Proof Mac OS X is better than any other Operating System


macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jul 18, 2002
Houston, TX
This was with every app open on my Mac. Switching between apps was instantaneous still and some apps would still open with less than a bounce. This was on a 2.26 13inch Macbook Pro with 2gbs ram.



macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
Everyone already knows this. OS X is the Gold Standard of consumer OSes. That's why we hear of Microsoft trying to be more "Mac-like" with each successive release of Windows. Except they never quite pull it off.


macrumors 6502a
Jun 11, 2004
Essex, U.K.
The page out are very high, you would notice a little bit of slowdown if you were to use one of the applications that been moved to the swap file, but probably not much.

Mac OS does a good job of keeping important stuff in the ram and not shoving it all to the swap file like windows usually does, as soon as something else needs the ram.

Also YAY for the Avril wallpaper!


macrumors G3
Mar 26, 2008
West Suburban Boston Ma

It's proof of how good OS X in general is of memory management.
But your thread title says "Proof Mac OSx is better than any other Operating System", which is nowhere near the same thing.

And what about secure/failsafe operating systems that handle hundreds of users with duplicate disks, duplicate processors, etc?


macrumors Westmere
May 16, 2008
It's proof of how good OS X in general is of memory management.
LOL. You haven't proven anything. Simply opening a lot of apps is not a test of memory management. Neither is it a valid test of any OS. One memory-intensive application can put more demand on a system than all the apps you have open. If you want to try to "prove" anything about operating systems, you must first understand how they work and what makes one better than another. Your post doesn't illustrate a knowledge of either.


macrumors 603
Oct 22, 2007
An Island in the Salish Sea
I would disagree - Best OS ever was OS/2 by IBM. The lack of applications available is what finally made me switch.... but IBM had nailed what an OS should do.

It was Object Oriented. Meaning that they took the metaphor of the Desktop and treated it as a real Desktop. Everything on it was an "Object" and had properties. Everything had right-click properties that included everything OS X, and more. By right clicking any object I could choose to make it a "template", for example (what Apple calls a stationery pad).

You create a series of printer icons that each had the properties you might need for different jobs, from the same printer. You would then drag'n-drop a document to whatever printer icon was appropriate. So, if you had a printer icon setup for printing photos at 4x5 on glossy paper, then if you had a photo (or a bunch) you would drag it/them to the photo printer icon and it would bang out the photos. Didn't matter what application you used to create the images, and you didn't have to open any application - printing was handled entirely by the printer icon. I think you can do something similar with OS X but it's not nearly as easy as right clicking a printer icon and setting up all the print settings and saving as a new printer.

Every single element of the GUI was customizable. Each individual icon could have its own font, size, font colour. Each folder could be customized. Not just the background colour, but the title bar, the scroll bars, the thin line around the window, the buttons, the background colour behind the buttons, the text (colour and font) etc etc.... each window had something like 15 or 20 elements that could be tweaked. You could a bunch of windows, of each window could be unique. Depends on how much time you had on your hands. All these elements were changed by using D'nD.... you opened a font palette (you would create a number of font palettes, each one with whatever fonts you wanted in that collection) and dragged the font. You opened the colour palette (see font palette) and dragged colours. Good Heavens I wasted more time making my desktop pretty than doing work some days!!

And finally (though this is not a complete list!) The Work Place Folder was the single most useful element - and I dearly wish OS X had the equivalent. It is the one thing I miss most. A Work Place Folder was a special folder.... Anything you dragged into it became an shortcut (Alias). You couldn't actually 'move' or 'copy' anything to it. What you would do is drag all the applications, documents, folders, remote folders, printers, font palettes and colour palettes, etc etc that you would need for a project. You open the Work Place Folder, and then you open the applications, foldes, palettes - whatever - and start your work. When you wanted to start something else or go home for the day.... you closed the WP Folder and all the apps, folders, documents, etc in that folder would close too. When you re-opened the WP folder everything that had been open previously would re-open as well and put themselves where you had left them. You would set up a WP Folder for each project and as you opened and closed them your work space would be restored. What a great concept. No more fiddling with the Finder going to the left when I'm in Photoshop and then moving to the bottom when I'm in Pages...

Sigh.... Maybe it's time I installed OS/2 (now eComstation) in VMWare? Just to waste some more time customizing it....

Incidentally, Apple and IBM collaborated on, IIRC, something called Taligent - which was supposed to be a joint project on an Object Oriented OS. Some elements made their way into OS X, but IBM really pushed it hard.

So - that's my vote.


macrumors 68030
Mar 23, 2006
Yes but that data doesn't really say anything. Minimize the window and post a new picture of your desktop for better results

Jason Beck

macrumors 68000
Oct 19, 2009
Cedar City, Utah
Yah OSX has awesome multitasking. Seriously though so does Redhat, Debian, and just about any *ix operating system. OSX is just simply the best and most polished of them all. Opening every application on a Windows machine of comparable hardware would bring it to it's knees.


macrumors 65816
Feb 15, 2002
If it's so good, why is there a disclaimer that restricts its use in any critical operating environment? It clearly doesn't conform to the standards for fail-safe operations, not until you do other things to it that Apple doesn't support.


macrumors 6502a
Jul 10, 2009
Except if you actually started to use a few of them it would probably begin to struggle...


macrumors 65816
Sep 19, 2009
I was more interested in the sheer length and small size of his dock. :D
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.