New posts

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zoolook" data-source="post: 631598" data-attributes="member: 21101">I wasn't sure whether to reply to this, because I'd be in danger of being hypocritical, since my answer would be incredibly pedantic, but the above is both playing with semantics as well has being arguably misleading. An appropriate analogy to your argument would be suggesting that removing the wings from a formula one car won't make it faster, because drag only comes into play after a certain speed. i.e., if the baseline speed is 100 mph, then having the wings makes no difference since it can achieve that speed with or without them. The assumption being, this is as fast as the driver wants to go. If the driver wants to go 200 mph, then removing the wings does indeed make the car faster. This is the new baseline speed.Since all of our experiences are perceived, this entirely moot. Almost all machines and processes are only as good as their weakest link, including computers. In my opinion you should measure the performance of your computer based on when it is under the most strain. When I used to reviewed video cards, I always looked for the lowest fps during a benchmark, since it is this, and only this, that indicates whether or not the player will perceive poor frame rates at any point in the game. There are very few reviewers who do this even now, but I happened to think it was important.I agree with you here, especially in regard to lazy comments like "get more RAM" or "repair permissions" (one of my 'favourites'). In the case of this thread, the OP is probably not suffering performance issues due to lack of memory.I've taken the time to reply to this carefully because that is clearly aimed at me, since I used that word. Your post comes across as being incredibly aloof, as though you're transmitting some special code that only vastly intelligent people will understand. Well, there are plenty of smart people on this board, and I think I would be fair in saying I probably know as much about hardware as anyone here. Suggesting that someone may not be your target audience when you make a statement in a thread, clearly about an individual performance issue, both lacks any sense of community coherence and suggests that whoever didn't 'get' what you'd said, was merely below your entrance point for understanding. There is nothing to suggest you have any right to think you're talking down to the rest of us.To an extent, I agree it is a matter of perspective, but when you cut through all the bull, as far as OS X is concerned, more memory almost always means better performance. For what it's worth, I think for the low/average user, the sweet spot with Leopard is probably 2 gigs with 4 gigs being a luxury.</blockquote>

Verification: Name this item. 🍎