16GB of RAM Could Be the New Minimum in Apple's Upcoming M4 Macs

[jlc1978]

Either I can’t read, or you just argued that Apple’s strategy is not to try to upsell you to the next price bracket? Are you joking? Or did my English just fail me? (I’m not native…)

I know a number of Apple Store employees and the goal is customer satisfaction, not upselling and they are not incented to upsell. They don’t SPIFFs like many companies offer to push certain products. For Apple, they want a relationship. rather than transactional sales approach.

 

[Velli]

I know a number of Apple Store employees and the goal is customer satisfaction, not upselling and they are not incented to upsell. They don’t SPIFFs like many companies offer to push certain products. For Apple, they want a relationship. rather than transactional sales approach.

Oh, okay. In that sense I agree with you, the Apple Stores specifically don’t PUSH the upsell on you. Nevertheless, the range is layed out in ways that there always is a model up to lure you to step up. Push, no. Lure, yes!!

 

[jlc1978]

Oh, okay. In that sense I agree with you, the Apple Stores specifically don’t PUSH the upsell on you. Nevertheless, the range is layed out in ways that there always is a model up to lure you to step up. Push, no. Lure, yes!!

Well, yes - that’s not uncommon in many consumer products - look at cars, cameras, etc. All have option levels to tempt you.

Having such options doesn’t mean, as some poster claim, the base model is not sufficient for a lot of use cases.

Edit - clarified statement

 

[breenmask]

Again, you don’t know that. Some of them understand the service life could be shorter, but others don’t.

so we should let them make the choice.

 

[breenmask]

ha, you think 8gb ram worth 20 bucks is the reason apple might jack up the price?

this makes no sense at all.

 

[Abazigal]

Either I can’t read, or you just argued that Apple’s strategy is not to try to upsell you to the next price bracket? Are you joking? Or did my English just fail me? (I’m not native…)

I think what he means is that Apple Store employees generally do not try to pressure their customers in buying something they may not need. This has been my experience with Apple Stores as well on a few occasions, where I had initially gone in with the intention of buying something, only to be talked out of it by the sales staff. I ended up leaving empty-handed, and more than a little amused at the whole incident.

An argument can be made that perhaps Apple does it at the product design level (eg: you need to buy a "pro" Mac if you want to be able to output to more than 1 monitor, or a more expensive iPad Pro if you want the matte display), but I find that apple staff aren't pushy about getting me to buy stuff from them at all.

 

[dwaite]

I just picked a number to make the math easier, but the idea the same no matter the percentage. Rain teh price at least to cover the lost upgrade revenue and spread it out over all he projected sales. Any additional increase is more marginal revenue.

Sure, if the market will bear them increasing the base price of M4 MacBook Airs $200 and rolling the memory upgrade in, then they'd be crazy not to.

That M1 and M2 Airs are still on the market indicates that people are way more price sensitive than that.

There's a budget for parts. A 16 GB upgrade that doesn't meaningfully affect baseline performance will take a backseat to say - increasing the screen quality of a device that many people use as their primary means of streaming media. The second one actually convinces people to buy a more expensive unit or to upgrade.

 

[ilikewhey]

I think what he means is that Apple Store employees generally do not try to pressure their customers in buying something they may not need. This has been my experience with Apple Stores as well on a few occasions, where I had initially gone in with the intention of buying something, only to be talked out of it by the sales staff. I ended up leaving empty-handed, and more than a little amused at the whole incident.

An argument can be made that perhaps Apple does it at the product design level (eg: you need to buy a "pro" Mac if you want to be able to output to more than 1 monitor, or a more expensive iPad Pro if you want the matte display), but I find that apple staff aren't pushy about getting me to buy stuff from them at all.

cause they are not commission based. they get paid regardless if you buy or not

 

[Velli]

Well, yes - that’s not uncommon in many consumer products - look at cars, cameras, etc. All have option levels to tempt you.

Having such options doesn’t mean, as some poster claim, the base model is not sufficient for a lot of use cases.

Edit - clarified statement

I didn’t say it was unique to Apple. Any company, including Apple, tries to get you to spend more money. But the tactics differ. I agree 100% that the base model is perfectly fine for many people, and I have argued this point staunchly. But, at the same time Apple is a master in constructing a lineup where it looks like the step up is tempting. Take the base Air. Okay, maybe I should get 512 GB of SSD, that also gets me some extra GPU. Hm, that’s an awful lot of money to spend on a PC, maybe I should get 16GB of RAM to future proof. Hey, now the price is upthere, should I be looking at a Pro instead?

All without any push from anyone, just smart product management. Again, this strategy is not unique to Apple, but they are incredibly good at it.

That is not the same as making the entry level useless. If the entry level is useless, noone enters the store, and there are noone to upsell to.

 

[d5aqoëp]

I think 8GB RAM milking is still not done yet. Plenty of milk in that cow.

 

[playtech1]

I am definitely someone who viewed Apple's approach to RAM as being poor for the consumer (it's the same with storage). Competitor products have all standardised on 16GB with 32GB as the upper tier option, while Apple has stagnated at 8GB with 16GB as the option (and still only 24GB rather than 32GB as an absolute maximum on base M3).

In many ways the comparison is worse than it looks, as Apple's unified memory architecture means that 8GB is shared with the GPU, so less will be available. Many competitor laptops will have a separate GPU with 8GB of dedicated VRAM.

I am pleased Apple Intelligence may be forcing Apple's hand and increasing base RAM specs, although of course it's because the OS is going to get more RAM hungry, so the benefits may be more limited.

 

[Abazigal]

I am definitely someone who viewed Apple's approach to RAM as being poor for the consumer (it's the same with storage). Competitor products have all standardised on 16GB with 32GB as the upper tier option, while Apple has stagnated at 8GB with 16GB as the option (and still only 24GB rather than 32GB as an absolute maximum on base M3).

In many ways the comparison is worse than it looks, as Apple's unified memory architecture means that 8GB is shared with the GPU, so less will be available. Many competitor laptops will have a separate GPU with 8GB of dedicated VRAM.

I am pleased Apple Intelligence may be forcing Apple's hand and increasing base RAM specs, although of course it's because the OS is going to get more RAM hungry, so the benefits may be more limited.

I have always wondered -

The unspoken implication in all this is that you would all rather have the additional ram for free, but lacking that, would you all be fine if the entry level MBA (with 8 gb ram and all) never existed and Apple sold only the MBA with 16 gb ram and 512 gb storage, but with the price starting at the same level as if you were to spec out the exact same model in the App Store today?

 

[Velli]

I am definitely someone who viewed Apple's approach to RAM as being poor for the consumer (it's the same with storage). Competitor products have all standardised on 16GB with 32GB as the upper tier option, while Apple has stagnated at 8GB with 16GB as the option (and still only 24GB rather than 32GB as an absolute maximum on base M3).

In many ways the comparison is worse than it looks, as Apple's unified memory architecture means that 8GB is shared with the GPU, so less will be available. Many competitor laptops will have a separate GPU with 8GB of dedicated VRAM.

All I am asking is that people compare performance, rather than specs. The fact is that an 8GB Mac is not slow for what many people call everyday tasks. I am very willing to listen to unsatisfied customers who bought one and aren’t happy with it due to the RAM. But you have to point Thise people out to me, because I can’t find them. All I see are people who argue that based on specs there MIGHT be people outthere that aren’t happy.

And I repeat: Although granted at different price points, competition starts at 4GB. Not 16.

Edit: Mind you, I do not and have never argued that Apple should stay at 8GB forever. I think this is a very reasonable time to step it up. It would have happened eventually, so why not now.

 

[Velli]

I have always wondered -

The unspoken implication in all this is that you would all rather have the additional ram for free, but lacking that, would you all be fine if the entry level MBA (with 8 gb ram and all) never existed and Apple sold only the MBA with 16 gb ram and 512 gb storage, but with the price starting at the same level as if you were to spec out the exact same model in the App Store today?

Answer: No, they would complain about something else.

 

[applepotato666]

Not all professionals have the same requirements. My spouse runs a small business and 8 GB is plenty. I have many colleagues in academia who are professionals (scientists, professors, and researchers) who also have no issues with 8 GB of RAM.

I’m not saying Apple should stick with 8 GB or that Apple should have included it as the default for all this time, I’m simply pointing out that not all professionals have the same RAM requirements.

True. I think the complaint's more about the look of selling a Pro-aimed machine with otherwise great specs that's essentially hampered by 8GB of RAM. Pro buyers are already looking to upgrade even beyond 16GB, so we're paying a lot regardless. A $1599 machine should get at least 16, but for the $999 MacBook Air, 8GB is just fine and it has indeed been the best value computer on the market since 2020. It's impossible to find a non-Apple computer that's built like that with the world-class color accuracy and resolution display, those speakers, chip, SSD speed etc. let alone battery life for that price. It's an unbeatable package and as long as it remains like that I'll keep on recommending it to casual users. But they're currently not that good of a value for Pros.

 

[Velli]

True. I think the complaint's more about the look of selling a Pro-aimed machine with otherwise great specs that's essentially hampered by 8GB of RAM. Pro buyers are already looking to upgrade even beyond 16GB, so we're paying a lot regardless. A $1599 machine should get at least 16, but for the $999 MacBook Air, 8GB is just fine and it has indeed been the best value computer on the market since 2020. It's impossible to find a non-Apple computer that's built like that with the world-class color accuracy and resolution display, those speakers, chip, SSD speed etc. let alone battery life for that price. It's an unbeatable package and as long as it remains like that I'll keep on recommending it to casual users. But they're currently not that good of a value for Pros.

Your definition of which price point should have how much RAM is completely arbitrary. You just listed s bunch of things you get for those 600.- extra. If you want those things because they are nice, but really only use your computer as an MS Office delivery device, nothing is wrong with the 8GB version. Okay, it is getting long in the tooth, and mine is 3 years old now. Were I to buy today, I’d probably get the 16. So to me, seems like the right time to bump it up. I can stretch and say maybe a year late. And I will join the choir if they don’t do it this year. But it’s nowhere near the fiasco some people make it out to be.

 

[applepotato666]

Your definition of which price point should have how much RAM is completely arbitrary.

When you look at the market it really isn't. At $1599 there's a lot of computers that are built well and have the same qualities of the MacBook, even better screens, etc that start at even beyond 16GB. The Razer Blade is a good example. $1599 computer with 8GB of RAM is something you can buy only from Apple nowadays. But yes, I wouldn't call it this huge fiasco either. It's just easy to disappoint the loyal Pro users who have been by default irritated by many of Apple's decisions around Macs and macOS for years now and anything will seem like a reason for annoyance to people who are irritated (which is Apple's fault).

 

[Velli]

It's just easy to disappoint the loyal Pro users who have been by default irritated by many of Apple's decisions around Macs and macOS for years now and anything will seem like a reason for annoyance to people who are irritated (which is Apple's fault).

I’m a relative newcomer, but in the 20 years I have followed Apple, this has been a constant. Yet, Apple’s market share is (roughly) the largest it has been since early 90’s. I’m not sure when all these supposedly disappointed fans will stop buying. Since we are now getting the 16GB base they were crying for, I’m assuming it’s not now…

 

[jlc1978]

True. I think the complaint's more about the look of selling a Pro-aimed machine with otherwise great specs that's essentially hampered by 8GB of RAM.

The "Pro" designation is a way of differentiating products and feature sets; it doesn't mean these are aimed at the professional market per se. The could as easily have called the MBA Airs and the MBP MacBooks; but they no doubt wanted to keep the MacBook moniker, just as with Pads and iPhones.

Answer: No, they would complain about something else.

That seems to be the whole purpose of internet message boards.

cause they are not commission based. they get paid regardless if you buy or not

Commission based sales would ruin the Apple Store experience for customers.

 

[playtech1]

I have always wondered -

The unspoken implication in all this is that you would all rather have the additional ram for free, but lacking that, would you all be fine if the entry level MBA (with 8 gb ram and all) never existed and Apple sold only the MBA with 16 gb ram and 512 gb storage, but with the price starting at the same level as if you were to spec out the exact same model in the App Store today?

I think Apple's bottom line could survive offering up a bit more computer for the price they currently charge - the materials cost is negligble.

That said, I would prefer paying a bit more for the base model if it had materially better specs. Base models are the only ones that get sold outside of the Apple Store, so there's the prospect of getting them on sale.

 

[The Game 161]

at last indeed

 

[mrnoark]

Let's not forget about the storage option for the current base iPad and Mini (64GB > 256GB). To me, this is hard upsell.

Then again, they finally increased the iPad Air to 128GB this year. Hope they do the same for other iPads.

But correct me if I'm wrong, RAM and storage upgrades have always been expensive for Mac, even before they soldered the RAM and SSD. We were okay with because we could upgrade them ourselves, but now we have to pay premium price.

 

[RumorChaser]

You are making the false assumption that these people, buying the entry models, have a bad experience switch them. Nothing supports that claim. I have seen plenty argue that these computers are bad. I have seen plenty (including myself) who bought one and loved it. I have seen exactly zero people on this forum claim they bought one and regretted it (although now I have of course baited someone out…).

If anything, Apple has been succesful in delivering a good experience to non-savvy customers, BECAUSE they know that these customers don’t need the extra RAM. They put more value in design, nice materials, a good keyboard, a good touchpad, a decent screen, simple to use UI etc etc. If you think these people will turn their back on Apple just because their stuff runs 10% slower, you have no clue what makes these people tick.

I'm not making any assumptions that people who bought entry models have a bad experience. Why are you putting words in people's mouth? Quoted me on part of my post but not the last part?

We are talking about the M4 Macs being released with 16GB RAM. My point is Apple thinks 8GB in the M4 Mac with Apple's new AI will bring an incomplete experience, so they upped it to 16GB, to ensure that people would not have a bad experience they would release it.

Not making a claim that current M1, M2, M3 macs with 8GB RAM and no Apple AI is a bad experience. Stop making things up then attack people on it.

 

[jlc1978]

That said, I would prefer paying a bit more for the base model if it had materially better specs.

Problem is Apple is trying to hit price points.

Base models are the only ones that get sold outside of the Apple Store, so there's the prospect of getting them on sale.

B&H has various custom configurations at a discount, plus with their CC you get the tax back as a rebate.

Edit: Corrected typo

 

[Manzanito]

But correct me if I'm wrong, RAM and storage upgrades have always been expensive for Mac, even before they soldered the RAM and SSD. We were okay with because we could upgrade them ourselves, but now we have to pay premium price.

It’s exactly that. They made an “experiment” with the retina macbook pro, offering an absolute wonder of a computer with the caveat of soldered ram and storage. The pros outweighted the cons, and after all, the rationale was that you could not fit everything in such a thin package if it wasn’t soldered. And the non retina version was still offered if rmbp wasn’t your cup of tea.

Nowadays we get mac studios where you can’t expand officially the storage just because apple are… apple.