Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!tarquin
From: tarquin@athena.mit.edu (Robert P Poole)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Memory requirements (Win 3.0)
Keywords: RAM, memory
Message-ID: <1990Aug15.044352.25786@athena.mit.edu>
Date: 15 Aug 90 04:43:52 GMT
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Followup-To: comp.windows.ms
Distribution: na
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 23


I have heard conflicting reports about how much memory is needed for Windows
3.0.  I have a 286 machine with (currently) 640K, which I plan on upgrading to
2 meg+ eventually (I might stop off at 1.5 meg for a while).  I also have a 40
meg HD, a VGA card that is fully BIOS compatible with IBM, and a few other nice
gadgets which are useful (like a mouse, etc.)

In a preliminary review of Windows 3.0 that I read, it was indicated that
Windows could run in a "limited" mode, which only required 640K.  Then, when I
actually saw the boxed set, the label said "Requires at least 1 Meg RAM."
Finally, I saw an ad in CompuAdd's catalog that said Windows required 2 Meg.
Now, who's telling the whoppers here?

Since RAM is cheap these days (about $8 for a 1 Meg x 1 bit chip), it hardly
matters -- I'll get that memory one way or another, but I don't see the point
in getting more than is optimal.

Thanks.
--
Robert P. Poole                       tarquin@athena.mit.edu
46 Massachusetts Avenue               MIT Course VIII
311B Bexley Hall                      "I love the smell of napalm early in the
Cambridge, MA  02139                   morning.  Smells like... victory!"