Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It’s a shame Apple isn’t a bit more transparent with this sort of thing. And upgrading storage / ram is always (too) expensive with apple.

That being said, the vast majority of users isn’t going to notice this much.
 
I don't have a M2 Mini base model with me but if I am correct, it takes longer for the MacBook Air 15" to reach the login screen. What could be the reasons?
 
and if a mba met your needs then congratulations on massively overbuying with MBP with a Max Processor.
Well I wanted a larger screen, and two years ago, only the 16” MacBook Pro had the larger screen. Also, it’s nice to be able to edit some video footage and export large amounts of photos whenever I need to.

Anyway, this computer is almost two years old, and we are all Apple fans, so gotta have the latest and greatest.
 
M1, M2 & M3 are consumer SoC... so a slow-ish SSD is understandable and acceptable by the consumers buying them for family computer, non-IT students, etc.

It is a good there is an option nearly double the throughput by bumping up the SSD to 512GB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
I bought my 16" M1p almost a year ago in mint condition because M2 MBA with 16/512 costs in Sweden more than I paid for MBP. 16" looked massive for me in the beginning but I got used to the screen realestate. It's not a a portable one and I don't need that much power but I really love the display. I have a 2017 MBA at work when I need extreme portability but whenever I use it, I love my 16" more.
15" with 16/512 costs same as 2021 14" M1p base model's price last year.
And if I get rid of my 16" just to save 600g of weight, I will loose a lot of money, better display, speaker system etc.. so, I don't bother carrying a bit more weight for the distance of 20m between parking and job.
 
Pretty obvious from your comment that you didn't actually watch the video.
That's the beauty of a Max Tech video — you don't have to watch it to know it's a waste of time. But in the interest of fairness, I did give it a quick watch after reading your comment and, as expected, it doesn't add anything of value. Even when they're taking the machine apart, it's clear that half the time they're just guessing at what things are or glossing over anything that might actually be interesting.

This is the same channel that rushed out botched benchmarks of the 13" M2 Air that they ran only after taking it apart and shoddily putting it back together, and then after whining about how the machine was thermally compromised and no one should buy it completely reversed course and tried to act like it was other people who were blowing the issue out of proportion.
 
Purely spit-balling, but my guess is Apple got a great price on the 128GB storage modules - a price for two lower than they would have had to pay for a single 256GB module. Once those deals ran out, they switched to the 256GB module. If this is the case, what would be interesting to know is if Apple is still manufacturing M1 models today, do those models have the 128GB modules or have they also switched to 256GB modules?

It is also possible Apple spent more money to use multiple 128GB modules for the M1 models to help the machine benchmark as high as possible since they were going to be compared to the existing Intel models. Once Apple Silicon was established, they could then move to 256GB modules to save money since even if disk reads/writes were slower, the overall performance was still much better than the Intel models.
Or, the manufacturer of the actual NAND chips discontinued the 128 models???
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
I'm shocked😳
Apple wouldn't do this!

Oh wait. They just did.
And the model before. And the model before😂

Actually I'm starting to think that the original M1 256 is the right way to go.

Just keep in mind ... "slower" does not equal "slow". Just because they might be slower than their big brother doesn't mean they are slouches. There are many other optimizations in the system that take precedence over pure SSD read/write speed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
That's the beauty of a Max Tech video — you don't have to watch it to know it's a waste of time. But in the interest of fairness, I did give it a quick watch after reading your comment and, as expected, it doesn't add anything of value. Even when they're taking the machine apart, it's clear that half the time they're just guessing at what things are or glossing over anything that might actually be interesting.

This is the same channel that rushed out botched benchmarks of the 13" M2 Air that they ran only after taking it apart and shoddily putting it back together, and then after whining about how the machine was thermally compromised and no one should buy it completely reversed course and tried to act like it was other people who were blowing the issue out of proportion.
I really hate the whole clickbait and making 10 videos on a single stupid topic

but please, tell me , is this a waste of time :
1686693913879.png
 
Just keep in mind ... "slower" does not equal "slow". Just because they might be slower than their big brother doesn't mean they are slouches. There are many other optimizations in the system that take precedence over pure SSD read/write speed.
irl they are actually quite slow, much slower in fact
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.