Any one ever try/use IFreeMem?
in [Mac Applications]
|
From: gtr on 21 Feb 2007 16:49 On 2007-02-21 09:23:08 -0800, Clever Monkey <clvrmnky.invalid(a)hotmail.com.invalid> said: > Wes Groleau wrote: >> Clever Monkey wrote: >>> John W wrote: >>>> and a way to reduce inactive memory without rebooting. >> >>> How is startup time affected _at all_ by the in-memory cache used by >>> the filesystem in the _previous_ system state? We have rebooted, so >>> therefore the cache items are being created anew. Furthermore, if you >>> run the same startup items as you have done since the day the OS was >>> installed, how is it possible for this in-memory cache to change at all? >> >.... >>> Are you saying that in-memory caches are persisted across restarts? >> >> Is this National Straw Man Day? >> > No, it is National Read What I Wrote Day. FYI it's National Pancake Day. -- Thank you and have a nice day.
From: Wes Groleau on 22 Feb 2007 13:34 Clever Monkey wrote: > Wes Groleau wrote: >> Clever Monkey wrote: >>> John W wrote: >>>> and a way to reduce inactive memory without rebooting. >> >>> How is startup time affected _at all_ by the in-memory cache used by >>> the filesystem in the _previous_ system state? We have rebooted, so >>> ... >> > No, it is National Read What I Wrote Day. > [snip] > How about you read what I wrote. I quoted the product web page. OK, enlighten me. What I read APPEARED to be you quoting the developer as "without rebooting" and then saying "We have rebooted" in your rebuttal. If it is not as it appears, sorry. I don't intend to _support_ his product, just to say that what he has said is NOT what more than one person is trying to debunk. -- Wes Groleau Armchair Activism: http://www.breakthechain.org/armchair.html
From: Wayne C. Morris on 22 Feb 2007 21:52 In article <LmlDh.4891$EU.2553(a)trnddc07>, Wes Groleau <groleau+news(a)freeshell.org> wrote: > Clever Monkey wrote: > > Wes Groleau wrote: > >> Clever Monkey wrote: > >>> John W wrote: > >>>> and a way to reduce inactive memory without rebooting. > >> > >>> How is startup time affected _at all_ by the in-memory cache used by > >>> the filesystem in the _previous_ system state? We have rebooted, so > >>> ... > >> > > No, it is National Read What I Wrote Day. > > [snip] > > How about you read what I wrote. I quoted the product web page. > > OK, enlighten me. What I read APPEARED to be you quoting the developer > as "without rebooting" and then saying "We have rebooted" in your rebuttal. You've taken two unrelated sentences out of context, ignoring everything that CM wrote between those two lines. Immediately before his "We have rebooted" rebuttal, CM pointed out a discrepancy between what the developer posted here and on his web site. He quoted the developer's web site: > "Over time you may notice your Mac takes a little longer to startup and > there appears to be more disk activity? This is due to more applications > starting up and reading files, and those files are kept in memory, just > in-case you need to access them quickly again (the cache)." CM's "We have rebooted" remark was in direct response to the developer's "longer to startup" claim. The developer appears to be claiming that cached data can cause your Mac to take longer to start up today than it did when it was brand new, which is absurd -- the boot process always starts with a clean slate, nothing cached. Is it relevant to a discussion of the developer's product? Yes, because the developer made that statement on his product's web page, and it shows he doesn't fully understand caching.
From: Wes Groleau on 22 Feb 2007 23:00 Wayne C. Morris wrote: >> "Over time you may notice your Mac takes a little longer to startup and >> there appears to be more disk activity? This is due to more applications >> starting up and reading files, and those files are kept in memory, just >> in-case you need to access them quickly again (the cache)." I see. Coming so close after "without rebooting" I took this to refer to starting up apps or logging into your account. Which would also be more consistent with his other comments. Including the next line: "more applications starting up" -- Wes Groleau "There ain't nothin' in this world that's worth being a snot over." -- Larry Wall
From: John W on 7 Mar 2007 17:55
On 21/2/07 05:00, in article olQCh.1604$h8.1216(a)trnddc05, "Wes Groleau" <groleau+news(a)freeshell.org> wrote: > Clever Monkey wrote: >> John W wrote: >>> and a way to reduce inactive memory without rebooting. > >> How is startup time affected _at all_ by the in-memory cache used by the >> Are you saying that in-memory caches are persisted across restarts? > > Is this National Straw Man Day? > > Maybe you have rebooted, but it seems pretty clear to me he said > "without rebooting" > > How about arguing with what he _said_ instead of the opposite? > > Better yet, take his advice--IF you notice a slow down, consider it. > > If not, ignore him. > > Or take the in-between route--reboot. Well I _hope_ the revised (more verbose) product description and benchmarks make it quite clear what the product does. Like Wes points out, if you don't notice any slowdown, ever, you wont be wanting to consider this tool. For the rest of us: Latest version and benchmarks here. http://www.activata.co.uk/products/ifreemem.html |