New PB's and Tiger query

[Logik]

when your windows struggles everyday with swapping, or crashes every week, that is what I meant by not having a properly formated windows. I guess I should have said tweaked/configured.

My windows XP partition can run for weeks with super heavy server usage (acting as a 4MB per second upload to bittorrent on multiple files).

I'll leave it on when I go out for a week and when I get back everything is still running as I left it.

So what I am learning is that I'll need a 1GB 15" powerbook with 128VRAM in order to get "what apple intended" or else i'll get "stutter and pausing" while just using the OS? That is not very good, hence my original question if MacOS programmers do a bad job with memory optimization.

I know what caching is. And I understand that it is a space for programs to use up ram when they need it. But that is nothing new, every OS can allow applications to acquire more RAM when they need it.

How much RAM does MacOS take up on a fresh start? (somebody with 1GB is probably best to answer this because they shouldn't be limited by their memory).

Thanx

ok you don't listen well.

i never said that you needed 1 gig of ram or a 128mb video card to get what apple intended. for the love of god. pay attention!

let's run through a few senarios just so you might grasp this concept.

NVidia GeForce 5500 FX - I believe this has 32 to 64mb of video ram. slow as molasses but has pixel shader api built in. what this means is that on any typical machine running any normal stuff, including games (though your resolution and detail levels may have to be toned down to make it playable) will work FINE. it will WORK. you even get core image support, which offloads video related things that are typically done in the CPU to the video card. like image rendering and video compositing. this can be done in the video card now, the more video ram the better, the more ram the faster it works, the more ram the more eye candy (ie frivolious effects such as expose and dashboard) you can have.

ATI Radeon 9200 - 64mb video ram, no pixel shader support. no core image. this means all video related things are done in cpu for core image instead of on the video card. just means more work, this is typically what is done in windows anyway. nothing new, nothing changed. it's the same thing, you realize all windows related things (minus gaming and very high end video rendering apps) do not take advantage of that video card's capabilities right? that means all your window drawning is done IN CPU not in the video card. with a pixel shader supported video card, that can be offloaded to the video card freeing up your CPU to do other more important things than rendering windows and compositing images.

ATI Radeon 9700/9800 - NVidia 6000 series - these cards typically have 64mb to 256mb of video ram. they will run tiger as intended. same as above, pixel shader support means CoreImage support. window drawing and compositing is done in the video card rather than in the CPU (LIKE WINDOWS).

let's say you have 64mb video ram. say you run 2 monitors... this is not "a lot" of video ram, it takes a lot of video ram to hold enough information for 2 monitors, doesn't matter if you're using OS X or windows here. it's simply NOT A LOT OF RAM. period, nothing windows specific, nothing os x specific, it just isn't a lot of ram. it will run it fine normally (except gaming and VERY HIGH resolutions). now let's throw in some of the wonderful things OS X does.. Expose is one of them right now.. in a dual monitor machine on my powerbook .. 64mb radeon 9700 mobility.. i get some "skipping" meaning the expose window stuff isn't always smooth. it just depends on what i'm doing and how many windows i have open. it doesn't bother me because in the end once the windows are placed in expose i can still see what they are.. i just didn't see this super smooth animation.. *yawn* oh well, it's cool when you first see it, but the functionality is all that really matters to me, it can skip all it wants. in a single screen setup it works GREAT, no window skipping nothing, super smooth and crisp.. but 2 monitors will slow it down, it's just too much information for 64mb of video ram.

the same will apply to tiger, expose and dashboard both will require video ram to accomplish it's task. single screen setups will run smooth as a baby's bottom on 64mb but switch to dual screen setup and expect it to choke a bit under the pressure where 128mb will handle more and probably be smooth regardless of single or dual screen setup.

if you MUST have the eye candy on full blast and always working perfectly.. go with 128mb video ram.. if you just want functionality, 64 is fine.. if you're doing single screen, 64 is going to work perfect for you, don't waste your money on anything more.

now.. if you're a video editor or whatever.. 128 might be beneficial.. if you are going to use any of apples video apps (final cut pro, motion, dvd studio pro, shake, etc) then 128 will be to your advantage in the NEW version that will be coming out. they will support coreimage.. which uses the video card to render things... MORE RAM THE BETTER.. this is obviously a high end setup.. it's NOT for your average user..

think of it this way.. average user.. 64mb

super user (video, gaming, etc) 128mb ...

it's not rocket science.

OS X simply owns windows in the memory management abilities. and i didn't have to tweak anything.. why should i have to tweak my windows setup to get it function correctly when i'm barely a power user and just leave my machine on? it chokes ok... under normal not heavy usage... works great to start, but once that ram is used up it's GONE, it's a dead machine ... OS X just keeps going. that's my experience... you can take your "tweaked" XP machine and have a blast.. i shouldn't have to sit and tweak it for it function correctly.. if i wanted more than normal performance sure.. but chugging along is barely normal performance to me.. it's very POOR ... OS X is a more advanced OS (in a lot of ways).. in some windows is more advanced.. mostly in ways that don't really matter to me.. like the ability to switch the system font for EVERYTHING throughout the OS... 10.5 will have that if 10.4 doesn't already.

 

[hechacker1]

64MB is not a lot of VRAM? ha, most people don't even have that. Unless you have the 15" or 17" upgraded powerbook or at least a $70 decent desktop pci card (PC). Mac is probably more.

64MB is perfectly fine for almost anything in the real world. Whats the powerbooks resolution? Not very much, hence not very much ram. Even with the GUI effects galore that apple has, it shouldn't use up 64MB and then have "skipping" after that. I never mentioned dual monitors, so don't try to justify your argument using that. There have been dual monitor cards for years. It isn't special. My older ti4200 can run two screens of UT2004 at the same with only 64MB of ram without any lag or slowdown at a 1280x1024 resolution (PC). Why can't expose be smooth?

you obviously know little about windows, and I'll admit that i don't know that much about macOS. But in windows, the desktop is accelerated by the drivers. That includes effects, videos, and transparency. In fact, I don't think that is even unique to windows. Almost every modern OS takes advantage of the video card for rendering, or else it would simply be to slow. For Example, use the default VGA driver in windows. Now you are using purely CPU rendering, and you will see how slow it really is without the GPU.

True, windows doesn't have an Opengl desktop, but that doesn't exclude it from using the GPU.

and btw, your right, it's not rocket science. It's computer science.

 

[Logik]

But in windows, the desktop is accelerated by the drivers. That includes effects, videos, and transparency. In fact, I don't think that is even unique to windows. Almost every modern OS takes advantage of the video card for rendering, or else it would simply be to slow. For Example, use the default VGA driver in windows. Now you are using purely CPU rendering, and you will see how slow it really is without the GPU.

BSSSST WRONG... try again

you need to go educate yourself, my last reply to you here. have a nice day troll.

 

[hechacker1]

if you wish to be ignorant of the truth, then so be it. But almost every modern OS uses 2D gpu acceleration at least. Nvidia even has a checkbox option in windows drivers that lets you further accelerate the windows desktop (it litteraly speeds up windows/animations and provides transparency through hardware).

maybe you are still using windows 3.1 or something.

 

[Logik]

if you wish to be ignorant of the truth, then so be it. But almost every modern OS uses 2D gpu acceleration at least. Nvidia even has a checkbox option in windows drivers that lets you further accelerate the windows desktop (it litteraly speeds up windows/animations and provides transparency through hardware).

maybe you are still using windows 3.1 or something.

Windows won't get this until LONGHORN.. god you are a dumbass. Microsoft calls it Avalon. It will be available in a future version of XP but it is NOT available yet.

EDIT:

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21077

 

[hechacker1]

sorry, your the one that doesn't have the right info. Either take this info from me, or go out and learn it yourself. Longhorn is going to introduce a 3D accelerated desktop with DirectX. Similar to the way Apple uses OpenGL. That is the only new thing in "Avalon"

But current windows uses 2D acceleration already. It still uses the videocard. I wish you would go and learn before you flame me.

Right now I am looking at my video options. I have serveral acceleration options.

1. "Hardware Acceleration" - it allows you to change from nothing to full. It specifically says it controlls acceleration of the desktop and mouse/windows. That's been around in windows since 95 in the video properties.

2. As mentioned already, the nvidia drivers have "Windows Drawing enhancements" Which include hardware transparency (which is also native to XP) and faster drawing of windows/menus.

3. In DxDiag there are "DirectDraw Acceleration" (2D - Desktop). "Direct3D Acceleration" and "AGP Texture Acceleration" Each can be enabled or disabled.

4. In my TV player there are options that use my videocard to help offload the video and processing. It's called "VMR9" A feature of DirectX9. Any directX 9 compatible card can do this. The older 9100 ATI cards could even do in hardware video enhancements (a rebaggaged 8500le). Newer nvidia cards have acceleration for HD video and processing.

5. Most video uses VMR9 if you have DX9 to help with video acceleration.

So in summary, there is no way that Windows is purely CPU driven when it comes to the GUI. Like I said before, the only way to achieve that is to change the video card driver in windows to "VGA STANDARD" which completely disables all forms of acceleration and relies purely on the CPU. Otherwise, all cards provide some sort of acceleration.

Furthermore, almost every other modern OS also takes advantage of hardware 2D and video acceleration if there are appropiate drivers for it. Or else, it has to default to the CPU rendering like you describe. I am not the one making uneducated guesses.

btw, how much ram does MacOS (newest) take up on a fresh boot? Like I said before, somebody with at least 1GB is probably best qualified to answer it because the OS won't hold back loading itself.