[filmscanners] Re:Win98 memory [was Polaroid sprintscan 4000 problems]

["Maris V. Lidaka Sr." <mlidaka@ameritech.net>]

With respect to Win98's 512MB memory usage, see
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q253/9/12.ASP

Maris

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Michael" <opopanax@xs4all.nl>
To: <mlidaka@ameritech.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 11:28 AM
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Re:Polaroid sprintscan 4000 problems


I remember a conversation on this list in which a limit of 512 k for W98 was
mentioned.
I tried higher and did not get the PC working
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Finley <mike@efikim.compulink.co.uk>
To: <opopanax@xs4all.nl>
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2002 11:48 PM
Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Re:Polaroid sprintscan 4000 problems


> Windows 98 can certainly address more than 128MB RAM, though I don't know
> what its limits actually are. Some motherboards of that vintage may not
have
> been able to effectively use more than 128MB, perhaps?
>
snip
> Windows 2000 Professional has been mentioned, and I (vaguely) remember a
> conversation with someone about Windows 98 not being able to address more
> than 128Mb RAM. I do not know if this is correct, but I am going to try
it.
>
> Brian.
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body