Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regarding an OS being intuitive...my wife is typically the ultimate test. She's not a power user...she just wants to surf the web, process photos, and email. She also has very low tolerance for UX deficiencies. I've had Windows 7, Ubuntu with Gnome 2, and OSX Snow Leopard and Lion in front of her. She was ok with Windows 7...it was tolerable, but we hit our first virus soon in and I ordered it off the machine. She li…
I'm not so sure about "eating memory" with programs still running. I'm no OS expert but I'm pretty sure that assuming that app isn't doing anything then it's pages will be swapped out to disk (in essence , quitting the application from a memory perspective) if there are more pressing requirements for the memory. What is the technical difference between a program that is running or not running? As far as I can tell it…
Yes, but let's say you open an email client to receive notifications. Then you perform various tasks that involve opening new applications for a limited period of time, and they keep running after you're done with them. Eventually they'll use all the memory and the email client, since it's been idle for so long, gets paged to swap.
Now you get a new email notification and you click to open it, which forces the system to page something else and "bring back" the email client, which creates a huge delay between the click and the email window showing up.
If the temp applications had been closed as each task was completed, the email client would've never been paged out, so it'd remain fast when it was needed.
This might seem a contrived example, but if you have some applications that you tend to leave open, it can be hell.