And so do 7 and Snow Leopard!
I don't think that you can blame today's operating systems for their memory usage.
The issue with Vista was that the average computer that times just didn't have enough memory.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why is Windows so much slower at most everyday tasks than OS X?
- Thread starter JamesDV
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And so do 7 and Snow Leopard!
I don't think that you can blame today's operating systems for their memory usage.
The issue with Vista was that the average computer that times just didn't have enough memory.
Sure you can blame if there is someone which does not. Linux does not eat that much memory.
Thanks,
Joe.
You could try something like Registry Mechanic or one of the hundreds of other such programs. I know its a nuisance and MS should provide something like that in the OS but it does help. I agree that things tend to slow down after a while in Windows but its much better in 7 than it was in XP from what I have seen. The background defragging helps too.
I put a webapp on Windows & there were memory leaks galore that did not exist on other platforms.
I don't know how Snow Leopard runs on modern Macs, but on my Mid 2007 MacBook it doesn't feel that fast to be honest. I have a dual boot with Windows 7 and I have to say, it's MUCH more responsive, doesn't feel sluggish at all and the graphics effects are pretty much always silky smooth. The last Mac OS X version that felt like this was 10.4 Tiger.
Snow Leopard is not slow on my MacBook, it just "feels" a bit sluggish at times and the graphics effects can become VERY choppy. If there is one thing that annoys me it is choppy graphics.
Pretty sure Snow Leopard runs better on modern Macs with dedicated GPU's, but when comparing Windows 7 to Snow Leopard on my Mid 2007 MacBook, Windows 7 is better speed-wise.
Snow Leopard is not slow on my MacBook, it just "feels" a bit sluggish at times and the graphics effects can become VERY choppy. If there is one thing that annoys me it is choppy graphics.
Pretty sure Snow Leopard runs better on modern Macs with dedicated GPU's, but when comparing Windows 7 to Snow Leopard on my Mid 2007 MacBook, Windows 7 is better speed-wise.
On my PC (Quad Core 3.00GHz, 4GB RAM, yada, yada...) Windows 7 feels much snappier than OS X...
My MBP on the integrated 9400M is snappy as can be with the Leopard system animations (which are pretty much the same as those in SL). Did you have 10.5 on it with no problems?
"Snow Leopard consistently beats Windows 7 in many general performance areas." (source: CNET Performance showdown)
Ah, yes. I forgot about the Intel graphics cards...
I'm surprised that you find Win7 snappier with all that Aero animation. Do you have Aero turned off?My old Dell tower has an Intel integrated; I quickly installed an ATI Radeon when I got the machine because that Intel thing is soooo bad. Plus it didn't support DVI at the time.
Aero is turned on, runs really well.Ah, yes. I forgot about the Intel graphics cards...
My old Dell tower has one; I quickly installed an ATI Radeon when I got the machine because that Intel thing is soooo bad. Plus it didn't support DVI at the time.
The only tests that everyone will see is boot and shutdown time. The other tests (multimedia multitasking and iTunes encoding) are not done generally by most consumers. How about application launch time with iTunes, OpenOffice, etc?
Also, they were both done on a Mac. I'd rather see a test with a PC of similar specs versus both on a Mac.
The point is that both operating systems can beat each other in different tests. Get 1000 tests and you'll get at least 900 different results.
Depends how you put faster into the terms.
If you mean boot times yes SL is faster.
But if you put it into how fast you can get things done on windows to OSX that's a different story. As I use win7 most of the time on my macbook now as i find it faster to do my work as the SVN clients are better less steps to get a update and commit. the PHP IDE's are better. but it will be different for each people.
If you mean boot times yes SL is faster.
But if you put it into how fast you can get things done on windows to OSX that's a different story. As I use win7 most of the time on my macbook now as i find it faster to do my work as the SVN clients are better less steps to get a update and commit. the PHP IDE's are better. but it will be different for each people.
Ummmm...no...Windows does not have hardware; PC's have hardware. And in any case, it's pretty much only the graphics cards that tend to lag behind.
True; but I don't really need a quad core (like the i5 or i7 iMacs). And the truth is most others don't either.
Right now, if you aren't using Handbrake, Photoshop, or another pro app, quad core is a waste IMO. That will change, of course, as developers rewrite more 'everyday' apps to take advantage of 4+ cores. A C2D is more than fast enough for everyday use.
True; but I don't really need a quad core (like the i5 or i7 iMacs). And the truth is most others don't either.
Right now, if you aren't using Handbrake, Photoshop, or another pro app, quad core is a waste IMO. That will change, of course, as developers rewrite more 'everyday' apps to take advantage of 4+ cores. A C2D is more than fast enough for everyday use.
quad core aside, apple has been slow to keep the core2duos up to snuff as well
the mini comes to mind
It was just updated; it's a really competitive system now with 4 GB of RAM and the 2.66 GHz C2D option. Remember that it's not a full size tower!
Besides, the uMB (before it morphed into the 13" Pro) and uMBP had 1066 MHz buses on their C2Ds and 1066 MHz DDR3 RAM quite some time before most PC laptops had them. By "most" I mean the ordinary ones that aren't labelled as pro models (such as the Dell Latitudes).