Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Offering 8 GB RAM Kits for 2.93 GHz and 2.66 GHz 15" MacBook Pros

At launch event of Leopard, Steve Jobs made a joke about Vista and said "Leopard will come in 3 editions, all of them will cost $129". (He was making fun of the fact that Vista had like 6 editions)

Well guess what? Microsoft has different editions that disable certain functions (like business edition cannot use media center etc) BUT SO DO Apple but with APPLE, it's ON THE HARDWARE SIDE SO it's MORE EXPENSIVE.

Example:
Vista Home Premium = $110
Vista Business = $250

That's about a $140 difference.

Now compare to Apple:
Macbook Pro 2.4 = $1899
Macbook Pro 2.6 = $2500

That's over a $500 difference.

And you say Apple is better than Microsoft.
 
whitefang said:
At launch event of Leopard, Steve Jobs made a joke about Vista and said "Leopard will come in 3 editions, all of them will cost $129". (He was making fun of the fact that Vista had like 6 editions)

Well guess what? Microsoft has different editions that disable certain functions (like business edition cannot use media center etc) BUT SO DO Apple but with APPLE, it's ON THE HARDWARE SIDE SO it's MORE EXPENSIVE.

Example:
Vista Home Premium = $110
Vista Business = $250

That's about a $140 difference.

Now compare to Apple:
Macbook Pro 2.4 = $1899
Macbook Pro 2.6 = $2500

That's over a $500 difference.

And you say Apple is better than Microsoft.
Click to expand...

You're assuming Apple is going to issue a firmware update that enables it for all of them. Even if they aren't, they have to know it's silly and people will work their way around it easily.

Your analogy doesn't work Microsoft has no control over the hardware.
 
chrmjenkins said:
You're assuming Apple is going to issue a firmware update that enables it for all of them. Even if they aren't, they have to know it's silly and people will work their way around it easily.

Your analogy doesn't work Microsoft has no control over the hardware.
Click to expand...

No, my analogy works. What I'm saying is that Microsoft controls pricing through software, Apple controls pricing through hardware. The end result is that Apple ends up costing more.
 
whitefang said:
No, my analogy works. What I'm saying is that Microsoft controls pricing through software, Apple controls pricing through hardware. The end result is that Apple ends up costing more.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't, because we don't know if Microsoft WOULD control hardware if they could. You can't give two parties the means to do different things and compare results on equal grounds.

Besides, we don't have proof Apple is doing this. What we need is someone with a 2.66 or 2.93 to test it and verify it and someone else to use the same RAM with a 2.4 or 2.53 and say it doesn't work.
 
chrmjenkins said:
No, it doesn't, because we don't know if Microsoft WOULD control hardware if they could. You can't give two parties the means to do different things and compare results on equal grounds.

Besides, we don't have proof Apple is doing this. What we need is someone with a 2.66 or 2.93 to test it and verify it and someone else to use the same RAM with a 2.4 or 2.53 and say it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

The scientific method does not work here when the proof of the hypothesis is so damn obvious, same chipsets, same videocards, same everything except processor speed. It is Apple's EFI module that they purposely made it disable 8gigs on 2.4 and 2.5 versions. It can be fixed with a simple firmware update. Apple is holding out or won't do it. Simple as that.
 
whitefang said:
The scientific method does not work here when the proof of the hypothesis is so damn obvious, same chipsets, same videocards, same everything except processor speed. It is Apple's EFI module that they purposely made it disable 8gigs on 2.4 and 2.5 versions. It can be fixed with a simple firmware update. Apple is holding out or won't do it. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

That's why I'm asking if someone has tried 8 GB on a 2.66 or 2.93 model? If they have, and it works, there's the proof, but we don't know that either works right now that I know of.
 
whitefang said:
Bottom line: Apple has purposely disabled 8gigs from working properly on 2.4 and 2.5. It will never be enabled because Apple wants you to buy the next system up. Just like they did with firewire on macbooks issue, the battery slow-down issue, the led proprietary ports issue.
Click to expand...
And the disabling of display spanning on the iBooks (and probably other Macs back then too).
 
chrmjenkins said:
That's why I'm asking if someone has tried 8 GB on a 2.66 or 2.93 model? If they have, and it works, there's the proof, but we don't know that either works right now that I know of.
Click to expand...

Yes I've been using 8GB for 2 days now on my 2.93 15". No problems at all.
 
The real reason why the new 15'' MBP support 8GB

Hi, I think I know why Apple is able to offer 8gb ram support on the revised 2.66 MBP and not on the 2.53 or 2.4 MBP.

Take a look at this:

15'' 2.4-2,53 NVDA Chipset
http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/oEmmaxSOKDDvZfZh.large

17'' NVDA Chipset
http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/SSLSgODWYbiIuTLL.large

There are TWO different revisions. The first is B2 and the latter is B3.
I think that the former does not support 8GB of RAM and the latter does. That explains why the 17'' has support and now the NEWs 15'' also have, Apple gave the 15'' not only a speed bump but also the newer revision of the chipset!
 
eth said:
There are TWO different revisions. The first is B2 and the latter is B3.
I think that the former does not support 8GB of RAM and the latter does. That explains why the 17'' has support and now the NEWs 15'' also have, Apple gave the 15'' not only a speed bump but also the newer revision of the chipset!
Click to expand...

Ah, good catch. That's interesting.
 
eth said:
Hi, I think I know why Apple is able to offer 8gb ram support on the revised 2.66 MBP and not on the 2.53 or 2.4 MBP.

Take a look at this:

15'' 2.4-2,53 NVDA Chipset
http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/oEmmaxSOKDDvZfZh.large

17'' NVDA Chipset
http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/SSLSgODWYbiIuTLL.large

There are TWO different revisions. The first is B2 and the latter is B3.
I think that the former does not support 8GB of RAM and the latter does. That explains why the 17'' has support and now the NEWs 15'' also have, Apple gave the 15'' not only a speed bump but also the newer revision of the chipset!
Click to expand...

Then I want my money back. This should have been made obvious when we purchased the 2.4ghz, and I know I bought it for the new Nvda chipset AND NO OTHER REASON.

P.S. This article seems to belie the reasoning that the B3 chip revision has anything to do with maximum ram...

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/670/1049670/nvidia-heat-causing-macbooks-to-fail
 
I didn't see anything about the 2.8 mbp that came out last october, could have missed it.

Does anybody know if it's supported?
 
What about the processor?

One thing that I haven't seen anybody talk about is the L2 Cache that the 2.4 C2D has 3mb vs. 2.53 / 2.66 and up is 6mb. I am not exactly sure why this would limit the memory addressed by the computer, but to me this means that there has to be something different with more than just the chip. I could be totally wrong about this. :confused: Does anybody know if this could affect this?
 
eth said:
Hi, I think I know why Apple is able to offer 8gb ram support on the revised 2.66 MBP and not on the 2.53 or 2.4 MBP.

Take a look at this:

15'' 2.4-2,53 NVDA Chipset
http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/oEmmaxSOKDDvZfZh.large

17'' NVDA Chipset
http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.com/igi/SSLSgODWYbiIuTLL.large

There are TWO different revisions. The first is B2 and the latter is B3.
I think that the former does not support 8GB of RAM and the latter does. That explains why the 17'' has support and now the NEWs 15'' also have, Apple gave the 15'' not only a speed bump but also the newer revision of the chipset!
Click to expand...

I thought Nvidia has already come out and said the chipset supports 8GB, regardless of the revision. There were a lot of threads about this last October. I think the issue is on Apple's side.
 
Actually, Ive revised my opinion somewhat after reading around it. Still stinks if the 2.4/2.53(mine) remain forever unable to use 8gb, but it doesn't *really* affect me, even in the long term. I generally aim to use a laptop for 3-4 years, an upgrade to 6gb plus a 512gb+ SSD in a year or two will keep my mbp more than capable for my usage. The loss of dual channel probably wouldn't affect me either.

To be completely honest, power wise, I would have been happy with the higher end MB but I wanted the better quality LED and higher res of the 15". If I was a power user, though, and the situation doesn't change...ouch! Low blow Apple, low blow.
 

Attachments

  • Pic.jpg
    Pic.jpg
    36.4 KB · Views: 94
darrenscerri said:
Yes, the direct link is there. But when manually navigating through Apple's pages the 2.66Ghz memory option is omitted.
Click to expand...

Well... The RAM for the 17" 2.66GHz is the same as the 15" 2.66GHz one. Maybe Apple is trying to make there navigation simplyer by merging the 17" with the 15" RAMS

If apple desided to not to sell 8GB for the 15", the 15" 8GB page should be dead by now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back