He asked because I said about 32GB. Since Adobe lets the users set whatever memory usage you have or need.
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.
Snow Leopard vs Mountain Lion
- Thread starter bruleke
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
He asked because I said about 32GB. Since Adobe lets the users set whatever memory usage you have or need.
I kind of like yet hate mountain lion. I thinks its quirky to try to make a desktop mimic their portables but the integration is nice. The problem is the functionality and comparability associated with ML makes it apples version of vista, yes it is that bad. I upgraded out of necessity, my printer quit working and it was an OS problem. Now I have to deal with ML complete lack of HDMI functionality which Apple doesn't acknowledge is a problem since I assume it doesn't help their bottom line in their mind. I for one will alway remember that and will revert to building my own PC as I always had next time around.
You don't need to purge InActive Memory. Inactive Memory is not a Bad Thing. It is there for a reason to improve performance.
If you have spinning wheels, it's probably some other issue. You don't need to purge inactive Memory all the time.
I took my MBP 3,1 2.2ghz back from ML to Snow Leopard because ML was excruciatingly slow, and I have a SSD in the MBP. *Everything* was slow on ML. Maybe my box is too old, but I don't like the iOS elements incorporated into ML, either. Mac is Mac, iOS is iOS.
I'm buying a Mac Pro (used) this summer, and it will run SL on a SSD and be as zippy as can be.
I'm buying a Mac Pro (used) this summer, and it will run SL on a SSD and be as zippy as can be.
Me too!
SL any day, sticking with it as long as I can. Especially with an imminent Mac Pro purchase, will be mighty zippy with an SSD, some more RAM, and a nice ATi 5870 :3
I went from SL to L when it first came out and back to SL, I am running MS office and it didn't work and lost all my Doc's
Also was slower, I to am thinking about ML
I have a few brand new Mac Minis, standard config (4GB/i5/HDD/HD4000)
They are dog slow. Extremely disappointed. After 3 browser tabs and iTunes running, it's a beach ball fest.
I installed Mavericks on one of them... it's a little bit faster, but come on.
I have an old Core 2 Duo (1st gen) tower that I built back in 2007, and installed Snow Leopard on it. It mops the floor with the Mini's.
Spec-wise, it's slower in every way (old processor, 4GB DDR2, 5400RPM drive...)
Windows 7 to 8 saw nice increases to performance. Apple has no excuse.
They are dog slow. Extremely disappointed. After 3 browser tabs and iTunes running, it's a beach ball fest.
I installed Mavericks on one of them... it's a little bit faster, but come on.
I have an old Core 2 Duo (1st gen) tower that I built back in 2007, and installed Snow Leopard on it. It mops the floor with the Mini's.
Spec-wise, it's slower in every way (old processor, 4GB DDR2, 5400RPM drive...)
Windows 7 to 8 saw nice increases to performance. Apple has no excuse.
Why do I need 8GB of RAM to run 3 browser tabs and iTunes?
The minimum requirement is 2GB for ML... most Airs are shipping with 4GB.
Lion/ML are easily the most inefficient OS X versions to date.
I will not speak to your conclusion about the efficiencies of Lion/Mt, but I will say that Apple's minimum RAM requirements have been notoriously low for years!
Feel free to slog about at 4 GBs of RAM, if you like...
Mtn. Lion w/8GB RAM/Snow Leopard w/4GB or less.
Snow Leopard, for me anyway, was the most stable Mac OS X Apple has put out so far (especially 10.6.8). That being said, while I did upgrade to Lion, I now have Mtn. Lion, and (PRE 10.8.4) I do like it better than Lion.
However!
I am running a MBP 13 mid 2010 w/4GB RAM.
I highly recommend 8GB RAM minimum for Mtn. Lion.
My fan spins up much more easily, and it can get bogged down if using pro apps such as for photography, video, music (or even iPhoto).
Also: some people are having issues with 10.8.4/Safari 6.0.5. For me, Safari is crashing quite often, or will lag, which requires restarting my mac. Some others have wifi, sleep/wake, safari or other issues. So, if you can install 10.8.3, great, if not, wait for 10.8.5. Just my suggestion.
Snow Leopard, for me anyway, was the most stable Mac OS X Apple has put out so far (especially 10.6.8). That being said, while I did upgrade to Lion, I now have Mtn. Lion, and (PRE 10.8.4) I do like it better than Lion.
However!
I am running a MBP 13 mid 2010 w/4GB RAM.
I highly recommend 8GB RAM minimum for Mtn. Lion.
My fan spins up much more easily, and it can get bogged down if using pro apps such as for photography, video, music (or even iPhoto).
Also: some people are having issues with 10.8.4/Safari 6.0.5. For me, Safari is crashing quite often, or will lag, which requires restarting my mac. Some others have wifi, sleep/wake, safari or other issues. So, if you can install 10.8.3, great, if not, wait for 10.8.5. Just my suggestion.
System Preferences>Trackpad
You can modify the ones found in SL and there are more gestures w/ML, so they have been rearranged. (I.E.: If you are used to scroll direction in SL, under "Scroll & Zoom" uncheck "Scroll direction: natural". I have iOS devices also, so I prefer the direction in ML, as it is more natural to the way you scroll w/touchscreens.)
Stumbled on this thread hoping to hear mountain lion was much better than lion, and subsequently better than snow leopard. Doesn't seem to be the case I guess, considering I don't use any icloud services or anything that necessitates upgrading.
Looks like I'll be keeping SL (10.6.8) on my mid 2009 mbp running 4gb ram, 2.5 core 2 for a while, unless maverick is a huge step forward.
Looks like I'll be keeping SL (10.6.8) on my mid 2009 mbp running 4gb ram, 2.5 core 2 for a while, unless maverick is a huge step forward.
I held iTunes 10.x on SL for a long time, but suddenly accepted an update and surpised later that iTunes 11 doesn't see anymore my old iPod shuffle. I'll not wonder if in one day SL doesnt see your new next gen iphone or ipad.
I just stepped back from 10.9 DP3 to 10.6.8 I found nothing of value in Mavericks..
In SL wireless wake on lan was working. In ML not anymore (at least for me and some others going by the threads). Problem: to play video or music on my ATV I have to go upstairs first to put my iMac out of sleep and check iTunes is running. Annoying.
But for the rest ML is working quite good on my 2012 iMac.
But for the rest ML is working quite good on my 2012 iMac.
Last edited:
Hey all,
I'm fairly new to posting on the Macrumors forums.
I have a late 2006 macbook (white) and due to finances and other responsibilities, haven't been able to upgrade to a newer mac, however I do have an iphone 5, so i am current with iOS.
My macbook is able to go to Lion, which i've used but due to it's ram limitations, it really suffered if I wanted to run a vm, or something a little more heavier then typical everyday tasks. Overall Lion brought to the table some nice features, and Ideas, but for me personally many I can live without and really don't need, especially since I have the iPhone that can give me the same features in a more appropriate environment for me.
Because of Hardware limitations, i haven't been able to run ML so i can't comment, so Lion is the latest I can go.
With all things considered, SL still meets my needs, I have gone back as It's easier on my system, and some of the more heavier tasks i do work better in SL on the older hardware, and since I have learned to appreciate what I have until it's literally not usable anymore I think SL will be ok for my needs. I am someone who would choose stable over current, if current made my workflow unstable, or i couldn't upgrade. The nice thing about intel macs is if someone is stuck in a position where I am and apple's latest won't run, windows is always an option, or even freebsd or linux.
Anyway, Just thought I'd add some real world and personal experience here.
The other thing nice about SL is the powerpc support as well, so legacy apps still run, just because something, is dated, doesn't mean you have to throw it away. I personally like legacy software and hardware, as well as current.
For me Lion has had it's bugs, and i've pulled my hair, or wanted to a few times, but the concepts are nice for those who need the features offered.
I'm fairly new to posting on the Macrumors forums.
I have a late 2006 macbook (white) and due to finances and other responsibilities, haven't been able to upgrade to a newer mac, however I do have an iphone 5, so i am current with iOS.
My macbook is able to go to Lion, which i've used but due to it's ram limitations, it really suffered if I wanted to run a vm, or something a little more heavier then typical everyday tasks. Overall Lion brought to the table some nice features, and Ideas, but for me personally many I can live without and really don't need, especially since I have the iPhone that can give me the same features in a more appropriate environment for me.
Because of Hardware limitations, i haven't been able to run ML so i can't comment, so Lion is the latest I can go.
With all things considered, SL still meets my needs, I have gone back as It's easier on my system, and some of the more heavier tasks i do work better in SL on the older hardware, and since I have learned to appreciate what I have until it's literally not usable anymore I think SL will be ok for my needs. I am someone who would choose stable over current, if current made my workflow unstable, or i couldn't upgrade. The nice thing about intel macs is if someone is stuck in a position where I am and apple's latest won't run, windows is always an option, or even freebsd or linux.
Anyway, Just thought I'd add some real world and personal experience here.
The other thing nice about SL is the powerpc support as well, so legacy apps still run, just because something, is dated, doesn't mean you have to throw it away. I personally like legacy software and hardware, as well as current.
For me Lion has had it's bugs, and i've pulled my hair, or wanted to a few times, but the concepts are nice for those who need the features offered.
I have a Mini running SL, Mini running ML and a Mini running Mavericks.
From experience, if you don't have any apps that need a newer OS than Snow Leopard, hold on to 10.6.8, because the improvements aren't there.
Snow Leopard is rock solid, Mountain Lion isn't. Mavericks is promising, but I'd wait until the .3 release before upgrading.
I agree with this statement. Although I am using Mtn Lion, if you don't care about the new features, and don't need it for your apps, Snow Leopard was still my fav. Mac OS X, fast & stable (if you haven't, be sure to update to 10.6.8/latest as this is the best version, plus Apple, at this point, still keeps up w/security updates).
Also agree... wait for the .3 release...typically Apple's OS X releases have been buggy until about .3, plus, if you wait, this gives your app makers time to update as well.
NOTE: I can't overstate this: if anyone reading this decides to get Mountain Lion, get at least 8GB of RAM first/with it, 4GB is not enough.
And an SSD for those that don't come with flash storage. Snow Leopard may run fine with a conventional drive platters, Mountain Lion runs terribly slow on them.