You will not be considering this memory in a PC near you any time soon if ever, and I am leaning to "ever" part. There are two big reasons you won't notice it in consumer PCs. The first reason is that there are very few people that want 16+ GB of RAM now. Even with dual quad cores, quad video cards, playing intensive games or running high end video editing software, you would be okay with 4-8 GB.

The other problem you run into is physical barriers. I clarified before that built in chipset breaks memory down into small sizes for memory controller to hold. Any X86 (32 bit) programs can only handle 4 GB RAM; it's a hardware problem and no real way to get around it. When we go up to 64 bit, the potential available memory is over 17,000 TB.

I don't feel we will hit that mark for a while. The problem is 99 percent of PCs being sold are still 32-bit. There are 64-bit versions of all Vistas, but companies are still sticking to 32-bit. Most consumers are going to be restricted by this, which will kill any hopes of a 4+ GB system.

The market here is mainframes and servers. Most servers are running or must be switching at their next upgrade to 64-bit operating systems. This will remove physical barrier with obtaining over 4 GB.

Consider that however, this is not for a small network of a few hundred or thousand PCs. We are talking about companies like Microsoft or Wal-Mart that have hundreds of thousands of PCs. Such a network will use as much memory as it can obtain it is applied, and its visitors will make it eat RAM for breakfast.

In fact, some websites actually get pounded. Let's look at Amazon.com, for example. Amazon had to deal with 5.4 million items; that's 62.5 items per second. Do you think they could live with a server with 4 GB RAM.