|
|
|
|
|
by supermatt
1955 days ago
|
|
I just assumed that this was some deep "app nap", where its effectively swapping the entire state of an inactive app to disk. That would likely explain why the usage is scaling with available RAM, rather than storage space. I get that its a much higher wear than we would traditionally expect, but given I have 8GB of RAM that seems near inexhaustible., maybe it just a different approach to memory management, permitted by the blazingly fast storage we now have access to? I simply couldn't run all this stuff on my 16GB 2015 machine. I cant run figma though - that thing eats 4GB for a smallish project, so it almost always complains about my available memory when im using figma. |
|
2TB model: 5000TBW
256GB model: 2000TBW
That means that, at the worst known rate that David had (150TB in 2 months), a 256GB drive would reach lifetime writes in ~2 years. That's still way too fast, so this is still something Apple needs to adjust if it is happening to people (and given what he told me about the write rates he was seeing while using and switching apps, it really does seem like a bug, not normal app swapping).
FWIW, the "app nap" thing is what iOS does, but macOS can't do that because Mac apps aren't really designed that way. macOS just does traditional swap plus compression, as far as I know.