Understanding OS X Kernel Internals
jglidell writes "The OS X kernel has been in the news alot this past year, whether it's why its slow, Mach/micro-kernel makes it bad, it's going closed source and what not. Amit Singh has put up a new presentation on the innards of OS X. It does a pretty good job of summing up the OS X kernel architecture, and has some pretty detailed diagrams... for instance they show that there are so many process/threads layers in OS X. So if you are in the mood for doing some OS studying then head over."
"OS virtualization is going to kill off the native OS X software market"
Ahh, and welcome back to another thrilling episode of "doesn't know what the fuck they're on about" theatre!
Honestly. OSV is SLOW compared to native. No one wants slow.
110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
Before anyone starts spouting off again about Mac OS X being "slow by design" or somesuch, read this article by an Apple engineer that investigates those claims.
somebody must have mispelled "book commercial" as "presentation".
there's nothing really new in that presentation, most of slashdotters know this stuff already, the only thing that we didn't know as of yet is that you can mispell "book commercial" in such an interesting way.
you can "troll" or "flamebait" my post, but this is the way that it is.
I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
I looked at the "presentation" and no, it doesn't do a very good job of explaining anything. Maybe combined with an extensive lecture to explain what the hell he's talking about would make it a bit more clear. From what I saw it was basically just enumerating the different components. Then I noticed the second to last slide. It's basically an ad for a book coming out.
Maybe it's just me though. Did anyone else find it extremely enlightening?
It might make more sense in this format, and without the grammar error:
I don't know if this what you are looking for, but: http://rentzsch.com/mach_inject/
Why not fork?
"I noticed that my system out of the box with 512 of RAM was dog slow when you start loading iPhoto, or any more then 2 apps." You know, for the first several hours of uptime after starting Tiger for the first time, depending on how much data you have, the Spotlight is indexing all your drives in the background and the system is SLOW AS MOLASSES. Like, painfully so. But it speeds back up after it finishes all that initial indexing.
You also have to remember that the Mac mini has integrated graphics which uses some of the memory. I've heard it uses about 80MB of your memory. But I agree, it needs at least 1GB to run smoothly.
Buying RAM for a Mac isnt' what it used to be. If I remember right, before the MacIntels, and such, you had to buy special matched/paired memory kits for upgrades, specially from Apple.
You don't remember right.
I've owned Macs for years, and never once used anything other than cheap third-party memory to upgrade them. The G3 Towers were very picky about memory that was up to spec, but even then there was no need to buy from Apple.
And how, exactly, would you suggest installing "matched/paired memory kits" into the SINGLE SLOT in the G4 version of the Mac mini?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
TO START
PRESS ANY KEY
Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...