Don’t get me started with 5GB of iCloud…
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
I'm torn by this. First I think "correlation is not causation." But Cook is such a details guy, and an absolute master of manufacturing efficiency.
I think our biggest problem is Apple executive putting too much emphasis on, "Making computers we want to use ourselves," and that leading to, "What I need is what you need."
I think our biggest problem is Apple executive putting too much emphasis on, "Making computers we want to use ourselves," and that leading to, "What I need is what you need."
no because I just explained they saved a lot of money by not using the latest and greatest chip and instead using the previous gen chip which costs much less to produce 1 year later. they used that savings to give you double storage/ram. they took one thing away (latest chip) but gave you another thing (double the storage/ram). see how that works?
what? you quoted 5 links and responded "and unified memory architecture". I have no idea what you're saying here. highly ambiguous and nonsensical.
Reused camera module and design, but a brand new CPU, new memory architecture, new custom designed GPU, etc...you pull one area and you push another to balance the budget. Some years you get new camera, but same screen. Some years you get a new design but same camera and flash/memory speeds. See how that works?
Saying iPhone increased storage/ram and therefore Mac should increase it proportionally is an extremely narrow take that doesn't even make sense at all.
I can't really be any clearer than this. If you still don't understand, that's really not my problem. Moving on.
Last edited:
ridiculously terrible take considering it ignores everything else about the phone.
a budget phone manufacturer can build a $200 phone that includes a slow 512GB microsd built internally which doesn't cost that much, therefore all flagships must include 512GB as base right? 🤦♂️
8GB is what customers are continuing to buy and is what Apple will continue to produce.
Market speaks. When the market stops speaking, Apple will axe that product. See iPhone mini.
It's only cheaper because Apple inflate the cost of RAM upgrade. Apple can offer the base model with 16 GB of RAM at the same price of $1200, and *still* make a huge profit margin. However, they KNOW defenders eat it up.
Good analogy, because no one is going to write software that only runs on a fraction of existing macs. The market is too small.
Even the Playstation 5 has 16 gb of ram, and an 825GB SSD.
I would consider 16 GB the absolute minimum and 32 GB what I would want in a laptop that I buy in 2024.
Apple chose to have RAM embedded on the Apple Silicon. I definitely prefer a modular solution. I cannot tell whether Apple deliberately chose to have the RAM embedded to increase profits, or whether there is a deep technical reason for this architecture. Regardless, the horrendous premium that Apple charges on RAM makes all current Apple computers unappealing to me. The straw that broke the camel's back, though, is soldered SSD. There is no excuse for that and it is the reason I will not buy any new Apple hardware.
I am glad I don't need a computer right now because the choices aren't great: Apple's superior but overpriced architecture that still cannot run Linux comfortable BTW. Or PCs that still use Intel processors and have terrible battery life. PCs are just starting the transition to ARM processors. The hardware is ~3 years behind Apple, but it will catch up. I wonder if RAM will be user-upgradable in newer ARM PCs. I just want to sit this out and and see.
Apple chose to have RAM embedded on the Apple Silicon. I definitely prefer a modular solution. I cannot tell whether Apple deliberately chose to have the RAM embedded to increase profits, or whether there is a deep technical reason for this architecture. Regardless, the horrendous premium that Apple charges on RAM makes all current Apple computers unappealing to me. The straw that broke the camel's back, though, is soldered SSD. There is no excuse for that and it is the reason I will not buy any new Apple hardware.
I am glad I don't need a computer right now because the choices aren't great: Apple's superior but overpriced architecture that still cannot run Linux comfortable BTW. Or PCs that still use Intel processors and have terrible battery life. PCs are just starting the transition to ARM processors. The hardware is ~3 years behind Apple, but it will catch up. I wonder if RAM will be user-upgradable in newer ARM PCs. I just want to sit this out and and see.
Steam shows as of march 2024, about 46% of all Mac users have 8GB of RAM. If you're going to write a Mac app/game requiring 16GB, you'd be alienating half your user base. lol you're wrong.
Microsoft and Sony sells their gaming consoles at a loss for several years to build their user base. and they don't even have the same features. Terrible comparison. lmao
Microsoft takes a $100-$200 loss on all Xbox Series X|S sales
According to Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer, Microsoft is selling Xbox Series X|S consoles at a hefty loss of up to $200, though that loss could be reduced next year.
moving from cars to video game consoles...what's next?
Last edited:
So many deniers. Why is it so bad to add more RAM instead of keep using 8GB? Such a silly statement.
HAHAHA, that theory already debunked by many YouTubers. Clearly, you have no idea what you are saying.
No? unless you meant something else.
you said "no one is going to write software that only runs on a fraction of existing Macs."
did you mean no one is going to target >8GB or 8GB? extremely confusing.
developers are going to target 8GB because that would allow the majority of the customers to use the software.
similarly majority of highways target 65MPH in USA which majority of cars are able to do.
tell me again how your analogy is good.
Last edited:
Which is fine and dandy if you are producing a console that is supposed to run games at 4K for about a decade.
For corporate computers with a base configuration they just need to be able to run an OS and cloud apps. When corporates and schools make bulk purchases on limited budgets they need to be able to save money per unit.
That’s why almost every major laptop maker has 8GB memory and 256GB storage options.
The issue in threads like this is that a bunch of nerds and gamers appear and they think they should force their credit card based purchases on everyone else. The world outside their bedroom doesn’t run on credit cards as much as they like to believe.
If you go around saying ‘all machines should have minimum 16GB’ and ‘iPhone should have stylus support’ what you are actually doing is upping the base price for everyone who doesn’t need those features.
You are causing inflation in a world that already suffers from high inflation, war, corporate greedflation.
Think about the effects of your decisions rather than impose a selfish view on everyone.
iCloud RAM is fully FTW. Only $19.99 per month for 16GB. Latency might be a bit high but it's fine for most people and sells well IIRC 👍
Pretty sure you just made their point for them... Also it's absolutely absurd to think that Apple making 16GB would in any way make apple dip into the red on any of their lineup. 16GB RAM chips at the scale apple would be buying them are literally a couple dollars more than 8GB chips. I'm not even talking double digit dollars either. At the prices they charge, they can afford it and still make bank without even raising prices.Steam shows as of march 2024, about 46% of all Mac users have 8GB of RAM. If you're going to write a Mac app/game requiring 16GB, you'd be alienating half your user base. lol you're wrong.
Microsoft and Sony sells their gaming consoles at a loss for several years to build their user base. and they don't even have the same features. Terrible comparison. lmao
Microsoft takes a $100-$200 loss on all Xbox Series X|S sales
According to Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer, Microsoft is selling Xbox Series X|S consoles at a hefty loss of up to $200, though that loss could be reduced next year.www.trueachievements.com
moving from cars to video game consoles...what's next?
But of course the issue for Ebenezer Cook & Co. isn't the additional dollar cost to Apple of making everyone's life easier by pegging base RAM at 16GB. It's the $200 loss of not extorting an overpriced upgrade out of everyone who knows better than to buy 8GB in the first place. That's how the mind of a miser ticks. Some will rightly say that Apple isn't a charity. And nor should it be, but at some stage it becomes so crystal clear you're acting in bad faith that it begins turning customers off in growing numbers. Everyone I know in RL has already reached this point. Apple currently don't sell one single product I could happily buy, and that is quite astonishing in my estimation.
Why did you link to an article from 19 years ago? 😂 Why not just go the whole hog and start criticising the European leaders of the 1940s?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.www.theguardian.com
Apple is making a lot of profit with the prices charged for the upgrade from 8 GB to 16 GB. Hoping that M4 will come with 12GB RAM.