The ultimate shootout: Apple Mac OS X vs. Microsoft Windows Vista
- Status
Zeeshan Quireshi
C# Be Sharp !
That's what others do when u don't patent something YOU made .praka123 said:^ but the think is M$ wants to patent itthat's what i
for example , there r many Indian texts that the US has patented
teknoPhobia
t3h g04t
thinActually, you really can't patent software per se, in India, it's prohibited under the Indian Patents Act and the US only allows software to be patented if it is integral to the functioning of some hardware that is patentable and only in conjunction with the said hardware, i.e. the software cannot be patented as a stand alone piece of code, the hardware and software have to be patented as a whole. In any case, just because something belongs to a patentable category doesn't mean it is per se patentable, it still has to satisfy the triple test of novelty, utility and non obviousness, which are pretty stiff bars. Similarly, algorithms and business plans cannot be patented either. Finally, patent is a territorial right, just because something is patented in one jurisdiction does not mean it enjoys protection everywhere in the world. Neither does one jurisdiction have an obligation to award a patent to a product just because it has been granted patent protection elsewhere. I may be a pure capital markets lawyer now, but I haven't forgotten all my IP law
The principal argument based on which patents have been granted for software per se is when the software is used to solve a technical problem.
The principal argument based on which patents have been granted for software per se is when the software is used to solve a technical problem.
Last edited:
gxsaurav
You gave been GXified
I just found something severely flawed with the Mac OS X method of application installation which makes it completely in-efficient.
I downloaded NeoOffice which is a native port of OpenOffice.org for Mac OS X. It uses native binary etc. The installed file is as you can see, 350 MB. Now according the the Mac way, it loads the full “Writer” application in the memory when started. After which when I further select to launch an application from the Apple Menu it loads the other application completely in the memory.
Here is the thing, It loads the application completely in memory which results in higher memory requirement for the application to run. Now this doesn't affect small apps like Skype or Yahoo Messenger etc as they are just 10 or 12 MB but for such a big app of 350 MB, it makes it load & respond very slow because no matter what Macboys say, the whole Writer app is loaded in memory right now which is resulting in higher memory usage as you can see in the screen shot.
*img525.imageshack.us/img525/9436/picture2hz3.th.jpg
Now come to the Windows approach of loading application. Windows has one small exe file & several helper dll files which are loaded only when required or asked for. When starting an application in Windows, it only loads the exe to the memory along with 1 or 2 dll as required. It doesn't need to load the whole application cos well, if required any dll can be loaded dynamically. Thats why we call it DLL, Dynamic Link Library.
Comparing both methods, I would like the fellow members to tell here themselves which method is more efficient in computers where RAM is always limited. Loading the complete application in memory or Loading only the required part of the application while loading the rest as & when required.
I downloaded NeoOffice which is a native port of OpenOffice.org for Mac OS X. It uses native binary etc. The installed file is as you can see, 350 MB. Now according the the Mac way, it loads the full “Writer” application in the memory when started. After which when I further select to launch an application from the Apple Menu it loads the other application completely in the memory.
Here is the thing, It loads the application completely in memory which results in higher memory requirement for the application to run. Now this doesn't affect small apps like Skype or Yahoo Messenger etc as they are just 10 or 12 MB but for such a big app of 350 MB, it makes it load & respond very slow because no matter what Macboys say, the whole Writer app is loaded in memory right now which is resulting in higher memory usage as you can see in the screen shot.
*img525.imageshack.us/img525/9436/picture2hz3.th.jpg
Now come to the Windows approach of loading application. Windows has one small exe file & several helper dll files which are loaded only when required or asked for. When starting an application in Windows, it only loads the exe to the memory along with 1 or 2 dll as required. It doesn't need to load the whole application cos well, if required any dll can be loaded dynamically. Thats why we call it DLL, Dynamic Link Library.
Comparing both methods, I would like the fellow members to tell here themselves which method is more efficient in computers where RAM is always limited. Loading the complete application in memory or Loading only the required part of the application while loading the rest as & when required.
Zeeshan Quireshi
C# Be Sharp !
Means that 300 MB of data is Written to the hard disk(VM=HDD Space as i know) .goobimama said:
well in windows , even while using MS Office 2007 , Firefox , etc VM hardly goes above 200 .
And in case of saurav u can see , his VM usage of just one app is 1.7 GB .
gxsaurav
You gave been GXified
Now I don't know if it is because I m running hackintosh, but the apps start very slow here. Once I quit them & restart them they still start slow.goobimama said:
If I close them, & restart them, they open instantly cos they are already in memory.
Vista is doing the same, but the apps which I quit or close still stay in memory so that if I run them again they start instantly (superfetch).
IF some other app asks for memory, the old memory is released & given to the new app.
In your case goobi...the app is using 70 MB . Thats for what it is showing in your screen right now, more like the RAM taken by the stuff in frame buffer. But rest of the app is loaded in the memory too.
Just to tell u, I am running a fully functional Mac OS X 10.4.9 kernel. So the memory management is same as what u get on your iMac running Mac OS X 10.4.9.
On top of that I have 10.4.10 kext & update installed. Now, even if I say that there is memory leak, it is still Mac OS X 10.4.9 atleast
In Mac OS X, there are only 2 ways to make an application.app, either XCode or JAVA.
In case of XCode, when u make an application & package it, it saves as a single folder by the name.app format in which there are application resources, binaries & runtime files.
Suppose I have another application made, when packing it also bundles the resources, binaries & runtime files for that application.
This result in 2 two big applications. When you start them, they are loaded completely in RAM+Virtual Memory.
In Windows, things are different. You make an application using any programming language & IDE be with .net, C, Delphi or VB or JAVA.
When you package & compile an application, you package the resources, exe & dll files. If it is made in .net then there is only one shared runtime called “The .net 2.0/3.0 runtime”
When you start an application, only the exe & the helper dll is loaded in RAM with rest of the part staying untouched in HD. Why should the exe load it if it is not needed? If it is required the exe will load it.
A DLL can dynamically load any other dll, do its work & then remove it or keep the 2nd dll in memory.
Which method is more efficient? Its logical to understand.
I don’t know about Linux part so Linux user plz do not come here & say Mac OS X is based on Linux/UNIX so it is efficient. The package management of Mac OS X is not as same as Linux.
Last edited:
goobimama
Macboy
No idea what you are talking about dude, but I have found no 'slowness' in my mac. Safari starts with one bounce (sometimes even faster). Photoshop takes no longer than 11 seconds.
Maybe SuperFetch is better on Vista, I wouldn't know cause I only use that machine for movies...
As for quitting apps, that's where you are going wrong. You need to understand the OS and work with it...don't resist it, cause it will just get bad. Leave that Windows baggage behind...
OS X in my experience is amazing as memory management. I sometimes have photoshop, dreamweaver, pages, safari, itunes, and a whole bunch of other apps open (as in, the black triangle showing under the dock) with no slowdown in the workings of the system. As soon as a different app takes focus, the one's in the background slowly use less and less memory, taking up virtual memory instead, and I know what virtual memory is.
But can you explain a 5MB app using 250MB of virtual memory? That happens in OS X, I don't know why and i don't want to know why. Cause it doesn't affect me.
Maybe SuperFetch is better on Vista, I wouldn't know cause I only use that machine for movies...
As for quitting apps, that's where you are going wrong. You need to understand the OS and work with it...don't resist it, cause it will just get bad. Leave that Windows baggage behind...
OS X in my experience is amazing as memory management. I sometimes have photoshop, dreamweaver, pages, safari, itunes, and a whole bunch of other apps open (as in, the black triangle showing under the dock) with no slowdown in the workings of the system. As soon as a different app takes focus, the one's in the background slowly use less and less memory, taking up virtual memory instead, and I know what virtual memory is.
But can you explain a 5MB app using 250MB of virtual memory? That happens in OS X, I don't know why and i don't want to know why. Cause it doesn't affect me.
gxsaurav
You gave been GXified
goobimama said:
That was the technical part. Macs philosophy is "You don't need to know how it works, just work on it".I am not baling Mac OS X for performance when I m running on my PC. I know it is slow here due to obvious reasons (unsupported drive, chipset etc). I was just talking about how Mac OS X name.app applications work which eats lots of RAM when not even required. They can simply use things like shared resources cos Mac OS X is a self centered OS running on only a few hardware configuration.
You have another computer just for movies
. Goobi, dual boot on iMac man.Yup, all OS do the same now. In Vista as well as XP as soon as any application goes to the background, its memory is swapped to VM. Just that Vista is better due to superfetch while Mac OS X is no longer using Pre-binding. In Vista, most of the time I am running 3Ds Max rendering in background minimised to taskbar, with uTorrent or Flashget
you think a 5 MB apps will only use 5 MB RAM, lolz. It is an application. It executes, expands in RAM & then works (thats as technical as I know)
goobimama
Macboy
You seriously think you can crowd the taskbar in Windows with all these open apps? If you don't any docs open, you will most obviously close the application to keep it all clean. Not so on the mac.
Anyway, as for the not knowing how it works, its absolutely true in my case. I don't WANT to know, cause it works so nicely.
As for a 5MB app using more memory, I know that it does use a lot more than 5MB for its workings. But 250MB of VM is a bit of a stretch don't you think?
Anyway, as for the not knowing how it works, its absolutely true in my case. I don't WANT to know, cause it works so nicely.
Well, I have a dell 24 inch and a Z5500 hooked up to a Pentium 4. Its the obvious choice for movies. I do have a dual boot on the iMac, but there's not point to it. I much too much prefer FrontRow to any other media center app.
As for a 5MB app using more memory, I know that it does use a lot more than 5MB for its workings. But 250MB of VM is a bit of a stretch don't you think?
gxsaurav
You gave been GXified
I got 5 buttons in my Mouse. (I know I know, too complex for Macboys ). Right click & left click do the basic thing & in Windows the left side button is set to middle click. When opening things in Firefox I just use the side button & it opens in a new tab ( a handy feature). There is nothing like this in Mac.
). Right click & left click do the basic thing & in Windows the left side button is set to middle click. When opening things in Firefox I just use the side button & it opens in a new tab ( a handy feature). There is nothing like this in Mac.
goobimama
Macboy
I know how to open tabs with a middle click. Btw, the mighty mouse has four buttons (the side squeeze is left for "show desktop" in Goobimama's world).
Is it like you have no job or something? Cause you obviously seem to be someone with a lot of time on his hands to use an OS WHICH HE DOESN'T LIKE and go through it with a fine comb TRYING TO FIND FAULTS when there is, in his opinion, a perfect OS which he could very well be using...vista.
Just doesn't make sense...
Is it like you have no job or something? Cause you obviously seem to be someone with a lot of time on his hands to use an OS WHICH HE DOESN'T LIKE and go through it with a fine comb TRYING TO FIND FAULTS when there is, in his opinion, a perfect OS which he could very well be using...vista.
Just doesn't make sense...
Last edited:
gxsaurav
You gave been GXified
^^^ Time pass in free time.
The only reason I wanted to use Mac Os (or fedora core 4) was shake 4.1 which now I use
Anyway, how do I set as a button as middle click on Mac?
One more thing. How do I backup my Macintosh Partition?
This is how my current partition is, as shown in disk utility
*img530.imageshack.us/img530/1526/diskpe7.jpg
I want to back it up as a Drive Image. I made a drive image of my Windows XP Partition using Acronis True Image. Is there something like that for Mac so that I can make a bootable replica of my Mac drive, so that in case I screw up the Mac installation again I can simply paste the whole image back.
The only reason I wanted to use Mac Os (or fedora core 4) was shake 4.1 which now I use
Anyway, how do I set as a button as middle click on Mac?
One more thing. How do I backup my Macintosh Partition?
This is how my current partition is, as shown in disk utility
*img530.imageshack.us/img530/1526/diskpe7.jpg
I want to back it up as a Drive Image. I made a drive image of my Windows XP Partition using Acronis True Image. Is there something like that for Mac so that I can make a bootable replica of my Mac drive, so that in case I screw up the Mac installation again I can simply paste the whole image back.
Last edited:
- Status