System cleanup in one click
Few things are more frustrating than your Mac telling you it has run out of memory when you're trying to be productive. It's more frustrating when you've ignored the problem for quite some time and your Mac's limitations simply won't let you put a solution on hold any longer.
Most Macs ship with 8GB RAM - it's been a long time since Apple shipped Macs with 4GB RAM or less. 8GB RAM should be plenty if you don't run memory hungry applications and games, but even the most. A library of over 125,000 free and free-to-try software applications for Mac OS.
- How to get rid of low memory notifications
So I ran the command below and it told me the memory limit only was 128 mb. $ php -r 'echo iniget(‘memorylimit').PHPEOL;' Okay, so I just have to change a value in my php.ini file.
Usually, a popup warning isn't the first sign that something is amiss. You may have noticed that your Mac isn't running as fast as it used to, with the fan louder than normal as if it's struggling to carry a heavy load up a hill.
Although Macs are wonderful computers, they have limitations. Thankfully, there is plenty you can do to resolve this problem and get your Mac operating smoothly again.
Reduce memory usage with Setapp
Instead of manually deleting files, get Setapp. It not only removes the clutter but also gives you full control over memory usage.
Your system has run out of application memory - Fix it
Mac memory usage is often occupied by apps, even browsers like Safari or Google Chrome. In the most dire circumstances, your Mac will toss a warning at you: 'your system has run out of application memory.'
Don't despair – it's solvable. The first thing to note is this is a natural issue; your Mac has a limited amount of RAM. Though more expensive Macs have more RAM, even they can butt against limitations when too many applications are running.
It may also be an app that is hogging all of your resources. This is especially true of older applications which haven't been optimized for modern computer architecture. Websites may also be a culprit.
Check RAM usage on Mac
To check your RAM use on any Mac, take the following steps:
- Open Activity Monitor from your list of applications
Note: You can do this is the Mac's control center, via the Finder in your Mac's dock, or by pressing command-space and typing 'Activity Monitor' in the Spotlight search field. - Toggle to the 'Memory' pane in the Activity Monitor window
As you see in the above screenshot, Activity Monitor shows you all of your processes, sub-processes, and how much memory each is taking up. The most pertinent portion of the window is the bottom, where it shows you the total memory usage, and how it's affecting your Mac.
A better way to monitor your Mac's memory use is with iStat Menus. After installing the app, it makes a home in your Mac's menu bar, and monitors just about everything, including memory, CPU, GPU, disks, and network usage.
You can choose which systems you'd like to monitor in the app itself. Only the items you're monitoring will have an icon in your menu bar. A simple click on the menu bar icon surfaces a drop-down menu of how your Mac is performing at the time, and hovering over each graphic brings up a larger menu, as you can see below.
How to check CPU usage on Mac
Checking CPU use on your Mac is similar to the steps above for checking memory use. For Activity Monitor, you'd make sure to highlight the 'CPU' section of the window. This will show you all the processes using your Mac's CPU at the time.
Similarly, iStat Menus has a 'CPU & GPU' toggle just above the memory section. Activating that will add a CPU and GPU monitor to your Mac menu bar, which has the same interactivity as the memory icon and menu shown above.
How to free up memory on Mac
Knowing how to clear memory on Mac is important, especially if you have a Mac with limited resources. One option is using Activity Monitor:
- Open Activity Monitor on your Mac
- Select an app using a lot of memory
- Click the 'x' icon on the top left of the screen
This is straightforward, but there's a better way. CleanMyMac X has an automated CPU and memory monitors built-in, which can give you a real-time view of memory usage in your Mac's menu bar. It also has a really quick and easy way to free up memory without digging through Activity Monitor and manually shutting down apps.
All you have to do is click the CleanMyMac X icon, select 'Free Up' in the memory pane, and the app takes care of the rest! Oftentimes, it doesn't even shut apps down.
This is a quick fix, but CleanMyMac X takes it a step further in the app itself. Under the app's 'Maintenance' section is an option to 'Free Up RAM,' which helps you clear RAM on Mac. Once you've got this option selected, simply select 'Run' at the bottom of the window, and CleanMyMac X will do a thorough scrubbing of your Mac's RAM, and clear unused files out of the way.
How to get rid of low memory notifications
Most apps are pretty good about how they use your Mac's resources. Having too many open or running in the background can severely limit what your Mac can handle, and is often why a Mac overheats or slows down.
Here are a few tips to reduce high memory usage manually if you're experiencing unique warnings or issues:
Fix 'kernel_task', a high CPU usage bug
You may have noticed through Activity Monitor something called kernel_task absorbing a large amount of processing power. One of the functions of kernel_task is to help manage CPU temperature; you may find that your Mac fan is loud and always on, even if the device isn't hot to the touch.
kernel_task usually performs this way when one or more applications are trying to use too much CPU. Unfortunately, one of the potential downsides is a Mac can overheat to such an extent that internal systems are damaged, sometimes irreparably.
Working through the following steps in this article is one way to avoid similar problems. If none of this work and kernel_task is still absorbing a high percentage of your CPU, then one or more of the following could be the cause:
- Cooling system inefficiency
- A failed or disconnected temperature sensor
- Another hardware issue, including a worn out batter
- Your System Management Controller needs a rest
If you're experiencing severe issues, Apple recommends a system management controller (SMC) reset. It's essentially a hard reset for your Mac, and should help your RAM and other hardware components start from scratch. Keep in mind you won't lose any data in this process.
Reduce memory usage in Finder
One common culprit for RAM issues is Finder, your Mac's file manager. If iStat Menus or Activity Monitor has highlighted Finder as using hundreds of MBs of RAM, there is an easy solution: change the default display for a new Finder window so it doesn't show All My Files.
- Click on the Finder icon in the Dock and click on the Finder menu, then select Preferences
- Click on General. Under 'New Finder windows show', click the dropdown menu and choose any option except All My Files
- Close Preferences, press Alt-Control, and click on the Finder icon in the Dock. Click Relaunch
Finder will now relaunch with new windows opening at the option you selected in step two.
Improve Chrome's Task Manager
Chrome is a popular browser, but it's a resources hog! Chrome uses a GPU Process as standard, which means it speeds up the loading of web pages, which can be great except at times when your computer is struggling with insufficient RAM.
Here's how:
- Open Chrome on your Mac
- On the right side of the Chrome window, select the three-dot menu
- Select 'More tools'
- Select 'Task Manager'
- Select a Chrome process you'd like to kill
- Select 'End Process' at the bottom right of the window
Here's another way to reduce Chrome's use of your Mac's memory:
- Open Chrome on your Mac
- On the right side of the Chrome window, select the three-dot menu
- Select 'settings'
- Scroll to the bottom of the page and select 'advanced'
- Scroll down to 'System,' and toggle 'Use hardware acceleration when available' off
This will affect how Chrome runs on your Mac, and your experience won't be as smooth. You can also remove unused or unwanted Chrome extensions to help it use less resources on your Mac.
Get CMM X to free up space
Install CleanMyMac X and streamline the entire process of memory management on Mac. Clever memory usage control done for you.
Clean up browsers
In every browser you use regularly, there are always going to be extensions and popups that take up space and use RAM. You can manage each one manually, or use a tool such as CleanMyMac X to identify and delete them.
In the CleanMyMac X app is a section titled 'Extensions,' which lists each extension you have for your browser or browsers. All you have to do is view the list of extensions, select the ones you no longer want, and remove them. It's really that simple!
Disable login items
Login items, browser extensions, and preference panes, such as Flash, are another common source of memory usage. Most of us have several installed that we rarely use, but which hog memory and reduce performance.
One way to do this is through System Preferences:
- From your Mac menu bar, select 'System Preferences'
- Select 'Users & Groups'
- Select 'login items'
- Deselect items you no longer want active at login
Another way, one that is even quicker, is to employ CleanMyMac to identify and cleanup login items.
- Open CleanMyMac X
- Under 'Speed,' select 'Optimization'
- Select 'login items'
You can remove all login items, or select the ones you'd like to remove individually on the right side of the window.
Disable desktop widgets
Older Macs running a version of macOS older than Catalina can disable widgets. Desktop widgets can provide a useful shortcut to apps you need to access fairly often. But they can take up processing memory that is slowing your whole Mac down. One way to close them completely is in System Preferences.
Go to: Mission Control > switch off the Dashboard
Declutter your desktop
Apple's built in decluttering tool is handy for many. All you have to do on your cluttered desktop is right-click, then select 'Use Stacks.' This places all of your desktop files into folders unique to their filetype, like 'screenshots' and 'images.'
A better way is to use Spotless, an app that gives you far more control over how your Mac is organized. It has several triggers for automated cleanup of files on your desktop, placing them wherever you see fit. It's particularly useful for power users who produce several files daily, but don't want to take the time to place each in a respective folder.
You can also select many files on your Mac desktop, and tell Spotless to tidy them up. You always have full control!
Schedule regular cleanups
Constant use of your Mac, or leaving it on all the time, will slow it down over time. Shutting it down and restarting is a traditional way of 'cleaning up' a computer.
We also like CleanMyMac X's scheduled cleanup feature. Telling the app when you'd like to perform a thorough cleaning up of your Mac's system is a method many prefer to shutting down and restarting often. It has the upshot of removing files and folders you no longer use, and cleaning up tasks that are slowing your Mac down behind the scenes. A simple shutdown may not do this.
Keeping your Mac in tip-top shape is critical. While we'd all like to think computers are brilliant little devices that can handle anything, they need some care, too.
All of the apps mentioned in this article help with taking care of your Mac, and protecting your investment. Best of all they're each free as part of a seven day trial of Setapp. Give it a try today!
This article was nominated for deletion on 2010-05-03. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Memory Pig Mac Os X
WikiProject Computing | (Rated C-class, Low-importance) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
WikiProject Apple Inc. | (Rated C-class, Mid-importance) | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Untitled[edit]
I apologize if my English isn't perfect, anyway, I think is at least understandable.Motorola MC68000 isn't a 'full 32-bit' processor; it has only 24-bit wide address bus.It is incorrect to say '24 lines allow addressing up to 8MB' because 24 lines allow to address up to 16 MBytes of memory (any kind of course). The reason of the 8MBytes limit is due the way the memory map was structured on '24-bit' Macs (http://www.osdata.com/system/physical/memmap.htm#MacPlus).Because of this MacOS 7 is able to address more than 8 MBytes of memory (4MBytes RAM + 4MBytes ROM) only on the models equipped with 'full 32-bit' processors.I know my english is simple. Please feel free to improve it in any way.Please let me know (here) if anybody of you think I'm wrong somehow.- 213.203.155.204 18:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
The tone of the article worries me slightly..the author(s) seem to assume that Apple refused to change the memory manager out of pure stubbornness or pig-headedness. I think it more likely that Apple assumed all along that some radically new OS would supercede the existing Mac OS (as OS X eventually did) and that it would not be worth the trouble to rewrite the entrenched memory manager. -Astrovan
- Some developers were already indicating their displeasure at the way memory management worked as far back as 1989 or so (possibly earlier, but that's when I became aware of it). At that time System 7 hadn't even been released, and it certainly didn't address the issue. In fact by making MultiFinder a non-optional part of the system, it made the situation worse. There were some third-party extensions that replaced the memory manager (Optimem), which showed that it could be changed - though it's true that Optimem caused some compatibility issues with some apps - but then they didn't have the inside story that Apple themselves would have had. In 1992 some colleagues and I had a lengthy discussion with some Apple engineers at a developer seminar about the situation, and we outlined a scheme to them that we thought could have worked. They agreed it was a workable idea, but told us that backward compatibility would be too difficut to ensure, though we didn't really buy that, since our plan provided an identical view of the system from the app's perspective. Perhaps they knew that it really wasn't apps they were worried about, it was system code that was taking liberties - it's come to light much more recently that a lot of it was undocumented, uncommented and certainly unmanaged. However, despite this their tone was very much along the lines of 'you boys shouldn't meddle in grown-up's business, now go away and leave it to us, we know what we're doing'. We found it patronising to say the least, especially as clearly the implementation that the 'grown ups' had come up with sucked so badly. OS X totally replaces the memory manager though implements the same APIs in Carbon, so it shows that a different plan could have been dropped in underneath without compromising API compatibility - and provided apps stuck to the rules that Apple had promoted since the first public issue of Inside Macintosh, they would not have had a problem. Apple's other sticking plaster 'solutions' to the problem - temporary memory and so forth, as well as the seriously crappy virtual memory scheme in System 7.whatever, simply added to the problem in spades. It's a moot point, but they really should have bitten the bullet and fixed it with System 7, even if there would have been some bumps in the road as a result - they did it with the 24 -> 32 bit thing, 68k -> PowerPC thing, and others, so why they were so stubborn about this is hard to fathom.Graham 08:00, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I agree with the points made by Graham, however, I do believe that the article does not contain a level of objectivity that is desirable. While Graham makes perfectly valid points, they are still points of personal opinion, which could be done without. If this article was more objective, then perhaps it would not seem to people that Apple was 'stubborn or pig-headed'. For instance, instead of saying 'Apple did a bad thing' we could say 'It was some people's opinion that Apple did a bad thing', the latter keeping a neutral point of view. This would be quite an interesting (and by that I mean 'boring') task to do, but it would give this article quite a nice polish. --huwr 08:51, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I am deleting this:
In fact this demonstrates conclusively that it was possible to change the model all along without a major compatibility issue, which was always Apple's defence for keeping the original scheme.
because it is, pardon me, bullsh*t. Cryozia mac os. The 'compatibility issue' was that applications were reaching into private memory manager data structures, patching traps (in many cases, Apple could not change the order in which purely internal routines were called by portions of the toolbox without breaking important third-party applications), directly reading low-memory globals, in other words, generally violating encapsulation. This was a problem for the entire Mac toolbox, not just the memory manager.
All of that compatibility nightmare still exists -- in the Mac OS 9 emulation layer (Classic.app).
All you have to do is click the CleanMyMac X icon, select 'Free Up' in the memory pane, and the app takes care of the rest! Oftentimes, it doesn't even shut apps down.
This is a quick fix, but CleanMyMac X takes it a step further in the app itself. Under the app's 'Maintenance' section is an option to 'Free Up RAM,' which helps you clear RAM on Mac. Once you've got this option selected, simply select 'Run' at the bottom of the window, and CleanMyMac X will do a thorough scrubbing of your Mac's RAM, and clear unused files out of the way.
How to get rid of low memory notifications
Most apps are pretty good about how they use your Mac's resources. Having too many open or running in the background can severely limit what your Mac can handle, and is often why a Mac overheats or slows down.
Here are a few tips to reduce high memory usage manually if you're experiencing unique warnings or issues:
Fix 'kernel_task', a high CPU usage bug
You may have noticed through Activity Monitor something called kernel_task absorbing a large amount of processing power. One of the functions of kernel_task is to help manage CPU temperature; you may find that your Mac fan is loud and always on, even if the device isn't hot to the touch.
kernel_task usually performs this way when one or more applications are trying to use too much CPU. Unfortunately, one of the potential downsides is a Mac can overheat to such an extent that internal systems are damaged, sometimes irreparably.
Working through the following steps in this article is one way to avoid similar problems. If none of this work and kernel_task is still absorbing a high percentage of your CPU, then one or more of the following could be the cause:
- Cooling system inefficiency
- A failed or disconnected temperature sensor
- Another hardware issue, including a worn out batter
- Your System Management Controller needs a rest
If you're experiencing severe issues, Apple recommends a system management controller (SMC) reset. It's essentially a hard reset for your Mac, and should help your RAM and other hardware components start from scratch. Keep in mind you won't lose any data in this process.
Reduce memory usage in Finder
One common culprit for RAM issues is Finder, your Mac's file manager. If iStat Menus or Activity Monitor has highlighted Finder as using hundreds of MBs of RAM, there is an easy solution: change the default display for a new Finder window so it doesn't show All My Files.
- Click on the Finder icon in the Dock and click on the Finder menu, then select Preferences
- Click on General. Under 'New Finder windows show', click the dropdown menu and choose any option except All My Files
- Close Preferences, press Alt-Control, and click on the Finder icon in the Dock. Click Relaunch
Finder will now relaunch with new windows opening at the option you selected in step two.
Improve Chrome's Task Manager
Chrome is a popular browser, but it's a resources hog! Chrome uses a GPU Process as standard, which means it speeds up the loading of web pages, which can be great except at times when your computer is struggling with insufficient RAM.
Here's how:
- Open Chrome on your Mac
- On the right side of the Chrome window, select the three-dot menu
- Select 'More tools'
- Select 'Task Manager'
- Select a Chrome process you'd like to kill
- Select 'End Process' at the bottom right of the window
Here's another way to reduce Chrome's use of your Mac's memory:
- Open Chrome on your Mac
- On the right side of the Chrome window, select the three-dot menu
- Select 'settings'
- Scroll to the bottom of the page and select 'advanced'
- Scroll down to 'System,' and toggle 'Use hardware acceleration when available' off
This will affect how Chrome runs on your Mac, and your experience won't be as smooth. You can also remove unused or unwanted Chrome extensions to help it use less resources on your Mac.
Get CMM X to free up space
Install CleanMyMac X and streamline the entire process of memory management on Mac. Clever memory usage control done for you.
Clean up browsers
In every browser you use regularly, there are always going to be extensions and popups that take up space and use RAM. You can manage each one manually, or use a tool such as CleanMyMac X to identify and delete them.
In the CleanMyMac X app is a section titled 'Extensions,' which lists each extension you have for your browser or browsers. All you have to do is view the list of extensions, select the ones you no longer want, and remove them. It's really that simple!
Disable login items
Login items, browser extensions, and preference panes, such as Flash, are another common source of memory usage. Most of us have several installed that we rarely use, but which hog memory and reduce performance.
One way to do this is through System Preferences:
- From your Mac menu bar, select 'System Preferences'
- Select 'Users & Groups'
- Select 'login items'
- Deselect items you no longer want active at login
Another way, one that is even quicker, is to employ CleanMyMac to identify and cleanup login items.
- Open CleanMyMac X
- Under 'Speed,' select 'Optimization'
- Select 'login items'
You can remove all login items, or select the ones you'd like to remove individually on the right side of the window.
Disable desktop widgets
Older Macs running a version of macOS older than Catalina can disable widgets. Desktop widgets can provide a useful shortcut to apps you need to access fairly often. But they can take up processing memory that is slowing your whole Mac down. One way to close them completely is in System Preferences.
Go to: Mission Control > switch off the Dashboard
Declutter your desktop
Apple's built in decluttering tool is handy for many. All you have to do on your cluttered desktop is right-click, then select 'Use Stacks.' This places all of your desktop files into folders unique to their filetype, like 'screenshots' and 'images.'
A better way is to use Spotless, an app that gives you far more control over how your Mac is organized. It has several triggers for automated cleanup of files on your desktop, placing them wherever you see fit. It's particularly useful for power users who produce several files daily, but don't want to take the time to place each in a respective folder.
You can also select many files on your Mac desktop, and tell Spotless to tidy them up. You always have full control!
Schedule regular cleanups
Constant use of your Mac, or leaving it on all the time, will slow it down over time. Shutting it down and restarting is a traditional way of 'cleaning up' a computer.
We also like CleanMyMac X's scheduled cleanup feature. Telling the app when you'd like to perform a thorough cleaning up of your Mac's system is a method many prefer to shutting down and restarting often. It has the upshot of removing files and folders you no longer use, and cleaning up tasks that are slowing your Mac down behind the scenes. A simple shutdown may not do this.
Keeping your Mac in tip-top shape is critical. While we'd all like to think computers are brilliant little devices that can handle anything, they need some care, too.
All of the apps mentioned in this article help with taking care of your Mac, and protecting your investment. Best of all they're each free as part of a seven day trial of Setapp. Give it a try today!
This article was nominated for deletion on 2010-05-03. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Memory Pig Mac Os X
WikiProject Computing | (Rated C-class, Low-importance) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
WikiProject Apple Inc. | (Rated C-class, Mid-importance) | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Untitled[edit]
I apologize if my English isn't perfect, anyway, I think is at least understandable.Motorola MC68000 isn't a 'full 32-bit' processor; it has only 24-bit wide address bus.It is incorrect to say '24 lines allow addressing up to 8MB' because 24 lines allow to address up to 16 MBytes of memory (any kind of course). The reason of the 8MBytes limit is due the way the memory map was structured on '24-bit' Macs (http://www.osdata.com/system/physical/memmap.htm#MacPlus).Because of this MacOS 7 is able to address more than 8 MBytes of memory (4MBytes RAM + 4MBytes ROM) only on the models equipped with 'full 32-bit' processors.I know my english is simple. Please feel free to improve it in any way.Please let me know (here) if anybody of you think I'm wrong somehow.- 213.203.155.204 18:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
The tone of the article worries me slightly..the author(s) seem to assume that Apple refused to change the memory manager out of pure stubbornness or pig-headedness. I think it more likely that Apple assumed all along that some radically new OS would supercede the existing Mac OS (as OS X eventually did) and that it would not be worth the trouble to rewrite the entrenched memory manager. -Astrovan
- Some developers were already indicating their displeasure at the way memory management worked as far back as 1989 or so (possibly earlier, but that's when I became aware of it). At that time System 7 hadn't even been released, and it certainly didn't address the issue. In fact by making MultiFinder a non-optional part of the system, it made the situation worse. There were some third-party extensions that replaced the memory manager (Optimem), which showed that it could be changed - though it's true that Optimem caused some compatibility issues with some apps - but then they didn't have the inside story that Apple themselves would have had. In 1992 some colleagues and I had a lengthy discussion with some Apple engineers at a developer seminar about the situation, and we outlined a scheme to them that we thought could have worked. They agreed it was a workable idea, but told us that backward compatibility would be too difficut to ensure, though we didn't really buy that, since our plan provided an identical view of the system from the app's perspective. Perhaps they knew that it really wasn't apps they were worried about, it was system code that was taking liberties - it's come to light much more recently that a lot of it was undocumented, uncommented and certainly unmanaged. However, despite this their tone was very much along the lines of 'you boys shouldn't meddle in grown-up's business, now go away and leave it to us, we know what we're doing'. We found it patronising to say the least, especially as clearly the implementation that the 'grown ups' had come up with sucked so badly. OS X totally replaces the memory manager though implements the same APIs in Carbon, so it shows that a different plan could have been dropped in underneath without compromising API compatibility - and provided apps stuck to the rules that Apple had promoted since the first public issue of Inside Macintosh, they would not have had a problem. Apple's other sticking plaster 'solutions' to the problem - temporary memory and so forth, as well as the seriously crappy virtual memory scheme in System 7.whatever, simply added to the problem in spades. It's a moot point, but they really should have bitten the bullet and fixed it with System 7, even if there would have been some bumps in the road as a result - they did it with the 24 -> 32 bit thing, 68k -> PowerPC thing, and others, so why they were so stubborn about this is hard to fathom.Graham 08:00, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- I agree with the points made by Graham, however, I do believe that the article does not contain a level of objectivity that is desirable. While Graham makes perfectly valid points, they are still points of personal opinion, which could be done without. If this article was more objective, then perhaps it would not seem to people that Apple was 'stubborn or pig-headed'. For instance, instead of saying 'Apple did a bad thing' we could say 'It was some people's opinion that Apple did a bad thing', the latter keeping a neutral point of view. This would be quite an interesting (and by that I mean 'boring') task to do, but it would give this article quite a nice polish. --huwr 08:51, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I am deleting this:
In fact this demonstrates conclusively that it was possible to change the model all along without a major compatibility issue, which was always Apple's defence for keeping the original scheme.
because it is, pardon me, bullsh*t. Cryozia mac os. The 'compatibility issue' was that applications were reaching into private memory manager data structures, patching traps (in many cases, Apple could not change the order in which purely internal routines were called by portions of the toolbox without breaking important third-party applications), directly reading low-memory globals, in other words, generally violating encapsulation. This was a problem for the entire Mac toolbox, not just the memory manager.
All of that compatibility nightmare still exists -- in the Mac OS 9 emulation layer (Classic.app).
Memory Pig Mac Os Downloads
In Carbon on Mac OS X, Apple could do away with all the cruft because there is no binary compatibility with old applications. Carbon apps may run on Mac OS 9 -- but the version of Carbon on Mac OS 9 is a compatibility shim that still uses the old implementation underneath the modernized API calls. Only in Mac OS X could Apple fully do away with the old implementation.
(If you must have credentials, I was a software engineer on the Carbon team at Apple.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.203.155.204 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think that's fair comment. But since Apple were already aware that there was a problem as far back as the late 80s, there is no real reason that Carbon or so0mething very like it could not have been instigated then, rather than waiting for OS X (and which, I seem to recall, was forced on them by some high-profile rebellious developers who refused point-blank, and quite reasonably, to port their code to Cocoa). Adoption might have been slower since there was no clear benefit in the short term, but Apple could have done it. I think that's the point. Graham 03:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- That's not really the topic of the article, though. Your meeting with Apple engineers of course isn't usable in the article because of WP:Verifiability. It's clear that everyone was annoyed by MultiFinder and the lame memory scheme we all found ourselves in; if you feel the need to add citations saying so then feel free. More citation would help this article, though it's hard to find them on programming topics from the 80s and early 90s. Tempshill 23:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Mac OS Classic application memory allocation.png[edit]
Image:Mac OS Classic application memory allocation.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 07:01, 1 January 2008 (UTC) Bringing home the bacon mac os.
Historic or current article[edit]
Does this article reflect the current state or is it a historic article about pre OS X era? If so it should be renamed IMHO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.110.199.118 (talk) 10:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
- This article is definitely not up to date. There is no description of the 64 bit system used today Agnerf (talk) 05:22, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
- Renamed it because it is fundamentally historic. Contemporary macOS memory management methods are not particularly distinctive. On the whole, not hugely different from any other Unix-like operating system. Only Classic Mac OS has such a unique way of managing memory that it deserves its own article in my opinion. (But, if someone disagrees, and thinks such an article should be written about contemporary macOS, by all means go ahead in another article.) SJK (talk) 08:38, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
'32-bit clean' redirect[edit]
32-bit clean redirects here, but there's a similar phenomenon in the ARM architecture and System/360 which also had programs use unused address bits to store data which caused problems when addresses were expanded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.21.52.10 (talk) 07:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
External links modified[edit]
Memory Pig Mac Os Catalina
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mac OS memory management. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100516140618/http://www.memorymanagement.org/articles/mac.html to http://www.memorymanagement.org/articles/mac.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
As of February 2018, 'External links modified' talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these 'External links modified' talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}}
(last update: 15 July 2018).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot(Report bug) 07:36, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Is this article overly-technical?[edit]
Memory Pig Mac Os Download
I was reading this article and it seems excessively technical. If I did not have a computer science background myself, I would struggle to make sense of this article. I think that mentions to specific API names and features is a little too specific. Perhaps this could be rewritten to be more high-level or understandable to less-technical users? I marked the page itself as technical after reading the guidelines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjkucia (talk • contribs) 17:11, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Rjkucia: This is an article about an inherently technical topic, and a rather obscure technical topic at that – the memory management of a discontinued operating system. The fact is, memory management is something which only concerns programmers, and you need to know a bit of background about computer science and/or programming to make sense of it. As such, I feel that asking for this article to be made less technical is a bit of a dubious request. When we dealing with more advanced topics, which are not of general interest, I think it is reasonable to assume readers already understand the basics. If they don't, they can always read other articles, or other sources, to get those basics before attempting to tackle something like this SJK (talk) 11:00, 10 September 2020 (UTC)