Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Three kinds of users...you forgot the ones that run benchmarks to make sure the newest generation is actually faster than the old generation, then they go to work.

In principle, one should never pay more for same or less performance than previous gen. One should also not have to pay $200 extra (for less than $20 worth of product you can buy anywhere else) to get your new gen device up to the same performance as the last gen.
not faster, just the same , at the very least
 
It may be that the reason they spent so much for a 16” MBP is to get the larger screen. That was what people had to do to get a bigger screen size before the 15” MBA. Now, the 15” can address the market of someone who needs a bigger screen but doesn’t need (or want to pay for) the higher performance processors.
buying a max chip makes no sense though
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
Max Tech got the MBA and went right for the click bait. No review, no running apps, no listening to the speakers. They just tore it apart looking for the problem that got them plenty of views with the 13 inch. It’s kinda pathetic, but this kind of thing is what people like, I guess.

The performance of the M2 chip is already known, and the speakers are not determining factors. People who already want the 15” Air are going to buy it, and people who are considering the machine aren’t going to be swayed by the speakers.

Many people were waiting to order the machine because it was unclear whether the 15” would suffer the same performance issues due to a single nand chip. So going straight to this before anything else makes a lot of sense.
 
The performance of the M2 chip is already known, and the speakers are not determining factors. People who already want the 15” Air are going to buy it, and people who are considering the machine aren’t going to be swayed by the speakers..

And those that already want the 15", along with many others, aren't going to be swayed by some bogus "performance issue," and buy I anyway.
 
The performance of the M2 chip is already known, and the speakers are not determining factors. People who already want the 15” Air are going to buy it, and people who are considering the machine aren’t going to be swayed by the speakers.

Many people were waiting to order the machine because it was unclear whether the 15” would suffer the same performance issues due to a single nand chip. So going straight to this before anything else makes a lot of sense.
No. Going straight to this is clickbait. They took the computer apart before doing a review and could have compromised the performance. Today they put out a review. They could have easily done the review first, then released their clickbait video.

Look, I get it, they survive on those clicks. I don’t necessarily blame them for going for the cash, but they have enough of a following at this point that they really didn’t need to do it this way.
 
I am totally for Apple screwing us, but could they do it in a better way, like for example post purchase upgrading so that I can over a couple of years upgrade, I would happily pay to play, pay Apple to replace the battery, the RAM, a faster SSD... I truly hate my 2020 M1 Macbook Air, it sucks, as it is just really a toy, for what it cost, it should be at least a bit better than a 2013 macbook pro... M1 is stupid..
 
not merely improving or maintaining current specs. If a spec adds no real value for most users of the device not meeting it and saving costs is a smart tradeoff.
We don't merely upgrade or maintain performance! When it benefits the user we'll downgrade it too! If you don't see how ridiculous that is we must be living in very different realities.

Saving costs? The M1 Air is literally the cheapest Macbook that Apple sells, Apple even just reduced the price, and that has a faster SSD. Apple explicitely advertised that faster SSD on the M1 Air too. Why would Apple even mention that if they thought it didn't add any "real value"?
 
  • Sad
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
We don't merely upgrade or maintain performance! When it benefits the user we'll downgrade it too! If you don't see how ridiculous that is we must be living in very different realities.

I live in a reality where the overall performance counts, and don’t get all worked up over one measurement that has no impact on 99% of teh purchasers of the base machine.
Saving costs? The M1 Air is literally the cheapest Macbook that Apple sells, Apple even just reduced the price, and that has a faster SSD.

Apple has no doubt amortized much of the development costs and reduced supply chain costs to allow a price reduction and maintain margins; not atypical for older devices.

Apple explicitely advertised that faster SSD on the M1 Air too. Why would Apple even mention that if they thought it didn't add any "real value"?

Because at the time AS was new and they wanted to highlight all the reasons to buy one.

If the idea of a slower SSD bothers you, don’t buy the base M1 Air and let those who care about how it does the job overall buy them If it meets their needs.

Frankly, this whole “slower SSD” is clickbait for YouTubers and web sites.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
Apple has no doubt amortized much of the development costs and reduced supply chain costs
The NAND chips are literally the same if you look at teardowns. There is no extra cost. No development cost, nobody needs to redesign flash modules just because the SoC was switched to M2. You could just as well say that a faster SSD would have eaten little children, it would be another claim with nothing to back it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
The NAND chips are literally the same if you look at teardowns. There is no extra cost. No development cost, nobody needs to redesign flash modules just because the SoC was switched to M2.
so you are saying 128 chip is identical to a 256? And 256 cost the same as a 128?

As to development costs, it was in reference to amortized M1 Air costs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
Of courses why is this news? I remember several years ago when I bought a 128GB Surface Pro and I read about the higher capacities having faster speeds. I exchanged it for a higher capacity. I really didn't need to for my uses but it still bugged me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinkyyy 💜🍎
I read about the higher capacities having faster speeds.
That is not what this is. It's as if you had bought that Surface and then replaced it a year later with the successor and found that the 128GB in the new device were now an extra 40% slower than on your old model.
 
It's unreasonable that they're still selling computers with 256GB storage
Oh, I agree that they need more Storage and RAM…my first MacBook Pro from 10 years ago was 256 Gb and 8Gb of RAM. That said, its not a huge issue for me, because I easily make 256 Gb work, because I work with files like I do with my iPad Pro, where I offload all the files I’m done with either on a external drive or in the cloud. My storage in always about 50% full
 
It's unreasonable that they're still selling computers with 256GB storage
Why? 256 is plenty for a lot of people. If all you do is browse the internet and work with basic text files and spreadsheets, do some emailing, etc (a perfectly plausible use case for a MacBook Air) then 256GB is heaps.

It's not like that's your upper limit, you can get more if you need more.
 
This was highly expected, nothing surprising here. Since that was the exact same case with the 13" M2 MacBook Air and the 13" M2 MacBook Pro models, and the 15" model is just a copy of the 13" model with a bigger screen so it makes sense.

But who really cares about SSD speeds anyways ? I mean, for most of the basic daily stuff you'd do on a laptop, it's not really a big deal and you wouldn't even notice that it's any slower or something.

And if you're a power high-end user, you'd most likely go for the 14" & 16" MacBook Pro models anyways, since the MacBook Air is more targeted as a "consumer product".

Though I still kinda feel like the switch to a single 256gb NAND chip instead of two 128gb modules (from M1 to M2) was just another way to make money off people by making them go for the 512gb SSD/16gb RAM option even if they don't really need it.
"But hey look, it has a faster SSD !! Interesting, huh ?"
 
To be fair, the 13" M2 Pro is a machine that shouldn't exist in the first place. Anyone who needs more power than the Air should be jumping up to the 14" Pro.
I only bought the 13" M2 MBP just because I'm not really a big fan of the new design with the notch on screen (and I don't really need the 1080p webcam either) but otherwise, yeah I agree. If they both had the same design, I would've just gone for the 13" MBA.
There's no difference between them aside from the TouchBar and the two extra hours of battery life, which don't really matter. And on terms of performance, it's literally the same.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.