Apple gotta keep those super high margins by using those low end left over pieces....
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.
Base Model MacBook Air With M2 Chip Has Slower SSD Speeds in Benchmarks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If that happens, what's the likelihood that developers will simply start making all Mac apps more RAM intensive, causing the new floor to become the old floor?
We've seen that with storage. As operating systems get more bloated, they take up more space, so we need larger drives just to have similar space to older days. What's to stop the same happening with RAM?
Not an argument against your point btw. Just theorizing about where that takes us.
I liked how he addressed those who think they might as well go for the base MBP14.
Going with a single 256GB chip is strictly a cost cutting measure that doesn't feel appropriate for a $1200 laptop. The difference between a 2x 128gb chips or 1x 256gb chip is almost nothing (128GB chips are not difficult or expensive to procure) and Apple sacrificed a big chunk of storage performance to shave basically nothing from their BOM cost. This feels like something you would see a ****** PC maker pull and not something you should see from a company who is positioning themselves as a premium product.
Last edited:
Look, I do think that even if Apple threw inside SATA SSD* most people wouldn't "notice the difference"
You and the people like you are missing the point here by a mile.
*implying it would fit
The issue (which you fail to comprehend) is that even the base M1 (YES THE BASE MODEL) has faster SSD speeds. This isn't an issue of it being a base model, its an issue of it having weaker SSD speeds than the base model computer it is replacing (all while being more expensive).
To be honest, this would have been an okay tradeoff if the new M2 started at $999.
But this lineup is all-round absurd. Even the $200 for stepping up to 512GB is daylight robbery.
But this lineup is all-round absurd. Even the $200 for stepping up to 512GB is daylight robbery.
I guess you're the authority of point-missing around here 🤣
Maybe if this was uniquely my stance on this thing, sure. If you read the thread replies, you will see I am not the only one.
Maybe you have the right in a sense maybe it should be rephrased so that it says "people sharing the same opinion as you", so that it doesn't sound personal.
My apologies.
Boo, Apple. Or should I say Tim Cook? Cost cutting has gone too far at Apple and is affecting usability and quality
M1 Air with deals / refurbished is 30% cheaper than M2 Air, and is perfect for all price sensitive customers. Performance, speakers and display improvements are modest and single NAND chip doesn't help. Also, Apple didn't really increase the price of 14" Pro - they merely do not offer lower ram/storage tiers so 14" Pro starts at 16/512.
M2 Air is $200 more expensive for the same ram/storage tier and it fails to impress me. But we cannot underestimate how much a next-gen design is worth to the general customers. It looks nicer, and that is enough for many.
M2 Air is $200 more expensive for the same ram/storage tier and it fails to impress me. But we cannot underestimate how much a next-gen design is worth to the general customers. It looks nicer, and that is enough for many.
I’d say this is the wrong question. There are many internal and invisible changes to Apple products and if they don’t affect the usage someone has, then on-paper numbers are not a rational measure of satisfaction for someone’s needs.
Just like it is pointless for Android phones to boast about Apple working with lower RAM on mobile. If it meets the level of performance Apple users expect, why would they need to put higher RAM hardware? The numbers do not matter more than the outcome a user experiences - and if all the user notices is their satisfaction, that is absolutely ok.
Did they promise something else? It isn't like they are sneaking this in.
Nonsense. Apple has never disclosed all parts of their hardware and doesn’t need to if they are honest about the experience itself. Just like some iPads have more RAM than others in the same model due to storage management. I promise you Apple’s lawyers aren’t stupid enough to get their advertising wrong enough for a class action suit over internal design.
Nope this is more like people complaining that they paid $200 more than last years model (the price is the price, not extra) and only got a better screen, MagSafe, better speakers, and better chip with more cores (which is always higher priced) that is demonstrably 20% faster in most tasks, from a company that is not a non-profit but actual company and hence profit motivated, and complaining how one aspect of the base model does not perform as fast as in some tasks (not all or even most) as the same model with a $200 upgrade! Shocker.
I wasnt sure it would make a difference but I will say that when I toggle from my work 16 M1P MBP to my personal last gen intel air I now notice the top bezel a lot more than I used to
Apple defenders need to chill on this one. Most members in macrumors are real apple fans (including me), but everyone defending Apple for intentionally slowing down a device to upsell is just malpractice. Apple engineers must have tested both the setups and knew the performance difference and still sided with marketing/sales to screw the base model owners.
Congrats, Apple has limited internal storage for a decade to push you to paying them a monthly fee and you fell for it
You can actually sue anyone over anything and everything. You just won’t always win.