why does apple suck?

Discussion in 'macOS' started by darkwing, Nov 4, 2007.

  1. darkwing macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #1
    Here's a cool thing to do with Leopard:

    1) Open TextEdit
    2) Open ActivityMonitor and set filter to "TextEdit"
    3) Observe ~6 megs of "real memory" usage. This may seem like a lot to some, but all the Cocoa frameworks are loaded and initialized. If you want a powerful GUI you have to pay some overhead. No complaints there.
    4) Create 900 empty new text windows.
    5) Observe approx ~780 MB of real memory usage. (Again, this is still ok.)
    6) Option-click a close box and watch all windows close.
    7) Observe ~49 MB of memory usage.

    Tiger had horrible memory leaks in Cocoa. So did Panther. So did Jaguar. How long will this framework be in use before basic memory leaks are fixed?

    Also, how does thread creation time (my biggest gripe with OSX) get WORSE with Leopard coming out? (According to xbench results.) Simply put, the people over at Apple are idiots. It's cool that they've made a pretty GUI on top of a UNIX foundation, but they clearly have no interest in making it a platform that anyone with a solid computer science background can be proud of.

    </rant>
     
  2. Luis macrumors 65816

    Luis

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Location:
    Costa Rica
    #2
    Why would you want to open 900 text edit windows?





    just kidding, don't get mad at me
     
  3. adrianblaine macrumors 65816

    adrianblaine

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Location:
    Pasadena, CA
    #3
    Every company has flaws. Every human has flaws. We have to deal with it. If it is a big deal to you, find a way to work for them and fix the problem instead of griping about it.
     
  4. compuguy1088 macrumors 6502a

    compuguy1088

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Location:
    In the Sub-Basement of Solitude
    #4
    I have no clue why anyone would open that many text edit windows...
     
  5. tyr2 macrumors 6502a

    tyr2

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Location:
    Leeds, UK
    #5
    As I understand it one of Apple's design goals with the kernel/OS is to make it appear to be running faster to the end user, rather than improving artificial benchmarks. I've got to say Leopard certainly seems much faster than Tiger especially on my Mac Pro.

    Edit: That's regarding the thread creation time, not the memory issue, if that wasn't clear.
     
  6. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #6
    It's a proof of concept. The idea is that, most likely, some failure to de-allocate memory is occurring with each window, but the amount is too small to be easily noticed. When you do it 900 times, you notice the stack up. But the problem was there in the beginning.

    Suppose Safari has a similar leak level. Opening 900 blank tabs and closing them would be silly. However, I close / reset Safari maybe once every week or two. Opening and closing 900 tabs between resets is not at all unreasonable for me.
     
  7. BBC B 32k macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    London
    #7
    first time computer users may not realize that you put more than one character in each file. Apple should have this covered. I for one am going back to my Phillips G7000 for my computing needs.
     
  8. cmaier macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2007
    Location:
    California
    #8
    I wonder if part of the issue is that they are now using garbage collection. Are you seeing the leak if you exit the program, or just when you close the windows? If the latter, the collector might simply not have decided to sweep up yet.
     
  9. ClassicBean macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2004
    Location:
    Torontoland
    #9
    Here's a cool thing to do if you have time to open up 900 text edit windows for no apparent reason:

    1) Click the apple icon
    2) Click Shut Down...
    3) Observe the computer shutting down
    4) Get dressed
    5) Put on some cologne
    6) Go get laid
     
  10. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #10
    It's a geek thing. If you don't understand why, then you probably suck too.

    BTW, I hereby nominate this thread for the Most Useless Thread Title of the Year Award.
     
  11. D1G1T4L macrumors 68000

    D1G1T4L

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    #11
    Shut down? Now why would you want to go and do that :D
     
  12. compuguy1088 macrumors 6502a

    compuguy1088

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Location:
    In the Sub-Basement of Solitude
    #12
    Isn't that why you have to reboot every once in awhile. Code will never be completely bug free.
     
  13. Slumbercub macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    Location:
    Gloucester, England
    #13
    LOL :D

    I can see no reason for 900 text windows, or any other window for that matter. It is a shame we can't have 900 Spaces! :eek:
     
  14. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #14
    Usually, rebooting isn't necessary to deal with this. Closing the program in question is sufficient.
     
  15. gr8tfly macrumors 603

    gr8tfly

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    ~119W 34N
    #15
    Garbage collection is working fine when TextEdit exits. On the surface (using Activity Monitor), it does look like TextEdit itself has a leak. However, it's all deallocated upon exit.

    It's quite an extreme leap to condemn an entire engineering group (let along the entire company), because there's something you notice that looks like a problem. It's not rocket science to use Activity Monitor (or other tools) to monitor memory allocation/deallocation. I sincerely doubt you're the first to notice this behavior, especially when it's something so easy check.

    edit: There are most likely hundreds of action items for each engineering group. This is most likely one of them, and it's not going to be high on the list. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some groups (if not the majority) are having daily meetings to prioritize them - especially getting the first update for 10.5 out.

    If you still think they need to know about the bug, you can signup for a free ADC account and submit a bug report.
     
  16. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #16
    Are you kidding? This calls for wiping the hard drive and reinstalling everything!

    I'm going to do it right now, while I'm thinking about it.
     
  17. nizz macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    Location:
    north philly
    #17
    so, what is so terribly bad about this that it would embarrass you to use?
     
  18. psychofreak Retired

    psychofreak

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Location:
    London
    #18
    Apple of all companies should have efficient code...

    I truly thought this was a troll post when I clicked on the Forum Spy title...
     
  19. gr8tfly macrumors 603

    gr8tfly

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    ~119W 34N
    #19
    Bugs happen. That doesn't mean the design is inefficient.

    All in all, they do pretty well - each major release of OS-X has had noticeable performance improvements.
     
  20. sportsnut macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Location:
    Michigan
    #20
    :D:D:D:D:D:D
     
  21. unity macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Location:
    Green Bay, WI
    #21
    After reading all of this, I am still trying to figure out how this is being called a memory leak. Oh, its not.

    This is a rather common "issue", although its not, with ALL OSs. Even OS 9 on back did this.

    A memory leak is when a program starts using RAM when not called for and keeps doing so even until there is even no RAM available. Its like overfilling a bath tub.
     
  22. gr8tfly macrumors 603

    gr8tfly

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    ~119W 34N
    #22
    What you're describing is more akin to a buffer overflow. Usually will end up in a crash.

    Leaks happen when which is allocated, but never deallocated. That's what garbage collection takes care of.
     
  23. stupidregister macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    #23
    Of course it is deallocated on exit. Memory deallocation on exit is handled by the operating system. Memory leaks typically refer to unneeded memory that is not deallocated while the program is still running, not when it exits. If the memory stayed allocated even after program exit, that would lead to major problems and the OS would be to blame.
     
  24. J@ffa macrumors 6502a

    J@ffa

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2002
    Location:
    Behind you!
    #24
    Methinks you just inadvertently came up with a use for the 32GB of RAM the Mac Pro supports! :D

    On a theoretical note, seeing as how this thread isn't really going too far, is it possible to override the maximum number of Spaces you can have anywhere? Or is it hard coded? I'm perfectly happy with four but meh. I'm not creating a new thread just for the purpose of such a silly musing question :p
     
  25. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003

Share This Page