Windows 10 slow?

[Benm]

Servers are a bit different, in fact much different from personal computers. They're based on serving clients the most efficient way possible (most server OS's). Even with no requests I wouldn't be surprised if a server had over 75% of it's memory in use, that's to store data for the next few requests as much faster access than on the main drive, essentially preparing itself. And, obviously if there's no processes or events taking place there won't be any CPU usage.

That's true, especially since i told it to do so by setting mysql memory use parameters to make use of all that ram since it was just there. These VPS's come with a number of cores, amount of memory and storage as fixed packages. We needed the processing power, but got a huge load of ram with that which we don't actually need but may as well use.

With zero requests it doesnt fill memory really, but with a low number of requests it caches everything until allotted storage is filled. It just seems like an insane amount of memory being used for a fairly simple task, but then again, if you tell a database to do that it will

 

[ped]

The other day, whilst browsing a few sites, I could hear a grinding, like crunching sound coming from my computer, it was Chrome eating all my RAM.

It is, by far, the worst offender.

 

[Rivem]

The other day, whilst browsing a few sites, I could hear a grinding, like crunching sound coming from my computer, it was Chrome eating all my RAM.

It is, by far, the worst offender.

Chrome is a nice browser, but that sandboxing it uses is not "lightweight" as advertised. Firefox is MUCH easier on the RAM.

If you're serious about the grinding sound, that's either the HDD or a fan handling extra heat. Chrome can overfill your RAM and start using the cache on the system disk (secondary storage) to make up for it. This results in constant reading and writing while you're running the program. It's bad for the lifespan of any nonvolatile memory.

I didn't escape it until I upgraded my minimum RAM in my computers to 8 GB.

 

[ped]

If you're serious about the grinding sound, that's either the HDD....

No I wasn't serious :crackup: , it was a stab at Chrome EATING my RAM.

I used FF for many years, but I'll admit, I love the ease of use with Chrome across my various devices, once you've signed in. I have 16Gb DDR3 in my main machine and it handles the Chrome RAM munching with ease, so I'll live with it.

Ped

 

[Benm]

Yeah, memory management is a choice. Chrome uses a lot because on most systems there simply is plrenty available, and optimizing memory usage may cost time with no benefit to the user.

By the time a system starts to swap memory to disk this changes completely and things grind to a halt.

This is important in devices with limited memory, but most laptops and desktops nowadays come with a lot. It's not expensive stuff either, 8 gb of ram for a laptop costs under $30 retail, probably about half of that for the system manufacturer.

 

[Chrisbee]

I just got my 8G ram for the laptop in the mail. So when I actually get a free day I'll be installing that, and maybe a fresh copy of Windows 10. Fingers crossed. :yh:

 

[Bionic-Badger]

The problem with Firefox is that it's still predominantly a 32-bit application, and it can only allocate up to about 3.5GB of RAM for all the windows that are running. When or if the memory gets used up the entire application crashes as opposed to having a tab get shut down.

This used to happen on a fairly frequent basis for me in older versions of Firefox, and was what started me using Chrome a bit more for videos and sites that would update (like Facebook or even a news website that updates itself) causing the memory footprint to slowly grow in size. At least Chrome would free the memory and not crash everything if I closed a particular tab. Also, it meant I could just buy more RAM and allow tabs to grow as needed without worrying that my entire browser session would crash. I like problems that I can just throw more hardware at.

In Firefox's case, Firefox's memory becomes fragmented. When it can't allocate a contiguous block of memory for what it needed, it crashes. You an actually see how close you are to a crash by monitoring the vsize-max-contiguous in "about:memory". As it approaches zero you're in for an "Out of memory" error and a subsequent crash. Things are a little better these days, but I still keep Firefox and Chrome running for different kinds of browsing.

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

This is related more so to the screwed up way my office network is setup, with router, switch, wireless router, and ~10 pcs connected but another issue I have noticed with Chrome but not so much with Firefox is that of constant DNS errors.

Btw, typing this on a bluetoot keyboard, and will be using Tab S2 as a laptop replacement for a little while. For basic work, which consists of mostly email, excel, word, I think it will suffice. Going to be interesting to see if I can install a digital security certificate on this tab.

 

[Benm]

It's interesting why there would be a difference in DNS handling between browsers. Normally they all rely on the OS to do it.

For chrome there are some plugins that actually make it use different DNS servers, or directly plugin your own domain-to-ip values if you want. I use one named 'host switch plus' when testing new servers when migrating websites, so i can forcefully make a domain resolve to its future ip address and see if the new server is working properly. This is much easier than editing the HOSTS file and rebooting the system.

I don't really see why any non-webdeveloper would want a feature like that though

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

I really have no explanation for it either, but apparently there is some difference. Same plugins running on both, Adblock Plus and Ghostery.

 

[Benm]

I mostly use chrome - it gobbles up ram but this far never to a point where this actually became a problem causing crashes or such.

As a web developer i do test stuff against firefox or ie/edge one in a while, and there are some differences. One thing is that firefox doesn't seem to like really long pages (i.e. tables with a few thousand rows etc). Obviously we don't use those on the open web, but in some administrative environments they can be handy.

 

[dden4012]

On older equipment it can be horrible. My desktop is an evga 750i FTW with 2 video cards and win10 refused to let me run them in sli. My wifes laptop came with win10 and it has been fine. My office still employs win7 due to all of the software compatibility issues with win10. I also have a laptop that came with win8 and tried the win10 update. But then I realized there are issues with some of the hardware that I use with it like my usb GPS receiver and the goops program for google earth.
What comes after win10?

 

[ElectricPlasma]

What comes after win10?

Nothing.

IIRC, Microsoft stated that win10 is going to be the last OS they're going to release, they're just going to keep updating it.

 

[InfinitusEquitas]

They've said the same in the past with windows 7 and also.

While microsoft office is now discontinued, and strictly subscription based moving forward, I'm not sure the same is feasible where an OS is concerned.

They will be pushing some major updates in 2017 though. The whole license to use, vs actually own approach, that is spreading through all product and software sales does bother me a great deal.

For example, I found out recently that Blizzard has been banning people for cheating in single player. :wtf:

I'm all for fair play in multiplayer, unless it's a specific server, and anything goes, but being stuck not able to do with a product as one wishes after paying for it. That is bothersome, and it is certainly the biggest reason to maybe stay way from W10.

 

[Benm]

The whole license to use, vs actually own approach, that is spreading through all product and software sales does bother me a great deal.

It depends a bit on what you do and who you are, but it can also be a good thing.

A standalone copy of windows 10 will cost you $100 or so. The copy included with the purchase of a system like a laptop or desktop costs you a fraction of this - the exact deals are usually not disclosed, but think around the $20 mark or even below for large suppliers.

Effectively you'd have to go through 5 new machines to benefit from having a transferable license. Very few people will own 5 computers after eachother that run the same OS, although this might change is MS really keeps supporting 10 until the end of time.

What is really in it for MS is that people will actually pay for the OS. Lets be honest, private individuals never paid for licences that often, pirated copies were/are available from windows 3 to 95, 2000, xp, vista and 7. They also are available for 10.

The difference is that people now usually purchase complete systems and not assemble them from parts any longer, in particular because there are a lot more laptops than desktops out there now. The $20-ish windows license saves you the hassle of installing it yourself on a new laptop, which is worth that to virtually all consumers.

MS made a smart move here to remain the dominant consumer OS on laptops and desktops. The previous model was letting people pirate the stuff at home but require businesses to buy rather expensive copies to use on their office desktops. With BYOD this model is not that sustainable, and MS realized that well in time.

 

[Dr_Evil]

I purchased every single Windows version I have with ME and 7 Ultimate being the only 2 I paid full price for. All others were OEM. I think I have 4 copies of XP Pro with one of them being 64 bit. The others are Vista, ME, and 7. That subscription based crap is exactly that, crap. Especially with something like Photoshop. Not everybody needs the latest and greatest. It would be dumb for MS to not make another OS considering how much they make from each one. They won't make a dime off of me for 8.x or 10 though. I may purchase some more 7 copies. Not like I need them anyway since I keep using the same one with each upgrade.