Upgraded memory not reporting correctly

I upgraded my Mac Mini to 1GB of RAM, but the system still says I have 512MB of RAM. I got the memory from the Apple Store, so I know it's the right memory size. I've double-checked that the memory is inserted properly. Any Ideas?

Yes, it was probably just a seating problem. The memory slots are tight and there's not much maneuvering room and every once in a while one of the SIMMs doesn't seat properly. For me it tends to be the bottom slot. The tech probably just assumed everything was okay because the mini booted up okay - or maybe he was really busy and thought he'd checked under About this Mac.

Similar Messages

Captivate Quiz Not Reporting Correctly in LMS

I am using Captivate 5.0 to publish a project to an EKP LMS. I am able to get the file to show complete in the LMS, but the quiz is not reporting correctly. Instead of a percentage it is reporting the number of points earned. Is there any way to have a percentage reported instead? I would appreciate any suggestions. Grace

Hi Grace,
Can you check the Highlighted part and reset your Radio button to 'Percentage'--
Thanks,
Anjaneai

Mac OS Version not reported correctly in ARD

Using ARD admin 3.7.2 the screen displays Mac OS Version as 10.9.2 but on the computer "About this Mac" clearly shows OSX 10.9.3.
Other computers that are running 10.9.3 show correctly. I have re-scanned but no change. Deleted computer from "All Computers" and re-scanned, no change.
Why are certain computers not reporting their current Mac OS Version correctly?

I discovered that if I did the "Upgrade Client Software", the Mac OS Version shows correctly now. The client software was already 3.7.1 but apparently re-installing it fixed the problem.

HELP! Capital One not reporting correctly

Hello everyone,I filed my case BK 7 on 05/15/2015, had my 341 meeting, and am now patiently awaiting my discharge to arrive in the mail. I've been monitoring my credit report via CreditKarma and have been noticing most of my accounts being updated as, IIB, and closed with zero balances. Capital One, however, is not showing "included in bankruptcy." The balance was updated to $0, but the payment status shows, "Collection/Charge Off." I called Capital One and they told me they sold the account to a collection agency and there was nothing they could do to report the account as IIB. They said that when they had the account, they could have reported it correctly, but since they sold the account, they only report information from when they owned the account. They gave me the new account owner and told me this is who I should contact. I understand what the rep is saying, but I can't believe that this account can not be updated to report as IIB. Will this account continue to report on my CR as a charge off? Has anyone else run into this issue? Please help! I am trying to get my reports as cleaned up as possible before my discharge. Thank you in advance for your repies!

0REDSOX7 wrote:
It is valid because they sold the debt to a collection agency prior to your filing. They do not own it anymore. So they report it as Collections/Charge Off. If/When the new creditor decides to report it to your credit report, it will have to say zero balance, and IIB. And yes, the CA will be able to report it even if it was discharged (so long as reporting is accurate) as it was sold/transferred prior to your filing.With all do respect I disagree wholeheartedly with this. Yes, creditors can and do report accts previously sold/charged off prior to filing, as such. However I do not feel that it has to end this way. My recent experience with getting an original creditor (Credit One) to report as iib/0/closed, is a testament to this. Basically, I had 2 creditors reporting to Equifax that my CH7 discharged accounts were 'sold/transferred/charged off'. Naturally, like the OP, I was concerned and didn't think this was right. So, I filed an initial online dispute with Equifax, against the entries for both creditors. Ultimately Equifax found in favor of the creditors, stating that they were reporting correctly. I was LIVID! After that, I filed a second dispute, this time via certified mail and providing copies of my Schedule F inclusion of both creditors, as well as a copy of my discharge order. Similarly, Equifax again found in favor of the creditors and refused to adjust the entries. Here is where it gets better and where I hope it gives you something to look forward to: I gathered all of my documentation up and called Equifax on the phone. My initial motive for placing the call to Equifax was to get an answer to one simple question: "How could anything that the original creditors report to you, supersede documents from a discharged US Bankruptcy order?' I spoke to a halfbrained CSR at first and asked exactly that question. After haggling a bit, his ultimate answer was that he couldn't disclose any information to me on what response was given from the original creditors. This is a clear violation of law. The CB's must provide to anyone who disputes a credit entry, the exact data included in the response from the creditor. Hearing "I cannot disclose" from this CSR sent me into stratospheric anger. I asked to speak to a supervisor. The call took a better turn. After reviewing my schedule F inclusion of the creditors and the discharge papers, the Equifax supervisor agreed that the creditors were reporting unfairly and inaccurately. The supervisor has the 'Specialty Department' make the two entries for these creditors immediately update to 'iib/0/closed'. All is well with that aspect of my story. My point is, don't lie down and just give up OP. Just because the original creditor doesnt' have to play ball, doesn't mean you can't get it reported the way you need it to. Be persistent. Gather your papers and call them. Don't lay down and accept it.

The new firefox 4 upgrade does not work correctly, how can I downloand 3.6?

I just upgrade to the latest version of firefox browser for my desktop (version 4). It is not working correctly, it is slow and crashes. I want to download the older version I was using (3.6?)

Please [http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all.html Click Here] to Download Firefox 3.6.

Forefront clients not reporting correctly

Hi guys
Here at work, we have 2 Forefront management servers which are being used to provide policies for a large number of different managed customers (different networks, domains, etc).
We're having an issue where some FEP clients are updating correctly and working fine but the Forefront reporting on the management server is saying otherwise. I've noticed that for some clients, the policy showing as installed when looking at the
registry isn't tying up with what the report console shows.
I've tried re-applying the required policies to some of the clients for a test but this has made no difference. I can't see any pending actions on the MOM console, etc.
Any advice greatly appreciated.

Hi,
Did the Forefront Client Security Management Server computer display as an
agent-managed computer on MOM Administrator console and appear in Forefront Client Security reports? If not, maybe it is due to the FCS Management Server computer does not communicate correctly with the collection server. Please make sure that you have installed
the MOM agent on the FCS Management Server computer. In addition, I would appreciate it if you can provide some screenshots of the MOM console and the related information of the report on the FCS management server.
Best regards,
Susie

Crystal Reports in 8.5 not reporting correctly after upgrade

Has anyone experienced issue running Crystal Reports after upgrading to BI 7.0?
Specifically our finacial reports will not show detail level descriptions from BW queries created in 3.5 with hierarchies.
All was functioning fine last time we checked prior to upgrade. We have tried setting the display level in the heirarchies from the queries and even creating from scratch but Cost Element Descriptions do not appear.

Thanks for the hints. I took out the databind() and it still throws the same error.
Also, I tried adding
crReportDocument.SetParameterValue("pi_letters", "LETTERXXX")
just before setting ReportSource and I get the following error:
Failed to open the connection
This confirms to me that the push method is not being used by the application/report since the report is still trying to open a connection with the database and is throwing this error when the logon credentials are not supplied.
Can someone tell me why the push method is not working here? I have a valid dataset, so my thinking is that I shouldn't have to go through the trouble of supplying parameters and logon credentials to the report.

D20 memory not reading correctly. Bios sees only 20 gigs lenovo diagnostic sees 24 gigs

Ok i have a d20 with one set of dimms not reading in the bios. I have tried using all combinations and it always disables one channel of one CPU not reading in the bios but if I use the lenovo diagonstic it sees all the memory and can also run the quick memory test with no errors. I would really like to get all of the slots to work anyone got an answer for this. Thanks for you help in advance.
Mike

I'm assuming you're following the correct DIMM install order based on the service label on the inside cover? The DIMM numbering is non-standard with regards to the location.
If you think you've narrowed it down to a specific DIMM slot (or pair of DIMM slots), I'd try booting the system with memory ONLY installed in that slot (or slots). Obviously it's not the recommended fill order or anything, but it could be a good test to see if you possibly have a damaged slot or something.
Also, have you been messing with the CPUs at all? Though unlikely, I would guess it's possible that a specific CPU pin in the socket could be damaged as well.

LineNumber not reporting correctly

Hi Everyone
I've been working on a side project of mine that helps me learn powershell and incorporate other languages, and I've hit a bit of a roadblock.
My powershell script basically reads the latest entry (the last line) of a logfile everytime the logfile has been updated. When the logfile updates, the script reads the last line of the logfile and searches for 2 specific words; GameStart and GameEnd.
Once it finds 'GameStart' it is supposed to remember the LineNumber and continue to read the latest entries until it finds 'GameEnd' and remember its LineNumber.
The problem I'm having is no matter the line position, GameStart is always report LineNumber 0 and GameEnd is relevant to only the position of GameStart, and not the actual LineNumber. (So if GameEnd is found 77 lines down, it reports LineNumber 77 which is
not the actual LineNumber)
I'm using this section of code to monitor the logfile for updates:
http://dereknewton.com/2011/05/monitoring-file-system-changes-with-powershell/
For testing purposes, I just have the below lines to confirm if the position of GameStart and GameEnd reports back with the correct line number:
$changed = Register-ObjectEvent $watcher1 "Changed" -Action {
$GameStart = Get-Content 'c:\path-to-log\logfile.log' -Tail 1 | select-string -pattern '(GameStart)'
$GameEnd = Get-Content 'c:\path-to-log\logfile.log' -Tail 1 | select-string -pattern '(GameEnd)'
if ($GameStart)
Write-Host $(Get-Date -format T) "GameStart entry found on line "$GameStart.LineNumber
else ($GameEnd)
Write-Host $(Get-Date -format T) "GameStart entry found on line "$GameEnd.LineNumber
Any ideas to get the GameStart and GameEnd to report back the actual correct LineNumber?

You can't have a true line number without dealing with the entirety of the file, so I pulled it all in with
Get-Content 'c:\path-to-log\logfile.log'
then used
| select-string -pattern '(GameStart)'
to filter out only the lines that contained the pattern.
I wrapped all that up as an array with the @() syntax to get
@(Get-Content 'c:\path-to-log\logfile.log' | select-string -pattern '(GameStart)')
and then chose only the last member of the array with the [-1] index.

This Forum does not report correct system info and thinks I am still using v3.6.x

Visiting the Forums the sidebar info is incorrect. For example I am advised:
System Details
Windows XP
Firefox 3.6.16
Wrong!!
I am using Vista and Firefox 4.0
On this page the info is correct.
These silly inconsistencies suggest that this version has been inadequately tested.
Upgraded and now bitterly regret it! This info is wrong; the Google search bar no longer works correctly - beginning to lose confidence in the browser!

When visiting forums the 'System details' are the details of the user that posted the question, not your system details. For example look at the System details on this page, it correctly identified you as Fx 4.0 on Vista.

TI-4200VTD8X memory not being correctly read

When I go to the display properties in the control panel it says my video card only has 32 mbs of ram when it really has 128mbs. However games like wolfenstein seem to run fine, should I worry?

comstocki,
You are using the MSI Drivers form your CD. Some CDs shipped with MSI drivers that reported all the Vid Cards as having 32Mb. It is onlly a display issue in that info tab. It does not affect the performance of the card in any way. If you want it to read correctly, just download the Drivers from the MSI Website or go get the nVidia Drivers from the nVidia Website.
Take Care,
Richard
P.S. If you had done a search of this forum, you would have found this issue had been discussed to death a few months back.

FTP connections through Finder not reporting correct file size

Hi,
I have a NAS that running as an FTP server. When I connect to it through Finder it reports the incorrect file size of 2.7GB (the real file size is 61GB)
Its an DMG image file so it obviously fails when I try to image a new IMAC.
FTP through windows reports the correct file size so rules out any problem on the NAS.
Any ideas anybody?
Many thanks.

Hi,
I have a NAS that running as an FTP server. When I connect to it through Finder it reports the incorrect file size of 2.7GB (the real file size is 61GB)
Its an DMG image file so it obviously fails when I try to image a new IMAC.
FTP through windows reports the correct file size so rules out any problem on the NAS.
Any ideas anybody?
Many thanks.

Batch transaction report is not reporting correctly.

Inventory reports > Batch Number Transactions Report
For one item, I check one particular batch. A sales order with Qty 5 was copied to delivery note(fully delivered qty 5). On the Batch Number Transactions Report the delivery has Allocated -5 and Direction u2018Allocatedu2019.
Why is the Delivery Note showing 5 units with a direction of allocated, rather than out?

Hi Maeve,
Post a Message to SAP Support Center and also check the
following thread
Allocated quantity's batch showing Null basetype
Re: How to release batch number that's allocated in a "closed' sales order
*Close the thread if issue solved.
Regards
Jambulingam.P

Memory not recognized correctly on boot

Okay, I have 2 sticks of memory in my main computer: 1G and 512M. On boot, the BIOS says I only have 1G. I've heard that you can't mix the size of mem modules so I removed the 512M stick, but then the system says I only have 512M mem installed! Sensors sees the 1G stick.
I tried passing mem=1536M to the kernel, but free still shows only 1G.
Anyone have any ideas on why this might be?

Ghostwalker, the problem is that not only linux, but also the BIOS is detecting 1G. But I just assumed that Arch's default kernel would have High Memory enebled anyway.
Penguin, I just looked at my MB manual and it's good on my PC2700 RAM and says it takes up to 1G per stick, so that should be good.
Maybe I'll swap out all the memory with another system and see what happens.

New drive not reporting correct geometry -- help?

I have a new Seagate drive and am trying to put it into an Xserve (g4). OSX Server reports 128G but the drive is a 750G.
diskutil info /dev/disk0
Device Identifier: disk0
Device Node: /dev/disk0
Part Of Whole: disk0
Device / Media Name: ST3750640A
Volume Name: Untitled
Mount Point:
File System: HFS+
Owners: Disabled
Partition Type:
Bootable: Not bootable
Media Type: Generic
Protocol: ATA
SMART Status: Verified
Volume UUID: DBDB245F-223A-34E6-99FD-ED49204A044D
Total Size: 128.0 Gi (137437904896 B) (268433408 512-byte blocks)
Free Space: 0.0 B (0 B) (0 512-byte blocks)
Read Only: No
Ejectable: No
Whole: Yes
Internal: Yes
OS 9 Drivers: No
Low Level Format: Not Supported
Device Location: "Bay 3"
I've tried to specify a different geometry in fdisk but the drive returns to report this geometry.
ns2:i386 young$ sudo fdisk -e -c 16383 -h 16 -s 63 -b 512 -S 1465149168 /dev/disk0
fdisk: could not open MBR file /usr/standalone/i386/boot0: No such file or directory
Enter 'help' for information
fdisk: 1> print
Disk: /dev/disk0 geometry: 16383/16/63 [1465149168 sectors]
Offset: 0 Signature: 0xAA55
Starting Ending
#: id cyl hd sec - cyl hd sec [ start - size]
1: AF 0 1 1 - 1023 254 63 [ 63 - 16514001] HFS+
2: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0 - 0] unused
3: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0 - 0] unused
4: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0 - 0] unused
fdisk: 1> edit 1
Starting Ending
#: id cyl hd sec - cyl hd sec [ start - size]
*1: AF 0 1 1 - 1023 254 63 [ 63 - 1465149105] HFS+
Partition id ('0' to disable) [0 - FF]: [AF] (? for help)
Do you wish to edit in CHS mode? [n] y
BIOS Starting cylinder [0 - 16382]: [0]
BIOS Starting head [0 - 15]: [1]
BIOS Starting sector [1 - 63]: [1]
BIOS Ending cylinder [0 - 16382]: [1023] 16382
BIOS Ending head [0 - 15]: [254] 15
BIOS Ending sector [1 - 63]: [63]
fdisk:*1> write
Writing MBR at offset 0.
fdisk: 1> print
Disk: /dev/disk0 geometry: 16383/16/63 [1465149168 sectors]
Offset: 0 Signature: 0xAA55
Starting Ending
#: id cyl hd sec - cyl hd sec [ start - size]
*1: AF 0 1 1 - 1023 254 63 [ 63 - 16514001] HFS+
2: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0 - 0] unused
3: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0 - 0] unused
4: 00 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 [ 0 - 0] unused
fdisk: 1> quit

At present, the new drive is in the second Xserve. The second Xserve has two of these drives working in a RAID configuration (I'll post the two outputs of diskutil below for comparison). I was trying to bring up the second Xserve when I ran into this geometry problem so I transferred the drive into a working machine thinking that I could somehow overwrite the geometry. I'll check out this limitation anyway, thanks.
ns2:~ young$ diskutil info /dev/disk1
Device Identifier: disk1
Device Node: /dev/disk1
Part Of Whole: disk1
Device / Media Name: ST3750640A
Volume Name:
Mount Point:
Partition Type: Applepartitionscheme
Bootable: Not bootable
Media Type: Generic
Protocol: ATA
SMART Status: Verified
Total Size: 698.6 Gi (750156374016 B) (1465149168 512-byte blocks)
Free Space: 0.0 B (0 B) (0 512-byte blocks)
Read Only: No
Ejectable: No
Whole: Yes
Internal: Yes
OS 9 Drivers: No
Low Level Format: Not Supported
Device Location: "Bay 1"
ns2:~ young$ diskutil info /dev/disk0
Device Identifier: disk0
Device Node: /dev/disk0
Part Of Whole: disk0
Device / Media Name: ST3750640A
Volume Name:
Mount Point:
Partition Type: Applepartitionscheme
Bootable: Not bootable
Media Type: Generic
Protocol: ATA
SMART Status: Verified
Total Size: 128.0 Gi (137437904896 B) (268433408 512-byte blocks)
Free Space: 0.0 B (0 B) (0 512-byte blocks)
Read Only: No
Ejectable: No
Whole: Yes
Internal: Yes
OS 9 Drivers: No
Low Level Format: Not Supported
Device Location: "Bay 3"

Upgraded memory not reporting correctly

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for