Re: OS9, 1GB RAM, no virtual memory: implications?

In article <280620030327188141%>,
James Shannon <> wrote:

> I had read on the Apple site that if more than 1GB RAM was installed,
> virtual memory was disabled in OS9. Apparently, the more accurate
> statement is: "If greater than /or equal to/ 1GB RAM is installed,
> virtual memory is disabled."
>
> Whatever, I am curious what the implications are of virtual memory not
> being available with that much memory installed. Is it that there's now
> so much RAM that the system doesn't need VM, or is there a meaningful
> performace deficit involved with the lack of VM with „1GB of RAM? I
> know that some apps require VM to be turned on, but if there's so much
> RAM available, maybe they don't need the extra VM disk space, and the
> lack of VM is no big deal?

I have a PowerBook G3 with 1GB of RAM, an iMac DV with 1GB of RAM and a
MDD G4 with 2GB of RAM. Previously I had a G4 AGP with 1.5GB of RAM. I
have never had any issues with applications refusing to run because VM
is disabled.