As with the "Staingate" mess, you always have posters trying to justify why an issue is not really an issue or said issue due to user error/ignorance. Sorry to break it to you folks, but Apple isn't perfect. There have been bugs and other hiccups with both Yosemite and El Capitan. I first reverted to Mavericks from Yosemite due to the general choppiness of Yosemite compared to Mavericks, especially with Preview. Now with El Capitan, Preview scrolling is somewhat smoother than Yosemite, but it is still not comparable to Mavericks. Also, at times, text is blurry after scrolling and memory consumption is an issue, as others have pointed out. There is no reason why PDFs that require less than 100 MB of RAM under Mavericks require well over 1GB of RAM under El Capitan.
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.
El Captain only for laptops?
- Thread starter Trogledyte Mac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's still better to just dim or turn off the monitor completely then. The computer will still lock after a few minutes of being idle.
LCDs don't suffer from burn-in. At worst you might get some temporary ghosting if you leave it on the same image too long. Screensavers are pretty much just cosmetic nowadays.
That would be because you simply can't as you clearly do not understand what is going onIf you did you'd have explained why a vm running 10.11 with 2GB of memory has a far lower memory usage with Preview and the same PDF file as the iMac running 10.11 and 16GB of memory.
And it also performance considerably less or have you forgotten all those complaints about Preview and PDF performance such as scrolling being really sluggish? Especially when the PDFs are more complex, have pictures in them, etc. etc. El Capitan fixes those problems as can clearly be seen in the release notes as well as the many reviews and experiences from people on the forums here and elsewhere (some of us check if issues we're having still exist in the new release). There have been some threads here specifically discussing this performance improvement (with a positive outcome).
Where's that supposedly bad performance? Nowhere to be seen as can be seen in said reviews and experiences
Just because it doesn't work well for you doesn't mean it doesn't work for the rest of the world or that it is broken!
Since when does Apple have access to the Adobe Reader source code? Since never so this is a really bad comparison. If Adobe didn't change anything about Adobe Readers memory usage than it'll behave the same way in 10.11 as it does in 10.10, 10.9 and whatever OS X version it supports. You should have checked what happens if the machine has 2GB, 4GB, 8GB, 16GB of memory plus the overall memory footprint compared to Preview. In both cases it is huge and it exhibits the same behaviour. Safari and other apps do exactly the same thing because that's how it works nowadays.
The two of you are like the OPs friends: ill-informed. Also, hijacking someones thread to complain about something isn't cool either, nor is this forum Apples bug tracking system. Good luck with getting your issues resolved (with such a mindset I doubt you'll ever be able to).
When you sleep or hibernate the machine it will disconnect all devices and networking. If you are doing filetransfers and such in the background it is much better to use the screensaver because then all devices and networking are still available. If the machine is truly doing nothing then yes, it is better to have it sleep. A lot of people are not aware that you can't download anything in the background when you sleep/hibernate the machine. Screensavers are a good tool to prevent image burn in, that's their sole purpose but in OS X it is also used to lock the machine. That alone shows this isn't for laptops only but I can imagine the confusion due to OS X users using them to lock the machine.
All is clear now only "you" understand
as stated your experience with 10.11 will vary to others.Q-6
Last edited:
Agree.
I don't feel the need for a yearly update of OS X (while Im fine with iOS , since every year a new model with new features is introduced ).
A 2 years schedule would be better, with regular point updates.
No, just no.
Mission control smooth?
How about full screen animation? Smooth?
How about app launch speed?
How about stability and polish?
How fast is your Yosemite under heavy workload or when used for weeks without restarts? Smooth?
El Capitan smokes Yosemite in every area.
For those tasks yes, but the problem is distinguishing a machine that is turned off from one that only sleeps its display. The screensaver is a nice visual cue for that. Also some displays take quite some time to wake up. Not a big deal, just a matter of convenience.
That's actually not true at all. All displays will suffer from burn-in. LCDs are no exception from that rule at all. This is something you need to take into account when you are setting up a narrow casting system. This especially applies to presentations since a lot of organisations will use a template for those and thus have quite a lot of common elements that will be there in the same place all the time. It's these elements that will burn-in. The problem is that on some setups you won't notice them because they only display those presentations but once you start displaying something else it'll be very visible. Luckily it is easy to fix at an early stage (plus the alternation trick: alternate between images, presentations, use different templates, etc.) and luckily it is not as worse as with the old CRTs. Screensavers today are most definitely not cosmetic, they are still a good thing (and in some cases a bare necessity).
Regarding the Preview memory hogging, my unscientific test using a 7.5 MB, 35 page graphics intensive PDF and a whole ton of scrolling seems to max out somewhere around 275 MB of memory in 10.11.1 (it'll settle around 235 MB once left alone). Compare to 85 MB in 10.9.5 (after I leave it alone a few seconds it'll settle down to about 55 MB).
There is no appreciable difference in performance, that I can notice, between the versions. Sounds like sloppy programming to me. Remove the constraints on RAM because we can page the SSD and suddenly you don't have motivation to author tight code. Just as how when you have a huge kitchen with tons of cabinet space, you don't often tend to use it very effectively. I get the "unused RAM is wasted RAM" argument but on the other hand there is nothing to be gained from inefficiency and leaving nothing in reserve. It'll come back and bite you somewhere along the line.
There is no appreciable difference in performance, that I can notice, between the versions. Sounds like sloppy programming to me. Remove the constraints on RAM because we can page the SSD and suddenly you don't have motivation to author tight code. Just as how when you have a huge kitchen with tons of cabinet space, you don't often tend to use it very effectively. I get the "unused RAM is wasted RAM" argument but on the other hand there is nothing to be gained from inefficiency and leaving nothing in reserve. It'll come back and bite you somewhere along the line.
How about loading of individual pages in a document? How about more complicated documents? That's where one should see improvements, not the ordinary ones. How's the memory usage with different amounts of memory?
Did some more tests and all I'm seeing is a much improvement memory management of Preview. When the system doesn't have a lot of memory available it won't use a lot of memory. It'll start consuming memory when you scroll or resize the window and the memory usage will decrease if you leave Preview alone for a few seconds (5 to 10). After firing up some virtual machines that will eat up memory rather quickly I see Previews memory usage drop dramatically. At first about 50% but after a while so much that I had to search for Preview because I couldn't find it. Memory usage went from 85MB to 1.99GB then after 10 secs idle to 1.79GB and after starting the vm's it's down to 16MB. Then it has gotten a bit more memory and rose to 37.6MB. So there you go, memory management the way it should be. Taking memory when possible and returning it when required. And yes, the performance in Preview did drop too.
The most worrying thing: I'm the first person in this thread actually doing a test like that and reporting back. Everybody else is only pointing his finger and screaming as if their life depends on it. A bit less drama and a more down to earth approach is greatly appreciated. You're going to need it when you start submitting this as feedback to Apple. As for "getting it"...I'm not seeing much proof in this topic, else I wouldn't have been the first and only with the above test (which you can do really easy in about 5 minutes).
Did some more tests and all I'm seeing is a much improvement memory management of Preview. When the system doesn't have a lot of memory available it won't use a lot of memory. It'll start consuming memory when you scroll or resize the window and the memory usage will decrease if you leave Preview alone for a few seconds (5 to 10). After firing up some virtual machines that will eat up memory rather quickly I see Previews memory usage drop dramatically. At first about 50% but after a while so much that I had to search for Preview because I couldn't find it. Memory usage went from 85MB to 1.99GB then after 10 secs idle to 1.79GB and after starting the vm's it's down to 16MB. Then it has gotten a bit more memory and rose to 37.6MB. So there you go, memory management the way it should be. Taking memory when possible and returning it when required. And yes, the performance in Preview did drop too.
The most worrying thing: I'm the first person in this thread actually doing a test like that and reporting back. Everybody else is only pointing his finger and screaming as if their life depends on it. A bit less drama and a more down to earth approach is greatly appreciated. You're going to need it when you start submitting this as feedback to Apple. As for "getting it"...I'm not seeing much proof in this topic, else I wouldn't have been the first and only with the above test (which you can do really easy in about 5 minutes).
Last edited:
I'll take your word for it; I'm not looking for an argument. What I did was just a quick "let's see for myself" for my own edification since I'm playing around with 10.11.1 on a separate partition to help me decide if I want to migrate over. Overall, I have to say the experience is pretty good. I haven't done any "stress testing" and I'm usually not a very intensive user so it's not too much of an issue. I have a few memory/battery hog games (almost all Windows games running with WINE) but I wouldn't normally even be running Preview then. Really just iTunes if anything...
That said, my faith in Apple's ability to author good software has been shaken in recent years and as a result there's going to be a level of cynicism on my part until they prove me wrong. They've been becoming very Microsoft-ish of late and it's been enough to try to figure out a "succession plan" for when this current machine gives up the ghost. I'm not expecting that to happen any time soon (it's only 3 years old) but I like to be prepared. Right now I'm not 100% that I would stick with a Mac seeing as Apple seems to be slowly deprecating the lineup. (On the other hand, there's a 0% chance for me to buy a Windows PC and keep Windows on it. I've been considering dabbling with Linux for some time, however.)
That said, my faith in Apple's ability to author good software has been shaken in recent years and as a result there's going to be a level of cynicism on my part until they prove me wrong. They've been becoming very Microsoft-ish of late and it's been enough to try to figure out a "succession plan" for when this current machine gives up the ghost. I'm not expecting that to happen any time soon (it's only 3 years old) but I like to be prepared. Right now I'm not 100% that I would stick with a Mac seeing as Apple seems to be slowly deprecating the lineup. (On the other hand, there's a 0% chance for me to buy a Windows PC and keep Windows on it. I've been considering dabbling with Linux for some time, however.)
Please stop trolling this thread. Half of it is your nonsense by now and it is making already complex issues harder to understand.
EDIT: I forgot to add quote that was directed at dyn.
EDIT: I forgot to add quote that was directed at dyn.
Yes, thats why we call them friendsAre we in the 90s? You listen to your friends to make decisions?
My wife's 2013 MBA with Yosemite on it, has 17GB of free space. We are thinking of upgrading it to El Capitan. This link says the min free space available should be 15-20GB for the install. I assume this is for the download.
My question: Is the footprint of these two OSs approximately the same? I don't think it should be upgraded if EC has a substantially larger footprint. Anyone know? Thanks!
My question: Is the footprint of these two OSs approximately the same? I don't think it should be upgraded if EC has a substantially larger footprint. Anyone know? Thanks!
Installing El Capitan to drive with so little free space is risky, installer will take about 6 Gb and during installation Mac will need room for temporary files. Its possible it will work but I recommend additional 10-15 Gb free space to be on the safe side.
I also recommend waiting .2 or 3. updates before upgrading because current version has too many bugs. If you upgrade make backup before installation! For some reason Apple doesn't mention it in their instructions...?
I also recommend waiting .2 or 3. updates before upgrading because current version has too many bugs. If you upgrade make backup before installation! For some reason Apple doesn't mention it in their instructions...?
Installing El Capitan to drive with so little free space is risky, installer will take about 6 Gb and during installation Mac will need room for temporary files. Its possible it will work but I recommend additional 10-15 Gb free space to be on the safe side.
I also recommend waiting .2 or 3. updates before upgrading because current version has too many bugs. If you upgrade make backup before installation! For some reason Apple doesn't mention it in their instructions...?
Have you experienced any bugs? This MBA has an SSD, I wonder if you can configure the update to use an external drive for install files? Thanks!
^^^^
I agree with Mr. Ebenezum's first paragraph. IMHO, your way to tight on space to try an upgrade.
However, I disagree with his second paragraph. I have been using El Cap as my main OS since the first release of the PB as my main OS on my cMP. Currently I am running the Beta 10.11.2 on my cMP and have the released version of 10.11.1 on my my MBA. No bugs for me. The only real issue I'm having is with Adobe's Bridge. It won't recognize my Camera anymore. I can work around it with Aperture, it does recognize my Canon 7D. but, IMO, that's Adobe's problem and not Apple's.
Lou
I agree with Mr. Ebenezum's first paragraph. IMHO, your way to tight on space to try an upgrade.
However, I disagree with his second paragraph. I have been using El Cap as my main OS since the first release of the PB as my main OS on my cMP. Currently I am running the Beta 10.11.2 on my cMP and have the released version of 10.11.1 on my my MBA. No bugs for me. The only real issue I'm having is with Adobe's Bridge. It won't recognize my Camera anymore. I can work around it with Aperture, it does recognize my Canon 7D. but, IMO, that's Adobe's problem and not Apple's.
Lou
Have you experienced any bugs? This MBA has an SSD, I wonder if you can configure the update to use an external drive for install files? Thanks!
Too many to list them all, serious ones are in Mail (it took over 2 hours to get it to work and its still too unreliable), Safari is slower even when extensions disabled, Time Machine has serious problems restoring files, Disk Utility is very buggy, etc.
For some reason I am not impressed with Apples quality control at the moment!
As for using external drive for temporary space it might be possible with Terminal (I haven't tested it) but its much easier to remove unneeded files from internal SSD.
Too many to list them all, serious ones are in Mail (it took over 2 hours to get it to work and its still too unreliable), Safari is slower even when extensions disabled, Time Machine has serious problems restoring files, Disk Utility is very buggy, etc.
For some reason I am not impressed with Apples quality control at the moment!
As for using external drive for temporary space it might be possible with Terminal (I haven't tested it) but its much easier to remove unneeded files from internal SSD.
Ooo, thanks for the heads up. I'll hold off for a while.
******
I had always a lot of respect for your opinions, Lou.
However my experience with El Capitan refers only to the only Mac I have able to run it: my MP end 2013.
I have no other computer to check it but that one.
On that machine it was a true nightmare
No way to finish operation in the usual (opposed to boot) way through the usual shut down command!
Only the On-Off power cutting button did it.
I still believe that any computer running any OS should be able to shut down in a smooth way and certainly not only by cutting its power supply.
The no longer possible normal shut down was in my case certainly not the only problem I found when upgrading to 10.11, but I believe it is a very relevant one since it cannot be blamed either to
1) any new hardware (entirely unchanged configuration in my case) or
2) to trying any new conflicting software (I had nothing new installed).
Either the opinion of someone in another post is true, that El Capitan one gets is not one and the same for everybody but is automatilly "tailored" to the hardware one uses, and then I must have received an entirely wrong "tailored" 10.11 for the MP 6.1, ...or there is some conflict which affects the "MP 6.1-OSX 10.11" combo (at least my combo?!?!).
In both cases I have no solution and do not see how to find one.
I have seldom be so relieved
that at the moment in which, thanks to a saving clone booting backup on an external USB drive, I could (for the first time in my life) perform a downgrade and so avoided the ordeal of sweating a couple of weeks...just to return to the applications and data situation I had before that very wrong decision of mine Therefore if 10.11 or 10.11.1 work perfectly right for you I congratulate you.
However that happy info does nothing at all to help me.
(...nor to solve the different bugs many others post in this forum).
I decided to postpone the 10.11 upgrade at least until there are enough updates released by Apple, and enough time has passed, that might give me the courage to repeat my traumatic experience,...once again (of course) with a booting clone back up near me!
Ed
Last edited:
^^^^Sorry for your troubles, and sorry that you will now doubt what I say But, what I posted above is true - for me!. Absolutely No Reason for me to be untruthful. Both my machines are running smoothly. El Capitan is snappier than Yosemite was, I am extremely happy with it.
My 2010 Mac Pro is far from Apple stock.
The CPUs have been upgraded to X5677s
The Video card is an Nvidia GTX 780 and I am running the Web Driver
I have 5 SSDs, 1 HDD and 1 SSHD (all internal)
My boot SSD is a Samsung SM951 on a Lycom PCIe Card
Slot 4 contains a High Point RocketU USB 3.0 Card
My Keyboard is a Logitech Gaming Keyboard
My Mouse is a Logitech Performance MX
And all this stuff is running perfectly for me. As I indicated above, my only issue is with Adobe Bridge not recognizing my Canon 7D.
And Yes, I had and still have prior OSs installed on my BackUp StartUp discs just in case El Cap didn't work out for me.
I will still keep recommending El Capitan as a Great OS that should, IMHO, be installed on every Macintosh capable of running it. This has been my Personal Experience on two machines
I have been a Mac user since 1986 (Since Mac OS 3.2) and every OS upgrade over the years has been pretty smooth for me. Maybe I'm lucky, but I've really never had any issues other than software incompatibilities.
Again Sorry for your issues.
Lou
But, what I posted above is true - for me!. Absolutely No Reason for me to be untruthful. Both my machines are running smoothly. El Capitan is snappier than Yosemite was, I am extremely happy with it.My 2010 Mac Pro is far from Apple stock.
The CPUs have been upgraded to X5677s
The Video card is an Nvidia GTX 780 and I am running the Web Driver
I have 5 SSDs, 1 HDD and 1 SSHD (all internal)
My boot SSD is a Samsung SM951 on a Lycom PCIe Card
Slot 4 contains a High Point RocketU USB 3.0 Card
My Keyboard is a Logitech Gaming Keyboard
My Mouse is a Logitech Performance MX
And all this stuff is running perfectly for me. As I indicated above, my only issue is with Adobe Bridge not recognizing my Canon 7D.
And Yes, I had and still have prior OSs installed on my BackUp StartUp discs just in case El Cap didn't work out for me.
I will still keep recommending El Capitan as a Great OS that should, IMHO, be installed on every Macintosh capable of running it. This has been my Personal Experience on two machines
I have been a Mac user since 1986 (Since Mac OS 3.2) and every OS upgrade over the years has been pretty smooth for me. Maybe I'm lucky, but I've really never had any issues other than software incompatibilities.
Again Sorry for your issues.
Lou
Last edited:
********^^^^Sorry for your troubles, and sorry that you will now doubt what I say
I will still keep recommending El Capitan as a Great OS that should, IMHO, be installed on every Macintosh capable of running it.
Lou
Thank you very much for your detailed list of the fine components you use.
I never doubted, Lou, that your reported good experience with the present OSX 10.11 was absolutely true.
However I must therefore assume that for reasons unknown to me
the 10.11 does not work well with my MP late 2013, since my report is also no less true than yours.Since other people reporting from light to very severe bugs, mention owning MacBooks, iMacs, MacMinis, the problems (when existing) are not exclusive to my model of Mac but affect other users working with other Mac models as well.
I have no reason to doubt that they tell the truth no less than you do.
I am of course very glad for you (and other people satisfied with El Capitan) to hear that their computers work fine with 10.11.
Still, since I believe those unhappy users in this forum (and I had my own personal bad experience), there must be reasons why this OSX causes bugs to different people using different computers, while it works fine for others like you.
Unfortunately I have no idea how this might be possible and less how to solve it, but it actually happens.
Unfortunately.
Ed