Honestly if you think you are doing more than 95% of the Mac users out there and doing fine in 4Gb of RAM then you simply don't have the workload you think you do.
Depends upon Mom and Pop.
He mentioned doing fine with 4GB of ram before, but I don't see how that's the case. Activity monitor would show a high level of memory pressure just due to browser activity if those windows represent much more than plain text. I can personally notice a pretty significant difference when memory pressure is high, regardless of of what I'm doing. I would say that Snow Leopard was the last time I would have considered 4GB of ram. Even then it was really pushing it, but I had that much in a G5 running Tiger at one point.
Quote:
He mentioned doing fine with 4GB of ram before, but I don't see how that's the case. Activity monitor would show a high level of memory pressure just due to browser activity if those windows represent much more than plain text. I can personally notice a pretty significant difference when memory pressure is high, regardless of of what I'm doing. I would say that Snow Leopard was the last time I would have considered 4GB of ram. Even then it was really pushing it, but I had that much in a G5 running Tiger at one point.
I guess everybody has their own feeling for what good performance is. Personal experience and The no upgradability aspect of these machines demands that I point out my negative opinion of Apples base RAM allotment. Combine that with the wish to get more than a couple of useful years out of a Mac and 8GB becomes a minimal amount.
As for Mac OS I'm really hoping that Apple puts serious effort into optimization and performance in the next couple of revisions. The performance hit doesn't seem to be justified based on the additional features. It makes me wonder if Swift might allow them to rebuild key parts of Mac OS that are currently written in Objective C. I do believe that Objective C contributes to many of the bugs and performance regressions in Mac OS. I'd like to see Mac OS enhanced to the point where you could run Safari well on a machine with 2 GB of RAM.
Comments
Quote:
Honestly if you think you are doing more than 95% of the Mac users out there and doing fine in 4Gb of RAM then you simply don't have the workload you think you do.
Depends upon Mom and Pop.
He mentioned doing fine with 4GB of ram before, but I don't see how that's the case. Activity monitor would show a high level of memory pressure just due to browser activity if those windows represent much more than plain text. I can personally notice a pretty significant difference when memory pressure is high, regardless of of what I'm doing. I would say that Snow Leopard was the last time I would have considered 4GB of ram. Even then it was really pushing it, but I had that much in a G5 running Tiger at one point.
I guess everybody has their own feeling for what good performance is. Personal experience and The no upgradability aspect of these machines demands that I point out my negative opinion of Apples base RAM allotment. Combine that with the wish to get more than a couple of useful years out of a Mac and 8GB becomes a minimal amount.
As for Mac OS I'm really hoping that Apple puts serious effort into optimization and performance in the next couple of revisions. The performance hit doesn't seem to be justified based on the additional features. It makes me wonder if Swift might allow them to rebuild key parts of Mac OS that are currently written in Objective C. I do believe that Objective C contributes to many of the bugs and performance regressions in Mac OS. I'd like to see Mac OS enhanced to the point where you could run Safari well on a machine with 2 GB of RAM.