|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] OT: Mac OS X question
|
- From: zuzu <sean.zuzu@gmail.com>
- To: "Philadelphia Linux User's Group Discussion List" <plug@lists.phillylinux.org>
- Subject: Re: [PLUG] OT: Mac OS X question
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:38:32 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=5Hr9rWsmJk2YROm5zr8Q8bo0TV+gcWTYiiSmWw5xWQU=; b=rY0Ow/HF+yAGQMmP8ra4KVFO8xVqS6I4yHsFBo+alHmfFFZSGiaW7x7Xd9pVqdjJt/PYacloHJjtRkWRoPKlkh9L7IZa1LD2ye5RY0uFivXEXEaVTdGkhpPAdV2Wln5q/Eooc52UY2lzZoQmcDwa0VgSU0kwjyBxgDEjWHR2c4A=
- Reply-to: Philadelphia Linux User's Group Discussion List <plug@lists.phillylinux.org>
- Sender: plug-bounces@lists.phillylinux.org
On 10/10/07, James Fiore <jfiore@absurgery.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, zuzu wrote:
> > ...try Firefox -- especially Firefox rather than Camino -- with 200+
> > tabs...
>
> > ...my experience has been, as I attempted to illustrate, that just
> > doing web browsing, email, IM, and a few "office apps" on top of that
> > will easily use 4GB of RAM. nothing "out of the ordinary"...
>
>
> 200+ tabs in Firefox is "nothing out of the ordinary"?
yes.
> No wonder you need
> 4GB of RAM. I'm not trying to be belligerent. I'm just genuinely curious how
> you work with that many tabs open and why?
a typical daily collection of articles I need to reference and a "todo
list" of sorts seems to naturally gravitate to about 130-170. it
never seems like that much to me until Camino starts slowing down to
the point that text input displays much slower than I am typing, and
when I "bookmark tabs as group" I find out the exact number.
> Are these news articles?
yes.
> the way you do research?
yes.
> What do you do with that many tabs?
I can think of at least 20 webapps that I keep open all the time. I
keep open anything I need to be reminded to follow up on later. I
keep open articles I need to read, both news and work, until I
actually read them (an excellent example of the von Neumann
bottleneck, it seems), I tend towards at least 10 wikipedia tabs open
at once, and it gets way worse (up to 300 tabs) if I'm catching up on
Slashdot, BoingBoing, etc.
I don't understand how people work without over 100 tabs open as their
"working memory", but then again I'm also a huge advocate of
orthogonal/transparent persistence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_%28computer_science%29
however, I have observed that there seem to be two general "cultures"
of computer users. one group generally just wants to "get er done" --
opening a web browser, viewing a page, using that info, and then
closing the browser. these people also seem to have no problem
rebooting. the other group makes the computer into another cognitive
organ, like something from Doug Engelbart's thesis, and tends to keep
everything open to "intertwingle" it, and rebooting is an extremely
painful process of closing everything down and opening everything back
up afterwards.
for everyone in the latter category, and getting back to Linux, I've
been told that dumping/freezing active applications is theoretically
very easy (a technical sibling to debugging), but have yet to find
solid information on how exactly to go about actually doing it. I'd
love to just take "snapshots" of running programs rather than having
to repopulate data after a program crashes, and restore it to a
pre-crash instance. (stupid imperative rather than declarative
programming!) but I've also heard that linked libraries can trip this
up. anyone know more about this to shed light on it?
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
|
|