Here's something weird.  I ran a test that showed 768 installed RAM, but Windows detects 512.  I upgraded the memory a long time ago, but can't recall if I actually put that much in.  Any way could I actually have 768 in there with Windows spotting only 512?  It's run like this for years- I would suspect that I'd get some memory read errors if there were that much of a discrepancy.  (Yeah, I know I could open her up- just lazy, I guess.

Just searching for opinions.

(...about the computer.)

Thanks.  [/color]

If your motherboard is kinda old, it may not support more than 512 MB ram. For example my sister's computer could've had 768, but it would be pointless, since the extra 256 could not be used by the motherboard.

ehh... totally :-p

Thanks for the "mem" command.  I didn't know that one.  The results of that command are as follows, however.

655360 total conventional memory
655360 bytes available to MSDOS
633766 largest executable program size

1048576 bytes total contiguous extended memory
0 bytes available contiguous extended memory
941056 available XMS memory
MSDOS resident in high memory area

So where do I stand, really? 
Looks like I have a Gig, but I know I do not.  Or do I?

Thanks for the replies...

Hi klaus655!

You are exactly right.  Aside from the normal amount of BASE MEMORY used by DOS, you have 1048576 bytes of extended memory with most of it hiding in the XMS area (Extended Memory Service) ...which is roughly a 'gig'.  Hey ......buried treasure!  lol...  (It means that your computer is "seeing" all the available memory and making good use of it.  Your computer is making good use of the parameters by loading as much of DOS into the HIGH MEMORY area as possible, leaving more room for Base Memory resident programmes to operate!

To learn more about the < mem > command, at a DOS prompt just type <  mem /?  > (that's mem (space) slash?)  and hit enter to see all of the 'variables'.  It's a pretty handy tool.  If you want to see ALL of the parameters available to you in DOS, just type < help > and hit your Enter key!  You'll be amazed at what is hidden in them thar silicone chips!  o.O

Cheers!

Hi Marcin541!

Everyone has 640MB of RAM.  (But it is not to be confused with actual memory like System RAM or DDR).  It's the standard "Base Memory" needed to run DOS that is built into the motherboards to ensure DOS will run properly.  (Although DOS, in reality, uses slightly lesser amounts depending on what kind of motherboard you have, and how old it is).  The closer to 640 that you can get DOS to use, the more efficient and faster your system will operate.  (Believe me when I say that it is a rare thing to hear or read about anyone trying to "tweak" their DOS settings for "Max Impact")!  Use Google and do some checking around on the topic, you'll be amazed at just how much has been forgotten about computers! 

Every computer in the world has 655360 Total Conventional Memory.  One of the biggest challenges is "breaking the 640k DOS Barrier!"  When that happens, computing will be forever changed!

The XMS and/or Contiguous Memory is simply RAM that is built right into alot of motherboards, yet few people ever discover it's there because the < mem > command was forgotten about after Windows 3.1 had been around about a year.  Most of today's programs are written in such a manner that it fails to make use of this extra bit of memory because the folks writing the code aren't aware of the older DOS commands and parameters.  Simple!  (Also, the newer motherboards don't have XMS anymore ...of course).  But ...they all depend upon the standard 640k of DOS "base memory" ...or the dang thing wouldn't even boot. 

Prior to that (meaning Win 3.1), us old folks were DOS ONLY USERS ....and proud of it!  lol...  Of course, there were the Commodore 64 systems, yet they were just "fancied up" DOS systems, and Tandy (Radio Shack) had a DOS GUI (interface) called DeskMate which was ALOT like Windows 3.1 evolved into.  And that was how computing was in 1981 ...look at how far we've come in a bit over 20 years!  Wonder where it is heading given the latest discoveries relating to silicon wafering manufacturing plus the discovery of "rare earth" metals being used in a computing environment along with silicon 'thrysistors'?  Whew!  The sky is the limit!

Cheers!

*Even today, it is still possible to do far more using DOS than with ANY OS!  It's just a matter of knowing how to use DOS ...a lost art.     

Thanks, Reverend.  I knew I wasn't the only old guy in this forum.  I have a feeling your mentions of Commodore 64s and Atari 5200s fell on deaf ears.  Oh, wait.  You didn't mantion the 5200- you were a Tandyman.  Memories....

Thanks again.

Marcin and Klaus,

Yeah Marcin, it would be nice to see Linux get more of a foothold than just with the danged hackers!  I think you'll find you can run Linux Redhat (using a dual boot system of course), and your ISP won't know the difference!  RedHat is also very easy to quickly learn, and rather addictive!  It's not free, but you get what you pay for right?   ;)  There are several FREE dual-boot software programs out there too.

And Klaus ...I hear you loud and clear!  Gone are the days of DOS, yet without it even today not one thing would run!  Ironically amazing isn't it?  Microsoft has purposely 'dumbed down' computer users by removing more and more DOS commands from OS's to prevent the user from doing things that Linux (or any "nix" user) has rediscovered is a "buried treasure."  (Actually, the DOS commands are still there, just 'coded' into the OS so that nobody can see them "at work." 

One trick that I pulled was to take all of my old DOS commands and edit them so that they will work with XP Pro.  It greatly "broadened" my abilities to do things that would otherwise be impossible for the 'standalone' OS!  Mr. Bill wouldn't like me for doing that but I can't help it if the "OLD_DOS" Directory got messed up with the System32 folder now can I?  lol...

Cheers!