PDA

View Full Version : Bump the RAM Apple!!!


tinydancer
Jan 26, 2005, 01:31 PM
So here's my thought, which I'm sure is not that novel, but nevertheless on my mind:

Rather than go through the standard price drops for the various computer lines every so often, Apple should bump the min RAM specs across the board by 256 while leaving the price untouched. Leave the option open for the buyer to downgrade the RAM for a savings, if so desired. This will dramatically increase the performace of the computer, which results in greater customer satisfaction. The average computer user doesn't understand what factors influence the computer. All they know is if they like what their using or not. More minimum RAM will lead to happier customers, among them who are the reccent PC converts who are buying up these iMac Mini's. What do you think?.....not that it will happen anytime soon, but I guess somethings got to give at some point.

rhpenguin
Jan 26, 2005, 01:41 PM
A company giving something for free?! Are you serious?!

tubedogg
Jan 26, 2005, 01:43 PM
A company giving something for free?! Are you serious?!How are they giving something away for free if, instead of dropping the price by e.g. $100, they add 256MB of memory? They'd actually be making money on that deal since the memory doesn't cost them anywhere near that much.

Lacero
Jan 26, 2005, 01:45 PM
Sheesh, I remember when 4MB was plenty enough for daily computing, and having 16MB was an ungodly amount of ram.

rhpenguin
Jan 26, 2005, 02:05 PM
Read it how the original poster intended it.. Basically hes saying, keep the price the same, add 256mb more memory and give users the option to remove that 256mb as a bto option.

tinydancer
Jan 26, 2005, 02:10 PM
Read it how the original poster intended it.. Basically hes saying, keep the price the same, add 256mb more memory and give users the option to remove that 256mb as a bto option.


Yes you're right. Make this change in hardware, not price. But if Apple is going to drop the price anyway...just add the RAM and keep the price the same. Apple gives nothing away for free if they intend to drop the price on the line as it is. It would be like you paying for an upgrade, it's just that in this case apple has make the upgade for you.

tubedogg
Jan 26, 2005, 02:16 PM
Read it how the original poster intended it.. Basically hes saying, keep the price the same, add 256mb more memory and give users the option to remove that 256mb as a bto option.I still don't see how they are giving anything away for free in that case. If they are going to drop the price by $100, and instead of doing that they add an extra 256MB stick of RAM which can be removed to reduce the price by, say, $75, they are still $25 ahead of where they were if they had just reduced the price, AND the system is better prepared for the average consumer (if the RAM is not removed). Even if they make the RAM an option that can be removed for the full $100, they still aren't any worse off then they would have been if they had just dropped the system's price by $100.

If they were to give you 256MB of RAM for the lower price, then fine they might be giving something for free, but if they don't lower the price, how are they giving anything away for free?

You seem to be disregarding the fact the original poster was intending this as a *replacement* for a price drop.

Fredstar
Jan 26, 2005, 02:22 PM
Apple really should have 512mb as standard really, Panther really slows if the hd is not upto scratch (<7200) with 256mb. Through economies of scale i doubt Apple would pay more than a tenner (if that) to bump up all the models and it would leave a lot of newbs who will walk out with a Mini a lot happier when they get it home. Forget a day or anything just put 512 in all the Macs, we do pay a premium after all.

wPod
Jan 26, 2005, 02:26 PM
i completely agree. i just got my bro a mac mini with min ram (cause ram elsewhere is cheaper) and set it up (havent gotten more ram yet). and 256 isnt enough for OS X. i have my PB maxed out and i like it (with 5 programs open at once) but honestly 256 is hardly enough to run OS X so i dont know why apple keeps packaging everything with only 256. oh well. probably by the time i get another computer 512 will be too little and thats what apple will ship as its standard.

dejo
Jan 26, 2005, 02:42 PM
... but honestly 256 is hardly enough to run OS X...

Are you saying that running OS X alone, with no other applications running, takes up most of the 256 MB of RAM?

Steven1621
Jan 26, 2005, 02:51 PM
Are you saying that running OS X alone, with no other applications running, takes up most of the 256 MB of RAM?

It comes rather close. I restarted just to see what it comes up as and it was 220 MB for me. I suppose if you close applications completely you might be able to get by, and there probably are ways to lower the amount you use.

Chip NoVaMac
Jan 26, 2005, 02:59 PM
My hope is that once the frenzy is over with that the Apple Stores in the malls will have versions of the Mac mini with at least the 512mb RAM and the AE/BT built in. I have heard that they do that on some of the PB configs that sell well.

Logik
Jan 26, 2005, 03:06 PM
Sheesh, I remember when 4MB was plenty enough for daily computing, and having 16MB was an ungodly amount of ram.

indeed man, i have a stick of PNY 4mb ram at home.. bought the stuff for $200 at best buy.. i have the receipt and the ram and the box.. i'll take pics ;) the good ol days of windows 95.. so it was in '95 or '96 i bought it

jxyama
Jan 26, 2005, 03:07 PM
considering cheap PCs also ship with 256 MB RAM, most of them also being used as shared video RAM, i don't see the reason for apple to do this.

you are right, though, 256 MB is fairly low for OS X. (nevermind Win XP for cheap PCs.) you will get a lot more beachballs because of frequent access to virtual memory.

but for people who want cheap computer, i think it's ok. if you know better, you'd upgrade. i don't think selling with 256 MB is really stifling the demand - those who buy without upgrades wouldn't know the difference even if it came with 512 MB, and those who know will (grudgingly) pay to upgrade.

Timelessblur
Jan 26, 2005, 03:17 PM
I can understand them keeping the mini at 256 but I might like to point out by the time PC hit 800 base price for monitor and all they at sitting at 512 megs of ram. so basicly everything but BTO for the min mac and the lowest of the Emac, and Ibook, but after that they all should be at the standard 512 meg.

Level it to apple to put top of the line stuff in there top of the line computer than waste all that extra power with POS graphic card and 256 megs of ram. A basic 1,8 ghz power mac (no upgrades) will get creamed in almost all test by a 1K pc tower with a slow CPU just because that computer has 4 times the ram and a much better graphic card. before I get flamed I might like to point out that the PC tower would still have a ram and graphic card upgrade but it is still 1/2 of the cost of a basie 1.8ghz Powermac and is not hampered by no ram. It was making a poitn that Apple really needs to increase it ram

dejo
Jan 26, 2005, 03:18 PM
It comes rather close. I restarted just to see what it comes up as and it was 220 MB for me. I suppose if you close applications completely you might be able to get by, and there probably are ways to lower the amount you use.

Then how can OS X (10.3.7) be running on my 128MB iBook?

jxyama
Jan 26, 2005, 03:23 PM
Then how can OS X (10.3.7) be running on my 128MB iBook?

it'll run. but it'll be slow. that's all. (obviously, 'slow' is relative. i personally found my experience - read below - nearly unusable.)

i had a 1 GHz eMac with 128 MB. panther ran, but it was very slow. try to run any app and you'd get beachball. slow and 'nearly' unsable doesn't mean it won't run. you'd be amazed how much better the performance will be if you put a bit more RAM in your iBook.

ifjake
Jan 27, 2005, 08:14 AM
i think it's an excellent idea. and now that Apple has been messing with the price of the upgrade options for the mini, maybe it wouldn't be too "below" them for it to actually be possible.

jemeinc
Jan 27, 2005, 08:31 AM
I think it's more than an excellent idea- I think it's imperative... Yeah, cheap PC's come with 256- but those $500 PC's come with a keyboard. mouse, & monitor- ... So for all intensive purposes, Apple doesn't really make a "Cheap" computer... I understand the target audience for the mini is people who already have that stuff- but they are also comparing it to the $500 PC's so it's fair to point out what you get & don't get..

Let's face it- even Apples low end desk tops are expensive- compared to PC's - 512 should be standard- 256 is unacceptable in anything other than the mini...

auxplage
Jan 27, 2005, 09:13 AM
I used my eMac with 256 mb of RAM for a few months. It was very annoying and all I use is iTunes, Safari, iPhoto, and few other programs on a regular basis. 256 mb is not enough. I have used a Mac with 512 mb and imho that is not enough. 768 mb seems to be a sweet spot with normal use and anything more is never a bad thing. :)

rosalindavenue
Jan 27, 2005, 09:24 AM
considering cheap PCs also ship with 256 MB RAM, most of them also being used as shared video RAM, i don't see the reason for apple to do this.

I'm sure there are a few cheap PCs out there with 256K, but the cheap Dell on the back of Parade Magazine in my Sunday paper ($499 after rebate with 17" CRT and keyboard/mouse) has 512K of RAM. I think that 512 is becoming the PC standard, even on the cheapest of boxes.

Chip NoVaMac
Jan 27, 2005, 09:45 AM
I'm sure there are a few cheap PCs out there with 256K, but the cheap Dell on the back of Parade Magazine in my Sunday paper ($499 after rebate with 17" CRT and keyboard/mouse) has 512K of RAM. I think that 512 is becoming the PC standard, even on the cheapest of boxes.

Based on my experiences, I would be far more likely to run a Mac with 10.3 with 256mb RAM, than I would a Win XP box with the same amount of RAM.

daveL
Jan 27, 2005, 12:04 PM
Apple has to struggle against the common perception that Macs are too expensive, thus the emphasis on a low advertised price point. Up-selling is common throughout business and that's what Apple does with the BTO options.

AndrewTosh
Jan 28, 2005, 12:21 AM
Based on my experiences, I would be far more likely to run a Mac with 10.3 with 256mb RAM, than I would a Win XP box with the same amount of RAM.

I disagree. My XP machine with 256mb ran much more smoothly than the mac mini does with 256. Mac OS X is simply a more demanding operating system.

The typical WinXP computer might be slower, but if you don't let a bunch of spyware and junk get installed, it is very usable with 256mb of ram. Adding more would probably help when you have lots of stuff open, but regular web browsing, word processing, etc. performace isn't boosted that much.

The mini is literally a night and day difference switching to 512. I put in the memory today and it finally feels like it should. Using this machine with 256mb is like driving a car with the emergency brake on. It also bothers me that the iLife '05 suite that Apple touts as a reason to buy the mini runs so poorly on the stock memory configuration. I think this potential PR nightmare could be easilly aleviated by putting in another $30 of ram (probably much less wholesale)

-Andrew

tinydancer
Jan 28, 2005, 11:47 AM
Does anyone know where we can make this sort of recommendation to Apple. Under ffedback on their site there is no general feedback section for RAM....just individual systems to commment on. No emac, no imac, no mac mini sections are avaible for comment.

rdowns
Jan 28, 2005, 12:07 PM
Read it how the original poster intended it.. Basically hes saying, keep the price the same, add 256mb more memory and give users the option to remove that 256mb as a bto option.

Makes no sense to offer a downgrade as a BTO option. Let's offer customers the option of paying less and we get to open the box and do more work.

srobert
Jan 28, 2005, 12:25 PM
I'd also like an option to order a BTO mac with ZERO Ram out of the box ^_^

I don't really mind how many RAM Apple bundles with their computers, but I think that it looks a little bit like Apple is cheating when they send a 512 MB RAM equiped Mini to reviewers when it normally comes with 256 MB out of the box. I wonder if the reviews would have been as good if people tested it with 256 MB. Then again, maybe it'S just me... it usually is ;)

johnnyjibbs
Jan 28, 2005, 12:27 PM
This is basically what Dell does to 'bump' its line from time to time. Nothing bad about it though. I for one think that Apple should be supplying machines with 512MB minimum and 1GB for the pro machines. And cut the crap - lets have it as one 512MB chip, not 2 x 256. A nice upgrade for the PB 12", for example, could be to up the soldered RAM to 512MB (up from 256) and thus leave the empty slot free so that getting to the magical 1GB RAM would only require purchase of a 512MB from crucial or whatever.. Mine is currently maxed out at 768MB (I'm not going anywhere near 1GB chips yet - too expensive!).

Apple needs to do it though anyway... Bottom of the line Dells are now coming with 1024MB RAM (double RAM free deals).

dejo
Jan 28, 2005, 12:43 PM
Apple needs to do it though anyway... Bottom of the line Dells are now coming with 1024MB RAM (double RAM free deals).

I just checked dell.com and the botton-of-the-line Dell (Dimension 2400) only comes equipped with 256MB of RAM (and costs $50 to upgrade to 512, with no BTO option for 1GB)

miloblithe
Jan 28, 2005, 12:52 PM
I like the idea of the original poster to have downgrading the RAM as an option. The move to 512MB standard should come soon. I wonder how you all would feel about 384MB as the standard? Would that temporarilly satisfy most of you? My iBook with that much runs OK, it seems to me.

johnnyjibbs
Jan 28, 2005, 12:57 PM
I just checked dell.com and the botton-of-the-line Dell (Dimension 2400) only comes equipped with 256MB of RAM (and costs $50 to upgrade to 512, with no BTO option for 1GB)
I admit that I saw that as an advert in a magazine at work today. Maybe it's expired now or you need a promotion code. On the website, you are right, bottom of the line (£300 machine) has 256MB RAM. But the £700 model contains 512MB RAM included and the £900 model has 1GB of RAM.

Here's a link (http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/topics/promo.aspx/uk%2fen%2ffy2005_q4_w13_memory_desktop_notebook?c=uk&cs=ukdhs1&l=en&s=dhs) to some of the double RAM deals.

tinydancer
Jan 28, 2005, 01:22 PM
I like the idea of the original poster to have downgrading the RAM as an option. The move to 512MB standard should come soon. I wonder how you all would feel about 384MB as the standard? Would that temporarilly satisfy most of you? My iBook with that much runs OK, it seems to me.

I guess 384 would work ok, I just think that 512 is better for 2 reasons:

a.) The more the better.

b.) 1 stick of 512 still leaves an avaibale slot for another stick of "x" for further expandablitiy, as opposed to using up both slot in a (1 x 256 & 1 x 128 = 384) configuration.

pubwvj
Jan 28, 2005, 02:12 PM
Actually, 256MB of RAM is plenty for many users. We have several machines with less than that and mere 266MHz G3 processors that run OSX 10.3.5 and most common applications without any problem. The most used applications are email and web browsing and you don't need a lot of power for those. Word processing and spreadsheets come next and they need even less RAM and processing power (CRU).

Yes, in my machine I have 1GB of RAM, but I like to have a dozen or more applications open at once and switch between them often. That is not the norm though. If you want that, pay extra. It is better for Apple to have a very low entry level price for a basic machine that will serve most people's needs. The Mac mini with 256MB is that machine.

Cheers,

-Walter
in Vermont

Thought for the day:

They say that "what doesn't kill you make's you stronger."
They fail to mention is that what doesn't make you stronger, kills you.

jxyama
Jan 28, 2005, 02:20 PM
I admit that I saw that as an advert in a magazine at work today. Maybe it's expired now or you need a promotion code. On the website, you are right, bottom of the line (£300 machine) has 256MB RAM. But the £700 model contains 512MB RAM included and the £900 model has 1GB of RAM.

well, you pay more and you get more RAM... what a concept! ;)

evilernie
Jan 28, 2005, 03:11 PM
Sheesh, I remember when 4MB was plenty enough for daily computing, and having 16MB was an ungodly amount of ram.

Well yeah, I remember when home computers didn't even exist. And we only had thirteen channels on tv, and we had to GET UP to change them...

Time marches on... :p

srobert
Jan 28, 2005, 03:16 PM
and we had to GET UP to change them...


Not necesseraly. You could tape a cork at the end of a broom stick, carve an horizontal slit in the cork, and then use the resulting gadget as a tool to "remotely" change channel on old TVs. (One of my crazy inventions) I called this one: ":La Gérolde". It actually worked surprisingly well. I tried upgrading it by taping 2 broom sticks togeteher (for a theorical 10 foot reach) but it was too hard to use. (We didn't have carbon fiber back in those days)

topher
Jan 28, 2005, 03:57 PM
I was in an Apple Store (Delaware) the other day...with $500 in my pocket and a strong desire to buy in a state where there is no sales tax. I've been running a 400mhz G3 with 10.2.8 and 192mb of RAM.

I expected all of the new machines, even the mini, to be blazingly fast compared to my 6 yr. old computer. They simply weren't. I know that there is probably a huge difference in the overall experience, they just didn't feel faster.

I was still ready to buy a mini until I checked the specs on the display models. Every display machine in the store had at least 512mb of ram.

If the display is an upgraded model, and even that doesn't quite feel right, the 256 mb standard is definitely not enough. If they won't even put a true standard model on display (I believe out of embarrasment), why do they offer it. The people who come in to switch are not going to like it when they find out that what they have at home doesn't even come close to what they used in the store, because they didn't spring for an upgrade (which the store wouldn't even have done on the mini at that time because they didn't have the kits in yet).

For the people who skim and then read the bottom line, there is at least one apple store in this country that won't even display a machine that has less than 512 mb of RAM, they shouldn't feel right about shipping them.

AndrewTosh
Jan 28, 2005, 04:12 PM
there is at least one apple store in this country that won't even display a machine that has less than 512 mb of RAM, they shouldn't feel right about shipping them.

And Honda puts the Accord EX out on the showroom and car show floor, and they don't feel wrong about making the DX with less creature comforts, nor should they. It's just good marketing.

-Andrew