4 ms·

SoftRAM95: "False and Misleading" (1996)

9 points by Lammy 2y ago

jprd 2y ago
WOW. I remember desperately trying to download this through a "Mass Mail" on AOL around this time. So much disappointment - you can't "magic" a 486/SX with 4MB of RAM.
Lammy 2y ago
Relevant Old New Thing: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20211111-00/?p=105897 https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20211111-00/?p=10... Compare to Connectix's RAM Doubler for Mac which was not only legit but is so good that it's often worth installing even with compression disabled: https://macintoshgarden.org/search/node/connectix%20ram%20doubler https://macintoshgarden.org/search/node/connectix%20ram%20do... https://tidbits.com/1996/10/28/ram-doubler-2/ https://tidbits.com/1996/10/28/ram-doubler-2/
- mmaniac 2y ago
  Old New Thing rarely disappoints, that article is worthily entertaining of a HN post by itself.
mc4ndr3 2y ago
See so mamy products like this. If the product genuinely worked, it would make a natural candidate to upstream into the operating system. Better to wait for the feature to arrive there. Than to risk scams and bugs meanwhile.
hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
Ah yes, there era of RAM compression products playing on the trend of storage compression products like Stacker coupled with the increase in RAM requirements of Chicago. RAM compression in the slow CPU era was definitely selling magical thinking to users who weren't software developers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stac_Electronics#1983%E2%80%931994 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stac_Electronics#1983%E2%80%93...
- P_I_Staker 2y ago
  I think they also had far more basic peripheral and logic controllers. In the current era, the idea of a dedicated CPU or application specific hardware is normal an commonplace. They really just throw in cores willy nilly. I think back in the day, this would be crazy talk. You already spent god knows how much on the super special processor. The idea of doing it again so you could use RAM is madness.
  - hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
    Stac disk compression started out as a CPU-consuming TSR while the STAC Coprocessor Card dedicated accelerator appeared later. That they were able to eek out minimal performance drop for on-the-fly storage de/compression was a testament to creative engineering. SoftRAM95 was merely a cheap rip-off of something vaguely similar but intent on committing fraud rather than offering anything of value. macOS and Windows both include native memory compression that now makes sense CPU-wise for highly-compressible, colder regions that are warm enough to not swap out except under pressure.

9 points by Lammy 2y ago

jprd 2y ago

WOW. I remember desperately trying to download this through a "Mass Mail" on AOL around this time. So much disappointment - you can't "magic" a 486/SX with 4MB of RAM.

Lammy 2y ago

Relevant Old New Thing: https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20211111-00/?p=105897 https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20211111-00/?p=10... Compare to Connectix's RAM Doubler for Mac which was not only legit but is so good that it's often worth installing even with compression disabled: https://macintoshgarden.org/search/node/connectix%20ram%20doubler https://macintoshgarden.org/search/node/connectix%20ram%20do... https://tidbits.com/1996/10/28/ram-doubler-2/ https://tidbits.com/1996/10/28/ram-doubler-2/

mmaniac 2y ago
Old New Thing rarely disappoints, that article is worthily entertaining of a HN post by itself.

mc4ndr3 2y ago

See so mamy products like this. If the product genuinely worked, it would make a natural candidate to upstream into the operating system. Better to wait for the feature to arrive there. Than to risk scams and bugs meanwhile.

hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago

Ah yes, there era of RAM compression products playing on the trend of storage compression products like Stacker coupled with the increase in RAM requirements of Chicago. RAM compression in the slow CPU era was definitely selling magical thinking to users who weren't software developers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stac_Electronics#1983%E2%80%931994 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stac_Electronics#1983%E2%80%93...

P_I_Staker 2y ago
I think they also had far more basic peripheral and logic controllers. In the current era, the idea of a dedicated CPU or application specific hardware is normal an commonplace. They really just throw in cores willy nilly. I think back in the day, this would be crazy talk. You already spent god knows how much on the super special processor. The idea of doing it again so you could use RAM is madness.
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
  Stac disk compression started out as a CPU-consuming TSR while the STAC Coprocessor Card dedicated accelerator appeared later. That they were able to eek out minimal performance drop for on-the-fly storage de/compression was a testament to creative engineering. SoftRAM95 was merely a cheap rip-off of something vaguely similar but intent on committing fraud rather than offering anything of value. macOS and Windows both include native memory compression that now makes sense CPU-wise for highly-compressible, colder regions that are warm enough to not swap out except under pressure.