Not enough memory use = 60%

[SLaY3R]

Kudos everyone,

I am running in a little problem when I go upon copying BT3 to my PC, In the middle of Copying Ram it says "Not Enough memory use = 60%, but I deleted all the partitions on the HD with a Microsoft Xp Boot Cd and still no positive results. Can you help me?

Thank you in Advance

[xorred]

RAM =! HDD.
You will get better answers if you give better questions.

[floyd]

=!

I'm not sure if he knows what that means...

[Thorn]

I'm not sure if he knows what that means...

Good point. If he doesn't know the difference between HD space and RAM, he probably doesn't know any programming symbols.

[SLaY3R]

Opss Lol Omg I really didn't realize what I was Talking about
Well that simply means that my comp sucks ballz and doesn't have enough Ram Oh well

[Eatme]

Good point. If he doesn't know the difference between HD space and RAM, he probably doesn't know any programming symbols.

either that or he doesn't know anything about how computers run.

[Thorn]

either that or he doesn't know anything about how computers run.

With posts like this, it's hard to know whether you're serious, if you're attempting to start something due to the other thread, or you're attempting a joke.

To answer this if you are serious, not knowing anything about how computers run isn't a case of "either", per se. The concept is inclusive and central to the original premise.

[Eatme]

nope. Im not trying to start anything here.

I was just agreeing that he doesn't know the difference between the two and i was serious about what i said.

btw, why are you so technical, im not trying to challenge you how smart you are, i think it was useless explaining what you just explained.

[Lincoln]

You just don't get it .

I smell thread 2 coming up.

[Thorn]

nope. Im not trying to start anything here.

I was just agreeing that he doesn't know the difference between the two and i was serious about what i said.

OK, no harm done then.

btw, why are you so technical, im not trying to challenge you how smart you are,

Since it was worded as an alternative ("either that") to what I'd previously said, yet essentially repeated it, it comes across as either a challenge, joke, or some sort of combination of the two. Rather than treat it in a manner that might start a fight, I wanted to state it as technically accurate as possible, and at the same time keep it semantically neutral.

By my very nature, I'm a very technical guy, and generally speak and write as technically accurate as possible.

i think it was useless explaining what you just explained.

Perhaps it was redundant, but I wanted to be clear. Again, no harm done.