Should I be disappointed?

You can run Vista in 1 GB. And obviously, it will have more than 0 GB then in use.

My advice: temporarily remove that new stick and see the difference and progress for yourself. Then please tell us what you found and how glad or disappointed you are.

Another interesting question: is the system faster now or could it be that there were other bottlenecks in your PC than not having enough RAM.

Kees

Depends on who or what you're disappointed with. The whole 32-bit memory limitation thing has been no real secret for over a decade. Ever since Intel rolled out it's first 32-bit CPU, the 386, anyone wanting to do the math could figure out that the limit for an unsigned 32-bit integer variable is right around 4GB. Then you subtract the few bits that are reserved for useful things like keeping Program A from clobbering data being used by Program B, which would trigger the General Protection Fault (GPF) error people familiar with Windows 3.1 probably remember all too unfondly, and you wind up with somewhere around 3.25-3.5GB of user addressable space. Again, this has been known since Intel first published the specs on the 386 probably over 20 years ago. So being disappointed in yourself for not knowing, or the glorious tech press, that is supposed to be made up of a bunch of experts, not having a clue about this until maybe a year ago... All perfectly reasonable.

IMO though, the 32-bit Vista is just slow period. It came on my brand new laptop, and there was a noticeable difference between it and my desktop running Vista x64. So I dumped it for Vista x64 for that reason, and that my laptop had 4GB of RAM, and I intended on being able to use it all.

If your system came with Vista, you could probably request a copy of the 64-bit version. IMO, it's worth it. Only catch is there's no upgrade path. You have to format and install fresh.

The memory mapped I/O (memory that gets stolen for use with devices) comes out of the addressable memory, not the actual memory.

So, if you have 3 GiB of RAM and a 1 GiB graphics card, then you still have 3 GiB of usable memory, and the last gibibyte of address space is allocated to the card. If you install another gibibyte of RAM, it cannot be addressed.

The solution is to install a 64-bit operating system; it needs to be done from scratch. I'm not familiar with Windows, but on Linux the transition is virtually "fait accompli" with few/no compatibility problems. On Linux there's also the ability to use PAE, which is "36-bit addressing" with 32-bit software, but I understand that desktop Windows does not support this despite the claims of many hoaxers

If your laptop uses a Core 2 it can already support 64-bit. Original Core Solo or Core Duo processors are sadly only 32-bit. If your laptop uses an AMD Turion it is 64-bit and ready to go!

Don't expect much by adding a half GB but if you must, you must.

Wow, it was 3.5 till I read this:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605

Enjoy your .12 GBs of RAM

First of all...I am NOT a big believer in Vista 64 Byte...yes numerous programs, or drivers may not work. Vista is SLOw...so instead go to CNET forums area and look at all the solutions for speeding up Vista. Turning off as much services, Aero etc as much as you can.

Second Windows 7 is faster so reserve your copy of W7-home for $49.99 at MS website

And most importantly ..shame on you...CNET had dozens of these posts last year when user brought additional memory to help Vista and did not know 32 bit architecture can not use beyond 3 Gbytes.