Apple is not going to stop starting at 8GB anytime soon. And that's good.

[gpat]

Hahahahah in a manner of speaking.

It's good practice for me, and the people who live here deserve a spanking now and then. Many of them clearly haven't thought about who actually uses Macs, or how they are power users, or any of a number of things.

OP dude, do you actually classify yourself as a Pro user?
Because it looks like your main workflow is to just piss off people on message boards.
I understand you being OK with 8GB for that. To each their own.

I'm chilling with my 16GB here. Already spent money so no point in complaining.
But 8GB for more than half of their notebook offer is still a douchebag move. Just stating the obvious.

 

[mrmister]

FWIW, I agree a lot more with this idea about it being not enough when we flip to the other side they tier—the side of storage.

For years after Apple went SSD they had the sizes too small.

The difference is that in my experience a too small SSD leads to people needing to upgrade bc their computer is too full. RAM matters, but a too small SSD means the computers life is much shorter.

Now that the base is 256 there's a lot more breathing room for this.

RAM, on the other hand, you can tell on day one if it matters to you—you can then return the machine and get one with more RAM.

This rarely happens because power users get more RAM, and those that don't, don't care.

 

[EdwardC]

I guess others are feeling the same about 8GB as well.....

Apple's MacBook Pro memory problem is worse than ever

Apple still sells expensive "Pro" computers with just 8GB of RAM and charges a fortune for more.

www.macworld.com

 

[mrmister]

OP dude, do you actually classify yourself as a Pro user?
Because it looks like your main workflow is to just piss off people on message boards.
I understand you being OK with 8GB for that. To each their own.

Since you asked, I never think about whether I am a pro user or not. I do know I care a lot more about how things work on my Mac than any normal person.

I have 24GB of RAM, and it is definitely much more than I need for all my tasks.

I use a machine with 8GB all the time that's someone else's, and unless I run Activity Monitor I can't tell any difference.

Most regular people are good with base models, and if you can buy Apple base models, it is the most economical way to buy them, generally as refurb on top of that.

 

[mrmister]

I guess others are feeling the same about 8GB as well.....

Apple's MacBook Pro memory problem is worse than ever

Apple still sells expensive "Pro" computers with just 8GB of RAM and charges a fortune for more.

www.macworld.com

This article is a hilarious demonstration again of "I AM A PRO USER!!!1!" with a side of "THIS INSULT TO THE PROS WILL NOT STAND"

This guy is not the target audience. He was always supposed to buy a MBP with a M3 Pro or Max chip in it.

The title is perfect too—because the "we're all paying for it" is the power users, and the idea that's the only people who exist in the user base is a big part of the delusion.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

The real travesty here is that RAM and SSD prices are ridiculously, ludicrously cheap. Like really cheap. So cheap that with the amounts Apple is buying, they could add them on for $25 per current tier and break even.

I am pretty platform agnostic, but have been a Mac user since the ibook G4 days (not counting school computers as a kid) and this is just plain robber baron behavior.

It didn't used to be so bad because I could add the RAM and SSD myself a year or two later, but now? I can't. See this leads to some issues. What if I buy the Mac I think I need--an M2 MBA with 8/256 for instance, and it seems fine, but then suddenly a year later I decide to pursue programming and now 8 GB of RAM isn't enough? I can't upgrade it in a year if I need it--same with storage. So now what? I have to sell my MBA and get a new one with more RAM.

Or I can over-buy what I need and suck it up once. Which is really Apple's plan--because this is like a fast food combo (barely break even on the burger, but massive margins on the upgrades--fries and soda).

And it's stupid when the worldwide economy is the way it is. Again, I bought a gaming laptop (refurbed) for $1150 in total cost with a 2 year warranty --> i7-13700HX, 32GB RAM, 2 TB SSD, RTX 4060 8GB for that price with a 16" 500 nits 2560 x 1600 screen. Saved about $2k over a refurbed 16" Macbook Pro--which means Apple isn't even trying.

 

[James Godfrey]

At the end of the day Apple puts the amount of RAM in these systems that they feel is the minimum the target demographic of said system would be happy with and have a great experience with. The fact that their entry pre-built options are the exact models that go into every retailers stock and the fact that that M3 yet again comes with 8GB base shows that general consumers quite clearly are not complaining about the systems that they are purchasing to the retailers.

Further to this Apple will monitor things such as how many users of the MacBook Air 8GB are running into issues with their systems due to the RAM etc… and if by that data and retailer sales/complaints/returns that isn’t translating into 8GB not being enough for the majority of the demographic then Apple won’t feel a need to upgrade the base RAM.

Apple are not going to sell a brand new M3 equipped MacBook Pro with only 8GB of RAM if they know (due to M2 sales, returns, complaints and system data) that the majority purchasing that model are not going to be satisfied with their purchase and return it, it would have too much of a dire effect on their brand… Mac will start to be known as a horrible sluggish machine that can’t cope with basic tasks and judging by reviews of more recent reviews of entry Macs sold on Amazon and such like over 90% of people purchasing are more than happy with their purchase.

As an example imagine if over 50% of people buying an M2 Air base model we’re having issues directly related to the amount of RAM in the device, this would be reflected in data gathered by Apple from the system itself, coupled with large return/complaint figures, ultimately loosing Apple plenty of $$$… this quite clearly isn’t happening as M3 has yet again launched with 8GB of Ram as standard, Apple simply wouldn’t risk it if the above scenario was true.

Yes don’t get me wrong Apple are blatantly ripping consumers off, but that has been the case for years and it will never change, but yet even with these ‘rip off’ prices consumers are still queuing up which shows that they are definitely doing something right.

I always look at the stock RAM options as being what is perfectly fine for the average demographic of that same device:-

MacBook Air - Casual computer users who don’t have a heavy workload (use their Mac for email, FaceTime, messaging, word processing and such like) but may dabble their toes into photo/music/video editing from time to time as a bit of a hobby. For those who like to edit photos/music/videos etc more regular they have the option of bumping up the RAM if they so wish.

MacBook Pro M3 - Same as above but also want some of the Pro features on their machine (promotion/better speakers/ports etc) and are willing to pay extra for the privilege.

MacBook Pro M3 Pro - Users who have relatively intense workloads, need a faster performing machine as they regularly edit music, videos and such like, quite likely as their job.

MacBook Pro M3 Max - the most intense computer users who do a lot of graphic work, probably use the machine for their business, constantly need a very high performing machine.

 

[ric22]

There's your fallacy—"most of us" aren't doing all that more demanding things on their Macs.

Do you genuinely think that "most people" when using Macs fail to use more RAM than their iOS activities take on their phone? Maybe they don't intentionally, but software on Macs, especially that not optimised for ARM processors, does use more. This isn't up for debate, it's black and white.

I think we caught out 'mrmister', folks... he's not being serious, clearly, just getting a rise out of the posters here because it's become an emotive subject and easy target.

 

[ric22]

Hahahahah in a manner of speaking.

It's good practice for me, and the people who live here deserve a spanking now and then. Many of them clearly haven't thought about who actually uses Macs, or how they are power users, or any of a number of things.

It's good practice to openly admit you're trolling?

 

[tron2]

We have 8gb M2 Mac Mini at the office. The apps we use on it are Edge, Adobe Acrobat Pro DC, Outlook mostly. Zero problems with 8GB ram. In Edge we have few tabs open like 4-5. Things run so fast and efficiently on this machine, my other workstations in the office has 32gb of RAM (Dell Optiplex's, they also run the same apps). I would not run windows 10 on 8gb of ram (windows performance is absolute crap with 8gb of RAM). Obviously you need more RAM if you intend to use Parallels or something memory heavy but I have no problems having my entire office computers replaced with 8gb Imacs or Mac Mini's. It always depends on what your use is.

 

[thadoggfather]

"And that's good."

It's really not though.

I say this as someone who can skate by on 8gb and has not had a Mac with more, it's time for them to increase the ram size all around. And by the time they do, they won't keep 8gb users in mind in my opinion. There will be a point of no return and planned obsolescence, beyond that which is already perceived. IMO.

 

[applesith]

Probably around 60% of portable Macs are sold to office workers who do their job in the cloud using Google sheets, email and wetransfer. They don't need 16 gigs, not this decade anyway.

Do not underestimate browser-based software like Google to eat RAM. I primarily use Google's suite for work and I see various Google services like Sheets, Looker, and Ads using up to a few GBs.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

"And that's good."

It's really not though.

I say this as someone who can skate by on 8gb and has not had a Mac with more, it's time for them to increase the ram size all around. And by the time they do, they won't keep 8gb users in mind in my opinion. There will be a point of no return and planned obsolescence, beyond that which is already perceived. IMO.

Exactly, will it make sense to keep it at 8GB like 5 years from now? Well the people who spend thousands of dollars on a mac now will be in that boat. It's not like they can add RAM themselves.

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

Is 8GB of Apple RAM equal to 16GB? I doubt that. But it is definitely more efficient, and with dynamic caching, even more efficient than we've seen it become.

Is it equal to 12GB of PC RAM? 10GB?

8gb is 8gb no matter what "dynamic caching" is used, even moreso since the memory pool is unified so the CPU and GPU are having to use the same 8gb, versus on Windows and Linux PCs where the GPU generally has it's own RAM.

Apple isn't going to stop starting at 8GB anytime soon. They know that bumping up the low end will increase costs across the board...and especially since going to Apple Silicon, 8GB is a good amount if you're a simple user who doesn't run many apps at the same time, or you don't have 40 tabs open.

No it ain't. Everyone who has an M2 Macbook Air with only 8gb of RAM their memory usage already goes into the yellow just from five browser tabs. That is ridiculous.

Here's my memory usage from just seven tabs open in FireFox

If my Macbook Pro had 8gb, I would've hit swap already.

It's actually good they aren't just going to 16GB, because it incentizes them to make the system as efficient as possible, which pays dividends by making all Macs better machines.

And now you're gaslighting, trying to paint the absurd RAM costs and low base spec as a good thing when there's hardly anyone supporting this.

And if you are reading this, you're a power user—you come to Macrumors, come on—so you already know you want at least 16GB, so pay the tax.

Yes pay the extra $200 for RAM that costs Apple $40 to make and is base spec in almost every Windows PC.

Better idea: Stop gaslighting people into thinking 8gb is good on a almost $2000 laptop in the year 2023.

It's not smoke and mirrors—Apple Silicon does use RAM better,

It uses a unified pool of memory soddered onto the chip. That's it. That's all it does. There is nothing else special about the RAM used in Apple Silicon other than it being a unified pool in an SoC. Outside of that it's just standard LPDDR5 RAM that again, costs $40.

and 8GB is increasingly enough depending on what you do with it.

Yeah about that...

Bleating over and over that Apple "needs" to give away double that amount is silly...they will only do that if they look at what their average user is doing with the machines, and seeing that those folks are starting to have real memory pressure at such a level that the floor needs to be raised.

Don't make me tap the screenshots.

And when they do—count on it being 12 GB, not 16.

In the meantime...just buy your damn RAM up to 16GB if you are obsessing over it!

Better idea: You stop gaslighting people into thinking 8gb is acceptable in this day in age on a machine that costs so much when most people are suffering from inflation, and stop defending the fruit computer company screwing over their customers

 

[JustAnExpat]

This argument is nonsense. A 15-year-old computer can do all of those things. A 200 dollar Chromebook can do all of that. A 1500 dollar computer shouldn't come with 8 GB of RAM.

A 15 year old computer can't do those things like a new computer can. A 15 year old computer can't connect to modern websites, for example.

A 200 dollar Chromebook may not be able to run the same programs as a MacBook (Scrivener, for example).

 

[eltoslightfoot]

Look if you can get @thadoggfather, @Spaceboi Scaphandre, and I to agree on a topic, that's slightly shocking that there would be another side. I kid, I kid.

 

[Thirio2]

It is just Apple marketing BS. I would be more likely to put up with it if I could go into any Apple marketer and not have to special order a device with what I consider adequate RAM.

 

[jammyr]

OK to add fuel to the fire. I'm running a brand new M2 MacBook Air 15" 8GB with 'usual' Office Apps, Teams, Music Safari and Chrome and this is the memory pressure. To be honest in everyday 'office' use I notice no difference between this and my M1 MacBook Pro with 16GB RAM.

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

Look if you can get @thadoggfather, @Spaceboi Scaphandre, and I to agree on a topic, that's slightly shocking that there would be another side. I kid, I kid.

Not just us. I've hardly seen any Apple fanboys happy about the RAM Scam as Apple Explained calls it. There's no reason for the high RAM prices and low base spec RAM other than Apple hates their customers and is swindling them since they know they can since the ARM Macs are the only place to use macOS.

 

[IsaacM]

Tell me you have stock in APPL without telling me you have stock in APPL. 🤭

 

[mous94410]

MAX TECH just upload a video comparing the 8 and 16 GB versions of the MBP M3. The difference is night and day.

Before watching the video, I was considering the 8 GB version but now, I'm hesitating. The 16GB version price is 270 euros less than the M3 PRO version in France...

 

[mrmister]

Tell me you have stock in APPL without telling me you have stock in APPL. 🤭

That’s funny. No, I don’t have stock in Apple.

 

[ArkSingularity]

I do have stock in Apple, and I still think that it's about time for the Pro to be upgraded to 16GB of RAM.

Yes, 8GB of RAM works, but we're talking about a $1600 machine here.

 

[gpat]

MAX TECH just upload a video comparing the 8 and 16 GB versions of the MBP M3. The difference is night and day.

Before watching the video, I was considering the 8 GB version but now, I'm hesitating. The 16GB version price is 270 euros less than the M3 PRO version in France...

My solution is just to pretend that the lineup starts at $1999 for notebooks and $1299 for the M2 Pro Mini.
If the budget is lower, just buy used or previous gen Pro/Max chips.

You could probably get a boxed 14" M1 Pro on clearance for the price of the lowest M3.
Even losing on benchmark score and software support, it would definitely be my choice because of the silly commercial limitations of the base M3 (only one external display, lower RAM, no third TB port).

 

[code-m]

There are 2 ways it could go, and neither is a good option for Apple.

1. If they simply drop the base models with 8GB and only offer the next tier up as base with prices unchanged, they will price out a significant section of the market, and lose revenue.

2. If they instead slide the 16 GB model down to the base model tier and price it the same as today's base model, that would actually make the base model incredibly attractive, and it would sell very well...too well. Apple would miss out on a lot of BTO upgrades which where a large chunk of Mac revenue comes from. And thus, they would ultimately lose revenue.

So please, in the infinite wisdom of the know it alls of Macrumors, please explain why either of these bad decisions is something Apple should do. Clearly they know what they're doing, and know how to make money.

Yet you forgot to mention the middle ground that Apple uses in these cases where the base model RAM will be bumped to 12GB, that way Apple does not seem like complete liars. USB-C on iPhone was the same thing lower transfer speed on the consumer line.