<< Well I can tell you I'm a network engineer responsible for an exceedingly large network and Kingston is speced for all our servers and is exceptionally stable and reliable as opposed to "generic" ram which noone in their right mind would putr in a server. Now if you're a clone jockey only experienced with Kingston value ram then you're forgiven, if not then I'm afraid your opinion is WAY off the map here. >>
Well, i build the machines, i design the network and i setup the network... so what does that make me...
AND i analyze HW every day, not ONE memory module goes through without being checked and tested, and i can tell you that your opionion about "generic ram" is WAY off. Kingston RAM is sold by brand name and by generic sources, it IS the same, the same ram and the same QC.
You work with networks, i work with hardware, let me do my thing and i will let you do yours...
As a network engineer you are not qualified to determine the quality of a ram module, as an EE i am. And i tell you, Kingston ram is NOT as good as Crucial or Mushkin.
I bet that if i ask you if it would be a good idea to use anything else than Intel CPU's in your network, you would say no, no wouldn't you??
And if i were to ask you if the generic ram that you have used gave you any problems, you couldn't answer that question, now could you, you never used it, did you?? Well until you have something worthwhile to add to this thread like "i have now tested generic ram, and found that the kingston ram was more stable" maybe you should just not argue.
Patrick Palm
Am speaking for PC Resources