Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Moar Ram, Moar Ram!

RedTomato

RedTomato

macrumors 601
Original poster
MOAR RAM! MOAR RAM!

This is the frustrating stoy of Apple, RAM and my Macbook.

I got my new MacBook 2.2 ghz a couple of months ago.

Hmm, nice machine. Nowt wrong with it. But, after a couple of months, my routine went like this:

Turn it on. Load up a couple of apps. Surf firefox for a bit. Switch to email. Spinning beach ball. Check email. Type a doc in Word. Go back to Firefox. Beach ball. Beach ball. Finally Firefox comes up.

BEACHBALL??

This is one of the world's fastest laptops, 2.2ghz of C2D goodness. It has 1GB RAM, same as my old Panther Powerbook, which ran like greased lightening.

What's going on? My macbook is running like a broken down Soviet tractor.

Finally, I work it out. I need more RAM.

RAM prices were low, so off I go and ordered 4 GB (from Crucial) and installed it. Wow. It's like having a whole new computer all over again. Apps ran like greased lightening and switched instantly with each other.

Looking at RAM usage, Leopard needs as a minumum, 2 GB to run smoothly with Mail.app, Firefox, and Word (or iTunes). I regard this application load as the absolute minumum for a computer in 2008.

Apple are selling their laptops with a crippling lack of RAM. Putting more RAM in is like owning a dog without bricks tied to its bollocks.

Come on, a 2 GB RAM stick only costs Apple about 15 dollars. Is it worth crippling a $1000 laptop for that?

Come on Apple, MOAR RAM! MOAR RAM!
 
RedTomato said:
This is one of the world's fastest laptops, 2.2ghz of C2D goodness. It has 1GB RAM, same as my old Panther Powerbook, which ran like greased lightening.
Click to expand...

Heh. This is why computers never seem to get any faster; we keep weighing them down with heavier operating systems. Your MB is several times faster than any Powerbook, yet Leopard is several times more demanding than Panther. Net result? You need more memory and a faster computer to achieve similar performance to a two-year old computer running a five year old operating system. Two years from now, the computers available will be several times faster than your MB, but they won't feel any faster than your MB (or your Powerbook), because they'll be laden with a substantially heavier 10.6. We're basically running in place.
 
tsincaat said:
Hey, it's only $850 for 4 gigs in the apple store!

Yes, it's pretty sad.
Click to expand...

I thought you were pulling my leg - that that was the Mac Pro price for 4GB.

No... Apple do indeed charge $850 for 4 GB of laptop ram!!!

The exact same ram that costs $100 to the public from their own supplier (from Crucial who sell the same Micron ram that Apple uses). My God!

I'm not even asking for 4 GB in each macbook. I'm only asking for 2GB - that's the minimum that Leopard needs.

2GB from Crucial to the public is about $40, Apple could probably get it at half that.
 
RedTomato said:
I'm only asking for 2GB - that's the minimum that Leopard needs.
Click to expand...

Odd; I thought it was 768MB. It's all your other apps that need the extra RAM.

My MacBook runs absolutely fine, using Logic Studio, iTunes, Safari, MSN and iWork constantly as well as having a few other apps weave in and out.

Apple stocks their computers with thats amount of RAM because it's all that a lot of people ever need.
 
Leopard could probably run on an G3 iBook with 256MB of ram, but it would not be what you expect from a new 2008 laptop.

With a C2D and 768MB ram, again it might run, but you wouldn't get the speed you expect from a 2008 $1000 laptop while running several different apps at the same time.

My point is with 4GB, with mail and internet apps open, and a few tabs open, and word, etc, I see about 2GB being used.

These few apps are the minimum I expect from a new modern computer. I also expect it to be able to switch between these apps quickly without interrupting my flow of thought, without having to wait a few seconds to page stuff in and out the ram.

I agree it's possible to get by with far less. I have a g3 PowerMac with far less and I use it for a few things. However, it's not a 2008 model computer.

My issue isn't with software bloat (that's a different topic), it's with apple not selling their laptops with the ram needed to let them work at the same level as the rest of the hardware and software inside.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back