32GB RAM MacBook Pro release - when?

[aevan]

Not saying it's one way or the other, but if they wanted do, they could have it done (as others have). They could also update the Mini if they remember it's a product they sell.

Others have? Everyone else that has done a 32Gb laptop did it in a way that is not Apple-like (not saying that's necessarily bad, but Apple wouldn't accept their downsides). For example, HP has a workstation Zbook that is intended for heavy tasks but only has 2.5 hours of battery life. Dell has a 32Gb option that has significantly worse battery life than the same computer with 16Gb (even with the bigger battery option) - and, of course, most people don't know about this tradeoff. Razer has a 32Gb laptop that is literally twice as heavy as the MBP and has questionable battery life.

No one - and I repeat - no one that I know of has a laptop under 2kg with 7-8h battery life that has 32Gb RAM. All other premium, pro laptops that are light and capable have 16Gb max: Surface Book 2, Razer Blade, MacBook Pro, etc. Some companies like Dell and HP allow for 32Gb configurations, but at a hit to battery life.

So, no, others haven't done it in a way that Apple wants to. We'll have to wait for LPDDR to support 32Gb for Apple to do it.

As for the Mini, couldn't agree more!

 

[Naimfan]

With the direction Apple has been moving, never.

 

[john123]

You said if it were easy, Apple would do it. My point is that they have a history of not doing things that would be easy (that people want), as well as a history of limiting the RAM of devices.

Not saying it's one way or the other, but if they wanted do, they could have it done (as others have). They could also update the Mini if they remember it's a product they sell.

You are quite correct on all points. The bottom line is that Apple decided they don't want even the mere tiniest bit of a storyline that any of their laptops have poor battery life, so they are unwilling to do it, even as a BTO option. And yes, that follows historical precedent, unfortunately.

 

[aevan]

The bottom line is that Apple decided they don't want even the mere tiniest bit of a storyline that any of their laptops have poor battery life, so they are unwilling to do it, even as a BTO option.

I actually agree with this statement. Just that it doesn’t bother me and I think it’s a good business decision, that - unfortunately - doesn’t suit everyone.

 

[Altis]

Others have? Everyone else that has done a 32Gb laptop did it in a way that is not Apple-like (not saying that's necessarily bad, but Apple wouldn't accept their downsides). For example, HP has a workstation Zbook that is intended for heavy tasks but only has 2.5 hours of battery life. Dell has a 32Gb option that has significantly worse battery life than the same computer with 16Gb (even with the bigger battery option) - and, of course, most people don't know about this tradeoff. Razer has a 32Gb laptop that is literally twice as heavy as the MBP and has questionable battery life.

No one - and I repeat - no one that I know of has a laptop under 2kg with 7-8h battery life that has 32Gb RAM. All other premium, pro laptops that are light and capable have 16Gb max: Surface Book 2, Razer Blade, MacBook Pro, etc. Some companies like Dell and HP allow for 32Gb configurations, but at a hit to battery life.

So, no, others haven't done it in a way that Apple wants to. We'll have to wait for LPDDR to support 32Gb for Apple to do it.

As for the Mini, couldn't agree more!

They could always make a workstation-type laptop that's a bit thicker, more port selection, bigger battery, and maybe even a bigger screen... rather than just ultrabooks.

One can always dream (as I glance over to my 17" MBP).

 

[aevan]

They could always make a workstation-type laptop that's a bit thicker, more port selection, bigger battery, and maybe even a bigger screen... rather than just ultrabooks.

One can always dream (as I glance over to my 17" MBP).

No doubt they could, but obviously they believe they wouldn’t be able to sell that model in volume. Apple (and every other company) do not make (or not make) things because “they feel like it”, but because they believe there is (or isn’t) a big enough market for devices like these.

Hey, I wish they made a 27” iPad but I’m not holding my breath

 

[Altis]

No doubt they could, but obviously they believe they wouldn’t be able to sell that model in volume. Apple (and every other company) do not make (or not make) things because “they feel like it”, but because they believe there is (or isn’t) a big enough market for devices like these.

Hey, I wish they made a 27” iPad but I’m not holding my breath

Indeed. It's interesting though because there are many smaller companies that manage to make some niche products. For example, ASUS makes the mammoth-class GT80 2QE Titan laptops with giant screens and full Cherry MX mechanical keyboards.

I doubt they sell many at all... but they still do it.

But how hard would it really be for Apple to offer a 17" MBP? (Even forgetting about 32 GB of RAM for a moment) I'd say there's enough demand to warrant making it and profiting... but they don't seem to want to. Just as they don't seem to want to update the Mini (or even the Pro for that matter).

I've lost respect for Apple due to the direction they have taken the last few years. It's too bad, really.

 

[EugW]

Indeed. It's interesting though because there are many smaller companies that manage to make some niche products. For example, ASUS makes the mammoth-class GT80 2QE Titan laptops with giant screens and full Cherry MX mechanical keyboards.

I doubt they sell many at all... but they still do it.

But how hard would it really be for Apple to offer a 17" MBP? (Even forgetting about 32 GB of RAM for a moment) I'd say there's enough demand to warrant making it and profiting... but they don't seem to want to. Just as they don't seem to want to update the Mini (or even the Pro for that matter).

I've lost respect for Apple due to the direction they have taken the last few years. It's too bad, really.

Hard to offer it? Nah, that’s not really the issue. They already did offer the 17”. But then they decided it wasn’t worth their time so they killed it.

 

[Altis]

Hard to offer it? Nah, that’s not really the issue. They already did offer the 17”. But then they decided it wasn’t worth their time so they killed it.

I think it had to do with not being able to get 17" retina displays at the time.

It's not like it's at all difficult for one of the top companies in the world to toss the internals of the 15" into a 17" shell with a different display panel.

It's too bad as I really like the 17" screen size. It's hard to imagine using anything smaller for what I do. 13" is just painful for my software and workflows.