🚀 go-pugleaf

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
I agree with Maurice.  12MB works now, but you can not go wrong with
16MB.  Your are more likely to have problems that result from a lack of
memory using only 12MB of memory.

Besides, you can purchase a computer with 16MB now and save more
money.  You might as well do all of the work now rather than wait a
couple of years.  Your next increment in memory will be 32MB in my
opinion.

I have a '95 machine with 16MB now; my next jump in memory will be
32MB.  I think the applications are becoming hungrier for memory each
year.  Our multi-tasking expectations are also growing exponentially.

Go for 16!  We are upgrading our labs this summer.  That's what we will
be doing.

>>> <M.Rich@ens.gu.edu.au> 01/22/96 11:00am >>>
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
On 18 Jan 96 at 18:23, Kathy Crandall wrote:

> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> I have a problem I hope you readers can help me with.  I am a high
school
> administrator (just out of the classroom and new at this job this year!)
and
> my school uses SASI on the PC with Novell underlying.  My own
computer was
> first put in use in 1980 - no doubt a tribute to the manufacturer, but it
> doesn't exactly do what I'd like it to just now!
>
> We are ordering either Pentiums or fast 486's to replacd the 1980
brands, but
> I have some questions.  It appears that our computers must come with
Windows
> '95 whether we like it or not.  We are now operating a LAN of about
15 users,
> on Novell using SASI, (a rather antiquated administrative program).
We must
> make a decision about how much RAM we need on the new
conmputers.  I suspect
> 16 MB is necessary in order to support the coming software and keep
Windows
> 95, SASI, and a word processor plus Excel open simultaneously.
SASI doesn't
> take much memory - it will run on the 8088 640K computer, but the rest
seem
> to need increasing amounts of RAM to be functional.  However, I am
basically
> a Mac person and need some input from you PC nerds.  Is it likely that
we can
> run our computers on 12 MB happily for the next four years, using a
fast 486
> server, or do you think it is essential that we cough up the bucks for
the 16
> MB of RAM now?  As I understand it, almost all motherboards now will
require
> us to upgrade from 12 to 20 if we need to upgrade, so this is not a
decision
> that can just be postponed.

Hi Kathy,
          all the playing/delving/cursing/installing into/with/at Win95 indicate

that 16Mb or better is better, anything less will cost you.

regards,

Maurice H. Rich         maurice@gu.edu.au       | M.Rich@ens.gu.edu.au
Technical Officer   (Computing)                 | Ph  +61 7 3 875 7489
Faculty of Environmental Sciences               | Fax +61 7 3 875 7459
Griffith University,  Nathan,  Brisbane,   QLD,   Australia.  4111

C... it's not just a language, it's also a chord.