Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
13-Inch MacBook Air Models Now Have 8GB RAM Standard
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
To see if I can downgrade to an Air w/ better battery life and a small profile even though Apple's Pros are good on battery and size. Downgrading could save me $ too possibly.
They did, its called the Macbook
Almost 4 years ago, it was unacceptable for me to purchase a rMBP with 8 GB of RAM.
Today, 32 GB in the iMac barely gets me by.
I realize I'm a power user.
Even if I did nothing but browse, 8 GB would only be an acceptable minimum if OS X and Safari didn't completely suck with memory usage. I have a hard time recommending 8 to anyone.
Today, 32 GB in the iMac barely gets me by.
I realize I'm a power user.
Even if I did nothing but browse, 8 GB would only be an acceptable minimum if OS X and Safari didn't completely suck with memory usage. I have a hard time recommending 8 to anyone.
Can't believe how late they are to the party.
I do love the MBA. I hope they keep it in their lineup.
I do love the MBA. I hope they keep it in their lineup.
A couple of my coworkers use Surfaces. Whenever they need to do something which requires touching the screen, it's like they switch to slow motion mode.
My Windows admin coworkers basically don't bother with touch screens anymore.
The Macbook Air I bought in 2012 had 8Gb RAM - the fact that you *could* get it with 8GB RAM was one of the main reasons I finally bought a MBA, that and the fact that it had USB 3.0.
It doesn't always work out like that.
For every company that responds to hardship with improved quality and value in their products is another company somewhere else that desperately cuts corners and shoves junk out the door in a state of panic.
That said, Apple has a huge wad of cash to blow through, so it would take mind-boggling mismanagement to lose any significant chunk of that money. Decreased sales, on the other hand? Yes, that would absolutely encourage further improvements funded by Apple's stable financial position.
Yes, according to Apple's product pages, though only for desktop application use, don't expect to be able to run any 3D applications (e.g. games) at that resolution
- Intel HD Graphics 6000
- Dual display and video mirroring: Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 3840x2160 pixels on an external display, both at millions of colours
On a sidenote... I would love to know what percentage of all computers on Earth have touchscreens. It can't be that many.
There are hundreds of millions of desktop computers with standalone monitors being used in offices around the world... and they obviously don't have touchscreens.
And for laptops... it seems like there are more non-touch laptops being sold today than touch laptops. I just did a quick check on Dell and HP... and if they offer 8 configurations for a particular laptop... only 2 of them have a touchscreen.
The average price of a Windows laptop is around $500. There are obviously plenty of machines being sold below that price... and those certainly won't include a touchscreen. But not every Windows laptop above that price includes a touchscreen either. It seems to be optional even on the higher priced models.
I bought a Toshiba laptop last year... and I purposely chose a non-touch model to save $100. I, personally, had no need for a touchscreen. But it looks like most computers being sold today have no touchscreen at all... and the ones that do make it an option.
So I just wonder how big a deal touchscreens are on laptops.
Or as Seinfeld would say... "What's the deal with touchscreens?"
It's funny... I just read a comment on The Verge saying how Apple is behind since they don't offer touchscreens on Mac laptops.
Well... it looks like most computers don't have touchscreens.
Yeah it's nice that touchscreens are available on Windows laptops... but it doesn't appear to be a must-have feature.
4GB ram on my 11inch MacBook Air is already not enough. However it works well so I have no reason to upgrade it.
PC has 8GB and the result is definitely better. IE and Chrome, Sandboxie with a few apps running, I can run a lot of programs at the same time, or open a ton of tabs.
[doublepost=1461085648][/doublepost]
But now, I find touchscreen is more useful than what I thought. I can use it to help playing games. Use it to create a digital signature, browse the web, and do quick drawing or drafting using mspaint.
However, touchscreen is a bonus but not a must even in today.
PC has 8GB and the result is definitely better. IE and Chrome, Sandboxie with a few apps running, I can run a lot of programs at the same time, or open a ton of tabs.
[doublepost=1461085648][/doublepost]
I bought a dell PC with a touchscreen because the price with touchscreen was even cheaper than models without touchscreen. Pretty much a good deal.On a sidenote... I would love to know what percentage of all computers on Earth have touchscreens. It can't be that many.
There are hundreds of millions of desktop computers with standalone monitors being used in offices around the world... and they obviously don't have touchscreens.
And for laptops... it seems like there are more non-touch laptops being sold today than touch laptops. I just did a quick check on Dell and HP... and if they offer 8 configurations for a particular laptop... only 2 of them have a touchscreen.
The average price of a Windows laptop is around $500. There are obviously plenty of machines being sold below that price... and those certainly won't include a touchscreen. But not every Windows laptop above that price includes a touchscreen either. It seems to be optional even on the higher priced models.
I bought a Toshiba laptop last year... and I purposely chose a non-touch model to save $100. I, personally, had no need for a touchscreen. But it looks like most computers being sold today have no touchscreen at all... and the ones that do make it an option.
So I just wonder how big a deal touchscreens are on laptops.
Or as Seinfeld would say... "What's the deal with touchscreens?"
It's funny... I just read a comment on The Verge saying how Apple is behind since they don't offer touchscreens on Mac laptops.
Well... it looks like most computers don't have touchscreens.
Yeah it's nice that touchscreens are available on Windows laptops... but it doesn't appear to be a must-have feature.
But now, I find touchscreen is more useful than what I thought. I can use it to help playing games. Use it to create a digital signature, browse the web, and do quick drawing or drafting using mspaint.
However, touchscreen is a bonus but not a must even in today.
Hmm, amazing.
So when I moan about the MacBook being underpowered, I'll be referred to the MacBook Air.
Then I look into this thread "ready to complain" here (wasn't going to, but let's just assume I was) and I get sent back to MacBook.
Alternatively, if I want "an Apple laptop that's fit for my needs" asking for the MBA format with Retina and reasonable 2016-times specs I'll be referred to buying a product that carries the "Pro" tag, even though I may not even want to buy a Pro device.
Then again, we all know "Pro" has little meaning anymore at Apple, so there's that.
Oh and whatever I end up choosing, I'm supposed to just pony up the dough or shut up I guess...
I do remember when Apple offered reasonable specs and great consumer laptops at reasonable prices.
Reasonable accounting for "the Apple tax" of course which always seemed justified considering the build quality.
However, the newer the models, the weaker the quality actually is and the higher the premiums are for configuring your device.
RAM has always been expensive to buy from Apple, but the CPU upgrades and similar things were reasonably priced.
My iMac 27" from '11 is equipped with a Core i7 CPU which has been an ~€100 upgrade option.
That's REASONABLE. Not a bargain, but I paid that happily knowing what I get in return.
Let's look at today's i7 upgrade price:
Are you having a laugh, Apple?
Glassed Silver:mac
Last edited:
That's not usually the case though.
The Dell XPS 13 starts at $800 for non-touch... but the touchscreen is a $350 option. You are also getting their high-resolution Quad-HD screen with that... so it's not just the touch that adds cost.
But even on their mainstream models... adding touch is an additional cost.
You definitely got lucky by finding a touchscreen cheaper than a standard screen
There's nothing awkward about Macbook Air. It's the only usable thin cheap Macbook around. The other options are a machine with more ports and more power and in the other end the ultrathin small useless toy people want to buy to show they have so much money they can afford to buy a computer you can't use for anything useful. At least Air still has a proper keyboard.
Wow, Macbook air is purposely kept in the dark ages. The benzel and screen are out of date. I agree with others on here that Apple is positioning it has a low end alternative, but it's a far better alternative than the Macbook pro...(edit: i mean 12 macbook not Macbook pro)
But just to show how much Apple is innovating these days, ROSE GOLD!
But just to show how much Apple is innovating these days, ROSE GOLD!
Last edited:
But equally the "toy" has a real screen and most people never really use all those ports!
I don't hear the iPadPro dudes crying about ports, they'd kill for a single USB-C connector.
Lets be clear, from the actual stats, the "computer you can't use for anything useful" is as powerful as a 2014 MBA...
Maybe its best not to get carried away with the hyperbole.
Well, mb can only handle it @30Hz. What you quoted, proves that mba can handle @60Hz?