"There is a DRAM supply glut which has been worsened by the failure of Windows Vista to spark memory increases in PCs"

Is this not because everyone is 'downgrading' their Vista installations to XP? I have performed enough of these to keep me very drunk most of the time since Vista came out. You think theres any chance I could sue MS for turning me into an alcoholic?

"Elpida, Japan's only DRAM vendor, made a $144m operating loss in its first fiscal '09 quarter which finished at the end of June. It thinks it will post another thumping $144m operating loss for its second fiscal 09 quarter as well"

09'! - Great Scott! My computer has gone back to the future!

Do people ever proof read what the write on the internet?

I THINKS not. ha ha ha

Paris cause I think even she could do a better job a writing about this story.

I suspect this is partly due to the slowness in migrating to 64-bit OS' - after all, there's no need to put more than 3GB in most machines sold today which isn't far off what we were using a couple of years ago.

Any anyway, would it make any difference if you did have more RAM addressable? Does Vista 64 go any faster with 8GB than 3GB? I expect not unless you've got massive data sets in your applications.

*sigh* I bought 4GB of RAM when the prices came down... and then they came down even more! I suppose I should get some whilst it's still cheap. Anyone else compulsively buy far more RAM than they need? I just like looking at the big numbers on my screen, but I'm still trying to find ways to max it out so I can justify some more.... :(

A stop sign, because I should.

From 128MB to 256MB.

One of the things I was half expecting to see make big changes, maybe not for everyone, was 64-bit computing.

It seems to have shared in the Vistap floppitude.

And will 64-bit computing make the slightest difference to office computing?

"09'! - Great Scott! My computer has gone back to the future! Do people ever proof read what the write on the internet?"

Apparently you don't! That's Fiscal '09 which has sod all to do with calendar '09. Blame the bean counters...

It's still a pain getting all the Apps you need in 64bit even in Linux. The only argument in the windows world for 64bit OS (with lots of RAM) and Apps is to get more users on a Terminal Server box, but the problem is still is getting the support (and support tools) for the OS, Application from vendors to make it work any where as reliably as the 32bit stuff. Even with 64bits your still likely to max out the CPUu before you run out of memory. Though with visualisation that may not be the case.

I have no fear that if Vista sales ever pick up, RAM sales will go thru the roof.

Thank god for inefficient operating systems to improve computer sales!

When people move their apps from 32 bit to 64 bit there are upsides and downsides. The first can outweigh the second, but one often overlooked is the added memory required to run the self same application. With a 32 bit memory model, address pointers are 4 bytes long. With 64 bit, you burn up 8 bytes for every memory reference. Since much of the data your app addresses in memory is in small chunks, there are generally lots and lots of pointers being used. Think arrays, linked lists, etc etc. So add 30-60% to the memory footprint. Same is true of the OS itself.

Sell more RAM? Hell yes! But where's the 64 bit apps?

It does seem like 32bit was the magic number.

You actually have to think again for 64bit applications, and code accordingly it is, a bit like coding for 8bit.

Systems can always use more main memory, the problem actually is in pairing, if they made that simpler to achieve, that would increase sales. Though I suppose if the prices drop enough, then just a swap out works.