On a modern machine (=x64-capable CPU), just use a 64-bit OS. 1 or 2GB of RAM doesn't cut it anymore, if you're actually doing work on your machines you'll appreciate 4 or even 8GB of RAM. I've recently upgraded by notebook from 4GB to 8GB, and the 8GB cost me € 100,- (even less when I can sell the 4GB) - the "bang for the buck" factor is pretty good I'd say.
In theory, 32-bit OSs should be able to use 4GB of RAM (see here). For some reason, 32-bit Windows 7 (and Vista IIRC) can only use 3.2GB or something like that, not sure why. It's an OS limitation, and I don't think some "magic patch" will make it go away. You don't mess with your OS in that way, you simply don't.
I have found that x64 is generally more stable and feels snappier than its x86 counterpart, perhaps in part because of the lack of some of some of the legacy baggage.
In fact, 64-bit Windows versions carry _more_ "baggage" than 32-bit versions because they include the 32-bit subsystem(s) for compatibility reasons. I'm not an expert in the field, but I guess a 64-bit OS is taking advantage of certain modern CPU features, which is probably why it feels "snappier".
The only real drawback really is the lack of 16-bit support and the need for 64-bit drivers.
Lack of 16-bit support is no real problem when you're looking at the context. If you're installing a 64-bit OS you most likely have 2GB of RAM or more. That's more than enough to run a virtual machine of some kind which can be used to install troublesome apps/games. Most old apps/games will run in a 64-bit environment, it's mostly the installers that cause problems. You can use old and/or unsigned drivers by putting Windows into "test mode" with a tool like DSEO, though using native 64-bit drivers is of course preferrable.
I have TrackWinstall on the VM to install games and applications that have a 16-bit installer
Hey, that's _my_ solution! (;
why some people install 8 GB+ on their machines?
Because you can run more apps/memory intensive apps without the OS swapping memory (too much). I'm working with multiple VMs, Office apps, Adobe apps, etc. , so I need all the RAM I can get (; . Even if a 32-bit app can use only 2GB of RAM (I'm not sure if this is true), you could run two of those apps using up all the memory they can and still have a snappy OS because of no (or little) swapping on a machine with 8GB of RAM.
64 bit software in general requries more memory and the applications require more storage.
Irrelevant, unless you're trying to install your OS on a 20GB harddisk. It's 2011, live with it.
which explains why a 32bit load of W7 will boot and load applications somewhat faster.
Unless you have some kind of data to back that theory of yours up I call bullshit.
That most applications are still 32bit is another consideration.
Irrelevant. 64-bit OSs will run 32-bit apps just fine.
I will stop at this point. Mau1wurf1977 seems to be mentally stuck in the XP 64-bit era. A lot has changed since then, so IMO it'd make sense to adjust to the new situation lest you come across as an ignorant old fart (; .