OS X versus Vista, RAM division
section: windows, for your questions: KezNews forum, 26.10.2008
Tip: Click here to update all your PC's outdated driversAs I noted earlier this week, I’ve begun using a MacBook (the basic white model) and keeping a log of my experiences.
Yesterday, I received the adapter cable I needed to hook this machine to an external monitor so that I could use it in a desktop configuration. (A note to the thrifty: Don’t pay Apple $29 for this mini-DVI cable. Instead, go to Monoprice.com and pick up the generic adapter for $9.96. With shipping, it was still under $12, and it works just fine.)
Now that I have this system up and running on a full-sized screen, I’m ready to make some head-to-head comparisons with Windows. Because this system has a mere 1GB of RAM, I was curious to get a sense of how thrifty OS X Leopard is when it comes to memory usage. I was especially curious to see how Leopard compares to Vista, which as been slammed by critics as a resource hog.
To get started I opened Safari and opened a single web page, then began playing an MP3 track in iTunes. With those tasks running, I checked the results from Activity Monitor.
As you can see, the OS reports that 581MB is in use, with 430MB free.
Next, I launched a similar set of tasks on a system running Windows Vista Ultimate. To make the comparison fair, I used the System Configuration utility to disable all but 1024MB of memory in the system, which has 4GB of RAM. This system is using the full Aero interface (disabling it had no significant impact on the RAM footprint). I opened Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer, began playing the same MP3 tune and browsed to the same page that was open on the Macbook. Here’s what Task Manager showed for memory usage.
For those keeping score, the Vista machine is using 594MB of RAM, which is roughly 2% more than its Mac counterpart running the same set of tasks.
Vista gets a bad rap for lots of things, including its reputedly voracious appetite for memory. As you can see, Vista compares favorably to OS X in this regard and doesn’t deserve that reputation.
source:
blogs.zdnet.com
>> Click Here to Run a Free Scan for PC Errors <<
Send link 2 friend | Permalink
MORE RELATED ARTICLES:
Benchmarks: Windows 7 RTM versus Vista, XP || Steven Sinofsky named President of Windows division || Windows 7 Drives RAM Ccapacity Explosion; Vista SP2 Usage Rising || Check for RAM Error or Defect in Windows 7 and Vista with Windows Memory Diagnostic || Windows 7 - Maximum Supported RAM is 192 GB
Comments(9)
over time though as you install software on vista, boy does it slow down and takes
forever to load. i use a mac too and that system dont suffer the same way. not a mac fan
boy, and hoping that make windows 7 faster and not slower than vista. i wish they stop
backwards compatibility and dump that registry, but they wont of course.
you have to understand that most companies dont give a po.
see when you install
almost any program, most programs also make the programs start up in the beggining
(jave,googletoolbar,quicktime,itunes, etc). so thats why windows most of the time get slow
but a mac i dont think it lets anything else startp except coree services and thats
why it noticibly fast
as you can see. im a mac + windows user. not very long from the day i use mac but in
terms of executing and loading of software, mac is comparably faster then windows is all
matters. if just to compare ram usage, of cause is due to software resource consumption.
but think about the startup of 1gb windows and 1gb mac..you will see a total different in
both units..
i think you guys didn't read the article well enough, he compared vista and leopard
ram-usage , due to the fact that vista is known to be the memory-hog. what he didn't
compare is startup times and responsiveness. (maybe in the next post?)also on windows
there is so much software you just wanna try out and uninstall later which leaves dead
registry entries, trash and other crap behind, in that manner you are very restricted on
a mac os because there just isn't as much software available. meaning you install sw you
actually need, unlike on a windows system. so you gotta compare same with same not pears
and plums. please don't call me an windows-fanboy, i am well on the linux front, but i
also work on windows and mac systems....
my 2"cent
i wouldn't say there wasn't any software you just wanna play around with for mac, if
you don't find anything you want to toy with you can always grab *nix stuff.
graz: i
think the same too, they should really just build a 64 bit os from scrach and run vista in
a vm for the old stuff, so they could bin the add/remove programs and use mac style app
bundles and skinning engine instaid. also, a file system that looks after itself properly
would be cool.
punk: os x can also have stuff load at startup, like itunes
helper and stuff. but most devs don't use it.
i am under the impression that mac os is now 64 bit by default. so is this a comparison
of a 64 bit mac os to a 32 bit window os? as far as i can tell vista 64 with aero won't
even boot in less than 700mb ram.
it's nice to see some constructive comments on this site for a change instead of the
trash i normally read on here!!!
windows 7 doesn't seem to be a huge leap forward so what we actually have to do is go
back into windows history and look at the things that windows has had for a while that os
x still doesn't have today.
1. true 64 bit support. sorry, a 32 bit kernel
with a 64 bit compatibility shim doesn't count.
2. time machine (copy of
windows system restore) done 3 years before time machine was "invented", with a familiar
ui (no need to run a separate client, it is built right into windows explorer), support
for 3rd party backup programs (yup, the restore previous versions command is extensible
and will show you versions backed up by other programs, unlike apple's anti-competitive
program), and the ability to still work even when your external drive is unplugged
(important for laptops, time machine stops making copies the instant your time machine
drive is disconnected).
3. media center. way ahead!
4. better
support for exchange clients than os x and if you suggest that isn't important, why
don't you ask apple why they paid microsoft for the ability to sync the iphone with
exchange.
5. no lock in! standardizing on the os x platform restricts you to 3
models of computers. standardizing on windows allows you the freedom to purchase your
hardware from any vendor should your current vendor piss you off. also gives you access to
different types of hardware which leads us to...
6. tablet support. awwww, none
for os x!!! and you guys keep asking for it every year. :)
7. as mentioned
before, games suxx on os x. is this important to all? of course not. is this important to
some? if you believe the answer is no then you tell me who is injecting money into the
multi-billion $$$/year gaming industry.
8. hand and glove support for windows
server technologies like active directory. you know, the thing the eu said gave microsoft
an unfair advantage over the competition. is murphy right and the eu is wrong?
9. virtualization. os x can't be virtualized as a guest os. funny thing is that there is
no technical reason for this, this is just apple being apple and withholding things from
you guys just because they can. and you pay them for the privilege! i'm curious, do you
have a "safe word" in your relationship with jobs? you know, in case he goes too far
with the sadism? :) and windows 7 will bring support for vhd another great feature for us!
10: i can even encrypt my drives so that even if my laptop is stolen, my data
will still be hidden and inaccessible. what about crap os x?
the list goes on
and on!!
if you can't list anything then please tell us all why the doj
specifically singled apple out as not counting as competition.
in the end
murph, no one needs to prove the case that windows is better than os x since the doj, the
eu, and other european and asian government agencies prove that case every single year.
what you need to do is prove that these organizations are wrong and that microsoft has
always had competition. poor rotten apple!! go!!
apple will never be in the
position of where microsoft is and will be
1. os x can runs 64 bit and 32 bit apps on the same system at the same time, which all
that counts for the end user
2. show me how system restore can restore only a
photo you lost 6 weeks ago, and then tell me that system restore and time machine are the
same thing.
3. not every version of windows come with media centre, but it is
better that front row.
4. see snow leopard, if you need full exchange support.
5. no lock on the hardware, but plenty of software lock in, with windows, it's
microsoft that is the convicted monopolist, not apple.
6. apple don't make
one, why would the os need to support it.
7. is this important to all? not to
mac users, it's well known that mac's don't do games.
8. os x has hand in
glove support for unix technologies, and your point is?
9. you can for os x
server, but you have a point there.
10. file vault.
if steve jobs,
got out of bed and found apple had become the largest pc manufacture in the world the 75%
of all pc's would still sell with windows, so apple isn't trying to become microsoft.
No new comments are allowed for this article.
For your questions use our KezNews Forum
Windows 7 RTM 7600.16385.090713-1255 HERE !
Over time though
By Graz on 28.10.2008 - 01:10