2024 MacBook Air still 8GB Unified Memory

[raythompsontn]

No, they wouldn't know that 8GBs of RAM was the cause of their high-definition media video editing project taking forever to render, or apps reloading or crashing left and right.

I have rendered a lot of video over the years. I have processed hundreds of thousands of pictures over the years. I have done so on machines with 8GB of memory. I have done so on machines with 16GB of memory. I have done so on machines with 64GB of memory. The bottleneck was always the CPU, never a memory limitation problem. I have never had apps "reloading or crashing left and right" because of memory shortages. I can easily peg the CPU at 100% while memory usage stays well into the green with no swap usage.

 

[freddymack]

As disappointing as it is, at least a ram upgrade to 16gb this time comes with a processor upgrade from an 8 core GPU, to 10. I know it's rather inconsequential, but it is something, and they ordinarily charged for both.

Silver linings.

 

[ric22]

As disappointing as it is, at least a ram upgrade to 16gb this time comes with a processor upgrade from an 8 core GPU, to 10. I know it's rather inconsequential, but it is something, and they ordinarily charged for both.

Silver linings.

I liked how they often did that in the past- bundling a few upgrades together.

 

[geta]

The issue has less to do with the 8/256 starting point than it does with the upgrade costs being so out of line with the component costs.

So again it bring us to the point that you and other people not willing to pay the extra cost, and instead demanding these upgrades will be part of the base models free of charge.

 

[Algr]

So again it bring us to the point that you and other people not willing to pay the extra cost, and instead demanding these upgrades will be part of the base models free of charge.

We'd be fine with the extra cost if it was remotely in line with what competitors pay. But Apple charges $600 for what others charge $139, and makes it so you can't buy from anyone else without horrendous switching costs and re-learning. That is abuse of their power.

 

[saber32au]

I received work-issued newest Windows laptop 14 inch with 16/512

To be honest, it's not a fair comparison (work laptop with no end user control vs personal laptop with full end user control).

The problem with windows laptops deployed en mass across a workplace is that many IT departments are lazy (sorry, meant "of limited resource") and deploy generic installation images across multiple PC's. These generic images are un-optimized, full of software bloatware the end user may not ever need (and can't remove), and locked down which disallows the user to modify or otherwise optimise the windows installation.

If you had the ability to optimise (ie remove unnecessary programs, reduce startup items etc) you'll see a sizeable improvement...

 

[Mike Boreham]

It's pretty obvious that I meant everyone who brings it up.

Yes it was, but doesn't change that MR readers are very different from the millions who aren't.

 

[betasp]

We'd be fine with the extra cost if it was remotely in line with what competitors pay. But Apple charges $600 for what others charge $139, and makes it so you can't buy from anyone else without horrendous switching costs and re-learning. That is abuse of their power.

Please understand the difference in Apple's architecture and those PC vendors you are referring to, and why Apple's does benefit consumers.

 

[ric22]

Please understand the difference in Apple's architecture and those PC vendors you are referring to, and why Apple's does benefit consumers.

Say again? Are you suggesting Apple charging 1,000-2,000% markups on RAM/storage benefits consumers?!?!?!?!?

 

[za9ra22]

I come at the issue of 8Gb RAM as the base in the new model from a slightly different angle than most seem to.

Firstly, I'm inclined to think that Apple's management know their business better and are likely more competent in their decision making than I would be, hence they're the ones paid to work it out, while I just get to type about it. Armchair warriors don't have to understand a thing about the business, while those who carry the can in that business do.

Secondly, I can imagine what would happen if the minimum RAM increased to 16Gb, and it would not be at all pretty.

Out here, in the wild, there are millions of Macs with 8Gb RAM, and the minute Apple up the minimum to 16, their own and third party software will bloat outwards with new features to eat it all up - just as it has each time base RAM was upped before. 8Gb systems will choke on that, if they run it at all, and since this is the largest segment of Mac users - probably by far - it would cause serious problems.

By maintaining an 8Gb minimum, I think Apple are basically holding back the dam, and in doing so, forcing macOS and software development teams to constrain themselves within that limit.

 

[crsh1976]

To be honest, it's not a fair comparison (work laptop with no end user control vs personal laptop with full end user control).

The problem with windows laptops deployed en mass across a workplace is that many IT departments are lazy (sorry, meant "of limited resource") and deploy generic installation images across multiple PC's. These generic images are un-optimized, full of software bloatware the end user may not ever need (and can't remove), and locked down which disallows the user to modify or otherwise optimise the windows installation.

If you had the ability to optimise (ie remove unnecessary programs, reduce startup items etc) you'll see a sizeable improvement...

It's hard to compare indeed, but corporate Macs typically come with the same pre-installed stuff nowadays (a whole array of security and productivity applications), not to mention usage rules that partially locks user-level install/remove priviledges and totally blocks out the use of any sort of external storage devices or modifying device settings as well. That's just going with the Macs I have used at 3 companies in the last 10 years thus far.

This to say, this stuff exists and is very much a thing on Macs as well.

 

[iHorseHead]

Year 2004 MacBooks: 8 GB RAM

MacBooks didn't exist back in 04. In 2014 lots of Macs came with 4GB of RAM and 128SSD.

 

[ric22]

I come at the issue of 8Gb RAM as the base in the new model from a slightly different angle than most seem to.

Firstly, I'm inclined to think that Apple's management know their business better and are likely more competent in their decision making than I would be, hence they're the ones paid to work it out, while I just get to type about it. Armchair warriors don't have to understand a thing about the business, while those who carry the can in that business do.

Secondly, I can imagine what would happen if the minimum RAM increased to 16Gb, and it would not be at all pretty.

Out here, in the wild, there are millions of Macs with 8Gb RAM, and the minute Apple up the minimum to 16, their own and third party software will bloat outwards with new features to eat it all up - just as it has each time base RAM was upped before. 8Gb systems will choke on that, if they run it at all, and since this is the largest segment of Mac users - probably by far - it would cause serious problems.

By maintaining an 8Gb minimum, I think Apple are basically holding back the dam, and in doing so, forcing macOS and software development teams to constrain themselves within that limit.

If this doomsday scenario of developers bloating the RAM usage of their software were to come to be, Apple would be absolutely delighted- so many people with 8GB Macs would be looking to buy new Macs, as they've removed the ability to upgrade. This would be incredible for them, especially as they could blame 3rd parties.

 

[geta]

We'd be fine with the extra cost if it was remotely in line with what competitors pay. But Apple charges $600 for what others charge $139, and makes it so you can't buy from anyone else without horrendous switching costs and re-learning. That is abuse of their power.

$600???

It cost $200 to upgrade from 8GB to 16GB (or 16>24) and $200 from 512GB storage to 1TB, or €230 per upgrade in the Europe. That far away from you claimed $600.

 

[LavaLevel]

$600???

It cost $200 to upgrade from 8GB to 16GB (or 16>24) and $200 from 512GB storage to 1TB, or €230 per upgrade in the Europe. That far away from you claimed $600.

I'm getting an entry level Mac Mini M2 8/256 for $499 off Amazon to compile code. My next step will be Mac Studio M3 for Blender & compiling code! ( when those come out of course. Saving up )

I've never had a PC that didn't have driver issues, cheap components, needed oodles of replacements. Oh and the mind numbing rando crashes & Blue Screens. Sure, they're cheap all right. I hate opening up machines and pretending I am some kind of 'mechanic' or 'building my own machine' when I'm simply sticking in cheap components like a 1980's video game cartridge. I just want it nice & sleek and working on arrival.

This guy needs to go where he's happy. He's not happy on Mac.

 

[za9ra22]

If this doomsday scenario of developers bloating the RAM usage of their software were to come to be, Apple would be absolutely delighted- so many people with 8GB Macs would be looking to buy new Macs, as they've removed the ability to upgrade. This would be incredible for them, especially as they could blame 3rd parties.

They can't blame third parties when they themselves are the primary developer for the platform. But yes, they could lower the 16Gb systems to the same purchase cost as the current 8Gb models, marginally up the trade-ins and make a killing. That might be exactly why they're currently holding back the move.

But it doesn't change the fact that at present, the newest 8Gb model does keep the market constrained - even if only for now.

 

[ric22]

$600???

It cost $200 to upgrade from 8GB to 16GB (or 16>24) and $200 from 512GB storage to 1TB, or €230 per upgrade in the Europe. That far away from you claimed $600.

$200 for 8-16GB
$400 for 256GB-1TB

Total= $600

Other companies in Europe do charge as little as he mentioned to make those jumps.

 

[ric22]

They can't blame third parties when they themselves are the primary developer for the platform. But yes, they could lower the 16Gb systems to the same purchase cost as the current 8Gb models, marginally up the trade-ins and make a killing. That might be exactly why they're currently holding back the move.

But it doesn't change the fact that at present, the newest 8Gb model does keep the market constrained - even if only for now.

I agree with the first part, but I don't think people are necessarily constraining themselves by writing succinct and efficient rather than sloppy bloated code. It's just good practice.

 

[javisan]

It was never going to increase before the base MacBook Pro increased. I do suspect it'll increase next year, but to 12GB rather than 16 or 18. 4GB of RAM is close enough to free that it's just about Apple upselling.

As SoC advances are incremental at best and offer little advantage to regular users, Apple will need to lean on upgrades to RAM and storage to lure in people that already that already own Apple silicon Macs.

What else can they lure us in with at this point? Better screen tech? Return to attractive looking machines like the M1 MacBook Air? No more notch or at least a notch with Face ID?

I'll be in the market for a new personal laptop next year, with 16/18GB RAM and 1TB storage, minimum, to replace my 8GB/256 M1 Air. For the first time in decades I might actually look to Windows unless Apple up their game.

I fully agree with your assessment.

On potentially moving to Windows, let me share my experience as I see many starting to contemplate a potential move. I totally get it, it makes perfect sense. At some point, you just get fed up of being price gouged, and want not to support the company anymore. That was me in early 2022, completely against the direction Apple had been going with the Mac (soldered SSD/RAM, price gouging on upgrades, keeping base RAM too low to do the upsell, adding notches to Macs but with no Face ID to benefit from it, no touch screen, etc.). I wanted to buy a laptop and not feel totally ripped off. So I decided to move away from Mac OS after more than 10 years and buy a 15" Dell XPS, which on paper looked like an amazing value and is routinely called the best Macbook competitor on the Windows side due to its sleek looks and build. I bought it with 16GB RAM and 512GB SSD for $1,300, then upgraded the RAM to 32GB and added a 2TB SSD (yes, the XPS has user-replaceable RAM and 2 SSD slots). Sounds amazing, right? Well, 2 years later, I fully regret leaving Mac OS and buying this XPS. I have not had the hardware issues on the XPS that many others have experienced, but I never stopped missing the amazing Macbook trackpad (XPS trackpad is large, but horrible), never got used to the speakers, which were much inferior to my previous 2018 MBP, and the screen quality was not the same (even though it had the benefit of touch screen; which I ended up not even using much), I missed the integration that I had between Mac OS and iPhone, which is nonexistent in Windows (the Intel tool meant to close this gap is trash), and overall just got sick of the quirks of Windows. I'm sick of Microsoft pushing OneDrive and CoPilot, harassing to use Edge, non-stop updates from Windows and Dell software, etc etc. Even though hardware-wise, it was a great value, the overall experience was, in reality, a massive downgrade from what I had in Mac OS. Just way too many compromises. I'm ready to sell the XPS and come back to Mac OS and will likely buy the new 15" inch Air and will bite the bullet and pay for the extra RAM and SSD space that I want.

I see many are right now in the phase of concern, disgust, and anger and want to take action on it. Been there, done that. I'm past that and I'm currently, sadly, in the acceptance phase, where I just pay whatever I need to pay to get the machine that, while not perfect and not the best value, overall makes me happy. The unfortunate part is that Apple knows the grip it has on all of us, hence why this SSD/RAM and upgrade pricing structure is not new and will not change. Sure, at some point, the RAM will increase to 12GB or 16GB, the same as when it increased from 4GB to 8GB, but there will be new grievances by then. The massive upsell structure will continue, there is no changing that. For Apple to change these practices, Mac shipments would need to materially drop, not for a quarter, but for a long sustained period of time (well beyond 12 months), which I don't see happening.

I don't want to discourage everyone from doing what they believe is best for them, I only wanted to share my experience, being a long-time Mac user who actually tried to move away.

 

[JoeDezibel]

Where is the Problem? For me an so many other people the 8 Gigs are enough for everything.

 

[Howard2k]

Where is the Problem? For me an so many other people the 8 Gigs are enough for everything.

The overwhelming majority in fact.

 

[za9ra22]

I agree with the first part, but I don't think people are necessarily constraining themselves by writing succinct and efficient rather than sloppy bloated code. It's just good practice.

I've been in the business a long time, and while you're totally right about it being good practice to write succinct and efficient code, the fact that system resources keep expanding doesn't really encourage it in a commercial environment. Unfortunately.

 

[ric22]

I've been in the business a long time, and while you're totally right about it being good practice to write succinct and efficient code, the fact that system resources keep expanding doesn't really encourage it in a commercial environment. Unfortunately.

Competition encourages good code, more than Apple's artificial constraint upon RAM in base models, I'd argue. There's always been programs which are resource hogs, but finally hardware has essentially defeated those problems. CPU's are lightning fast, and RAM is cheap and plentiful.

Local LLMs test and punish low RAM systems, and if Apple pushes into that area (as all signs suggest) they'll soon make the majority of Macs look slow and limited. Great for Apple, after their long term strategy to constrain RAM! 😕

 

[za9ra22]

Competition encourages good code, more than Apple's artificial constraint upon RAM in base models, I'd argue. There's always been programs which are resource hogs, but finally hardware has essentially defeated those problems. CPU's are lightning fast, and RAM is cheap and plentiful.

Local LLMs test and punish low RAM systems, and if Apple pushes into that area (as all signs suggest) they'll soon make the majority of Macs look slow and limited. Great for Apple, after their long term strategy to constrain RAM! 😕

I don't see much evidence that competition encourages good code. What it does do is encourage bloating basic functionality with lots of frills and fancy stuff to create a dominant position in the market. This is precisely how Microsoft, Adobe and others got to be the big names, and everyone else trades in the small grass and weeds.

In Apple's case, the point is moot somewhat anyway, since they are the OS and primary software developer as well as the hardware provider. It would be a shock if they didn't have a plan at least somewhat more sophisticated and long term than 'lets make as much profit as we can', which is how many seem to see it.

 

[halledise]

MacBooks didn't exist back in 04. In 2014 lots of Macs came with 4GB of RAM and 128SSD.

… which was well sufficient for the macOS of the time and associated software.
my 2013 MBAir had those specs and it used to fly.
external storage options were/are plentiful and inexpensive.
it's still a pretty handy unit today, albeit limited by the old TFT display.
personally, i think what a lot of "16/512 as base model" proponents are forgetting is that Apple are providing a most competent base model for squllions of budget-limited people, such as students and non-professionals, whilst figuring that those who need more serious computing power will opt for the MBPro.
i've had quite a few Airs over the years since they were first introduced and have used them professionally for symposiums and other public speaking events/lectures, using keynote and similar software to project to a large screen for my audience.
admittedly it's not been Final Cut Pro type work.
even though that's a feasible option on the Air, you'd simply opt for a MBPro instead