MacBook shows I have used more storage than i have

Under the About My Mac tab it says i have 131gb of apps, but if it get info on the applications folder it says 25gb in size. Also i only just got this laptop and i don't have manny apps so i can't have 131gb of apps?
Can anyone help?
Also disk utility says i have the same amount free as about my mac.

also this is what disk utility shows

Similar Messages

Does tethering my iPad to my iPhone 4s use more data than using an iPad that has its own data plan?

Does tethering my iPad to my iPhone 4s use more data than using an iPad that has it's own data plan?

No, it won't work.. the Airports are not media devices.. they have no brains .. no media extensions.. and itunes must be running on a computer.
You can however watch movies from storage but not with itunes..
See how people use tools like VLC to get around Apple's built in iTunes limitations.
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-ios.html
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/vlc-streamer/id410031728?mt=8

Firevault: "Your homefolder is using more space than required"

I would like to ask for some help. After every log-out, Firevault tells me that "Your homefolder is using more space than required" (or something between that lines). What can I do?
Thank you for the help.

Hi Morales,
Unless you have a need for military-level security, FileVault is overkill. It slows your computer because all sorts of cache and preference files are repeatedly encrypted and decrypted, and because filevault is saving all your files in a big "container file," disk and directory errors that would otherwise be minor can cause massive data loss on a filevault-ed computer.
To keep SOME files secure, an encrypted, password protected disk image is a better idea. You can make encrypted disk images with Applications/Utilities/Disk Utility. Do File > New > Disk Image from Folder.
John

My macbook shows that I used up all my memory but I didn't

My macbook shows that I used up all my memory which is listed under "other". I don't know why

Read Pondini's "where did my disc space go" : http://web.me.com/pondini/AppleTips/DiskSpace.html. He is a valued member of this forum.

I had to upgrade from ios7 to ios8 but it needed more storage than i had so i backed up my phone to my computer then deleted the content on my phone and upgraded to ios8. i have not connect my phone and computer since. how do i get my content back?

i had to upgrade from ios7 to ios8 but it needed more storage i had so i backed up my phone to my computer then deleted the content on my phone and upgraded to ios8. i have not connect my phone and computer since. how do i get my content back?

Restore the backup from your computer

MBP Memory Upgrade Using More RAM than Before

Hey,
I have a 13-inch, late 2011 Macbook Pro with a 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7 Processor. I recently changed my 4GB memory (2 modules) PC3-10600 DDR3 1333 MHz to a Crucial 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1333 MHz.
Before the upgrade, the activity monitor would show memory used at around 3.98GB or so, and I was running only chrome with a few tabs open. Using chrome and a few more apps would slow down the computer significantly, though still usable.
After the upgrade, the activity monitor shows memory used at around 6.5GB with the same apps running (just chrome). My computer does run a faster and can handle a lot more apps.
My question is, why is my Macbook using more RAM after the upgrade?
Thanks,
Sebs

The short answer is that memory unused is memory wasted.
Mavericks is designed to decrease reliance upon mass storage, which is orders of magnitude slower than RAM. Mavericks will use all the memory available to it before resorting to using the swapfile. You are likely to find "swap used" to be zero, even with Google Chrome's notoriously profligate use of system resources.
Read: OS X Mavericks: About Activity Monitor

IPod wants more storage than needed

I have a iPod Nano 16GB 4th generation. My problem is that both iTunes and explorer says it has around 1GB free. But as soon as I try to transfer movies I get an error that says "needs more storage", I am using iTunes i swedish so I don't know the exact phrase.
For example: If I sync as many movies possible, and I then have 865,9MB free in my iPod. When I try to transfer a movie which in this case is 98,7MB, I get the error and it says: Cannot sync (918,3MB needed)
It's like the iPod needs some spare storage or something... so weird...
Message was edited by: jimpalompa

what if the movies your transferring is more then 1 gb?

Can oracle use more memory than pga+sga

Hi Experts,
If I have set pga 1GB and SGA 2GB then Could oracle use more than 3GB RAM from OS.
Thanks,
Please Ignore if seems to be very basic question..

Yes.
The PGA_AGGREGATE_TARGET is only a target. On a busy system, a system with frequently changing SQL patterns , Oracle may sometimes attempt to allocate a higher value.
I presume that you are on 32-bit Windows. You will hit ORA-4030 errors occassionally because Oracle on Windows is a single process (multi-threaded) and Windows limits the memory the process can address.
I suggest that you reduce your P_A_T.
Hemant K Chitale

Why does using AIFF Encoder use more space than original CD?

I import with the AIFF Encoder option, as I want the best possible sound quality. A Full CD uses 700 MB, yet when I import a full CD into itunes, it says that is is using more than 800 MB. How is this possible?

Using the AIFF/Apple Lossless encoder is different to using CDA or MP3 format.
This is like a comparison between digital and analogue.
Digital is about space efficiency - so, look at a CD - It's small right?
This is because they have only taken sounds within a narrower band-width than the band-width used on a record (vinyl) and they have also encoded it (it's like shortening 'male' to 'm' under sex)
Vinyl has a huge band-width (just compare a full-sized record to a CD) and takes every little detail of a song, every rich sound and keeps it as a value on its' surface.
This is the same as the AIFF of Apple Lossless format - they take every little sound and put it inside the file - which makes it high quality but huge!
I have compared sizes and AIFF of the same file is 10 times the size of the AAC.
The digital formats use maths equations rather than on/off values for sounds.
I would not use this format (AIFF or Apple Lossless) unless you were transferring from vinyl to your iPod and you didn't want much else because it is full of on/off values.
CD's have reduced quality of sound and downloads are limited to the speed of the servers for quality BUT if you still want good quality and small size, encode in AAC - It is better than an MP3 because AAC is 4 layers of maths instead of 3 layers in an MP3.
Remember though, there is no point in making a high quality file from a lower quality source - you are just filling your iPod with no noise!

IPod touch 4 gives message "Cannot Download" "there is not enough available storage to download...You can manage your storage in settings." when trying to update or install one but not all apps. I have more storage than the app takes. Can u help?

iPod touch 4 gives message "Cannot Download" "there is not enough available storage to download...You can manage your storage in settings." when trying to update or install one of the apps, but not other apps. I have more space available than needed for the app. What do I need to do to fix this problem? Do I need to completely reset this device as new and, if so, how should I do that?

You need to delete some item (apps, music, photos etc) from the iPod,.However, sometime files get corrupt. To determine that connect the iPod to your computer and click on the iPod under Devices in iTunes. How much storage is used by the "other" category. If over 1 1/2 GB that indicates corrupted files.
To get the "other" down to normal value you need to restore your iPod usually restoring from backup works but sometimes restoring to factory settings.new iPod is required./

MacBook Pro Freezes while using more than two applications at the same time

Over the last two weeks my MBP has been freezing every time i use two or more applications at the same time. For e.g. my whole system freezes from time to time when i use itunes and safari at the same time. This problem never existed before and has just started recently and is really annoying. What can i do to fix it?

Rather than re-installing Safari have you tried simply "Resetting" it (head to "Reset safari" under the "Safari" menu). It is possible that something in your user folder that supports Safari is really the cause of the problem. Re-installing Safari won't deal with this, but re-setting it can.
In fact the first thing you should try is simply choosing "Empty cache..". If your cache files are corrupted then this in itself could explain the behaviour.
If you choose to do the Reset first try it with just "Empty cache" and "remove all website icons" selected. This will reduce the amount that you will "lose" in the process. (Cookies, history, etc). Add in additional options if the first attempt doesn't fix it.
Cheers
Rod

About My Mac is telling me that I'm using more space than I think I am

Hi there,
I've only had problems with storage once before, so I bought DaisyDisk and used it - it cleared out a lot of space and I loved it - this was months ago by the way. Then, I checked my storage today and suddenly my 'Apps' tab was taking up about 130GB of data. I knew that my 'Apps' area was only taking up about 10GB so I got spotlight to check my drive again so that I could find out what was actually taking up all of this space. After this, I checked About My Mac again and the 'Other' tab was suddenly taking up loads of room. I opened up DaisyDisk and deleted some old files and managed to get from about 40GB of free space to about 90GB. I'm happy with this so far but I want to know what is in that 'Other' tab. DaisyDisk isn't helping me as it says that my user is taking up about 90GB of space but when I look on Finder it says that it isn't as big as that. I really want help so that I can clear out all the unnecessary junk off of my Mac before I go back to school. Also, I know that I have 20GB of files in my user (shows when I copy everything from the All My Files section in to a new folder), so I don't think this 'Other' section should be as big as it is.
I have a 2013 13" Macbook Pro with Retina Display with a 256GB Hard Drive.
A picture of the About My Mac section:
http://i.imgur.com/Xl6wE0o.png
Thanks for any help.

For information about the Other category in the Storage display, see this support article. If the Storage display seems to be inaccurate, try rebuilding the Spotlight index.
Empty the Trash if you haven't already done so. If you use iPhoto, empty its internal Trash first:
iPhoto ▹ Empty Trash
Do the same in other applications, such as Aperture, that have an internal Trash feature. Then restart the computer. That will temporarily free up some space.
According to Apple documentation, you need at least 9 GB of available space on the startup volume (as shown in the Finder Info window) for normal operation—not the mythical 10%, 15%, or any other percentage. You also need enough space left over to allow for growth of the data. There is little or no performance advantage to having more available space than the minimum Apple recommends. Available storage space that you'll never use is wasted space.
When Time Machine backs up a portable Mac, some of the free space will be used to make local snapshots, which are backup copies of recently deleted files. The space occupied by local snapshots is reported as available by the Finder, and should be considered as such. In the Storage display of System Information, local snapshots are shown as Backups. The snapshots are automatically deleted when they expire or when free space falls below a certain level. You ordinarily don't need to, and should not, delete local snapshots yourself. If you followed bad advice to disable local snapshots by running a shell command, you may have ended up with a lot of data in the Other category. Ask for instructions in that case.
See this support article for some simple ways to free up storage space.
You can more effectively use a tool such as OmniDiskSweeper (ODS) or GrandPerspective (GP) to explore the volume and find out what's taking up the space. You can also delete files with it, but don't do that unless you're sure that you know what you're deleting and that all data is safely backed up. That means you have multiple backups, not just one. Note that ODS only works with OS X 10.8 or later. If you're running an older OS version, use GP.
Deleting files inside an iPhoto or Aperture library will corrupt the library. Any changes to a photo library must be made from within the application that created it. The same goes for Mail files.
Proceed further only if the problem isn't solved by the above steps.
ODS or GP can't see the whole filesystem when you run it just by double-clicking; it only sees files that you have permission to read. To see everything, you have to run it as root.
Back up all data now.
If you have more than one user account, make sure you're logged in as an administrator. The administrator account is the one that was created automatically when you first set up the computer.
Install the app you downloaded in the Applications folder as usual. Quit it if it's running.
Triple-click anywhere in the corresponding line of text below on this page to select it, then copy the selected text to the Clipboard by pressing the key combination command-C:
sudo /Applications/OmniDiskSweeper.app/Contents/MacOS/OmniDiskSweeper
sudo /Applications/GrandPerspective.app/Contents/MacOS/GrandPerspective
Launch the built-in Terminal application in any of the following ways:
☞ Enter the first few letters of its name into a Spotlight search. Select it in the results (it should be at the top.)
☞ In the Finder, select Go ▹ Utilities from the menu bar, or press the key combination shift-command-U. The application is in the folder that opens.
☞ Open LaunchPad. Click Utilities, then Terminal in the icon grid.
Paste into the Terminal window by pressing command-V. You'll be prompted for your login password, which won't be displayed when you type it. Type carefully and then press return. You may get a one-time warning to be careful. If you see a message that your username "is not in the sudoers file," then you're not logged in as an administrator. Ignore any other messages that appear in the Terminal window.
The application window will open, eventually showing all files in all folders, sorted by size. It may take a few minutes for the app to finish scanning.
I don't recommend that you make a habit of doing this. Don't delete anything as root. If something needs to be deleted, make sure you know what it is and how it got there, and then delete it by other, safer, means. When in doubt, leave it alone or ask for guidance.
When you're done with the app, quit it and also quit Terminal.

Why Yosemite used more ram than maverick?

After installing Yosemite 10.10, the system used 80% of ram after I streamed serials with Safari. Meanwhile, when I was using it from Maverick, the system only used 50% of the memory.As I typed this, the RAM usage significantly increasing. Please fix this issue of RAM usage. Thanks
I'm using Macbook Pro Retina (13" late 2013)
Ram 8GB

How did you transfer the backup? It sounds like you may have transferred more or less than you should have, which is causing you problems now. Mountain Lion's memory requirements should be about the same as Lion's.
Note that your problems may or may not be RAM-related. Don't be too concerned about low free RAM... free RAM is wasted RAM, and low free RAM should not be a problem in and of itself. If you have low inactive RAM in addition to low free RAM, though, or if your page outs value in Activity Monitor is too high (10% or more of page ins), then it's probably RAM-related.
Still, you definitely should be able to run the same tasks on newer hardware in Mountain Lion just as well as you did in Lion, on the same amount of RAM. If that's not the case, something's wrong and some troubleshooting will be needed. You could try some of the tips in my Mac Performance Guide, though there may be some more specific steps you can take based on the answer to my initial question.

Selecting all columns makes oracle use more indexes than only selectng one?

I have 3 queries here that differ only slightly, conceptually, but the plans are massively different. What I cant work out is that the difference is only in the select list.. The fields referenced in the where clause are properly indexed for this purpose
SELECT
scc.expiry_date
FROM
bw3.int_file_log_details ifld
INNER JOIN
bw3.svc_card_status_change scsc
USING
    (institution_number, file_number)
INNER JOIN bw3.svc_client_cards scc
USING
    (card_number)
WHERE
institution_number = '00000001' AND
file_number = '00002504'This one above does a full table scan of SCC, over 3.5 million records
SELECT
card_number
FROM
bw3.int_file_log_details ifld
INNER JOIN
bw3.svc_card_status_change scsc
USING
    (institution_number, file_number)
INNER JOIN bw3.svc_client_cards scc
USING
    (card_number)
WHERE
institution_number = '00000001' AND
file_number = '00002504'This one above does an index fast full scan of SCC's pk (which is cardnumber), as does doing a "SELECT null as dummy FROM..."
SELECT
FROM
bw3.int_file_log_details ifld
INNER JOIN
bw3.svc_card_status_change scsc
USING
    (institution_number, file_number)
INNER JOIN bw3.svc_client_cards scc
USING
    (card_number)
WHERE
institution_number = '00000001' AND
file_number = '00002504'This one above does the index range scan of the columns mentioned in the where clause and two index unique scans to link in IFLD and SCC (because they are joined on their PKs)
I would expect all queries to run this way and completes in ~0.01 seconds
Now, I get that oracle will sometimes use only an index instead of a table access when the requested data can be got from the index, but the actual query is pulling data from some columns not in indexes, so must be accessed in the table:
SELECT
scsc.card_prod_data as "Field1",
substr(card_number,1,4)||' '||
    substr(card_number,5,4)||' '||
    substr(card_number,9,4)||' '||
    substr(card_number,13,4)||' '||
    substr(card_number,17) as "Field2",
'                           ' as "Field3",
scc.emboss_line_1 as "Field4",
scc.emboss_line_2 as "Field5",
TO_CHAR(TO_DATE(scc.last_issued_date, 'YYYYMMDD'), 'MM/YY ')||
    TO_CHAR(TO_DATE(scc.expiry_date, 'YYYYMMDD'), 'MM/YY ')||
    '    ' as "Field6",
'B'||
    card_number||
    '^'||
    RPAD('0', 27, ' ')||
    '^'||
    to_char(to_date(scc.expiry_date, 'YYYYMMDD'), 'YYMM')||
    service_category_code||
    '000000000000' as "Field7",
card_number||
    '='||
    to_char(to_date(scc.expiry_date, 'YYYYMMDD'), 'YYMM')||
    service_category_code||
    '000000000000' as "Field8",
card_number as "Field9",
scsc.cvv_cvc2 as "Field10"
FROM
bw3.int_file_log_details ifld
INNER JOIN
bw3.svc_card_status_change scsc
USING
    (institution_number, file_number)
INNER JOIN bw3.svc_client_cards scc
USING
    (card_number)
WHERE
institution_number = '00000001' AND
file_number = '00002504'This query above, which uses some data from all tables, does a table full scan of SCC, yet if I SELECT * FROM.. I get the expected index usage and table access by index rowid for all tables..
Why is oracle doing an FTS when I choose only some columns, yet doing index access when I select * ?
Edited by: charred on Oct 5, 2010 11:37 AM

Selectivity of indexes?
For a query linking these tables:
int_file_log_details <-> svc_card_status_change <-> svc_client_cards
I'm expecting Oracle to:
Use an index range scan of the index on svc_card_status_change that is a nonunique index of institution_number and file number. Selectivity of this index is:
1 institution number in the entire table
59 distinct file numbers in the entire table
4.1million records in the entire table
From there, with the records it found, to use index unique scan of the PKs of int_file_log_details (file_number: 1 record required) and PK of svc_client_cards (card_number: poetntially thousands of records required)
I can understand if oracle might decide it can get 69k records out of 4.1 million faster by FTS the cards table rather than having the indirection of the index... what I cannot understand is:
If I select all the data from the query (SELECT *) it does unique index scans for the 2 records
If I select say, only one non-indexed non-joined column from each table, oracle prefers a FTS of the cards table..
Is oracle not realising that there are only 2 records I need out of cards? Why would select * differ? Is it that oracle thinks "select * is a large amount of data, so it'll be faster to use the index and target certain rows" vs "select one_column can be garnered more quickly by scanning the table and generating a lower overall memory load" ?

Time Machine requests more storage than needed!

Starting standard backup
Backing up to: /Volumes/TM_Backup/Backups.backupdb
No pre-backup thinning needed: 1.94 GB requested (including padding), 109.41 GB available
Copied 2539 files (265.1 MB) from volume Snow_Leopard.
Copied 2547 files (265.1 MB) from volume Leopard.
Copied 2754 files (548.8 MB) from volume Data.
No pre-backup thinning needed: 1.29 GB requested (including padding), 108.86 GB available
Copied 382 files (103 bytes) from volume Snow_Leopard.
Copied 390 files (196 bytes) from volume Leopard.
Copied 435 files (196 bytes) from volume Data.
Starting post-backup thinning
No post-back up thinning needed: no expired backups exist
Backup completed successfully.
As you can see from the log entries above, Time Machine requested 1.94 GB, but it backed up only 548.8 MB.
And then it requested 1.29 GB and it backed up only 196 bytes.
I recall reading in this forum that this may be caused by the size information in some folder being wrong. I have partitioned my internal hard drive in three partitions:
1. Leopard
2. Snow Leopard
3. Data
So, I excluded the Leopard partition and did another backup and it was still more than 1 GB.
I added Leopard and took a backup.
Then I excluded Snow Leopard and did another backup and the space requested was still more than 1 GB.
So I added Snow Leopard and took a backup.
Then I excluded Data and did another backup. It requested more than 1 GB.
So, I was unable to identify which volume had the bad folder info.
I wiped out the Time Machine backup by reformatting the volume,
I then re-created the directory of all three volumes using Disk Warrior.
And then I ran a fresh backup.
And then I ran another backup. It still requests more than 1 GB than needed.
Any else I should try?
Thank you very much.
Roberto
Message was edited by: Roberto Sepúlveda

Pondini wrote:
Roberto Sepúlveda wrote:
As you can see from the log entries above, Time Machine requested 1.94 GB, but it backed up only 548.8 MB.
And then it requested 1.29 GB and it backed up only 196 bytes.
That's more of an over-estimate than usual. TM adds 20% to the estimated size of the backup, and it's usually fairly close.
no it's not. I frequently see large disparity between estimated and actual backup for smaller backups. in the example I posted the ratio is 5:1! this is completely normal. there is nothing to troubleshoot or see here.
There are some things that will cause the estimate to be off significantly, but most of them result in larger backups, not smaller ones.
It's pure speculation, but I suspect if the same file is updated repeatedly between backups, it's size may be counted more than once for the estimate.
But as you mentioned, something corrupted might be a cause, also. Since there's no way to tell how much was estimated from each partition, I'd run +*Verify Disk+* on the partition you're running from, and +*Repair Disk+* on the others, then do a Restart.

MacBook shows I have used more storage than i have

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for