• magiccupcake@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Oh no I read the article, I just don’t consider that testing.

    It’s not really apt to compare using ram on a browser on one computer and extract that to another, there’s a lot of complicated ram and cache management that happens in the background.

    Testing would involve getting a 8gb ram Mac computer and running common tasks to see if you can measure poorer performance, be it lag, stutters or frame drops.

    • Shadywack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 months ago

      You do have a point, but I think the intent of the article is to convey the common understanding that Apple is leaning on sales tactics to convince people of a thing that anyone with technical acumen sees through immediately. Regardless of how efficient Mach/Darwin is, it’s still apples to apples (pun intended) to understand how quickly 8GB fills up in 2024. For those who need a fully quantitative performance measurement between 8 and 16GB, with enough applications loaded to display the thrashing that starts happening, they’re not really the audience. THAT audience is busy reading about gardening tips, lifestyle, and celebrity gossip.