Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It’s moot point with Apple Silicon. Though RAM is not part of SOC, it’s packaged close to CPU/GPU in single package. It’s trading High Bandwidth/ performance of Unified memory with expandability.
There was a definite case to be made when Apple was using Intel Chips with separate RAM slots.
Apple is subsidizing the low end entry level Macs with upgraded models.
LPDDR5 in a different spot is still LPDDR5...

They're not "subsidizing" the low end models.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ric22 and ThomasJL
LPDDR5 in a different spot is still LPDDR5...

They're not "subsidizing" the low end models.
It’s not about type, it’s packaged and built as part of the CPU/GPU. They can’t pop it out or solder an updated RAM with ease. Can it be done? You have to jump through hoops. Apple literally has to build a new board if the RAM is customized. Another big reason BTO takes longer for customized RAM or CPU/GPU.
If Apple is some evil corporation forcing people to buy upgraded 16 GB models for greed, they would flood the market with very few 8 GB. In fact 8 GB has lower wait time than other configurations.
They want as many entry level buyers at lower cost, subsidized by upgrades and power users.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Analog Kid
yes, it could also mean somewhat reasonable “normal“ prices based on comparable tech elsewhere, in which i don’t think the other manufacturers are exactly becoming poor either. And pure price gouging people who don’t care about being “scammed“ at all as they either don’t care about reason, as money means nothing to them, or don’t need to pay for for such insanely overpriced stuff themselves.
I wouldn’t even mind if those upgrades were only “somewhat pricier“ (whatever that means), as Apple is a premium brand, but at least double the price than others, who are already gouging aswell, sometimes even 5-6 times more expensive if we are talking comparable NVMe /SSD tech you can find in the wild without any technical reason behind that at all, other than pure greed and their “hey, some suckers somewhere are going to buy this anyway!“ mentality
 
  • Love
Reactions: compwiz1202
RAM is still falling in price over time. Not as fast as before for sure but it's still falling.
Not true. I paid over $1,000 for DDR5 RAM. It was brand new. I don’t know where people get this concept from. Apple’s and any RAM 8GB of RAM 10 years ago is not the same as today’s RAM.
 
Last edited:
Not true. I paid over $1,000 for DDR5 RAM. It was brand new. I don’t know where people get this concept from. Apple’s and any RAM 8GB of RAM 10 years ago is not the same as today’s RAM.
How much did you buy for $1000 and when did you buy it? The price of DDR5 was expensive at launch but has dropped considerably since. That's how it goes. Price is high at launch, then production ramps up so price falls.

A year ago a 32GB kit of DDR5-5600 was approximately $350, now you can find kits for ~$150.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThomasJL
This is an interesting suggestion, but as someone who takes full advantage of the base model Apple stuff (iPP13, MBA M1), I wouldn't want to pay more for what I don't need. My wife and I share a base M1 MBA and it is such a breeze to use, even with Fast User Switching enabled. I'm typing this response on it, while docked to a 27" Dell 4k monitor - such a good setup.
 
if apple raises the minimum ram and/or SSD (ie 16/512)... am all in. but until they do, am fine with my 8/256 M2 air. and easy enough, if someone needs more, they can buy an air with... more... 👍
 
What do you think a subsidy is? A subsidy is when somebody gives someone else money to offset the price of something. You can't subsidize yourself. Less profit margin is not a subsidy. Yeesh.
What was said was this:

Apple is subsidizing the low end entry level Macs with upgraded models.
They want as many entry level buyers at lower cost, subsidized by upgrades and power users.

High end users are giving money to offset the price for cost sensitive users.

Apple is selling the Apple provided parts of the product at a lower price to the more cost sensitive customers and they're compensating for that by selling the exact same parts at a higher price to less cost sensitive customers. Whatever you want to call it, and subsidizing is a reasonable word to choose, that's what's happening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TechnoMonk
Lol, I did a search and this topic goes back years.
When I bought an MBP in 2013 it was exactly the same. The sky would fall in unless I "future-proofed" with 16 Gb. But here it is still running with 8 Gb; not as fast as the 8 Gb M2, obvs., but it's fine. And funnily enough, for most of the intervening time, it was running a lot more than a browser with two tabs.

The 16 Gb tribe will never know how far 8 Gb can go. The 8 Gb M2 is truly an astonishing machine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ericdjensen
No, she's not. 256GB is more than enough storage for the average user, home and corporate. Heck, I'm only using 220GB on this MBP, and I've got 75GB+ of ALAC files in that mix, which the average user absolutely does not have.




Because they wouldn't. They might page out to disk occasionally, but with fast SSDs they won't notice it.
The good old, "Well I don't run out, so you're wrong" attitude. So poor RAM management is acceptable because these machine have an SSD to burn through?

This attitude is one othe reasons Apple get away with having such **** poor RAM/SSD specifications in their products.

Even with the 512GB model storage is tight. With Full iTunes Library, Photographs, i've used 200 of the 512. Given Mac OS and software, thats another 35 - 50 gone, so i'm down to 50% of the storage space the machine came with. Thankfully I rarely have to use this for any work.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: GMShadow
The good old, "Well I don't run out, so you're wrong" attitude. So poor RAM management is acceptable because these machine have an SSD to burn through?

This attitude is one othe reasons Apple get away with having such **** poor RAM/SSD specifications in their products.

Even with the 512GB model storage is tight. With Full iTunes Library, Photographs, i've used 200 of the 512. Given Mac OS and software, thats another 35 - 50 gone, so i'm down to 50% of the storage space the machine came with. Thankfully I rarely have to use this for any work.
is that really a 'good old'? hmmm. meanwhile, fixed this for you:

"Even with the 512GB model storage is tight for me". remember, we don't all have the same needs.

also, having 50% open space on your drive is impressive!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.