[sek929]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

My wife takes Adderall for her ADHD, that s*** is wild.

Ah yes, amphetamine salts.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

It's like pharmaceutical grade cocaine.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

CRAP...

...I missed that. Forget it then. Apple is doomed.

Finally, all the horsepower in the Air 2 is good for something besides slightly less Safari tab refreshes! I carry around with two fingers enough horsepower to get to Mars, but damned if it can't open more than 3 tabs without a refresh.

[Hawkeye_a]

To have two apps 'active' you need a mobile device with 2GB RAM? Why is that on my 2008 MacBook with came with 2GB RAM, i could have a full desktop OS along with several desktop applications running smoothly? (desktop OS, desktop apps, by theory are more resource RAM/CPU hungry)

Has iOS and tablet/phone apps become so bloated that they have surpassed desktop resources requirements?

I can't believe that Safari still has to cache-out tabs and constantly reload them in devices with 2GB and fast flash storage. Does iOS even do virtual memory?(paging out application stacks to storage when not in use, etc?) Something just doesn't seem right with memory management and a whole host of other things in iOS.

iOS is starting to feel a lot like the classic MacOS did before OSX, and even it could have several applications loaded and running. </end-old-timer-rant>

[Spheric Harlot]

And how come Word 5.1 loaded faster on a 6 MHz 68000 processor than Word 2007 on a decked-out quad 2007 PC?

Because times change.

And no, iOS does NOT do virtual memory. Which is why memory compression was such a big deal (that trickled over to the Mac in Mavericks and made a HUGE difference there).

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Because times change.

I understand that.

With your example:
My use cases with Wordf 2007 would be close to 80-90% to Word 5.1. And the 'real world difference' i would see is a newer version being slower to accomplish almost the same thing.

Magnitudes more processing power, faster and more memory .... and a slower end-user experience. Brilliant!

With reference to iOS, we traded a 'full desktop OS' for a slimmed down(supposedly) mobile OS, and mobile applications, which were supposed to require less resources. But it seems in order to run 2 apps side by side you need 2GB of memory? And the browser cannot remember your open web pages, and has to reload them constantly. *sheesh*

[P]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

To have two apps 'active' you need a mobile device with 2GB RAM? Why is that on my 2008 MacBook with came with 2GB RAM, i could have a full desktop OS along with several desktop applications running smoothly? (desktop OS, desktop apps, by theory are more resource RAM/CPU hungry)

Hey, I did that on a 1MB Mac SE! OK so it barely ran, but the 4MB LC III had no problems.

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Has iOS and tablet/phone apps become so bloated that they have surpassed desktop resources requirements?

Everything has grown. The biggest icons in the current OS X would not fit on the floppy disks of the first Mac. Web browsers are extreme cases though, with many sites being exceptionally large.

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

I can't believe that Safari still has to cache-out tabs and constantly reload them in devices with 2GB and fast flash storage. Does iOS even do virtual memory?(paging out application stacks to storage when not in use, etc?)

It does not. Initially I thought that this was because of flash lifetime, but now I don't understand why they keep doing it. Flash has exceptionally long lifetimes these days. Battery life maybe? But then reloading tabs over the network takes even more battery life.

[Spheric Harlot]

The Flash used in iOS devices is SLOW. Slower than SSD drives in computers. Also, writing to Flash uses considerable power, AFAIK.

We have a full OS running on (relatively) low-power processors, and needing to be far more immediately responsive (aka "snappy") due to the touch interface…

incidentally, I just back-stepped in the browser due to server overload on my MacBook Pro with 16 GB RAM and Safari reloaded the page and ate my previous draft of this reply…

[P]

Deleting is high power, IIRC, but same diff I guess. And i don't think they should implement automatic page outs for all apps, but I do think that they should save a few tabs in Safari, especially if you have written something into one. Not having to load the page over the network and then rendering it seems like a power save.

[osiris]

Installed the beta on a spare machine - this is quite promising!
It is faster than Yosemite for sure, in its beta state too.

Office 2011 works well, definitely snappier... Safari in one bounce on this old iMac w 4GB RAM...

The split screen option is neat, but I wish Mission Control had the old Spaces style menu bar.

[Waragainstsleep]

You would think that apps like Word and Excel, where the core functions haven't really changed that much in years could use a system where they almost wrapped the fancy new HD features around a lightning quick, basic older version of themselves.

[subego]

****ing rerelease WriteNow.

[mindwaves]

Looking forward to El Capitan. A little worried about Java (or Sun's compatibility) in this version, which is absolutely needed for my job (need to access a website using a Java applet).

[P]

Originally Posted by subego 

****ing rerelease WriteNow.

Hah. WriteNow was 68k assembler, porting that would be a challenge - and I think we would all go crazy for the lack of underlining spell check. Textedit probably has more features by now.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by osiris 

The split screen option is neat, but I wish Mission Control had the old Spaces style menu bar.

I use BetterTouchTool to do Win7-style window snapping to the left or right half of the screen. I've tried using full screen mode in iPhoto, iMovie, Safari, and more but losing the menubar is annoying. This is the one thing that Microsoft got right, it's worth copying.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Agreed. The Windows left/right window snapping feature is so much better than anything else in OS X's window management.

[osiris]

Well, it's a pain in the ass in El Capitan, just like it is in Yosemite.. It's such a simple thing but implemented with too much complexity that it's useless. I hear a touch pad makes the process easier, but still....

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Agreed. The Windows left/right window snapping feature is so much better than anything else in OS X's window management.

My only complaint is the (apparent) inability to snap to the right half of the left screen (or vice versa) in a dual display setup. And when un-snapping, the window reverts to its pre-snapped size and shape.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I use BetterTouchTool to do Win7-style window snapping to the left or right half of the screen. I've tried using full screen mode in iPhoto, iMovie, Safari, and more but losing the menubar is annoying. This is the one thing that Microsoft got right, it's worth copying.

I didn't realize how incredibly useful that feature would be. I'm stunned Microsoft implemented it so well, yet Apple acts like it's a feature not worth copying.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

My only complaint is the (apparent) inability to snap to the right half of the left screen (or vice versa) in a dual display setup. And when un-snapping, the window reverts to its pre-snapped size and shape.

Hmmmm, not sure what you mean. I alternate between two- or three-monitor setup and it snaps to all halves. It "starts" pinning to whatever monitor the window appeared on when opened, and when you Window-arrowkey right or left it keeps pinning on the next "half" moving across the monitors - when it gets to the end, it will rotate back to the other side.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by mindwaves 

Looking forward to El Capitan. A little worried about Java (or Sun's compatibility) in this version, which is absolutely needed for my job (need to access a website using a Java applet).

Isn't the JVM pretty much OS agnostic?

[P]

No. Apps running inside the JVM don't care about the surrounding OS, but porting the JVM to an OS is major work.

Though I suppose they could rather easily make an X11 version that ran on OS X.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Hmmmm, not sure what you mean. I alternate between two- or three-monitor setup and it snaps to all halves. It "starts" pinning to whatever monitor the window appeared on when opened, and when you Window-arrowkey right or left it keeps pinning on the next "half" moving across the monitors - when it gets to the end, it will rotate back to the other side.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Haha I honest don't know what that is supposed to convey

[The Final Dakar]

You blew his mind.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

It wasn't me....it was Windows.

Seriously though. Because of that one feature I actually more and more dislike working on a Mac lately. I shudder in disgust when I have to manually resize a new Safari window.

[besson3c]

It has always been weird to me that Chrome has been a far better browser for me than Safari for years. There is the tab resizing stuff, the better dev tools in Chrome, etc. I wonder why Apple hasn't conceded victory to Google and refactored Safari to work like Chrome does in terms of process management.

[subego]

I've heard Chrome has its ups and downs. Sometimes it spanks Safari, sometimes it's a dog.

A few years back it felt like people were ditching it left and right.

[Cap'n Tightpants]

The newest version of Chrome appears to be the best they've released in some time. Memory usage is way down, leaks have been (mostly) plugged, and it feels more responsive and stable. IMO, it's the best browser again.

[besson3c]

How do you know that memory usage is down and that there are fewer leaks?

[subego]

Using it, one would presume.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by subego 

Using it, one would presume.

A tool is required for measuring this, there are too many variables to take into account to rely on observation alone.

[subego]

Noting the difference between what's in RAM and what's getting paged-in doesn't require superhuman perception.

If an application consistently forces everything else I'm using into VM, it's being a memory hog.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by subego 

Noting the difference between what's in RAM, and what's getting paged-in doesn't require superhuman perception.

If an application consistently forces everything else I'm using into VM, it's being a memory hog.

Sure, if you are using VM and it is clear that no other application is triggering the use of VM, fair enough, but with the amount of memory that computers have these days, are you guys using VM at all?

[subego]

None on my "home theatre" computer, but it's new, and I sprung for 16GB. I'd have 2GB+ virtual if I only had 8GB.

My older laptop, which is running work crap, has twice as much VM (16GB) going as real memory.

[Spheric Harlot]

Which OS?

[subego]

Yosemite on the htpc, Mavericks on the lappy.

Photoshop and Lightroom are running on the latter.

[P]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

How do you know that memory usage is down and that there are fewer leaks?

Activity Monitor. On the memory tab, sort so you see the top memory hogs at the top. If one keeps going up, it's leaking.

[subego]

POW! Right in the literals.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by P 

Activity Monitor. On the memory tab, sort so you see the top memory hogs at the top. If one keeps going up, it's leaking.

Not necessarily. Using available memory is fine, that's what it is there for. We've had this conversation many times on this forum, this is still true, no?

[mattyb]

Originally Posted by ort888 

I like the "Customers who viewed this item also viewed" section on that page...

Originally Posted by osiris 

Yes, but I don't want to know how the Wasabi Green Peas come into play.

Something to do with Ass Goblins?

[P]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Not necessarily. Using available memory is fine, that's what it is there for. We've had this conversation many times on this forum, this is still true, no?

Using available memory is fine, but if a single app is slowly consuming more and more memory, it is leaking. In practice, it is allocating memory and then not using it, meaning that less is available to be used by other applications, or as disk cache.

[besson3c]

If the app is idling, okay, I see your point.

[P]

Even if it is doing work, it shouldn't grow unless the dataset grows - which it very rarely does.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by P 

Even if it is doing work, it shouldn't grow unless the dataset grows - which it very rarely does.

It depends on the job. If a bunch of files are being loaded into memory, the memory size will balloon.

Let's not bicker though, my main point is that it is difficult to judge whether or not there are memory inefficiencies or leaks without in-depth analysis, and in our casual tech vernacular when people talk about something being a memory hog they often don't really understand these complexities.

[mattyb]

Originally Posted by P 

Using available memory is fine, but if a single app is slowly consuming more and more memory, it is leaking. In practice, it is allocating memory and then not using it, meaning that less is available to be used by other applications, or as disk cache.

Except a JVM. You can set the -Xmx (max memory) and it will grow if there is RAM and/or swap available.