Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
If you have a spare Studio with lots of RAM, you're smart if you sell it now. Someone out there is desperate for one. Then buy the much faster Studio when it becomes available, 2 generations up on the M3 Ultra. Probably upgraded for free then!

And since the Studio won't be on a yearly upgrade cycle, it's good for a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: madmin
I think it's more to do with the fact that M5 is around the corner limiting supply, and that these have been turned into Openclaw machines in droves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patroclus
Since unified memory is integrated into the same chip as the processor, I don’t understand why the availability and price of non-unified memory chips should affect the price and availability of Apple’s ARM chips.
That’s not quite how it works. The memory is in the same SoC package, it’s the CPU, GPU, And neural cores that re in the chip istelf.

An easier way to think about it is the memory is still in the form of separate chips, but they are fused directly to the CPU / GPU rather than connected via a logic board.
 
Since unified memory is integrated into the same chip as the processor, I don’t understand why the availability and price of non-unified memory chips should affect the price and availability of Apple’s ARM chips.
Unified just means the ram chips are shared by the CPU and GPU. The ram chips are no different from normal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Happy_John
We see variations on this "I wish this brainless bubble would hurry up and burst. Nobody is too big to FAIL" kind of comment with some frequency. I would love to have someone explain the thinking to me.

Because it seems to me that AI is a solid evolutionary tech concept still in its early years. No doubt some of the paths that AI growth may take will prove unsuccessful, "fail," but that is just the way growth works. IMO AI is not going to fail even if some current growth directions prove to have been bad choices financially for the folks wealthy enough to be investing in option A versus option B versus option C...
This iteration of AI is going to fail, because it is a bottomless pit for the money and resources, including g storage and RAM, along with capital for other business sectors and energy. That failure will have disastrous financial consequences.

Saying it is justified because of technological advancement is like saying dropping atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was OK because we now have nuclear energy. That isn’t a valid justification.

The technology has to be separated from disastrous implementations of the same technology.
 
Last edited:
wish this brainless bubble would hurry up and burst
Nobody is too big to FAIL
I would love to have someone explain the thinking to me.

Because it seems to me that AI is a solid evolutionary tech concept still in its early years. No doubt some of the paths that AI growth may take will prove unsuccessful, "fail," but that is just the way growth works. IMO AI is not going to fail
One has to be willfully ignorant at this point to look at AI and see a bubble. It's already doing real, valuable work in software engineering even in its infancy. It'll find useful applications in other industries too.
Did the technology of internet, online shopping services vanish without trace? No - ask Amazon.

Right. We’re really talking about two different things here aren’t we.

Is AI an ‘overhyped’ fad as many people seem to think? No. It’s a major tech revolution that, for good or for bad, is going to change life on earth forever. But it’s not surprising that many people can’t see that. I’m quite sure when the motor car first arrived, many people laughed at all its flaws and claimed that it would never replace the horse. I even remember trying to convince my dad that the World Wide Web was not just a fad.

Are some early investors in AI going to fail? It certainly looks that way. But some will succeed, and as always, a few filthy rich billionaires will get even filthier from it.
 
The memory is potentially upgradable if one has the appropriate surface mount soldering tools and the skill to use them.
People have de-lidded them, see the famous picture of the M2 Ultra next to an enterprise Intel CPU below from a few years ago. 8 LPDDR5 modules next to 2 M2 Max dies.
But has anyone managed to replace the M4 LPDDR5X-7500/8533 modules? Never seen a YouTube video of that. I guess it's not upgradeable.
FyxbOK6aIAAjrDW.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Only people who don't use AI for real work think it's a bubble. I just used Claude Code to code something in 30 minutes that would "normally" have taken me 2 weeks at least. The productivity boost is just phenomenal.

Absolutely. I find Claude Agent (Xcode) has a tendency to get into wildly long thinking loops that eat up all my tokens without getting much done, but I’m getting better at learning when to use the agent, and when to use a standard chat; when to keep going with a chat, and when to start a new one. I guess it’s like learning to use any new tool.

I’m still not sure if/how people are able to create decent apps through vibe coding alone though. I constantly have to review the architecture, question AI’s approach, revert poor changes, and steer it back on track. If I knew nothing about coding, the app I’m currently working on would, quite frankly, be an absolute mess.
 
Right. We’re really talking about two different things here aren’t we.

Is AI an ‘overhyped’ fad as many people seem to think? No. It’s a major tech revolution that, for good or for bad, is going to change life on earth forever. But it’s not surprising that many people can’t see that. I’m quite sure when the motor car first arrived, many people laughed at all its flaws and claimed that it would never replace the horse. I even remember trying to convince my dad that the World Wide Web was not just a fad.

Are some early investors in AI going to fail? It certainly looks that way. But some will succeed, and as always, a few filthy rich billionaires will get even filthier from it.
You might be surprised how few people share your opinions.

Sometimes great things are unpopular. But this ai stuff is being forced on us all everywhere all the time, and we cannot get away from it fast enough (or at all, unless we abandoned computers and the internet entirely, which we can also not do if we want to live and do business).

I can't remember a piece of technology shoved down my throat quite as hard as these slop generators.

I'm not sorry for wanting it out of my face. I never asked for this. I don't want this. Please, leave me behind as fast as possible.

I'd still like to use technology the way I did three short years ago. But we can't even hide this stuff. It's everywhere.

I recommend you sit and think about the wisdom of forcing technology on people who don't want it. Because it seems morally wrong to me.

If a sit-down restaurant forced me to order and pay with a tablet, I'd never go there again. If I sit down at a table and there's a tablet on it, the tablet goes facedown on on the seats.

Technology exists to serve us. At its best, technology is simply swapping one set of problems for a preferable set of problems. If technology doesn't serve us, I'm eager to let go of it.

You might notice the Amish still reproduce. Might want to think about that too.
 
Last edited:
Only people who don't use AI for real work think it's a bubble. I just used Claude Code to code something in 30 minutes that would "normally" have taken me 2 weeks at least. The productivity boost is just phenomenal.
Do you think it's smart to play with tools that you don't understand?


 
Since unified memory is integrated into the same chip as the processor, I don’t understand why the availability and price of non-unified memory chips should affect the price and availability of Apple’s ARM chips.

Because RAM is RAM whether you put it in one place or in another place. Like if I buy a MacBook and put it on my desk, or I put it on your desk, I still paid the same amount of money didn't I?
 
  • Like
Reactions: HVDynamo
Do you think it's smart to play with tools that you don't understand?




Anything can go wrong with any technology.

Are you saying that any technology based device that goes wrong means we forego the tech?


Imagine if humanity had walked away from fire after the first time someone burnt themselves.
 
Only people who don't use AI for real work think it's a bubble. I just used Claude Code to code something in 30 minutes that would "normally" have taken me 2 weeks at least. The productivity boost is just phenomenal.

Interesting. For those of us who grew up without running hot water (figuratively speaking), can you explain why, if this stuff is that much of a productivity boost? e.g. TurboTax can't re-implement their sacrosanct code base for Intel C++ in architecture-agnostic Rust and give us a robust Apple Silicon version? I don't need a Therapist that takes a climate-prediction-sized cluster to run, I just need a clean re-implementation of a modest, but, needs to behave "perfectly", Tax form filler.

BTW, I picked this example because TurboTax is a black box to me. I don't want to get wrapped up in discussions about application areas I might know something about. But, TurboTax should be already described by a set of specifications, and, an existing reference implementation, probably in C++, that could be transformed into a clean implementation in a theoretically "simpler" language. Can you do it easily with Claude Code?
 
  • Like
Reactions: HVDynamo
Anything can go wrong with any technology.
Can you provide an example of software that has directly encouraged and helped people commit suicide before?

I'm not inclined to argue with you. But some pieces of technology lend themselves to abuse far more than others. And I think that's obvious.

I want to be human. I don't think I can overcome my humanity through technology, and I wouldn't want to if I could. I'm not in a rush to worship my own creations.

There's something incredibly luciferian about the slop generators. Whether that bothers you or not, I don't know.

I'm just sick of the very vocal advocates of this stuff repeating the same lines, over and over again.

It's also unintelligent to bet the entire farm on tech that has never made a penny in profit.

I'll shut up; these topics bore me.
 
You might be surprised how few people share your opinions.

What makes you think I’m surprised when I explicitly stated that many people don’t share my opinion? 🫤

I recommend you sit and think about the wisdom of forcing technology on people who don't want it. Because it seems morally wrong to me.

I never argued anything about the ethics of AI or its implementation. I only hinted at it when I said, ‘for good or for bad’.

Here’s a tip… If you want to know someone’s opinion on something, try asking for it rather than making a bunch of assumptions.

You might notice the Amish still reproduce. Might want to think about that too.

Think about the Amish having sex? 😳 How is that relevant to this discussion??
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert
I decided it was the perfect time to sell my M4, Mac mini Pro and I got a pretty good price for it. Sold in less than one day. I just wasn't using it. I still have a MacBook Air and a MacBook Pro and I use those more than anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: turbineseaplane
People have de-lidded them, see the famous picture of the M2 Ultra next to an enterprise Intel CPU below from a few years ago. 8 LPDDR5 modules next to 2 M2 Max dies.
But has anyone managed to replace the M4 LPDDR5X-7500/8533 modules? Never seen a YouTube video of that. I guess it's not upgradeable.
I think it's possible, but by no means easy to replace the DRAM modules - hence writing potentially upgradable. I have seen ~1,000 pin BGA parts successfully replaced. The DRAM modules are probably more challenging to replace.

I don't see anything nefarious in Apple using non-connectorized DRAM, as it reduces cost and should improve performance. The extra trace length with connectors will slow down memory access and increase power consumption.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert
Since unified memory is integrated into the same chip as the processor, I don’t understand why the availability and price of non-unified memory chips should affect the price and availability of Apple’s ARM chips.
The memory is packaged with the rest of the SoC but it’s still LPDDR5 wafers Apple sources, it’s still RAM chips they need to buy
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tagbert
The MBP with 128GB RAM is available for delivery in just a couple weeks (14” and 16”), so how can the 32GB Mac Mini be unavailable due to a memory shortage? This MacRumors article doesn’t make sense.

I assume that the M5 is about to be announced - even the Mac Mini models that are “available” have really long shipping estimates. Isn’t that what typically happens shortly before a new model is released?
 
Last edited:
I think it's possible, but by no means easy to replace the DRAM modules - hence writing potentially upgradable. I have seen ~1,000 pin BGA parts successfully replaced. The DRAM modules are probably more challenging to replace.

I don't see anything nefarious in Apple using non-connectorized DRAM, as it reduces cost and should improve performance. The extra trace length with connectors will slow down memory access and increase power consumption.
There has not been a single report with detailed evidences like a video of soldering and then booting up, for any Apple Silicon RAM upgrade.

There was, however, one instance that I read from China that when M1 released, of course those technicians were eager to try, the result was it took way too many tries to even have one close to working that the economy of wasting good DRAM and M1 parts was just not sound. I think the attempts were into dozens of tries, it requires "star alignment" luck to happen. Again I read this among chatroom exchange in text, so just gossips.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.