I'm reminded from time to time about the power of the web. I know that we've been all warned about the quality of the information on the web and that it is no substitute for a good encyclopaedia (for instance). Fair enough - I have seen many an instance where this absolutely true.
However, I was reminded that this is not a "universal" and that there are some domains where indeed the information on the Web is more correct that that found in traditional print media. I'll explain...
I purchased my PC a little over 3 years ago in Nehru Place in New Delhi. The "box" has been extremely reliable and apart from a failed graphics card (looks like the fan got gummed up with dirt and dust) and the inevitable need to change CD drives on an annual basis (again due to dust issues), there have been zero problems. Indeed the thing is too reliable... I would have anticipated that any box built in the cramped, humid cubicles of Nehru Place would have been ready for replacement after 3 years. But armed with 2 GB RAM and 320 GB disk space, I've been able to use it as a principle workstation, host for Windows XP VM, internet browsing station for the family, etc.
The only problem, is that now with multiple users (and multiple logins) and the VM-thing going on, I do seem to be "hitting the wall" with respect to RAM and the machine is starting to crawl at times. I looked in the manufacturer's documentation (printed and on-line) and verified that the maximum memory for the motherboard is 2GB. So much for getting more life out of the MB... So I started browsing the specs for new motherboards and trying to figure out how I would plan the migration to a new MB (hence new installation). That is until I decided on a hunch to search the internet discussion groups for any information on "expanding RAM" for my MB.
Low and behold what I found was a pretty copious amount of "postings" suggesting that despite both the printed and on-line documentation from the manufacturer of the motherboard, the board can indeed support not the 2 GB "officially" stated, but a full 4 GB. I investigated further and could not help but notice the "concerns" of populating a 32 bit operating system (I use Ubuntu 10.10) with 4 GB; essentially much "common belief" that one will only get some 3 GB of active RAM. But I thought I would give it a chance - as RAM is presently "cheap" (I paid $50 for the 4GB).
You can imagine my delight when after taking the box apart, removing the existing 2GB DIMMs and replacing them with the 4 GB DIMMs, putting the thing back together and plugging it in, I got the boot-up screen where the POST messages flashing past indicated that the hardware recognised all 4 GB of RAM! I verified this further by restarting and going into the BIOS. Next, booted into Ubuntu there too verified that there was 4 GB of RAM, though usable was only a little over 2 GB.
I had been lead to believe the 32 bit operating systems cannot use effectively more than 2 GB and that if you increase the amount of RAM, it will only be a waste unless you switch to a 64 bit operating system. Well, that is just bunk... Ubuntu has a "pae" version that when installed and restarted alows the 32 bit operating system to make use of the additional memory. Upgrading the OS was a breeze as there was plenty of "advice" from discussion groups as to how to do this with either 1-2 command lines or with a handful of clicks through the GUI interface. In the end, the OS upgrade took no more than 5 minutes and afterward I was rewarded with the system indicating that there was 3.9GB of memory available - hot dog!
So the point of this is that, yes, there may be lots of "bogus" information out there. But the scales seem to be tipping from former paradigm of the "veracity of print" - "low quality of the web" to a different game where, as Sy Sims used to say "an educated consumer is our best customer". Discussion forums and community of trust are creating spaces and opportunities where information can be discovered, and it's relative "truth" tested. If my experience is relevant, this will not be the last word on a new model for information "cultivation" in the democratic "web".
