum

amount of memory that Vcache uses to 512 megabytes (524,288 KB) or less."
Since VCACHE only needs about 1/8 total system memory, this makes all

kinds

of sense. Or is that the problem?

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:14:06 GMT, "Davin"
scribbled:

Thus I do not consider this to be a solution.

Then it’s a good thing you’re not supporting the
several machines I’ve worked on running 9x
and large amounts of RAM, isn’t it? Since it
IS a solution and it does work.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;253912

"Sorry, the page you requested is not available. "

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;311871

"If your computer has 1 gigabyte (GB) or more of random access memory (RAM) with shared video memory"

Note the "shared video memory".

Microsoft itself states that Win9x is not designed to handle 1 GB or more or RAM – it leads to system instability – it says to use 512MB or less.

So if MS says it’s not designed to work with a gig or RAM or more (technet says differently) why are all you people going on about it NOT using more than 256 megs? Do try to be at least mildly consistent.

Guess the bottom line here, is this is a photoshop newsgroup – he was having problems with photoshop – I gave him a solution. That does not mean it is the only solution. That does not mean he has to use it.

Your solution was to cripple the computer, my solution, and the one MS recommends is a simple edit to a text file to change the vcache and solves the problem.

stmayhem – now has a possible use of two (2) solutions – I hope that one of them solves his problem.

"Hi, I’ve got a splinter in my big toe. What do I do?"

Davin) Amputate the leg!
Voivid) Remove the splinter.

Voivod wrote in server:

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 23:02:47 -0600, stmayhem
scribbled:

i double click the icon and i get a little pop up that says not enough memory (ram) to launch photoshop 5.5

i’m currently running windows 98se with 700+ mbs of ram and over 5 gbs of free space on my drive.

See if this solves your problem:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;253912

Wait an f’ing minute. In one message you snippily reply to Davin, after he has referred you and Eric to that exact page:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;253912

"Sorry, the page you requested is not available. "

And in the next message you refer stmayhem to that exact same page.

I had no opinion before, but now I see why folks in this group seem to think you’re an asshole.

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:52:33 -0600, Anonymoose <Ihatespam> scribbled:

Voivod wrote in server:

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 23:02:47 -0600, stmayhem
scribbled:

i double click the icon and i get a little pop up that says not enough memory (ram) to launch photoshop 5.5

i’m currently running windows 98se with 700+ mbs of ram and over 5 gbs of free space on my drive.

See if this solves your problem:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;253912

Wait an f’ing minute. In one message you snippily reply to Davin, after he has referred you and Eric to that exact page:

Well first you need to check your threading as I posted the link to the MSKB article last night when the question was first asked before and not after Davin did.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;253912

"Sorry, the page you requested is not available. "

Which is what the MS server returned when I clicked on the link that Davin provided. Do you have a hard time following along or are you just arguing because you haven’t had your yap run today? It may have been a simple server glitch but I wasn’t about to go digging through and reloading all the read messages to compare my URL to his. The link he provided at the time I clicked on it returned the "Sorry, the page you requested is not available." internal message from MS.

And in the next message you refer stmayhem to that exact same page.

Mine:
Subject: Re: not enough ram to launch photoshop
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 06:35:02 GMT

Davin:
Subject: Re: not enough ram to launch photoshop
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 06:47:51 GMT

Do learn to tell time, ok?

I had no opinion before, but now I see why folks in this group seem to think you’re an asshole.

As if I give a fuck what your opinion is.

Voivod wrote in
news::

[asshole rationalizations snipped]

As if I give a fuck what your opinion is.

Or anyone else’s apparently. Having had quite enough of your argumentative claptrap…

*plonk*

"Davin" wrote in
news:21dNb.64$:

Hello All,

Eric:
It maybe a quick and easy solution – with the side effect of system instability.

For which I’ve seen absolutely no evidence whatsoever, Microsoft’s "just throw up your hands and lobotomize your system" attitude notwithstanding. I ran the Win95 line for years with 1GB and the largest source of instability was the badly-misnamed "System Resources" issue.

In fact, that was damned near the *only* problem, and Photoshop sets it off big time.

Thus I do not consider this to be a solution.

<shrug> The *only* real solution is to upgrade to NT/2K/XP. Besides the better memory management, the Sys Resource bug goes away sompletely.

<snip>

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:54:08 -0600, Anonymoose <Ihatespam> scribbled:

Voivod wrote in
news::

[asshole rationalizations snipped]

Aww, did it bother you that I pointed out you can’t tell time?

Buh bye!

Davin wrote:

Hello All,

You are entitled to your opinion be it right or wrong, as am I. It can be tweaked/modified to run over 512MB’s of RAM.
If it was designed to run that amount of RAM – we would not need to be tweaking it after installing it – and that is so it recognises the RAM – it does not say it will use it.
I base my information on work, experience and research.

Due to windows 9x memory handling problems etc etc anything over 256MB’s is not very useful.

http://www.iamnotageek.com/showthread.php?t=4364
"Basically, Windows95 (and even 98 and ME) do work with more than 128MB, but they don’t actually benefit much from more RAM because they had very bad memory management that allowed memory leakage.

No matter how much RAM than 128MB you had, that memory leakage would happen and mess Windows up after running many applications for a while. With Windows95 memory addressing, some segments would remain locked even though programs that were using them actually finished.

That’s why with Win95/98/ME, after working for a while (a day or two), you would always need to reboot to fully get back free memory".

http://zurich.csail.mit.edu/hypermail/thinkpad/2003-01/0104. html
"With even larger amounts of RAM (approaching 1GB), you may experience system instability even with the above setting change. Basically, Windows 9x/Me were never designed to handle this amount of RAM – see this knowledge base article,
http://support.microsoft.com/search/preview.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q304943 and this one
http://support.microsoft.com/search/preview.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q311871 . If you want or need this much RAM, you should really be using Windows 2000 or XP, which do not have such problems with large amounts of RAM".

As stated by microsoft below

"Out of Memory" Error Messages with Large Amounts of RAM Installed The information in this article applies to:
Microsoft Windows Millennium Edition
Microsoft Windows 98 Second Edition
Microsoft Windows 98
Microsoft Windows 95

This article was previously published under Q253912
If this article does not describe your hardware-related issue, please see the following Microsoft Web site to view more articles about hardware: http://support.microsoft.com/support/windows/topics/hardware /hwddresctr.as p

SYMPTOMS
If a computer that is running any of the versions of Windows that are listed above contains more than 512 megabytes (for example, 768 megabytes) of physical memory (RAM), you may experience one or more of the following symptoms: You may be unable to open an MS-DOS session (or command prompt) while Windows is running. Attempts to do so may generate the following error message:
There is not enough memory available to run this program. Quit one or more programs, and then try again.

The computer may stop responding (hang) while Windows is starting, or halt and display the following error message:
Insufficient memory to initialize windows. Quit one or more memory-resident programs or remove unnecessary utilities from your Config.sys and Autoexec.bat files, and restart your computer.

CAUSE
The Windows 32-bit protected-mode cache driver (Vcache) determines the maximum cache size based on the amount of RAM that is present when Windows starts. Vcache then reserves enough memory addresses to permit it to access a cache of the maximum size so that it can increase the cache to that size if needed. These addresses are allocated in a range of virtual addresses from 0xC0000000 through 0xFFFFFFFF (3 to 4 gigabytes) known as the system arena.
On computers with large amounts of RAM, the maximum cache size can be large enough that Vcache consumes all of the addresses in the system arena, leaving no virtual memory addresses available for other functions such as opening an MS-DOS prompt (creating a new virtual machine). WORKAROUND
To work around this problem, use one of the following methods: Use the MaxFileCache setting in the System.ini file to reduce the maximum amount of memory that Vcache uses to 512 megabytes (524,288 KB) or less. For additional information about how to use the MaxFileCache setting, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base: 108079 32-Bit File Access Maximum Cache Size

Use the System Configuration utility to limit the amount of memory that Windows uses to 512 megabytes (MB) or less.For additional information about how to use the System Configuration utility, click the article number below to view the article in the Microsoft Knowledge Base: 181966 System Configuration Utility Advanced Troubleshooting Settings
Reduce the amount of memory that is installed in your computer to 512 MB or less.

STATUS
Microsoft has confirmed that this is a problem in the Microsoft products that are listed at the beginning of this article.
MORE INFORMATION
Vcache is limited internally to a maximum cache size of 800 MB. This problem may occur more readily with Advanced Graphics Port (AGP) video adapters because the AGP aperture is also mapped to addresses in the system arena. For example, if Vcache is using a maximum cache size of 800 MB and an AGP video adapter has a 128-MB aperture mapped, there is very little address space remaining for the other system code and data that must occupy this range of virtual addresses.

Use these commands

32-Bit File Access Maximum Cache Size
The information in this article applies to:Microsoft Windows for Workgroups Microsoft Windows 95

This article was previously published under Q108079
SUMMARY
When you use Microsoft Windows for Workgroups 3.11 with 32-bit file access, the maximum amount of memory that can be set in the 386 Enhanced dialog box in Control Panel is 24 megabytes (MB)(or 24,576 kilobytes [K]). Microsoft Windows 95 does not provide a user interface to change the 32-bit file access cache size.
MORE INFORMATION
Although the user interface is limited to 24 MB, the theoretical maximum size of the cache is actually 2GB. This cache size is using physical RAM; therefore, the cache size is limited to the amount of RAM on your computer. Setting the cache size greater than the physical amount of RAM available results in the following error message when re-entering the Virtual Memory settings in the 386 Enhanced dialog box:
32-bit file access was unable to run. Your hard disk(s) may not be compatible with 32-bit file access.
Steps to Manually Increase or Decrease the Cache Size for Windows for Workgroups 3.11 and Windows 95
Open the System.ini file in a text editor, such as Microsoft Windows Notepad.
Go to the [VCache] section.
Change the MinFileCache= and the MaxFileCache= settings to the desired value.
NOTE: The value for these settings are in kilobytes. For example, if you want to create a 50-MB cache that cannot exceed 55 MB, the lines would be as follows:

[VCache]
MinFileCache=51200
MaxFileCache=56320

Please note that Microsoft’s testing did not include cache sizes greater than 40MB. Microsoft makes no guarantees that the cache size will operate correctly when increased above the user interface. Microsoft is not responsible for data loss or data corruption due to a cache size larger than the user interface".

Regards,
Davin
www.davin-photography.com

"Voivod" wrote in message

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 06:47:51 GMT, "Davin"
scribbled:

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.
Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that

is

irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

This is complete and utter bullshit. Windows 9x can
address up to four GIGs of RAM (2 physical, 2 virtual).
I don’t know where this idiotic "Windows 9x can’t
address more than 256 megs of ram started, but it’s
entirely crap.

For those of you who have this problem: look for RamBooster on the Web. It defragments the RAM from time to time so that any free space remains contiguous (is this the correct term?). I was using it when Win98SE was my OS, and it works just fine. It’s slow, of course, when you load the OS with open apps, but in most cases, it can liberate enough RAM to keep the Win98 in tracks. It doesn’t address the 256 limit issue (if it, indeed, exists).

—
Branko Vukelic ()

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:16:01 +0100, "Branko Vukelic" scribbled:

For those of you who have this problem: look for RamBooster on the Web. It defragments the RAM from time to time so that any free space remains

RAM doesn’t need to be defragmented. Memory boosters do not work and only add to system instability.

contiguous (is this the correct term?). I was using it when Win98SE was my OS, and it works just fine. It’s slow, of course, when you load the OS with open apps, but in most cases, it can liberate enough RAM to keep the Win98 in tracks. It doesn’t address the 256 limit issue (if it, indeed, exists).

It doesn’t.

Voivod wrote:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 06:47:51 GMT, "Davin"
scribbled:

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.
Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that is irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

This is complete and utter bullshit. Windows 9x can
address up to four GIGs of RAM (2 physical, 2 virtual).
I don’t know where this idiotic "Windows 9x can’t
address more than 256 megs of ram started, but it’s
entirely crap.

It’s you who is full of crap Voivod.
Windows 9x has an absolute limit on it’s RAM handling of 512 Mb. It may be possible to coax it into ‘seeing’ up to 1 gig by changing the AGP aperture size but it certainly will not use more than 512 Mb.

ABC

stmayhem wrote:

i double click the icon and i get a little pop up that says not enough memory (ram) to launch photoshop 5.5

i’m currently running windows 98se with 700+ mbs of ram and over 5 gbs of free space on my drive.

any solutions?

stmayhem
———————————————————— ———- — Posted via http://www.forum4designers.com
———————————————————— ———- — View this thread: http://www.forum4designers.com/message32332.html

Windows 95/98/SE/Me were intended, as operating systems, to address up to 2 GB of RAM. In practice, Win98+ is ‘happiest’ at the 128MB to 256MB level. Moving from 256MB to 512MB may cause decreased performance. Beyond 512MB, some problems start to occur, and above 1GB you may be unable to boot into Windows 9x at all.

The main cause seems to be Windows’ inability to manage VCache correctly in large RAM system, and likewise, perhaps, for the swapfile on the Hard Disk (Virtual Memory).

The cure, for mainly Windows/Apps users, is to limit VCache’s MaxFileCache to about 70%, or 510MB, whichever is smaller. The MinFileCache can be left unaltered (default, dynamic). Also, ensure a permanent Hard Disk swapfile is sufficiently large, or that a dynamic swapfile has sufficient room to expand. Gamers often use 1/8 of physical RAM for the MaxFileCache.

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:55:04 GMT, "Alvie" scribbled:

Voivod wrote:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 06:47:51 GMT, "Davin"
scribbled:

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.
Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that is irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

This is complete and utter bullshit. Windows 9x can
address up to four GIGs of RAM (2 physical, 2 virtual).
I don’t know where this idiotic "Windows 9x can’t
address more than 256 megs of ram started, but it’s
entirely crap.

It’s you who is full of crap Voivod.

You’re wrong.

Windows 9x has an absolute limit on it’s RAM handling of 512 Mb. It may

You’re wrong. Even MS say’s you’re wrong.

be possible to coax it into ‘seeing’ up to 1 gig by changing the AGP

It’s more than possible for 9x to see it, it’s quite possible for 9x to USE it.

aperture size but it certainly will not use more than 512 Mb.

Why would I change the graphics card aperture size to get the OS to recognize system RAM? Did you mean vcache? And
since the MS fix* specifically states; "more than 512 megabytes (for example, 768 megabytes)" [Please note the words "MORE THAN"] even Microsoft is saying you don’t have a fucking clue what you’re babbling about.

* http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;253912

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:01:15 GMT, "Alvie" scribbled:

Windows 95/98/SE/Me were intended, as operating systems, to address up to 2 GB of RAM.

And only six minutes ago you stated; "Windows 9x has an absolute limit on it’s RAM handling of 512 Mb."

Could you try and be just slightly consistent in your prattle.

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:10:37 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

<shrug> The *only* real solution is to upgrade to NT/2K/XP. Besides the better memory management, the Sys Resource bug goes away sompletely.

And that, for anyone trying to make sense of this thread is the *real* solution.

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, reliqui

"Alvie" wrote in server.bigpond.net.au:

Voivod wrote:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 06:47:51 GMT, "Davin"
scribbled:

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.
Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that is irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

This is complete and utter bullshit. Windows 9x can
address up to four GIGs of RAM (2 physical, 2 virtual).

Except, of course, if you put more than 1 GB of RAM in a Win95/98/ME box, Windows fails to boot with a "Not Enough RAM" error.

I don’t know where this idiotic "Windows 9x can’t
address more than 256 megs of ram started, but it’s
entirely crap.

It’s you who is full of crap Voivod.
Windows 9x has an absolute limit on it’s RAM handling of 512 Mb.

No. The program VCACHE grabs all of the available RAM and fills it with memory pointers; when it fills 512MB or so, the possible number of pointers is exhausted and the system dies.

That’s why limiting VCACHE to using no more than 1/8 total RAM works like a charm.

It may
be possible to coax it into ‘seeing’ up to 1 gig by changing the AGP aperture size but it certainly will not use more than 512 Mb.

<shrug> I still don’t know where this comes from. The applications (such as Photoshop) certainly use it if it’s installed.

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 01:50:28 +0000, Hecate
scribbled:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:10:37 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

<shrug> The *only* real solution is to upgrade to NT/2K/XP. Besides the better memory management, the Sys Resource bug goes away sompletely.

And that, for anyone trying to make sense of this thread is the *real* solution.

*IF* your hardware’s on the HCL and *IF* your machines up to running a newer OS and *IF* you can afford the upgrade, sure. Otherwise 30 seconds with notepad solves it just fine.

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 02:29:54 GMT, Eric Gill
scribbled:

"Alvie" wrote in server.bigpond.net.au:

Voivod wrote:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 06:47:51 GMT, "Davin"
scribbled:

I would suggest removing any RAM over 512MB to start off with – you are lucky to be starting windows let alone Photoshop.
Windows 9x will not use over 256 MB of RAM either – so anything over that is irrelevant to the operating system – even though it detects it.

This is complete and utter bullshit. Windows 9x can
address up to four GIGs of RAM (2 physical, 2 virtual).

Except, of course, if you put more than 1 GB of RAM in a Win95/98/ME box, Windows fails to boot with a "Not Enough RAM" error.

I don’t know where this idiotic "Windows 9x can’t
address more than 256 megs of ram started, but it’s
entirely crap.

It’s you who is full of crap Voivod.
Windows 9x has an absolute limit on it’s RAM handling of 512 Mb.

No. The program VCACHE grabs all of the available RAM and fills it with memory pointers; when it fills 512MB or so, the possible number of pointers is exhausted and the system dies.

That’s why limiting VCACHE to using no more than 1/8 total RAM works like a charm.

It may
be possible to coax it into ‘seeing’ up to 1 gig by changing the AGP aperture size but it certainly will not use more than 512 Mb.

<shrug> I still don’t know where this comes from. The applications (such as Photoshop) certainly use it if it’s installed.

Shhh, don’t confuse them with facts….

Voivod wrote:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:16:01 +0100, "Branko Vukelic" scribbled:

For those of you who have this problem: look for RamBooster on the Web. It defragments the RAM from time to time so that any free space remains

RAM doesn’t need to be defragmented. Memory boosters do not work and only add to system instability.

Actually, it did work for my 64Mb lap-top. It’s certainly been more stable after I started using it. It doesn’t kill the BSOD issue, but it’s been a bit better. I don’t know if it works for all users, but it did for me. Anyway, as someone already pointed out, the only complete solution is to move on to Win2k or XP. That’s why I did.

contiguous (is this the correct term?). I was using it when Win98SE was my OS, and it works just fine. It’s slow, of course, when you load the OS with open apps, but in most cases, it can liberate enough RAM to keep the Win98 in tracks. It doesn’t address the 256 limit issue (if it, indeed, exists).

It doesn’t.

I wouldn’t know. I only had 64Mb. Good for me! 😉

—
Branko Vukelic ()

Your mother probably intended her baby boy would have at least a part of a brain and she was wrong. Why would Microsoft finally get it right after 15 years of selling beta software?

This is a "work around" for the problem. A plain vanilla install of 9x on a PC with an Intel chipset will not boot cleanly with more than 512 Mb of RAM. Use a NVIDIA graphics card and it absolutely won’t boot at all with 1 gig of RAM. Alter the graphics aperture in CMOS and the system *might* boot but it certainly won’t run properly until you modify the vcache and even then… How do you get the 2 gig you are on about, working? Simple… It’s all a dream in the minds of publicists and wannbes like you.

Where ever you get your information from Voivod, you ought to stop going there because in the past 15 posts you’ve made professing to be some sort of half baked expert, you got it wrong 13 times… Not a Biker are you? ABC

"Voivod" wrote in message

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:01:15 GMT, "Alvie" scribbled:

Windows 95/98/SE/Me were intended, as operating systems, to address up to 2 GB of RAM.

And only six minutes ago you stated; "Windows 9x has an absolute limit on it’s RAM handling of 512 Mb."
Could you try and be just slightly consistent in your prattle.

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 22:09:20 GMT, "Alvie" scribbled:

Where ever you get your information from Voivod

The MS site with the fix that solves the memory problem
for those users with more than 512 megs of RAM. You
know, the people who actually made the software you’re
pretending you know something about.

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 03:10:40 GMT, Voivod wrote:

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 01:50:28 +0000, Hecate
scribbled:

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:10:37 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

<shrug> The *only* real solution is to upgrade to NT/2K/XP. Besides the better memory management, the Sys Resource bug goes away sompletely.

And that, for anyone trying to make sense of this thread is the *real* solution.

*IF* your hardware’s on the HCL and *IF* your machines up to running a newer OS and *IF* you can afford the upgrade, sure. Otherwise 30 seconds with notepad solves it just fine.

And *IF* you want to get your work done within a reasonable time without having to reboot your computer every so often,. and *IF* you want to be able to run your computer so it continues for months on end without slowing down to a crawl, and so on. We could argue about this forever but it won’t change the fact that Win98 is almost useless and WinME is definitely useless, for any amount of serious work.

—

Hecate

veni, vidi, reliqui

Get into the real world and discover the people who spend thir life supporting the software actually have a clue too. Idiot! ABC

"Voivod" wrote in message

On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 22:09:20 GMT, "Alvie" scribbled:

Where ever you get your information from Voivod

The MS site with the fix that solves the memory problem
for those users with more than 512 megs of RAM. You
know, the people who actually made the software you’re
pretending you know something about.

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> <title></title>
</head>
<body text="#339999" bgcolor="#ffffff"> Anonymoose wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="">
<pre wrap="">Voivod <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:&gt;</a> wrote in
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="news::</a>

[asshole rationalizations snipped]

</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">As if I give a fuck what your opinion is.

</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!—->
Or anyone else’s apparently. Having had quite enough of your argumentative claptrap…

—————————
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Hey all, please be quiet and lets get on with photoshop techniques and such.&nbsp; Shut Up!<br>
</body>
</html>

Anonymoose wrote:

Voivod wrote in
news::

[asshole rationalizations snipped]

As if I give a fuck what your opinion is.

Or anyone else’s apparently. Having had quite enough of your argumentative claptrap…

—————————

Hey all, please be quiet and lets get on with photoshop techniques and such. Shut Up!

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 04:10:57 GMT, Charles Marinaro
scribbled:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"> <title></title>
</head>
<body text="#339999" bgcolor="#ffffff"> Anonymoose wrote:<br>

This isn’t the web, try it without the HTML crutch.

Well if you just use a bootleg version of XP, that takes out the issu of affording that upgrade ;

supchak
———————————————————— ———– Posted via http://www.forum4designers.co
———————————————————— ———– View this thread: http://www.forum4designers.com/message32332.htm