OP didn't state he/she is happy with it. But OP should know if he/she is happy with the basiness, so you're right, kind of.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Am I ok with the base 15in MBA?
- Thread starter helloapple1
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes but that machine may also need these upgrades. While many disagree, it has been
My experience that less ram or SSD space isn’t worthwhile.
Get the base model. You'll be fine. 8GB of RAM is plenty of RAM for just about any basic level user. I'm a developer. I ran a base M1 machine as hard as I could to see how it'd fare and it was far more capable than I'd have predicted.
I had a base for a few weeks and honestly was very surprised it did everything I needed! I am sure it will be more than enough!!
I ordered the base model. I figure if anything I’ll upgrade when the M3 comes out in a year. Will probably only lose a few hundred on resale in a year too so not worried. I just can not justify paying so much more for extra here in Canada for RAM or storage when it puts me into MBP territory. Hoping next year Apple makes the base ram and storage higher. It’s annoying to even have to make this thread.
Because the OP is making decisions about the future life cycle of a new box. This discussion is not about today.
I think ordering the base was a good idea... people are buying cheaper items resale not expensive due to economy. you should always come across the boarder here to US and get a MBP or MBA even on sale .. haha
I've been using the base 15" MBA for a while now and aside from using some swap every now and then, I haven't noticed any issues. It would be really nice though if Apple actually bumped up the RAM and storage from the 8/256 config they've been using for ages to 16/512...
LOL. M2 vs M1 is about as iterative as updates go. It's one small iterative step beyond the M1.
OP isn't coming from a 10th Gen Intel MacBook Air.
The "future" you refer to is the same "future" OP was facing when the M1 was purchased.
The 256 GB model has a slower SSD but it's not something you'd ever notice in normal use. Like, my 2015 15" rMBP with an aftermarket SSD actually has considerably faster read/write speeds than my 15" MBA but hell if I can notice any difference.
I'm also not sure why you're asking me about this or what it had to do with what I said...
The future is defined by the life cycle the user chooses; obviously different than the future when an M1 was purchased a year ago or more.
The OP has chosen a short life cycle and 8 GB RAM.
The OP says he is Hoping next year Apple makes the base ram and storage higher. Personally I strongly disagree with that particularly hope. IMO folks who have lesser needs (e.g. a granny with just email or a K-12 admin buying 50 boxes) should be able to buy a cheapest box with 8 GB RAM; certainly the Mac OS will make it work. Just because (IMO lame) base 8 GB RAM is a choice does not mean folks who are not grannies with email or K-12 admins need to choose it.
Y'all wishing for more base RAM are really wishing for additional "free" RAM, which is a preposterous idea. Product pricing (not just Apple) simply does not work that way. Every component adds to product cost.
Choice in RAM is what is important, and Apple allows up to 96 GB in the higher end laptops. Intentionally configuring 8 GB boxes that will be using swap to SSD makes no sense to me when more RAM is an option, but obviously others find it appropriate to do so. To each his/her own.
IMO with mass storage (SSDs) the cheapest, smaller size should similarly be included in Apple's base level. Anyone can pay more and get more internal SSD if they need it, but lowest end mass storage should stay at cheapest low feasible. Plenty of folks use the Cloud, LANs, etc. for their mass storage and should not be forced to pay for bigger SSD just because some silly folks perceive that larger base SSD is "free."
Last edited:
Apple didn't increase the price of MBA when they went from 4 GB to 8 GB RAM in 2017. They can do the same again.
Why is this concept so hard to grasp? Buyers must pay for everything. Period. Perhaps 8 GB DIMMs became as cheap to Apple as 4 GB DIMMs for whatever reason, but basically Apple (or any vendor) looks at costs and prices a product. If 8 GB cost more than 4 GB to Apple then they cut somewhere else to hold price (and margins) constant.
Most likely is Apple determined that 8 GB was an absolute minimum folks should have moving forward. And tech evolution (more for less cost) allowed Apple to not raise the product price. Personally I do not expect to see Apple raising from the 8 GB minimum in the next year (because the Mac OS has been proven to make 8 GB work), but who knows? IMO it depends on the specifics of Apple's costs building its revolutionary on-chip UMA RAM, and of that we have no clue.
Exactly, and so they will do again, from 8 GB to 16 GB RAM, if we consumers put pressure on Apple to do so. It's a natural step. The first portable mac had 1 MB of RAM.
Yes RAM needs always increase, but I do not see consumer pressure as relevant. Apple increases base RAM due to RAM costs and what they see working for OS/apps over the coming next few years. The Mac OS does such a good job managing sub-optimal RAM like 8 GB that I do not see Apple raising the base unless production economies make a raise to 16 GB cost-effective.
Well yeah but I'm curious as to why you asked me about the whole speed thing when I didn't mention it.
base model is perfect for your usage (which is same as mine).
however, if you can afford it, buy extra ram.
always a good option 👌
Note that when RAM is sub-optimal the way it presents may be subtle, non-obvious and not necessarily clearly seen using memory monitors. E.g. when editing in Apple Photos on my 16 GB MBP, edit saves fail fairly frequently; whereas when editing in Apple Photos on my 96 GB MBP edit saves never fail. The Apple Photos app works on both boxes, but some edit saves fail on the MBP with 16 GB RAM.
At least in my world, spending +$400 to boost RAM and avoid such issues for the next 5+ years is a total no brainer. It only takes a few lost edits at key times to easily cost $400. Hence the 96 GB in the newer box. Also, I find it very productive to have multiple apps and windows open concurrently.
Last edited: