If half the cars on the road could only do 30mph, then no one would "need" to drive 65 because no one would be able to.
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.
Apple's Regular Mac Base RAM Boosts Ended When Tim Cook Took Over
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If half the cars on the road could only do 30mph, then no one would "need" to drive 65 because no one would be able to.
You're making a strawman argument. I don't disagree that a few pc games (of which most are unoptimized console ports) require more than 8gb of RAM. I merely said I don't know of any in one line of a post with a larger point.
The fact there are a few now doesn't change the point. Which is that RAM needs for the masses are plateauing. And have been plateauing for a long time. And that it isn't even an opinion. IT's a fact. Its obvious no matter whether you desire more RAM for less money that Apple will sell it to you for or not.
The article even points this out. But you seemingly have a bad habit of not reading or understanding what you reply to.
The fact that 45% of STeam users still have only 8gb of RAM merely serves to show how much RAM needs are/have been plateauing even in a use case as demanding as pcgaming. (nevermind in a context of RAM in, and the mass audience for, a base Macbook Air. )
Last edited:
It's 2024 IMO. Disagree with someone's entrenched position and you may as well be disrespecting their entire bloodline never mind their mom.
Because technology of RAM is improving at exponential scale.
The chart will be super difficult to read in linear axis.
“The correlation is interesting, but other variables such as market trends and changes in technology can help to account for the plateau in Cook's era. For example…”
What the hell is the point of this article then?!!!
MR - please increase your journalistic stabdards. You know better than this.
What the hell is the point of this article then?!!!
MR - please increase your journalistic stabdards. You know better than this.
Wrong and it's in reverse.
Unified memory means your GPU is sharing memory with your CPU.
8GB unified is worse than an 8GB RAM + 2GB VRAM setup.
8GB is 8GB and you can not put more than 8GB data into it. A 16GB intel Mac can run JetBrains IDE with a project that an 8GB Apple silicon Mac will crash.
8gig of ram can **** off and £200 to go from 8gig to 16gig can **** right off.
Same goes for HD just swap out the numbers.
Same goes for HD just swap out the numbers.
The base RAM model is the one they have in stock at Apple Store and resalers.
It's always the most produced model of the machine. Plus, it's the base model that will receive most discounts.
This means the 8GB e-waste is where Apple generate the most profit.
That was because of two things, first its was time Apple started to use soldered RAM, second that 8GB was sufficient to run MacOS without much swap caching for most casual users. Back then I made a choice to go with 16 GB soldered RAM because of first its not upgradeable, second the chance of swap caching decreased greatly, also it supposedly lengthen the life of the SSD involved by reducing the amount of read/writes to the SSD. There's another issue back then not to select the smallest SSD also in addition to the smallest RAM config for maximizing the life and usefulness of the Mac.
Last edited:
e-waste is as low as it ever has been. upgrade cycles are as long as they have been. REcyclability is as high as it has been. The devices themselves are as small as they have been.
Go visit the 1980s and you'll come back with a different opinion on today's "e-waste."
Upgrade cycles are a lot slower than they used to be. And most here crying about e-waste and life and usefulness of Macs probably don't have 10 yr old Macs if you my get my drift.
Unified is Apple lingo for saying the CPU and iGPU share the same amount of memory. M series with 16GB, the cpu will share all the memory with the iGPU when needed whereas with Intel 630 series for example a MacBook with 16gb of ram will only share a max of 1.5gb of vram with the iGPU.
Any M series Mac will beat Intel Mac and it’s because the M chips are more powerful regardless of the ram.
These AS platform Macs are a joy to use comparably and one could use them for years until they die. They are just in raw performance so much better than a decade ago. So hopefully this perception contributes to much longer ownership and less e-waste.
Last edited:
You're right, but they are high-end computers. A low-end computer is around the $600 mark, half of what they're charging for the Air. Maybe 8GB is fine at $999, but at $1,799 it's just impossible to swallow.
I can’t wait for the Fanboy Pro that replaces all physical RAM with virtual memory.
Yep. 👍🏼 Soldering RAM and SSD then using very very small quantities produces a machine that will physically wear out faster as well as being outgrown by its users faster. Win for Apple if they earn quicker repeat sales, but a loss for consumers, and a loss for the environment.
Where's the EU with some new legislation when you need them? 😉
I just use my unified wallet to get the memory I need for my Mac. I don't rely on a vendor making those decisions for me.
Well, if I recall correctly, Intel was researching a type of memory so fast that could be used both as SSD and RAM, so no RAM would be needed and, at the same time, RAM was virtually infinite. They released a few models but they never achieved what they initially promised with Optane.
Optane was cool, but given that it was faster & more expensive than SSDs, but slower than RAM, it never really found a niche.
Before you go simping to the cocaine addicts and money launderers in the EU parliament at least understand that Dell and Samsung are soldering memory too.
Reporters find cocaine in EU parliament
Significant amounts of cocaine have been found in the European parliament, German undercover reporters claim.