Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This will most likely be an unpopular opinion, but if they are not running benchmarks this isn't going to be very noticeable to most folks who buy this machine. Sure, it may be slower in some tasks, but a few seconds here and there won't harm anybody at all.

If you're pushing a 13" MacBook Pro (M1 or M2) to where it slows down and/or costs significant time or money, you need to be shopping higher up the MacBook Pro range.
The point is that Apple are screwing us over and acting as though they deserve a medal for doing so. We should not need to spend more money just to get decent performance because Apple seem to have deliberately turned down the speed etc.
 
Nobody said anything about it not being good. But as of right now they only MacBook Air you can buy is the entry-level one. That leaves anybody wanting more storage or more ram out for luck until late July / early August. Doesn't matter if they want an M1 or M2 (which may be even longer). Or you can step up to the M2 MBP which has multiple configurations available for pickup of deliverable in a few days.
With a MBP you'll be stuck waiting if you BTO anything.
 
The only thing I can realistically think of is that Apple will stop selling Macs with 128GB (Education M1s use this), so they have no need for 128GB NAND chips. (M1 Pros had 2x 128GB NAND modules, so they ran in dual channel mode, hence faster speeds). More likely, its probably them trying to nerf the 13" Pro out of existence.
If that was even remotely true then why are they reusing last year's box? They just put the M2 MacBook Pro 13" into an OLD M1 box and stuck a label over the M1 monitor!
That is Apple deciding that they wish to make even more profits than they do and not even deliver anything new other than the CPU.
Talk about the ultimate screw over, what's next Tim? Sell us a MacBook that is just a box from 10 years ago with nothing inside?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GalileoSeven
It won’t be noticeable at all for 99% of the target user base.

Even a SATA SSD is fast enough that there is no perceivable difference in daily use vs an NVMe.

The only people who will whine are the users on this forum, who already wouldn’t buy this laptop.

It’s a nothingburger.
Actually it is something and something bad, kinda like being sold a brand new car but the car maker decides to screw you over and take 1 wheel off and also half the engine.
You would not put up with that so why this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GalileoSeven
If that was even remotely true then why are they reusing last year's box? They just put the M2 MacBook Pro 13" into an OLD M1 box and stuck a label over the M1 monitor!
That is Apple deciding that they wish to make even more profits than they do and not even deliver anything new other than the CPU.
Talk about the ultimate screw over, what's next Tim? Sell us a MacBook that is just a box from 10 years ago with nothing inside?
The machine sells well enough that it warranted a revision and quite frankly in my old company the 13" MBP is standard issue if you request a Mac. Yes, it's a cheap move to rebrand unused boxes. There I won't disagree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GalileoSeven
I wouldn't like it for the M2 MacBook Air also, because Apple significantly increased the price of these machines.

But I understand Apple. They struggle getting machines out, so Apple probably found a way to produce more M2 chips by downgrading to some crappy SSD's that nobody wants to use.
Apple make obscene profits and so they could just stop being greedy if what you say were true. This is a case of Tim being greedy and not caring less about the end result or user.
 
What is going on with this forum in the past five years? lol My post had zero praise of Apple's choice. It's like a bunch of rabid attach dogs when anyone post anything not bashing apple. You know what? "Life is good" when base model machines can R/W at 1400MBs FOR ANY BRAND! Holy smokes... 🙄
I push my machine harder than most so I have something that is well above the base model, ;) so you can sleep a little better my friend.
The point is Apple aren't correct for doing this, they cannot and should not be excused...!
It is called the principle, something most of you lack in my experience.
 
With a MBP you'll be stuck waiting if you BTO anything.
I can buy 8/265, 8/512, 16/512, 16/1Tb and pick up today. 24Gb anything and it's July 15 - Aug 4

Edit: silver seems to have more configs available than space gray
 
Last edited:
Indeed. Let’s face it though, Apple slaps ‘Pro’ on to many things now regardless of performance and capability. Nowdays, ’Pro’ often means squat.
Because Tim Cook is in my view a useless **** of a CEO and has NO clue about products or what the end user is likely to want.
Steve Jobs would not have settled for this mess and would have fired half the senior engineering team behind this and made sure the replacements did not mess-up.
All Tim seems to care about is as much profit as possible at the direct expense of quality and what customers deserve.
He has to go, end of!
 
  • Like
Reactions: GalileoSeven
Because Tim Cook is in my view a useless **** of a CEO and has NO clue about products or what the end user is likely to want.
Steve Jobs would not have settled for this mess and would have fired half the senior engineering team behind this and made sure the replacements did not mess-up.
All Tim seems to care about is as much profit as possible at the direct expense of quality and what customers deserve.
He has to go, end of!
Steve is dead, let the man rest. Deal with what you have right now and vote with your wallet if you feel such passion.
 
Not really news. The lowest end M-series Mac SSD (256 GB in this case) has always been considerably slower than SSD options with greater storage. It's how SSD in M chips is architected.

Sounds like all the people having a good whine here were about to pull the trigger on a 256 GB MacBook Pro. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.
No, actually. This is bad and case of Apple screwing people over. You do know that they are reusing last years boxes for the M1 machines right and just slapping a sticker over the revenant part?
It is like the Simpsons and Family Guy crossover where Peter Griffin takes a bottle of Homer's favourite drink (Duff beer) and peeling back the label to reveal it is in fact just Duff Beer with a different label on.
Tim is really REALLY penny pinching here which he should not do seeing as Apple have over $160 BILLION cash in the bank!
 
The use of a single NAND chip is obvious (at least to me) - it is because these chips are in such high demand and there is such a low supply of them. I believe Apple just couldn't find the supply needed to fit 2 of these chips in each base config 13-inch MBP with M2....
IF that is true then they should reduce the price and at least tell us instead of spouting that nonsense about how fast these machines are...yeah right! lol
 
Because Tim Cook is in my view a useless **** of a CEO and has NO clue about products or what the end user is likely to want.
Steve Jobs would not have settled for this mess and would have fired half the senior engineering team behind this and made sure the replacements did not mess-up.
All Tim seems to care about is as much profit as possible at the direct expense of quality and what customers deserve.
He has to go, end of!

He is probably one of the most successful CEOs in the history of modern business and has created much of Apple's 2+ trillion dollars in valuation and amassed hundreds of billions in cash on hand over the years based almost entirely on selling products that people want to buy. For all the credit Steve Jobs gets Cook has probably sold more in AirPods in a bad quarter than Steve brought into Apple between 1976 and 2011.
 
Isn't it the the same price as before? And it IS more powerful. The fact that the (still very fast) SSD is slower than before won't matter to most users, and won't be noticeable in anything but benchmarks, or very intense workloads that most people buying this machine won't be doing.

It's still overall a faster machine than the older generation M1 13" MBP.



I'm not sure that I understand this point. This is a faster laptop than the M1 Air. By paying the extra money, you do get a machine that performs faster. Agreed - some specific benchmarks may be underwhelming, but this is still a very capable machine for the money. And the fan gets you sustained performance over any Air. (I'd still get the Air over this though).
It IS slower than the previous version (SSD) and not to mention reusing last year's box and nothing, NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING has changed on this 6 year old machine apart from the CPU.
That is as bad as buying a car that is sold as being this year's model but is the EXACT same as the 6 year old model apart from a slightly better engine.
That is called screwing you over!
 
This will most likely be an unpopular opinion, but if they are not running benchmarks this isn't going to be very noticeable to most folks who buy this machine. Sure, it may be slower in some tasks, but a few seconds here and there won't harm anybody at all.

If you're pushing a 13" MacBook Pro (M1 or M2) to where it slows down and/or costs significant time or money, you need to be shopping higher up the MacBook Pro range.
I don't think the target purchasers are going to notice or care about this.
 
That is also what I am suspecting. Apple is doing this due to the current production issues they are having. So they came with a compromised solution.
Why the secrecy then? I suspect this is very deliberate knowing Tim and his desire to be as greedy as he can be whilst ignoring quality addend user in a way Jobs would never EVER have done!
 
Maybe you are being too harsh on Apple in a world of rampant inflation, global shortages and logistics delays?

I mean Apple can charge $3000 for the base model so it can preserve “excellence,” but how much will you be moaning then?

Also what kind of true Pro are you if you are settling for just the 256gb model?

Apple made the best decision it could at the time and it will not impxt
99.9999% of buyers of the base model.

That’s my estimation in any case, individual use cases will vary and obviously it does suck to have slower tech in a newer model, no question, but there are lots of reasons why Apple presumably made this choice and global prices and availability are obviously huge factors.
Apple made the best decision for their bottom line and rich rich shareholders, not the enduser. Tim is a money man, a penny pincher in my view and all his decisions seem to show that.
This is wrong and inexcusable and that is that!
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: visualseed
It IS slower than the previous version (SSD) and not to mention reusing last year's box and nothing, NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING has changed on this 6 year old machine apart from the CPU.
That is as bad as buying a car that is sold as being this year's model but is the EXACT same as the 6 year old model apart from a slightly better engine.
That is called screwing you over!
This is the MacBook Pro version of the SE. New guts, old housing.
 
The point is that Apple are screwing us over and acting as though they deserve a medal for doing so. We should not need to spend more money just to get decent performance because Apple seem to have deliberately turned down the speed etc.

Pro-tip - Avoid getting "screwed over" and giving medals to Apple by.... not buying it.

Everyone else can enjoy a machine that performs faster than a 13" M1 MacBook Pro for 99% of the things that they will do with it. For the 1% things that will be slower they can use the spare time to.... (oh, it's already done? - Never mind...)
 
  • Like
Reactions: visualseed
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.