> The OS is supposed to use memory. That's what it's for: to be used. Using memory is a feature, not a bug. Let the OS manage memory instead of demanding a lot

> The OS is supposed to use memory. That's what it's for: to be used. Using memory is a feature, not a bug. Let the OS manage memory instead of demanding a lot should be left in an used state. When I purchased my MBP, it came with 4GB of memory. This was apparently enough for Linux, but not for OS X. I was able to open 40-50 browser tabs, play music, run several terminal sessions, run my text editor, and a host of other software on Linux. OS X, though, it started swapping like crazy if I opened 20-30 browser tabs and my media player. It would completely freeze up for minutes at a time if I tried to run too many applications at once. It was so bad that I problems getting work done. I eventually invested in more RAM, which immediately fixed all my performance issues. This is not a one-off thing. OS X Lion is known to have issues with memory management, and several hacks exist to make things better. The easiest method, though, is to throw money at the problem and upgrade your RAM. > You also didn't make much effort to argue your points. Consider Safari vs Chrome. Safari has better UI IMO, and Chrome is a fork of Safari's internals. So what's better about Chrome on Mac? I use both regularly. Chrome's adblock works better but it's not obvious what else is better and you didn't tell me. I, too, love the Safari UI. But Safari lacks the customizability of Chrome and Firefox. Also, despite having switched to a multi-process architecture, Safari still sometimes freezes randomly if one tab is doing too much work. This doesn't happen too often, though. > Chrome is a fork of Safari's internals. It is not. Both Chrome and Safari use WebKit as their layout engine, but that's where the similarity ends. They have separate JavaScript engines and network code. In any case, WebKit has not been an Apple-only project for a very long time now. Google contributes as much to WebKit as Apple does. And there are tons of other companies that work on WebKit, including Nokia, RIM, Samsung, Adobe, and Intel. See http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/02/11/apple-google-nearly-tied-as-top-contributors-to-webkit-as-adoption-expands http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/02/11/apple-google-nearl.... So WebKit != Apple. As for iTunes: I don't think I can add much to what people all over the Internet have already said. It's does far too many things, and does all of them poorly. It has several UI issues. E.g, it's hard to see your media library and currently playing playlist at the same time – something I want to do very often. The search is quite bad, since the only way to use advanced search operators is by creating a smart playlist. If you make changes to your media library using something other than iTunes, those changes will not be reflected in iTunes unless you rescan your library. So, if I buy an album off Bandcamp and drop it into ~/Music/, iTunes won't pick it up. I'll have to drop it into iTunes to add it to my library. Oh, and when iTunes is scanning my media library, it completely blocks the UI. I could go on all day. I use Clementine for my music, which is clunky and ugly but manages my media library much better than iTunes.