On 11/14/23 17:36, Joel wrote:
> Win11 is a resource hog in every way imaginable. But modern Linux can
> be used in a pretty similar way. 16 GB just isn't what it used to be,
> and I found doubling that would be pretty cheap. So should I return
> to Windows, now that I'm sure to be at least decent when Win12 is
> released?
>
> I say, nope, there are too few advantages to the platform. I could
> dual-boot if I had a second SSD, but even that is pretty useless. I
> would actually give away my WinPro product key.

16GB works alright for me, though I don't usually use intensive programs.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

wasbit <wasbit@nowhere.com> wrote:
> On 14/11/2023 23:36, Joel wrote:
> > Win11 is a resource hog in every way imaginable. But modern Linux can
> > be used in a pretty similar way. 16 GB just isn't what it used to be,
> > and I found doubling that would be pretty cheap. So should I return
> > to Windows, now that I'm sure to be at least decent when Win12 is
> > released?
> >
> > I say, nope, there are too few advantages to the platform. I could
> > dual-boot if I had a second SSD, but even that is pretty useless. I
> > would actually give away my WinPro product key.
>
> Good luck with getting Microsoft to validate a used product key on a
> different system. That's if you can find the product key in the first place.

Joel already mentioned he has the key.

But in case one doesn't know the key used on one's system:

Someone somewhere suggested the Microsoft Store app (<barf>)
ShowKeyPlus (by Superfly-Inc.) and that works fine on my HP Windows 11
Home laptop. I could install it without a Microsoft Account(I use a
local account).

<https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/showkeyplus/9PKVZCPRX9NV>

For other versions (Windows 10, Win7, WinPE and CLI), Windows XP):
<https://www.techspot.com/downloads/7129-showkeyplus.html>

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 08:20:01 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:25:31 +0100, "Carlos E. R."
><robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Well, you can put 64 GB now so that in 10 years time the machine is not
>>short for memory.
>
>
>I have 32GB, which is considerably more than I need, and that's almost
>exactly why I have that much..

+1 (and the 1Gb fibre internet)

Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:

>>>>16 GB [RAM] is becoming the realistic minimum.
>>>
>>>That depends entirely on how the computer is used. For many people,
>>>GB,
>
>>>8GB
>
>>>or even 4GB, is enough for adequate performance.
>>
>>It'll boot the system, but I like to have everything running at once.
>
>Depends on what everything is. Moreover, what's realistic for you (or
>me, for that matter) isn't realistic for everyone.

8 GB is usable. But if you look at competitively priced computers, 16
is pretty standard. I'm confident, though, that 32 will be all I'll
ever need in this box. It can hold much more, but to what end I doubt
I'll know.

--
Joel W. Crump

candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:

>> Win11 is a resource hog in every way imaginable. But modern Linux can
>> be used in a pretty similar way. 16 GB just isn't what it used to be,
>> and I found doubling that would be pretty cheap. So should I return
>> to Windows, now that I'm sure to be at least decent when Win12 is
>> released?
>>
>> I say, nope, there are too few advantages to the platform. I could
>> dual-boot if I had a second SSD, but even that is pretty useless. I
>> would actually give away my WinPro product key.
>
>16GB works alright for me, though I don't usually use intensive programs.

I'm not having real trouble with 16 GB, but it seems that I might get
some benefit, and room to grow, with 32, and it was $40 for the same
pair I bought in 2021, DDR4-2666, so I'll have four 8 GB sticks, using
all four slots on the motherboard.

--
Joel W. Crump

Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>wasbit <wasbit@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> On 14/11/2023 23:36, Joel wrote:
>> >
>> > I
>> > would actually give away my WinPro product key.
>>
>> Good luck with getting Microsoft to validate a used product key on a
>> different system. That's if you can find the product key in the first place.
>
> Joel already mentioned he has the key.

The email receipt from the Microsoft Store Web site contains the text
of the key, I purchased the download, not having any use for anything
but the key itself (but one can be shipped media for the same price).
In truth, as much as a retail key can officially be transferred, an
individual OEM key can too, whether from the sticker on a preassembled
computer, or the System Builder media package. System Builder price
does save a bit by not including Microsoft tech support, but the only
way to get a cheap license is from a small reseller. Or just install
it free, and not care about changing the theme or using Remote
Desktop.

> But in case one doesn't know the key used on one's system:
>
> Someone somewhere suggested the Microsoft Store app (<barf>)
>ShowKeyPlus (by Superfly-Inc.) and that works fine on my HP Windows 11
>Home laptop. I could install it without a Microsoft Account(I use a
>local account).
>
><https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/showkeyplus/9PKVZCPRX9NV>
>
>For other versions (Windows 10, Win7, WinPE and CLI), Windows XP):
><https://www.techspot.com/downloads/7129-showkeyplus.html>

Cool.

--
Joel W. Crump

Joel wrote:
> Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>
>>> 16 GB [RAM] is becoming the realistic minimum.
>>
>> That depends entirely on how the computer is used. For many people,
>> GB, or even 4GB, is enough for adequate performance.
>
>
> It'll boot the system, but I like to have everything running at once.
>
like both feet

On 11/14/23 21:50, David LaRue wrote:

[snip]

> Addng RAM will help any platform.

At some point it could become a liability.

> My 64GB for Win 7 Pro does all I need and its over 10 years old. I'm not a
> gamer though.

I'm not either, but I do run multiple virtual machines. That requires
RAM too. My main PC has 48GB, out of a maximum 128GB.

--
40 days until the winter celebration (Monday, December 25, 2023 12:00 AM
for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Many of those people involved in Adolf Hitler were Satanists, many were
homosexuals -- the two things seem to go together" [Pat Robertson, ADL
report on Religious Right, page 131]

Mark Lloyd wrote:
> On 11/14/23 21:50, David LaRue wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Addng RAM will help any platform.
>
> At some point it could become a liability.
>
>> My 64GB for Win 7 Pro does all I need and its over 10 years old.  I'm
>> not a
>> gamer though.
>
> I'm not either, but I do run multiple virtual machines. That requires
> RAM too. My main PC has 48GB, out of a maximum 128GB.
>
i got lots too

On 11/14/23 21:58, Joel wrote:

[snip]

> There are things that won't run without 10 or 11.

The only think I have like that is income tax software.

--
40 days until the winter celebration (Monday, December 25, 2023 12:00 AM
for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Many of those people involved in Adolf Hitler were Satanists, many were
homosexuals -- the two things seem to go together" [Pat Robertson, ADL
report on Religious Right, page 131]

Mark Lloyd wrote:
> On 11/14/23 21:58, Joel wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> There are things that won't run without 10 or 11.
>
> The only think I have like that is income tax software.
>
how do you know what works and what doesn't

On 11/14/23 22:32, rbowman wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 23:00:37 -0500, Big Al wrote:
>
>> On 11/14/23 10:05 PM, this is what rbowman wrote:
>>> Moore's Law of Resource Hogging. iirc my first i86 box, DOS not
>>> Windows,
>>> had either a 5 or 10 MB hard drive.
>>
>> Oh I was smarter than you (ha ha), I bought a larger drive for my first
>> ibm clone. I got a 20M drive. I was a programmer then and knew hard
>> drive was needed. It only cost me $500. Wasn't I smart 👎
>
> I was moving up from a CP/M system with 2 DSDD drives for a massive 720
> KB. I did quite a bit of work on that box. The BDS C compiler ran fine
> and I was also doing some work with FORTH.
>
> I'm not sure I ever filled the hard drive on the clone. I had a little
> burn out, gave all the machines away, and took a little sabbatical for a
> few years.
>

You *gave away all your machines*? Why?
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 11/14/23 22:09, vallor wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 03:50:15 -0000 (UTC), David LaRue
> <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in
> <XnsB0BCE84A1814Ehueydlltampabayrrcom@135.181.20.170>:
>> My 64GB for Win 7 Pro does all I need and its over 10 years old. I'm not a
>> gamer though.
>
> That's plenty for a gamer, and still more than the average home
> computer I bet.
>
> I wanted to "future-proof" my new workstation, so got it with
> a decent amount of RAM:
>
> $ free
> total used free shared buff/cache available
> Mem: 263780224 7482272 250499608 2048944 5798344 252177528
> Swap: 2097148 0 2097148
>
> $ free -h
> total used free shared buff/cache available
> Mem: 251Gi 7.0Gi 239Gi 1.9Gi 5.5Gi 240Gi
> Swap: 2.0Gi 0B 2.0Gi
>
> As Linux uses the filesystems, they cache in buff/cache. Just like
> SMARTDRV, but for Linux.

WHERE did you get 250GB of ram? Why do you even need that much? Do you
use /tmp that much?
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 11/14/23 22:45, Tyrone wrote:
> On 2023/11/14 6:36 PM, Joel wrote:
>> Win11 is a resource hog in every way imaginable.  But modern Linux can
>> be used in a pretty similar way.  16 GB just isn't what it used to be,
>> and I found doubling that would be pretty cheap.  So should I return
>> to Windows, now that I'm sure to be at least decent when Win12 is
>> released?
>
> More RAM is always better.   Windows will use otherwise unused RAM to
> cache all kinds of stuff, resulting in better performance.

So does Linux!
And yeah, it's definitely a "better to over prepare than under prepare"
situation.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 11/15/23 10:07, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> wasbit <wasbit@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> On 14/11/2023 23:36, Joel wrote:
>>> Win11 is a resource hog in every way imaginable. But modern Linux can
>>> be used in a pretty similar way. 16 GB just isn't what it used to be,
>>> and I found doubling that would be pretty cheap. So should I return
>>> to Windows, now that I'm sure to be at least decent when Win12 is
>>> released?
>>>
>>> I say, nope, there are too few advantages to the platform. I could
>>> dual-boot if I had a second SSD, but even that is pretty useless. I
>>> would actually give away my WinPro product key.
>>
>> Good luck with getting Microsoft to validate a used product key on a
>> different system. That's if you can find the product key in the first place.
>
> Joel already mentioned he has the key.
>
> But in case one doesn't know the key used on one's system:
>
> Someone somewhere suggested the Microsoft Store app (<barf>)
> ShowKeyPlus (by Superfly-Inc.) and that works fine on my HP Windows 11
> Home laptop. I could install it without a Microsoft Account(I use a
> local account).
>
> <https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/showkeyplus/9PKVZCPRX9NV>
>
> For other versions (Windows 10, Win7, WinPE and CLI), Windows XP):
> <https://www.techspot.com/downloads/7129-showkeyplus.html>

There is no way that there are MS Store exclusives, just download the
real version..
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 2023-11-15 16:28, RabidPedagog wrote:
> On 2023-11-15 10:18 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 23:55:40 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 16 GB is becoming the realistic minimum.
>>
>>
>> That depends entirely on how the computer is used. For many people,
>> GB, or even 4GB, is enough for adequate performance.
>
> 8GB is fine for most people whereas 4GB is adequate as long as you're
> using Linux.

4 GB is also scarce on Linux, if you use simultaneously Thunderbird,
Firefox with 20 tabs of "modern" web sites, and Libre Office.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 2023-11-15 12:42 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 2023-11-15 16:28, RabidPedagog wrote:
>> On 2023-11-15 10:18 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 23:55:40 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 16 GB is becoming the realistic minimum.
>>>
>>>
>>> That depends entirely on how the computer is used. For many people,
>>> GB, or even 4GB, is enough for adequate performance.
>>
>> 8GB is fine for most people whereas 4GB is adequate as long as you're
>> using Linux.
>
> 4 GB is also scarce on Linux, if you use simultaneously Thunderbird,
> Firefox with 20 tabs of "modern" web sites, and Libre Office.

Nobody realistically needs to open 20 tabs at a time. Normal people tend
to close things they are no longer reading or watching.

candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
> On 11/15/23 10:07, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > wasbit <wasbit@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >> On 14/11/2023 23:36, Joel wrote:
> >>> Win11 is a resource hog in every way imaginable. But modern Linux can
> >>> be used in a pretty similar way. 16 GB just isn't what it used to be,
> >>> and I found doubling that would be pretty cheap. So should I return
> >>> to Windows, now that I'm sure to be at least decent when Win12 is
> >>> released?
> >>>
> >>> I say, nope, there are too few advantages to the platform. I could
> >>> dual-boot if I had a second SSD, but even that is pretty useless. I
> >>> would actually give away my WinPro product key.
> >>
> >> Good luck with getting Microsoft to validate a used product key on a
> >> different system. That's if you can find the product key in the first place.
> >
> > Joel already mentioned he has the key.
> >
> > But in case one doesn't know the key used on one's system:
> >
> > Someone somewhere suggested the Microsoft Store app (<barf>)
> > ShowKeyPlus (by Superfly-Inc.) and that works fine on my HP Windows 11
> > Home laptop. I could install it without a Microsoft Account(I use a
> > local account).
> >
> > <https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/showkeyplus/9PKVZCPRX9NV>
> >
> > For other versions (Windows 10, Win7, WinPE and CLI), Windows XP):
> > <https://www.techspot.com/downloads/7129-showkeyplus.html>
>
> There is no way that there are MS Store exclusives, just download the
> real version..

Duh! Why do you think I pointed to the TechSpot download site, which
in turn points to GitHub!?

The Microsoft Store is just *a* way to get it. If 'they' (Craig)
didn't want their software there, they wouldn't put it there, would
they?

In article <uj378u.16fg.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, this@ddress.is.invalid says...
>
> candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
> > On 11/15/23 10:07, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > > wasbit <wasbit@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > >> On 14/11/2023 23:36, Joel wrote:
> > >>> Win11 is a resource hog in every way imaginable. But modern Linux can
> > >>> be used in a pretty similar way. 16 GB just isn't what it used to be,
> > >>> and I found doubling that would be pretty cheap. So should I return
> > >>> to Windows, now that I'm sure to be at least decent when Win12 is
> > >>> released?
> > >>>
> > >>> I say, nope, there are too few advantages to the platform. I could
> > >>> dual-boot if I had a second SSD, but even that is pretty useless. I
> > >>> would actually give away my WinPro product key.
> > >>
> > >> Good luck with getting Microsoft to validate a used product key on a
> > >> different system. That's if you can find the product key in the first place.
> > >
> > > Joel already mentioned he has the key.
> > >
> > > But in case one doesn't know the key used on one's system:
> > >
> > > Someone somewhere suggested the Microsoft Store app (<barf>)
> > > ShowKeyPlus (by Superfly-Inc.) and that works fine on my HP Windows 11
> > > Home laptop. I could install it without a Microsoft Account(I use a
> > > local account).
> > >
> > > <https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/showkeyplus/9PKVZCPRX9NV>
> > >
> > > For other versions (Windows 10, Win7, WinPE and CLI), Windows XP):
> > > <https://www.techspot.com/downloads/7129-showkeyplus.html>
> >
> > There is no way that there are MS Store exclusives, just download the
> > real version..
>
> Duh! Why do you think I pointed to the TechSpot download site, which
> in turn points to GitHub!?
>
> The Microsoft Store is just *a* way to get it. If 'they' (Craig)
> didn't want their software there, they wouldn't put it there, would
> they?
>
>
he thinks pig poop in his water is medicinal

On 11/15/23 12:08, RabidPedagog wrote:
> On 2023-11-15 12:42 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2023-11-15 16:28, RabidPedagog wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-15 10:18 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 23:55:40 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 16 GB is becoming the realistic minimum.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That depends entirely on how the computer is used. For many people,
>>>> GB, or even 4GB, is enough for adequate performance.
>>>
>>> 8GB is fine for most people whereas 4GB is adequate as long as you're
>>> using Linux.
>>
>> 4 GB is also scarce on Linux, if you use simultaneously Thunderbird,
>> Firefox with 20 tabs of "modern" web sites, and Libre Office.
>
> Nobody realistically needs to open 20 tabs at a time. Normal people tend
> to close things they are no longer reading or watching.
>

I have seen too many people with 50+ tabs. I used to be like that, too..
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On 2023-11-15 19:08, RabidPedagog wrote:
> On 2023-11-15 12:42 p.m., Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2023-11-15 16:28, RabidPedagog wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-15 10:18 a.m., Ken Blake wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 23:55:40 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 16 GB is becoming the realistic minimum.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That depends entirely on how the computer is used. For many people,
>>>> GB, or even 4GB, is enough for adequate performance.
>>>
>>> 8GB is fine for most people whereas 4GB is adequate as long as you're
>>> using Linux.
>>
>> 4 GB is also scarce on Linux, if you use simultaneously Thunderbird,
>> Firefox with 20 tabs of "modern" web sites, and Libre Office.
>
> Nobody realistically needs to open 20 tabs at a time. Normal people tend
> to close things they are no longer reading or watching.

Oh, I was being realistic. I have a hundred or two opened, so 20 is very
moderate :-p

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

Carlos E. R. wrote:

>Well, you can put 64 GB now so that in 10 years time the machine is not
>short for memory.

Up until recently, one of my two home PC's had only 8G. It was plenty
when I built it, about nine years ago, and it was still plenty
recently.

The PC that recently replaced it has 32G, and I think that that will
still be plenty nine years from now.

--
"Win 10 will run on 256MB of memory." - "DFS"

chrisv wrote:
> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> Well, you can put 64 GB now so that in 10 years time the machine is not
>> short for memory.
>
> Up until recently, one of my two home PC's had only 8G. It was plenty
> when I built it, about nine years ago, and it was still plenty
> recently.
>
> The PC that recently replaced it has 32G, and I think that that will
> still be plenty nine years from now.
>
all you do is post in usenet you could use none at all for that

On 2023-11-15 22:28, chrisv wrote:
> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> Well, you can put 64 GB now so that in 10 years time the machine is not
>> short for memory.
>
> Up until recently, one of my two home PC's had only 8G. It was plenty
> when I built it, about nine years ago, and it was still plenty
> recently.

I also built a PC around 2010 with 8GB. On 2020 it was not enough, and
the board was maxed, so I had to replace the machine.

The new one has 64.

>
> The PC that recently replaced it has 32G, and I think that that will
> still be plenty nine years from now.
>

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 11/15/2023 11:11 AM, Joel wrote:
> Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> 16 GB [RAM] is becoming the realistic minimum.
>>>>
>>>> That depends entirely on how the computer is used. For many people,
>>>> GB,
>>
>>>> 8GB
>>
>>>> or even 4GB, is enough for adequate performance.
>>>
>>> It'll boot the system, but I like to have everything running at once.
>>
>> Depends on what everything is. Moreover, what's realistic for you (or
>> me, for that matter) isn't realistic for everyone.
>
>
> 8 GB is usable. But if you look at competitively priced computers, 16
> is pretty standard. I'm confident, though, that 32 will be all I'll
> ever need in this box. It can hold much more, but to what end I doubt
> I'll know.
>

For a given generation of RAM, the stick sizes span only a certain range
of values. And that's how machines are getting pretty decent RAM quantities,
since they don't make small enough stick capacities for the manufacturers
to cheap out.

My laptop for example, has a 2GB and a 1GB stick. What were they thinking ?
And since they've stopped manufacturing DDR3, you can't find decent
SODIMMs for the laptop now (2x4GB size is about the best you could do
for the poor thing).

Today, there is DDR4 and DDR5, and I really don't know how much longer DDR4
is going to be in production.

Paul