Any other ideas?  Sure -- User Training!   ;-)

What you are reporting is DOS memory construction.  Your description sounds
like everything is working as designed.  Find an old DOS manual (vsns 5.0 -
6.2) and read about conventional, extended and expanded memory.  Memory
management was one of the biggest features of Windows 95.

Adding additional physical memory won't change what happens in the first
megabyte of memory allocation.  When DOS was popular, computer users would
spend a great deal of time and money on memory management utilities to play
with these numbers so that they could run more and/or bigger programs.  640K
of conventional memory is a DOS limitation and won't increase regardless of
what you do with the physical memory.

Hope this helps!
Ron Jobe

----- Original Message -----
From: "David May" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: [PCBUILD] Problem w/ new SDRAM PC133


> DID NOT ADD PC133, ADDED PC100(SAME AS WHAT CAME OUT). BOTH THE OLD AND
NEW
> ARE SINGLE -SIDED, TRIED RUNNING JUST THE NEW MODULE AND IT RAN FINE BUT
WAS
> RECOGNIZED AS ONLY EXTENDED MEMORY. WHETHER I HAVE 64, 128, OR A COMBO THE
> PUTER SAYS I HAVE 640K CONVENTIONAL AND XMS AS 195,520K (WHEN BOTH ARE
> INSTALLED). ALSO RAN IN THE "O" AND "1" SLOTS AS SUGGESTED. ANY OTHER
IDEAS?

              The NOSPIN Group is now offering Free PC Tech
                     support at our newest website:
                          http://freepctech.com