There were a number of exciting announcements from Apple at WWDC 2024, from macOS Sequoia to Apple Intelligence. However, a subtle addition to Xcode 16 — the development environment for Apple platforms, like iOS and macOS — is a feature called Predictive Code Completion. Unfortunately, if you bought into Apple’s claim that 8GB of unified memory was enough for base-model Apple silicon Macs, you won’t be able to use it. There’s a memory requirement for Predictive Code Completion in Xcode 16, and it’s the closest thing we’ll get from Apple to an admission that 8GB of memory isn’t really enough for a new Mac in 2024.

  • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I still can’t fully accept that 1GB is not normal, 2GB is not very good, and 4GB is not all you ever gonna need.

    If only it got bloated for some good reasons.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      High quality content is the reason. Sit in a terminal and your memory usage will be low.

      • lastweakness@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        So we’re just going to ignore stuff like Electron, unoptimized assets, etc… Basically every other known problem… Yeah let’s just ignore all that

        • Aux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Is Electron that bad? Really? I have Slack open right now with two servers and it takes around 350MB of RAM. Not that bad, considering that every other colleague thinks that posting dumb shit GIFs into work chats is cool. That’s definitely nowhere close to Firefox, Chrome and WebStorm eating multiple gigs each.

          • lastweakness@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yes, it really is that bad. 350 MBs of RAM for something that could otherwise have taken less than 100? That isn’t bad to you? And also, it’s not just RAM. It’s every resource, including CPU, which is especially bad with Electron.

            I don’t really mind Electron myself because I have enough resources. But pretending the lack of optimization isn’t a real problem is just not right.

            • Aux@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              First of all, 350MB is a drop in a bucket. But what’s more important is performance, because it affects things like power consumption, carbon emissions, etc. I’d rather see Slack “eating” one gig of RAM and running smoothly on a single E core below boost clocks with pretty much zero CPU use. That’s the whole point of having fast memory - so you can cache and pre-render as much as possible and leave it rest statically in memory.

              • jas0n@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Just wanted to point out that the number 1 performance blocker in the CPU is memory. In the general case, if you’re wasting memory, you’re wasting CPU. These two things really cannot be talked about in isolation.

                • Aux@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  No, that’s the other way round. You either have high CPU load and low memory, or low CPU load and high memory.

                  • jas0n@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    I’m not sure what metric you’re using to determine this. The bottom line is, if you’re trying to get the CPU to really fly, using memory efficiently is just as important (if not more) than the actual instructions you send to it. The reason for this is the high latency required to go out to external memory. This is performance 101.

              • Verat@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                When (according to about:unloads) my average firefox tab is 70-230MB depending on what it is and how old the tab is (youtube tabs for example bloat up the longer they are open), a chat app using over 350 is a pretty big deal

                just checked, my firefox is using 4.5gb of RAM, while telegram is using 2.3, while minimized to the system tray, granted Telegram doesnt use electron, but this is a trend across lots of programs and Electron is a big enough offender I avoid apps using it. When I get off shift I can launch discord and check it too, but it is usually bad enough I close it entirely when not in use