In a message dated 7/9/2007 4:44:30 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, Stefan-Tiedje@addcom.de writes:
This isn't an advantageous feature, the Mac OS can do this since years,
Just so you know, I use PCs exclusively but am one of the rare individuals that honestly believes that Macs are superior machines hardware wise but are the lesser of the two as far as software is concerned. I wonder out of sheer curiosity if Mac more or less traded it's virtual ram ideology for the PC's processor aptitude? It would have seemed to be a poor trade in hindsight if this were so.
To me, this has always been kind of a "no brainer".Comparatively speaking, in our first column we have Macintosh made, produced & designed exclusively by who? Macintosh. In our second column we have the PC. Made & configuatively designed by everyone and their brother. If I were Einstein, which column would seem to yield the most consistent quality per functional dependability? As far as your minimal RAM is concerned, 768 MB is a joke if you plan on using multiple plug ins. Ain't gonna happen. Different strokes I guess...
See what's free at AOL.com.