DON'T UPDATE TO LION!

Bad RAM is not going to manifest in the way that you explained previously.

You said that different OS versions store executable code in different locations in RAM, but that is simply not the way it works. It doesn't matter whether it's the OS or an application, it will grab a memory block from wherever it is available when it needs one. There is no space in RAM that is dedicated exclusively for the OS. Memory blocks are allocated as needed and released when they're done. In any case, it's all machine code at that level, so it doesn't matter what's using any given memory block at any given point in time.

If there is a memory related problem with Lion, it's more likely to be the result of memory leaks due to bugs in Lion's code.

capaho wrote:

There is no space in RAM that is dedicated exclusively for the OS. Memory blocks are allocated as needed and released when they're done.

That is only partially true. Wired memory contains information that must always stay in RAM. Since the OS is always running, most of it's wired memory can never be released. And since the OS loads & initializes before anything else can run, & different versions of the OS have kernels & other OS components of different size & different wired memory requirements, it is entirely possible that one OS version will never use a bad memory cell for anything critical & another always will.

In any case, it's all machine code at that level, so it doesn't matter what's using any given memory block at any given point in time.

That is one of the most absurd statements I have ever read in these forums. In the first place, RAM doesn't hold store machine code -- where do you think data or interpreted instructions like HTML or Javascript are stored?!?

But regardless of that, it should be completely obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense that it matters very much what is using a block of memory with one or more bad cells. How could it possibly not?

If there is a memory related problem with Lion, it's more likely to be the result of memory leaks due to bugs in Lion's code.

Listen to what you say. The best you can do is claim that it is "more likely" that a problem is the result of an OS bug than something else. But to be certain, you must eliminate those other possible causes; otherwise it is just a guess.

And to be blunt about it, in light of the misconceptions & half-truths you have based your assertions on, you can't even credibly claim it is an educated guess.

Wired memory? As opposed to what? Wireless memory? It's hard to figure why you are so determined to continue an argument over technical issues that you clearly don't understand.

capaho wrote:

Wired memory? As opposed to what? Wireless memory?

http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1342

You're never going to get through to him, have lunch, it'll be more worth while than this

If I were to pick the one who doesn't understand, I would have to say it is you.

Allan

i am inclned to agree .should have stayed with the devil i know :microsoft

UPDATE TO LION !!!

Take precaustions!!!!!, i want ot use my computer to go onto the internet, do my shopping, listen to music, my kids do their homework, i am not an IT expert far from it, so when an update coms up i trust the supplier (apple in this case) to be offering me a product that works, like i would if my car needs repairing. if my car needed repairing I would not 'prepair and take precautions' on my car before I took it to the expert, that why I take my car to a garage. The next time you need to take something to get it repaired, think about hat.

This product is rubbish, Apple are getting to big for their boots and too many mistakes like this will start to turn people off, be ware Apple, we use computers as a tool, you write and make the tools that we use, but other folk also make these tools.

tonefox wrote:

http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1342

Some of you have no sense of humor.

From the document you referenced:

Wired memory

Information in this memory can't be moved to the hard disk, so it must stay in RAM. The amount of Wired memory depends on the applications you are using.

They are referring to memory that can't be swapped in and out of cache, but that doesn't mean that it always occupies the same memory block. Understand?

Allan Eckert wrote:

If I were to pick the one who doesn't understand, I would have to say it is you.

Allan

Of course you would. Nonetheless, I do understand how RAM works, which doesn't appear to be the case for everyone here, and it also has nothing to do with the Lion problems people are reporting. Unless, as I've said before, there are memory leaks in Lion due to bugs in its code.

capaho wrote:

Wired memory? As opposed to what? Wireless memory?

As opposed to active, inactive, or free memory. The name has its origins in early virtual memory management systems that used special "wired down" memory that was reserved for data & instructions that could not be paged out.

It has nothing to do with wired vs. wireless.

R C-R wrote:

It has nothing to do with wired vs. wireless.

Of course, that was just a joke, but I guess some people are taking this discussion a bit too seriously.

In any case, it's not an issue that's relevant to the Lion problems people are reporting here.

capaho wrote:

Nonetheless, I do understand how RAM works...

If that were true then you would not confuse caches & VM or make erroneous statements like "there is no space in RAM that is dedicated exclusively for the OS."

More to the point, you would understand quite well that different versions of the OS do in fact reserve different blocks of RAM for their exclusive use, why it is that a defective memory cell can affect one OS version but not another, & how this can be mistaken for a problem in the OS itself.

capaho wrote:

Of course, that was just a joke, but I guess some people are taking this discussion a bit too seriously.

Was it also a joke when you said "It's hard to figure why you are so determined to continue an argument over technical issues that you clearly don't understand?"

The only humor here is you trying to pass off your lack of understanding as a joke.