Re: LZ: More RAM
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
list-zshell@lists.ticalc.org wrote:
>
> -> > IN>He sure did. The gist of it was "Nobody will ever need more
> -> than 640K of > IN>memory." And that's why we still have the 640K
> -> barrier to this day. >
> -> > IN>--timmyt
> -> >
> -> >
> -> > I'm confused. 640k of what? It can't be RAM or hardrive. So what is
> -> it?
> -> Conventional RAM memory. A pain in the neck for us who use
> -> DOS/Windows...
>
> Well, not 95 or NT.
Well, if youre using NT or 95, you have other problems (mainly that your
state institution closed down due to lack of funding.) I use dos/win 3.1
(I only use win 3.1 to send stuff to and fro my ti-85. go figgure) The
640k isnt much of a pain to me. I mostly use linux though.
References: