Same thing as with Vista. From Microsoft (x64 versions): Home Basic 8 Gt Home Premium 16 Gt Ultimate 128+ Gt Business 128+ Gt Enterprise 128+ Gt
Windows 7 32bit supports 4 gb now... what rubish x32 architecture doesnt support above 3.25 gb or 3.3 in some cases. prove install 7 RC1 32bit on ur 4 gb and it will say 3.25 is usable
it supports up to 4GB shown. The reason it says that 3.2 ect is cause vram,Ethernet,built in sound all take up ram aswell.
This isn't correct anyway. A few various x86 windows releases doesn't support above 4gb. Their are plenty of other Windows releases that support way more then 4gb that are x86. And pretty much every x86 linux distro supports more then 4gb.
will there be a reasonable upgrade from vista i didnt see any promotional stuff yet to soon maybe ? I have both 32 and 64bit ultimate versions, but i would use step up program 100x faster than use this crap , i would definitely go with ultimate if i have that now or maybe Professional if its a bit cheaper.
For those of you who think that this limitation is crap what do you think about the 4GB limitation, not even that actually, that nearly every XP user has? 1GB was about the norm back then, actually IIRC 512MB was the norm and 1GB was recommended, ie what us Guru's likely used. 4GB is becoming the norm for Vista now, for us anyway. What is to say that in 3-4 years that we won't be using 16? That is really beside the point though. Why would you purposely cripple your own product? This is just as bad as Creative using drivers to limit what their own cards can do. That's the way I see this anyway.
Well the XP limit is something forced by 32bit architecture. This new limit is based on cripples that Microsoft have coded, which is below the belt. Sure, it might not be a problem, now, or even down the track. It's just a really low way of coding things.
