Back to SL

Discussion in 'macOS' started by wpotere, Aug 14, 2011.

  1. wpotere Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    #1
    I gave Lion a chance and to be honest it has been pretty bad. I have had numerous kernel panics as well as the fact that it simply hogs memory and won't release it. I have even tried a fresh install of it... All of this was on my late 2008 MB. So, I am rolling back to SL until Apple can fix the issues that they have.
     
  2. C64 macrumors 65816

    C64

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    #2
    Hogs memory how? Lion is pretty smart about memory use. It often keeps most of the memory you have reserved, and gives it to whatever app that needs it. So when there aren't any applications that need additional memory you might still see that a lot of memory is inactive rather than free. But it'll free it up and reallocate it when needed. Unless you're actually noticing a lot of page outs (using the disk instead of the RAM) and noticeable slow downs due to insufficient memory, there probably isn't much to worry about.
     
  3. ayeying macrumors 601

    ayeying

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Location:
    Yay Area, CA
  4. wpotere thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    #4
    That has not been the case for me. In fact it has caused problems with the VM's by not releasing it forcing them to page and or panic. That, and I watched as Safari took up 2 Gigs of ram by itself. It is doing the same on the wife's MBA as well. It has some issues handeling memory.

    As for "letting you know"; it is so that maybe someone that is on the fence about Lion might make the right decision for themselves. If it saves one person the hassle that I am now going through, then it was worth the post. So if you don't like my thread then move on....
     
  5. ayeying macrumors 601

    ayeying

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
    Location:
    Yay Area, CA
    #5
    I use VMs regularly also. I have yet to see my 8GB of total ram fall into swap, and even when I do use swap, it usually stays under 2GB total.

    As a, somewhat, main rule, you don't want ram to swap/page. Your drive is so much slower then ram and you'll actually just cause your system to stall.

    Lastly, after running VMs on many different systems, MacBook Air, MacBook Pro (Pre-Unibody), etc. Ram is very important and anything under 4GB is really more headache. I'm not saying it won't run, but I'm saying, it would be a lot easier and less time consuming by having as much ram as possible.

    Furthermore, having Safari use up 2GB ram does not indicate there's an issue with the OS. Safari was updated to a newer version under Lion, which people have been saying there could be a memory leak.

    For older users, yes, there's an option to downgrade to SL. However, consider this:

    What about the people who just bought new Macs?
    What about people who are average users and do not know how to downgrade?

    Apple isn't Microsoft where when Vista came out, you could easily downgrade back to XP. This is not the same case here.

    By informing us, you're just stating the problems with Lion (well, only 1 here, the other is just an issue with the Application itself) but no solution except downgrade; which is fairly extreme for an average user. And for the people who cannot downgrade, it's just an big smack in their face saying "too bad, you're SOL".
     
  6. wpotere thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    #6
    I have an older Macbook that can only handle 4 Gigs. If I could run 8 it would be fine. SL ran the same setup with no problems. I would hope that Lion could do the same but it can't. As a C# programmer, I still need windows so the downgrade is needed. I'm not knocking Lion, it has some nice features but I think that it still needs a little work to be lean.

    Safari does have a memory leak and there are times that Lion won't release it after you close Safari so there is an issue there as well.

    If you buy a new Mac, that is a choice you make. The one problem I am reporting is a pretty big one actually and if you only have 4 Gigs or ram or less you might consider simply staying with SL for now, especially if you are using memory hungry apps. Will Lion mature? Sure, but it will take some time.
     
  7. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #7
    I think you'll be hard pressed to convince many people here about Lion's memory usage. It does require a significant more about of ram then its predecessor. While its more intelligent in managing the resources, one cannot deny the fact that Lion is more bloated then SL
     
  8. artguy3d macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    #8
    Yes, so I also don't know myself if it was mainly Safari 5.1 that caused some of the memory problems or not. I was glad I had a backup with Safari 5.0.5 because I went back to that along with Snow Leopard. The system essentially forces you to upgrade Safari to 5.1 in order to upgrade to Lion, so many folks may have more trouble than I did going back to 5.0.5, even if they try.

    Essentially it really shouldn't be released in a state so buggy that we are forced to go back to an earlier version.
     

Share This Page