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

Why is everybody so obsessed with RAM?

sgtaylor5 said:
There should be one settings app. Not two. The whole situation is a victim of Microsoft's necessity to have backwards compatibility. I think that's the major reason why Windows slows down. They just can't. clean. everything. up. It would break far too many enterprise workflows.
Click to expand...
That's a separate discussion. The question I asked was:

How is the following an example of Windows bloatware?​

This is not an example of Windows bloatware (or any bloatware for that matter). It may be something one dislikes about Windows but it has nothing to do with the question. Keep in mind the discussion, and hence the question, has been with respect to Windows bloatware.

As an FYI I believe Microsoft no longer includes Candy Crush as a default with Windows any longer. At least it's not with version 2111 (November 2021 release). But I agree that it was annoying.
 
Last edited:
m1maverick said:
That's a separate discussion. The question I asked was:

How is the following an example of Windows bloatware?​

This is not an example of Windows bloatware (or any bloatware for that matter). It may be something one dislikes about Windows but it has nothing to do with the question. Keep in mind the discussion, and hence the question, has been with respect to Windows bloatware.

As an FYI I believe Microsoft no longer includes Candy Crush as a default with Windows any longer. At least it's not with version 2111 (November 2021 release). But I agree that it was annoying.
Click to expand...
You managed to ignore the entire list and fixate upon one topic! That is great work! Good job!
 
  • Like
Reactions: moka, jdb8167, russell_314 and 1 other person
eltoslightfoot said:
You managed to ignore the entire list and fixate upon one topic! That is great work! Good job!
Click to expand...
Perhaps you missed the post where I asked:

Can you please define which of these points you consider to be examples of Windows bloatware?​

I read the entire list which is why I asked the question.
 
m1maverick said:
Yes, your bad. I asked you to provide example of Windows bloatware and you have yet to provide it. How about dispensing with the snarky responses and just providing the information requested?
Click to expand...
No you showed me the light. There is no such thing as windows blowtware. It’s not even possible for me to give you an example because it doesn’t exist. Clearly if it existed you would know about it and wouldn’t need me to give you an example. I take back what I said because obviously I was wrong
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Saturn007, moka, jdb8167 and 3 others
russell_314 said:
No you showed me the light. There is no such thing as windows blowtware. It’s not even possible for me to give you an example because it doesn’t exist. Clearly if it existed you would know about it and wouldn’t need me to give you an example. I take back what I said because obviously I was wrong
Click to expand...
It's refreshing to see someone acknowledging their error.
 
Problem is, "bloatware" as such is strictly in the eyes of the user in question. Can't really pin a definition down globally.

For instance, I wouldn't mind running Windows 7 Pro with the Windows 10 Task Manager, the right-click Start power menu, and the ribbon in Windows Explorer. To me, those aren't "bloatware". I use them all the time. I would remove Windows 7 Libraries; to another with a lot of external disks the Library feature is essential. I'd like built in Windows Defender; another user would like to choose their own.

I don't like the entire idea of Microsoft Store, and to ME, that's "bloatware"; an unnecessary feature that gets in MY way: tons of processes running in the background I can't stop. I can't really delete any of them fully (emphasis on the word "fully"). On my Mac laptop, the Universal Control processes that run when Universal Control isn't supported is bloatware, to me.

Most Windows users would like to really choose when their machine updates, for instance, and it's hard to keep Microsoft away from controlling that process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eltoslightfoot
sgtaylor5 said:
Problem is, "bloatware" as such is strictly in the eyes of the user in question. Can't really pin a definition down globally.
Click to expand...

I didn't ask for a definition, I asked for examples.

sgtaylor5 said:
For instance, I wouldn't mind running Windows 7 Pro with the Windows 10 Task Manager, the right-click Start power menu, and the ribbon in Windows Explorer. To me, those aren't "bloatware". I use them all the time. I would remove Windows 7 Libraries; to another with a lot of external disks the Library feature is essential. I'd like built in Windows Defender; another user would like to choose their own.
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure where you're coming from with these but I recognize and appreciate your effort to provide examples.

sgtaylor5 said:
I don't like the entire idea of Microsoft Store, and to ME, that's "bloatware"; an unnecessary feature that gets in MY way: tons of processes running in the background I can't stop. I can't really delete any of them fully (emphasis on the word "fully"). On my Mac laptop, the Universal Control processes that run when Universal Control isn't supported is bloatware, to me.
Click to expand...
Curious, how does the Microsoft Store get in your way? I never encounter it unless I specifically run it.

sgtaylor5 said:
Most Windows users would like to really choose when their machine updates, for instance, and it's hard to keep Microsoft away from controlling that process.
Click to expand...
Another example of something that you may dislike but not an example of Windows bloatware.

Keep in mind this who thing started when I made the statement that Windows is no more "heavy weight" than macOS. So far I have seen nothing which disproves as much. I've been given examples of how system builders install third party bloatware (which I fully recognize) but that's not "Windows'" fault. I've been provided examples of some dislikes of Windows. But those aren't examples of Windows bloatware. Your examples at least address the question.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ArkSingularity
m1maverick said:
I didn't ask for a definition, I asked for examples.

I'm not really sure where you're coming from with these but I recognize and appreciate your effort to provide examples.

Curious, how does the Microsoft Store get in your way? I never encounter it unless I specifically run it.

Another example of something that you may dislike but not an example of Windows bloatware.

Keep in mind this who thing started when I made the statement that Windows is no more "heavy weight" than macOS. So far I have seen nothing which disproves as much. I've been given examples of how system builders install third party bloatware (which I fully recognize) but that's not "Windows'" fault. I've been provided examples of some dislikes of Windows. But those aren't examples of Windows bloatware. Your examples at least address the question.
Click to expand...
Windows 7 can be run on older slower hardware, and Windows 10 needs an SSD for any version greater than 1809. What I'm calling bloatware (for me) is the extra Windows processes that are in Windows 10 and aren't in Windows 7. I think what you are wanting examples of are Parts of Windows that aren't needed (but possible could be removed) and are there anyway. IOW, bloatware = tons of processes running in the background I can't stop. It's not just one thing.

Windows 7 is a lighter weight operating system and Windows 10 needs more hardware to run fast. That's the best I can explain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ArkSingularity and eltoslightfoot
erckrns said:
Think about the $ value of the amount of productivity lost to debating the definition of Windows bloatware on a Mac forum in this thread alone
Click to expand...
I just passed close of business! No productivity loss here. Always helps to hone my explaining skills.

On the Mac, the Universal Control processes that run when Universal Control isn't supported on my laptop is bloatware, to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eltoslightfoot
The first thing I always wish I had more of whenever my MacBook starts to feel a bit sluggish after years of use is RAM. It is always the first thing I wish I can upgrade but usually Apple makes it very difficult if not impossible to.

It is usually one of the most expensive things when choosing configuring your add-ons.

However I do think it is case to case as I use photoshop and some other heavy apps.

If you are simply browsing the internet you should be fine for awhile.
 
sgtaylor5 said:
Windows 7 can be run on older slower hardware, and Windows 10 needs an SSD for any version greater than 1809. What I'm calling bloatware (for me) is the extra Windows processes that are in Windows 10 and aren't in Windows 7. I think what you are wanting examples of are Parts of Windows that aren't needed (but possible could be removed) and are there anyway. IOW, bloatware = tons of processes running in the background I can't stop. It's not just one thing.

Windows 7 is a lighter weight operating system and Windows 10 needs more hardware to run fast. That's the best I can explain.
Click to expand...
I am not sure what the point is given that my initial response to you was wrt Windows versus macOS.

With that said newer operating systems tend to use more resources than previous operating systems. Thus the fact that Windows 10 has more running processes than Windows 7 should not be a surprise. The same could be said for later versions of macOS compared to the previous version. Though with the annual release schedule of new macOS versions this difference may not be as significant as moving from Windows 7 to Windows 10 as there was a six year gap between the two.

Also, I don't consider the number of running processes to be a reasonable way to determine bloat. Using this metric a freshly booted Windows 10 Home system has ~ 120 running processes whereas a freshly booted version of Monterey has ~ 410 running processes. Based on this metric Monterey is almost 3.5 times more bloated than Windows 10.

Finally, and outside the scope of Windows versus macOS bloat I am not aware that Windows 10 post 1809 needs an SSD. I've had several post 1809 versions of Windows 10 running on regular hard drives. Can you provide a reference to this requirement?
 
erckrns said:
Think about the $ value of the amount of productivity lost to debating the definition of Windows bloatware on a Mac forum in this thread alone
Click to expand...
It's interesting to me how many comments on this site tend to pull Windows into a discussion merely for the sake of commenting how Windows is so bad.
 
m1maverick said:
I am not sure what the point is given that my initial response to you was wrt Windows versus macOS.

With that said newer operating systems tend to use more resources than previous operating systems. Thus the fact that Windows 10 has more running processes than Windows 7 should not be a surprise. The same could be said for later versions of macOS compared to the previous version. Though with the annual release schedule of new macOS versions this difference may not be as significant as moving from Windows 7 to Windows 10 as there was a six year gap between the two.

Also, I don't consider the number of running processes to be a reasonable way to determine bloat. Using this metric a freshly booted Windows 10 Home system has ~ 120 running processes whereas a freshly booted version of Monterey has ~ 410 running processes. Based on this metric Monterey is almost 3.5 times more bloated than Windows 10.

Finally, and outside the scope of Windows versus macOS bloat I am not aware that Windows 10 post 1809 needs an SSD. I've had several post 1809 versions of Windows 10 running on regular hard drives. Can you provide a reference to this requirement?
Click to expand...

I am not an engineer. I merely fix computers. I base my comments on seeing hundreds of Windows 10 desktops and laptops gain new life and get fast enough for normal use when I cloned to SSD from a spinning hard drive. Before that, they were unusably slow. Your mileage may vary. I saw this need happen after I saw PC's upgraded to 1903. No facts other than that. An engineer will have to chime in on this.

Windows machines simply need faster hardware due to backwards compatibility requirements. Windows is simply not as efficient as macOS is. I've seen far less need for faster hardware on a Mac than I have on the Windows side.

Simply my (obviously invalid) personal observation; I shouldn't be trusting my lying eyes and ears after 35 years of working on my own and my clients' computers. Unfollowing this conversation. Good luck finding a scientific explanation; I can't give one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eltoslightfoot and ArkSingularity
sgtaylor5 said:
I am not an engineer. I merely fix computers. I base my comments on seeing hundreds of Windows 10 desktops and laptops gain new life and get fast enough for normal use when I cloned to SSD from a spinning hard drive. Before that, they were unusably slow. Your mileage may vary. I saw this need happen after I saw PC's upgraded to 1903. No facts other than that. An engineer will have to chime in on this.

Windows machines simply need faster hardware due to backwards compatibility requirements. Windows is simply not as efficient as macOS is. I've seen far less need for faster hardware on a Mac than I have on the Windows side.

Simply my (obviously invalid) personal observation; I shouldn't be trusting my lying eyes and ears after 35 years of working on my own and my clients' computers. Unfollowing this conversation. Good luck finding a scientific explanation; I can't give one.
Click to expand...
Yet you make statements, by your own admission, you're unqualified to make.

As I originally stated in my initial response to you: Windows systems do not require more resources than macOS systems. You have done nothing to demonstrate or argue as much other than "I merely fix computers". Example, your statement that Windows 10 post 1809 requires an SSD. The reality is it does not. One doesn't need to be an engineer to know this.

The reality is you are making a claim you're unqualified (your own admission) and unable to support. What's puzzling to me is why?
 
sgtaylor5 said:
I am not an engineer. I merely fix computers. I base my comments on seeing hundreds of Windows 10 desktops and laptops gain new life and get fast enough for normal use when I cloned to SSD from a spinning hard drive. Before that, they were unusably slow. Your mileage may vary. I saw this need happen after I saw PC's upgraded to 1903. No facts other than that. An engineer will have to chime in on this.

Windows machines simply need faster hardware due to backwards compatibility requirements. Windows is simply not as efficient as macOS is. I've seen far less need for faster hardware on a Mac than I have on the Windows side.

Simply my (obviously invalid) personal observation; I shouldn't be trusting my lying eyes and ears after 35 years of working on my own and my clients' computers. Unfollowing this conversation. Good luck finding a scientific explanation; I can't give one.
Click to expand...
Nor should you need to. Your experience is better than anything that individual is seeking anyway. You are corrrect in your experience. It matters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: moka and ArkSingularity
m1maverick said:
Yet you make statements, by your own admission, you're unqualified to make.

As I originally stated in my initial response to you: Windows systems do not require more resources than macOS systems. You have done nothing to demonstrate or argue as much other than "I merely fix computers". Example, your statement that Windows 10 post 1809 requires an SSD. The reality is it does not. One doesn't need to be an engineer to know this.

The reality is you are making a claim you're unqualified (your own admission) and unable to support. What's puzzling to me is why?
Click to expand...
What answer exactly do you need? I assume anybody who has extended experience with windows has encountered in at least one point issues with updating going wrong, or bugs in file indexing and how being on low resources cripples the whole system. Notably what I end up doing in every windows computer I have is disabling file indexing to save myself from system.exe (or whatever that was) taking up half my CPU for hours at random times. You fix it and after a few days it starts again. Windows update backups end up taking huge lot of space, and if you are limited in space already you have to choose whether keeping your only failsafe if anything proves wrong, which is much more common that one would like (and also many people have no idea about it in the first place). Windows defender scanning every cloud interaction making working on the cloud really hard again if you are low on resources. One does not have to have a PhD in computer architecture to deduce things from year-long everyday experience with windows. Even before I got a mac, I preferred linux and only had to suffer using windows for work/games/software.
 
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