No, I think it's an ad hom because it was directed at me, personally.
No, my post was directed at your advice, not you. There's a difference.
The same concept between my posts, so either you first came up with ad hominem, or neither of us did. Make up your mind. Personally, I didn't even consider either a personal attack until you took offense and started this crusade.
If you need an example of ad hominem to understand why the previous posts were not, here is one: I guess elite status simply means the poster blatantly crushes opposition to the party line and ignoring everything else.
Note it doesn't support or refute the topic at hand. On the other hand, what you seem to be taking as a personal attack does in fact overturn your previous post. I assume it seems personal to you only because I purposefully phrased it the way you phrased your remark. It seems doing so made it more amusing than I first thought.
I only dismissed it so tersely because bad ideas like that get presented all of the time. At first glance it does seem to make sense because everyone thinks that when memory gets low the pagefile is automatically the source of any slowdown. But that's not how VM works and the pagefile is only 1 source/target of paging when memory is low, pretty much every other open file is also a backingstore for data in memory and is a potential source of paging so making 1 of those files fast is going to have minimal affect.
Ah, see, that's what I meant by taking a phrase out of context. You're assuming it's a bad idea because of a preconception and assumed the advice was given in that previous context. It wasn't and I told you why in my previous post. Therefore, I assumed you were taking my first post out of context.
On a separate vein, when physical memory is used up, the pagefile is generally the default option for next source for storing new temporary data. Usually, there are other options to free up main memory before resorting to disks, but in the end, if you're out, you're out. Photoshop has had a scratch disk option for years due to permanently exceeding capacity, but the concept is not unique, nor is it the only one. Of course in that type of situation, speeding up the page file will speed up performance. However, the underlying issue is you're using up RAM in the first place. Fixing that problem gives better ROI because of the massive discrepancy in performance, which I think is what you are trying to insist even though it isn't even a topic of discussion.
Now, we already know disabling the page file is causing him problems.
We know he's currently not using enough memory to consistently reach RAM capacity.
We know he seems intent on upgrading at some time.
We don't know how much memory he will eventually use before switching to a new system core.
We don't know how much the extra memory will cost him.
We don't know what's an acceptable price for him in terms of money, time, or convenience.
We don't know when he will be upgrading.
Assuming the extra memory is cheap, he may as well put it to use. Other than running bloatware or programs requiring large temp space, his best option would be to turn on his pagefile and run it off a RAM disk given what we do know of the situation and providing reasonable assumptions on what we don't know.
His page file wouldn't be there for extra memory space or performance. It would be for fixing a problem. Since he would have the memory to spare, why bother taking up a chunk of disk space and also placing yet another load on it? Assuming Windows will use the page file once it's enabled, there's no point in degrading his performance or disk capacity when an option exists to maintain it at the previous level. If he runs into a program that does use more than he has available, that's a different topic.
If the memory is expensive, then the previous option may no longer be the best option. The definition of expensive lies in his personal tolerance. He may not wish to spend more than a few dollars. He may not wish to invest in time and labor for installation (don't laugh, I've known a few like that). He may weigh his options and decide it'd be better to wait a bit and put the money towards a new system. He may decide the problems he's having are worth the cost of fixing them.