Is: 1.99 GB free of 11.4 GB a problem sign?

Hi,

I have a Compaq Presario C700 Notebook PC -Vista Home Premium - SP 2, 32-bit
OS. Processor: Intel (R) Pentium (R) Dual CPU T2390 @ 1.86 GHz 1.87 GHz
The memory (RAM) is 2.00 GB but suddenly is showing to be 1.99 GB

Is this normal because I'm running many windows (some with DVD) or is it a
sign of a problem? If it is than what can I do to fix this?

Anyone?

Thanks!

>The memory (RAM) is 2.00 GB but suddenly is showing to be 1.99 GB

Huh ?? It is One and the same


--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

"mart" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi,
>
> I have a Compaq Presario C700 Notebook PC -Vista Home Premium - SP 2, 32-bit OS.
> Processor: Intel (R) Pentium (R) Dual CPU T2390 @ 1.86 GHz 1.87 GHz
> The memory (RAM) is 2.00 GB but suddenly is showing to be 1.99 GB
>
> Is this normal because I'm running many windows (some with DVD) or is it a sign of
> a problem? If it is than what can I do to fix this?
>
> Anyone?
>
> Thanks!

Peter Foldes wrote:
>> The memory (RAM) is 2.00 GB but suddenly is showing to be 1.99 GB
>
> Huh ?? It is One and the same
>
>
Perhaps not quite the same, but not to worry for 0.01 GB, which is 10
kilobytes. That's close enough for all practical purposes.

Now back to worrying about health care...

Bill

je je.. thanks Bill!

"Bill Sharpe" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Peter Foldes wrote:
>>> The memory (RAM) is 2.00 GB but suddenly is showing to be 1.99 GB
>>
>> Huh ?? It is One and the same
>>
>>
> Perhaps not quite the same, but not to worry for 0.01 GB, which is 10
> kilobytes. That's close enough for all practical purposes.
>
> Now back to worrying about health care...
>
> Bill

je je.. thanks Bill!

On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:05:28 -0800, Bill Sharpe wrote:

> Peter Foldes wrote:
>>> The memory (RAM) is 2.00 GB but suddenly is showing to be 1.99 GB
>>
>> Huh ?? It is One and the same
>>
>>
> Perhaps not quite the same, but not to worry for 0.01 GB, which is 10
> kilobytes. That's close enough for all practical purposes.

Or maybe 10 megabytes. Still close enough, as you said :-)

> Now back to worrying about health care...
>
> Bill

--
Gene E. Bloch letters0x40blochg0x2Ecom

Gene E. Bloch wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:05:28 -0800, Bill Sharpe wrote:
>
>> Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>> The memory (RAM) is 2.00 GB but suddenly is showing to be 1.99 GB
>>> Huh ?? It is One and the same
>>>
>>>
>> Perhaps not quite the same, but not to worry for 0.01 GB, which is 10
>> kilobytes. That's close enough for all practical purposes.
>
> Or maybe 10 megabytes. Still close enough, as you said :-)
>
>> Now back to worrying about health care...
>>
>> Bill
>
Back in the old days when I used a slide rule I was able to estimate
where the decimal point or thousands separator should be in the answer.
Obviously I have lost the knack of properly doing that digitally with
tera, giga, mega, and kilo...

Bill

On 12/08/09, Bill Sharpe posted:
> Gene E. Bloch wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:05:28 -0800, Bill Sharpe wrote:
>>
>>> Peter Foldes wrote:
>>>>> The memory (RAM) is 2.00 GB but suddenly is showing to be 1.99 GB
>>>> Huh ?? It is One and the same
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Perhaps not quite the same, but not to worry for 0.01 GB, which is 10
>>> kilobytes. That's close enough for all practical purposes.
>>
>> Or maybe 10 megabytes. Still close enough, as you said :-)
>>
>>> Now back to worrying about health care...
>>>
>>> Bill
>>
> Back in the old days when I used a slide rule I was able to estimate where
> the decimal point or thousands separator should be in the answer. Obviously I
> have lost the knack of properly doing that digitally with tera, giga, mega,
> and kilo...

> Bill

When I first learned slide rule, there was a chapter or a page or
something that told you how to keep track of the decimal point. It had
rules like "If the slide sticks out to the left, move the decimal point
to the right (or was it left)". I never could keep it straight, even
back then. Too confusing.

So here's what I did: I did a rough calculation with pencil and paper
first. I'd get something like 1320.0 that way, whereas the slide rule
gave me a result like 156 (I told you it was rough!), so I knew the
answer was 1560. OTOH, if the slide rule gave me a number like 622, I
was pretty sure I'd screwed up, so the method served two purposes.

BTW, my error was almost always in the slide rule calculation :-)

--
Gene Bloch 650.366.4267 lettersatblochg.com