Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is windows 11 really bloated?

maflynn said:
I'm getting Gen 4 speeds on my Studio, I linked to a MR thread where people are getting speeds well beyond gen 3. I'm not about to beat this horse to death. There is no way you can convince me that I have gen3 like speeds on my M4 when in fact I have verifiable results.
View attachment 2615191
Click to expand...

As I wrote, those are pro models. I get the same speeds as you do on my M1 Max Studio.

But I get Gen 3 speeds on my M1 mini and I think lower speeds, in the 2,xxx range on the M1 Air.

The table I showed above shows Gen 3 speeds on base M4 Macs. The M* Pro, M* Max and M* Ultra models have Gen 4 speeds. Though, for some reason, they don't get into the 6,500 - 7,000 range that you can get in the aftermarket NVMe Gen 4 world. It may be that Apple uses lower-power SSDs.
 
maflynn said:
You're moving the goal posts,

Like I said, I'm done beating this dead horse,and I'm moving on
Click to expand...

No, I'm not. I posted the performance of the Neo which is around 1,500 to start with.

I've discussed the SSD issue many times, here, and in Reddit and it's widely acknowledged that SSD speeds on Macs has lagged the PC market. It's more of an issue with Macs because you can't easily change after original purchase.

I have a spreadsheet with the read/write speeds of my systems and I watch the Max Tech videos and they've documented the Mac SSD shortfalls since Apple Silicon came out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: klasma and eltoslightfoot
pshufd said:
Click to expand...
Ppppfffftt. Youngsters......

ms_dos_prompt_127452.jpg
 
  • Love
Reactions: eltoslightfoot
It sadly because Windows 95 and windows 98 had fast boot up time then it got really slow later on especially windows vista.


Well Windows was not really built for hard dives later on has it was too slow.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: eltoslightfoot
Windows XP came from Windows NT which came from DEC VMS when Dave Cutler was hired away by Bill Gates. He brought his Pacific Northwest team with him and rumor has it that he took the VMS codebase with him. The legal stuff got settled later on. The problems with W95 and W98 is that it wasn't based on a true multitasking, and protected operating system so you could have processes from one program write memory to another program and get some great crashes from bugs in programs.
 
pshufd said:
I don't recall any good marketing campaigns for MS-DOS. Start Me Up was notable because of who played the music.

My start in computing was around 1973 with punched card machines.
Click to expand...
Sightly after you with the TRS-80 and my Pong console. Those were the days! Thought we had the world playing Sk8 or Die on a 286 with 16 colors.
 
Bubble99 said:
It sadly because Windows 95 and windows 98 had fast boot up time then it got really slow later on especially windows vista.


Well Windows was not really built for hard dives later on has it was too slow.
Click to expand...
Vista was crap on low powered machines. I never had an issue on any of mine. They were top of the line back in the day however.
 
Steve Adams said:
Vista was crap on low powered machines. I never had an issue on any of mine. They were top of the line back in the day however.
Click to expand...

It started when vista is when windows got really bloated.

The minimum hardware requirements for Windows Vista include a 1 GHz processor, 1 GB of RAM, and a DirectX 9 compatible graphics card with at least 64 MB of video memory. Additionally, you need at least 15 GB of free disk space and a DVD-ROM drive.

Windows Vista as having approximately 50 million lines of code, with about 2,000 developers working on the product


Even windows 7 has really slow boot up time on hard drive has it not uncommon to take minute or more for windows 7 to boot up on hard drive. And other minute when at the desktop for every thing to load.

The OSs of 80s and 90s where really fast on hard drive than it got really bloated for the hard drive and really slow.

Windows 95 and windows 98 is way faster than Windows 7 or Windows 10.
 
Steve Adams said:
Sightly after you with the TRS-80 and my Pong console. Those were the days! Thought we had the world playing Sk8 or Die on a 286 with 16 colors.
Click to expand...

With windows 11 having such steep hardware requirements you would think Microsoft would strip away lot of the old code and make it less bloated.

This is painful to watch booting on HDD.
 
Bubble99 said:
With windows 11 having such steep hardware requirements you would think Microsoft would strip away lot of the old code and make it less bloated.
Click to expand...
They're actually actively doing that. They're replacing c and c++ code with rust, streamlining the code. I believe the goal is to be done by 2030. With that said with MS laying off software developers and using AI to produce the code which is of lower quality.
 
it wasnt me said:
Wait until you start a GUI.
Click to expand...
Every modern Linux distro boots up in to a GUI. Like on MacOS or Windows, you have to open up Terminal or PowerShell to get a CLI.

Linux is still more efficient than Windows. A full featured Linux distro is still more efficient than a strip down Windows. I dual boot Win10 LTSC and Mint Linux on a 4GB RAM Celeron laptop. It's too old or run Win11.😶 Windows LTSC runs well enough, but Mint is noticeably faster.
 
pshufd said:
Windows XP came from Windows NT which came from DEC VMS when Dave Cutler was hired away by Bill Gates. He brought his Pacific Northwest team with him and rumor has it that he took the VMS codebase with him. The legal stuff got settled later on. The problems with W95 and W98 is that it wasn't based on a true multitasking, and protected operating system so you could have processes from one program write memory to another program and get some great crashes from bugs in programs.
Click to expand...
Two things:

1) There may be some VMS-inspired design in NT given that Dave was the chief architect and many of the programmers were from the VMS team. However as far as any court findings go and according to Cutler himself, there has never been any actual VMS code used in Windows NT. There are all sorts of rumors around the internet of all sorts of things, but this particular one was never really substantiated by anyone.

2) W95 and W98 did preemptively multitask 32-bit Windows programs and all DOS programs (in fact, in every 386 version of Windows as far back as Windows 2.0, DOS programs had always been preemptively multitasked). 16-bit Windows programs were always cooperatively multitasked. You are correct, though, that W9x did not have very effective protected memory (supposedly 32-bit Windows programs had some protected memory, but in practice it was nowhere near what you would find in other modern OS's of the time like OS/2, NT, Be, NeXT, or *nix).
 
jakey rolling said:
Two things:

1) There may be some VMS-inspired design in NT given that Dave was the chief architect and many of the programmers were from the VMS team. However as far as any court findings go and according to Cutler himself, there has never been any actual VMS code used in Windows NT. There are all sorts of rumors around the internet of all sorts of things, but this particular one was never really substantiated by anyone.

2) W95 and W98 did preemptively multitask 32-bit Windows programs and all DOS programs (in fact, in every 386 version of Windows as far back as Windows 2.0, DOS programs had always been preemptively multitasked). 16-bit Windows programs were always cooperatively multitasked. You are correct, though, that W9x did not have very effective protected memory (supposedly 32-bit Windows programs had some protected memory, but in practice it was nowhere near what you would find in other modern OS's of the time like OS/2, NT, Be, NeXT, or *nix).
Click to expand...

What I heard is that there were DEC copyright blocks in Windows code.

There was a subsequent agreement between DEC and Microsoft and I suspect Microsoft just gave DEC money to be quiet about it.
 
Bubble99 said:
It started when vista is when windows got really bloated.
Click to expand...
Meh - it started when Windows was at version 1.0. The complaint of "bloat" in operating systems (especially GUIs) goes way back. I remember people complaining about all the "bloat" that came with DOS 6.0 because it included so many utilities that were previously third-party (ie, antivirus, memory management, disk management, etc.)

Windows XP is considered "slim" to many people, but I recall it being quite the pig compared to Windows 2000 that I had been using before it. Same was the case moving from Mac OS 7 to Mac OS 8 and 9.

Bubble99 said:
The OSs of 80s and 90s where really fast on hard drive than it got really bloated for the hard drive and really slow.
Windows 95 and windows 98 is way faster than Windows 7 or Windows 10.
Click to expand...
Windows 95 and 98 were routinely run on computers with only tens of megabytes of RAM in them and hard drives of that era were measured in single-digit gigabytes. Of course they loaded from hard drives more quickly than Windows versions released this century. Just the driver update for my Stream Deck (installed this morning when I first logged in) was about 250MB. The download and install took a total of maybe ten seconds (took longer to enter my password than the actual install). The reasources we have today are insane compared to the W9x days, so of course there's going to be huge difference.
 
pshufd said:
There was a subsequent agreement between DEC and Microsoft and I suspect Microsoft just gave DEC money to be quiet about it.
Click to expand...
Fair enough - obviously my going by what Cutler says is going to be Microsoft's version of the "truth", so it should be taken with a good strong pickle.
 
Bubble99 said:
Is windows 11 really bloated?

I'm checking on HP laptop rebooted and shows 6 GB of RAM in use? Yes the laptop rebooted!! It showing 6 GB of RAM in use and no apps running.

The laptop has 16 GB of RAM.
Click to expand...
So, yes, Windows 11 is really bloated.

Having said that, in-use RAM after boot-up can be deceiving, and as others have said, can be due to caching. Just anecdotally, I have a desktop with 64GB of RAM and a laptop with 32. Both are running Windows 11 Pro and have more or less identical software installed (work computers). The 64GB Desktop shows around 12-15GB in use right after booting up, while the 32GB laptop shows between 6-9GB in use.

I also have a Windows 11 Pro VM that I run on my desktop and its memory is set to 8GB. When it first boots it shows only about 2.5GB in use. This isn't an LTSC version of Windows, either. Just bog-standard Win 11 Pro.
 
My Windows 11 desktop is using 8 GB for Windows and about 1.4 GB for my trading programs. It has 128 GB of cheap (when I bought it) RAM. Do I care? Not these days. Bloat away.

I suspect that it would use less RAM on a smaller system. I should check some of my virtual machines on what it uses depending on the RAM available.
 
I never understood how an Animal Anatomy describes software?
Bloat term for computers needs to be banned.
Bloat describes nothing of computer terms.
Oh you mean software that sits on your hard drive from a manufacture that takes up space and does nothing?
APPLE Does that. Linux does that.Windows does that. Please bloat term is right up there with SLOP now.
English language not used correctly is BLOAT! There i fixed it. See what i did?
Does this dress make my butt look big?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: klasma and UpsideDownEclair
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back