I know I'm re opening a can of worms, but I can't keep this in.
uh oh
It seems as though other sites are still saying the page file as a static value is a better choice, even after they've seen the proper refutation, and have not dissputed said refutation...IT IS NOT A BETTER CHOICE TO CREATE A STATIC PAGE FILE...and it does in fact make no sence to do it...when you read these obsolete suggestions, chuckle to yourself at this the same way you'd chucle at being afraid of black cats.
Once again, xp will page, whether you want it to or not, and you cannot deminish the amount of paging by lowering or eliminating the page file...creating a static page file does absolutely nothing for performance, and only serves to take away a safety net that you might need.
Here's my shot at an annalogy...
you need to breath...that's it, there's nothing anyone can do about it, you will breath...if someone restricts the amount of air you have in this room to breath, thinking that all this heavy breathing slows you down, since you get slower the same time you breath heavy...they will misstakenly think they are helping you by trying to stop you from breathing heavy...you will go to the next room, where there might be more air, even before you need the air, just to make sure you don't run out of air...that's it, you need air, and you will get your air, no matter what.
I think that analogy works, maybe not, but it at least gives a rough idea of why you should not static your page file