Win 7 Pro vs XP Pro

[Uncle Peter]

Which would cause it to fail memtest, and cause crashes.

You need to show a datasheet from a memory manufacturer and explain why a timing could end up being out of spec by running it slower.

[Ian Jackson]

In message , Uncle Peter writes

Well, I've had a very trying day.

But no. C is a SATA HD, and D-E-F is an IDE HD. G is a CD RW / DVD ROM, and H is a DVD RW. The BIOS shows them all, but I'm having fun trying to set the boot order.

[Uncle Peter]

The BIOS doesn't use letters. They may get rearranged in the boot order if one of them is intermittently being detected. I guess f***ed memory might cause that, but in my experience it's usually the drive's fault. There may be an option in the BIOS to give it longer to spin up if it's an old thing.

[Uncle Peter]

[Vir Campestris]

I'll add that while you _could_ rely on it being slow to make your system work you can't _rely_ on it and no good designer would.

There's a gap between "spec says 0-10nS" and "every device we've tested is 8nS" which you shouldn't cross.

Andy

[Vir Campestris]

Get a new supplier.

If someone shipped me RAM that wasn't protected I'd send it straight back.

Andy.

[Uncle Peter]

Lots of things don't come as protected as they used to be. Either circuits are less sensitive nowadays, or the number of returns from static does not outweigh the cost of antistatic packaging. Are you one of those folk that still uses a wrist strap?

[Ian Jackson]

It seems that I have actually managed to hit on the correct boot order - although I'm still confused about the BIOS settings. The problem is that I have two SATAs and two IDEs. They are : C - Western Union SATA DEF - Hitachi IDE G - Sony CD RW / DVD ROM IDE H - Toshiba CD/DVD RW SATA I want the boot sequence to be G, then H, then if there is nothing bootable in either, C. I had it doing this before I had the memory problem, but that seemed to be responsible for screwing it up. Fortunately, I think I now have it back to square one.

Thanks. I'll have a look at that tomorrow.

[Uncle Peter]

Each BIOS is different as to how you select the boot order, but it should stay put until one of the drives is not there. If your C is failing, then when it doesn't spin up one day, perhaps the BIOS defaults to another hard drive, then sticks on that new setting even though C works on the next boot?

[polygonum]

Recent (i.e. in last year) RAM from Crucial has not been in obviously anti-static packaging. Just directly within a clear plastic container. Of course, that might be "special" in some way - but it hasn't been obvious to me that it is.

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , polygonum escribió:

It should have the 'anti-static' symbol on it - a hand within a triangle, crossed out.

[dennis]

I don't need to do any such thing. If you want to look into it then you can. Pay attention to the difference between registered memory and unregistered memory.

[Huge]

Or he's a lying troll.

[polygonum]

I cannot be sure that it doesn't, but the packaging looks very like this:

... and I haven't noticed such a symbol.

(That is simply the first reasonable photo of the sort of packaging I meant. It is not mine!)

[John Rumm]

and if you read what is embossed onto the opening edge of their packaging is says "Anti-Static Packaging * ESD Safe"

[Bob Eager]

It just so happens that I bought some Crucial memory recently, and still have the packageing. I just went and look at it. It's the clera plastic as shown in the photo, and the inner tray has embossed:

"ANTI STATIC PACKAGING ESD SAFE"

No symbol, though (apart from the PET 1 one).

[Uncle Peter]

If you want me to get your point, you can explain it better, otherwise I will continue to believe what I've read on websites about faster memory working just fine.

Ah, so you mean only registered memory must be the right speed? Why didn't you say so? Do elaborate....

[Uncle Peter]

Why would anyone make up something like that? And it's not large numbers.

[Uncle Peter]

Apparently that stuff is antistatic.

Mind you, I bought some pink bubblewrap which claimed to be antistatic to package a computer (the whole computer). Just like the white bubblewrap, when I remove it, or when I wrap it round it, I build up static and the first time I touch the case I feel a sizeable static shock. If I was to have touched a socket on the back instead of the case, I would imagine something could fry (although I suppose it's most likely that the charge would hit the grounded part of the socket first). If you buy an Apple tower computer (this was a while ago, they may have stopped doing this), they are shipped with protective plastic film over the sides to stop scratches during transit. Pull that off, then touch the computer and you get a static shock.

[polygonum]

Thanks - obviously had not looked closely enough!