Guys, get 16 GB.

[john123]

Considering Apple replaced my machine for free with a better one at the two year mark, I'm ahead of someone who takes the biggest depreciation hit and sells their machine every year. It might not cost a lot to upgrade every year, but it still costs more than someone who keeps their machine longer - it's no different than a car depreciation.

Actually, you're incorrect for the reasons I stated above. It's very different than car depreciation. There are a lot of people who vastly overpay for used models. I've actually made money upgrading a couple times—including my most recent flip. Like I said, you're making invalid assumptions.

 

[puma1552]

I'm not, because it's an asinine, blanket claim without regard to how different people use their computers. For some users, 16GB absolutely makes sense. For others, depending on their usage and their upgrade horizons, 8GB makes sense.

Telling people what they "need" to do, and basing that statement on a whole bunch of assumptions, is the height of arrogance.

For anyone keeping the computer more than a year or two, it's a pretty sound OP. It should've been clear that the OP was referring to people keeping the machine for a few years.

 

[john123]

For future proofing definitely!
...
You will need that 15" top end model.

That's one way to future proof. The other way is to buy the base model (if it satisfies your current needs) and upgrade more frequently. If you don't mind the hassle of the flip, it can be very satisfying and will keep you in better machines, on average.

 

[unimac]

Your conclusion is flawed because your assumption—that the extra RAM suddenly will make it a "solid machine" half a decade later—is flawed. Moreover, your entire calculus is flawed. Saving that $200 now and earning a reasonable rate of return on that, and in turn upgrading your computer sooner, makes a lot of sense. It is especially logical given that add-ons like RAM depreciate more steeply than a basic machine itself.

Among other investments, I own 40 shares of AAPL's stock. So, that extra $200 was made probably in an hour and is going to come right back to me as a shareholder. Aside from actual investors, please don't make it seem like putting $200 in a piggy bank or stock market for that matter is going to make a world of a difference in your life. Low-No risk investments yield less than a percent now-a-days and inflation is roaring far above that. Depreciation? $200 ?!?!?! .. I'm already buying a luxury laptop .. and even then, I'm buying their top of the line model. Getting into discussions about depreciation and opportunity cost w/ $200 is an asinine conversation at this price level.

If we were talking about a $400 crapbook, then i'd get your point... But, were not. Were talking about a $2,000 premium/luxury machine and a tested scenario in which I hit 7.68GB of usage in-store easily... No other part of the system was strained.

Further, as someone who works in the industry centered on embedded systems and computer architecture, I pride myself in having a good understanding of what's on the horizon. Please stick to your 8GB and go change the world w/ the $200 you put away under your mattress.

P.S - As i already said, I hit 7.68GB ram usage in-store doing hardly anything... CPU usage across all cores was ~12% .. Thus, CPU isn't an issue... GPU handled 4 streaming 1080p movies w/o a hitch so GPU isn't an issue.. Now lets see if you can figure out the limiting factor here.... SURPRISE : RAM ..7.68GB/8GB was used.

 

[john123]

For anyone keeping the computer more than a year or two, it's a pretty sound OP. It should've been clear that the OP was referring to people keeping the machine for a few years.

Why are you referring to yourself in the third person? So odd.

It isn't sound advice because it assumes that RAM is the big determinant. Virtual memory used to suck quite a bit more when HDDs were involved. Now, with SSDs being the default, and virtual memory working better all around, it's not as big a pain.

And, like I said above, you're assuming an awful lot about users and their needs. I can guarantee you my dad and my sister, for whom I'm getting new rMBPs in the next month, will be just fine with 8GB for the next few years and beyond.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

For anyone keeping the computer more than a year or two, it's a pretty sound OP. It should've been clear that the OP was referring to people keeping the machine for a few years.

i think that's why the crux of your argument is flawed. it's not just several years, you have no way in knowing or saying or proving how many years it woudl take for 8gb to be the new 4gb and 16gb to be the new 8gb.

don't get me wrong, i totally respect people for spending their own money

like i said, it's insane to think that people who purchased a top of the line macbook air will be left with a worthless piece of brick in a couple years. 8gb is here to stay for a while. and if anything, you should try to convince me why RAM usage will skyrocket if tablets are the new norm? Tablets are viewing the same website as computers right? If I would know any better, my ipad example was just to prove that people are focused on efficiency now instead of big jumps in performance.

of course, you can always get 16gb of ram and just get ramdisk

 

[puma1552]

i think that's why the crux of your argument is flawed. it's not just several years, you have no way in knowing or saying or proving how many years it woudl take for 8gb to be the new 4gb and 16gb to be the new 8gb.

don't get me wrong, i totally respect people for spending their own money

I'd say it's probably somewhere around the 3-4 year mark.

 

[BreezyR]

Essentially from what I've gathered:

4GB would satisfy the most casual user but can get limited in the future.
8GB is playing it safe, future proofing some and likely not going to be full utilized.
16GB isn't worth it unless you're a power user that uses VM like photoshop.

And so, 8GB is good.

 

[FrozenDarkness]

I'd say it's probably somewhere around the 3-4 year mark.

that's a pretty good amount of time bro. it's not unreasonable to make a swap in the 3-4 year mark or keep an outdated machine to the 5 year mark.

 

[unimac]

Why are you referring to yourself in the third person? So odd.

It isn't sound advice because it assumes that RAM is the big determinant. Virtual memory used to suck quite a bit more when HDDs were involved. Now, with SSDs being the default, and virtual memory working better all around, it's not as big a pain.

And, like I said above, you're assuming an awful lot about users and their needs. I can guarantee you my dad and my sister, for whom I'm getting new rMBPs in the next month, will be just fine with 8GB for the next few years and beyond.

If you understood anything about SSD's, you'd understand the last thing you want to be happening is chunk pages of data being dumped and read off of it constantly because you don't have enough ram. SSD's have a lifetime and it's specifically tied to how much data you are dumping to them and reading off of them.

 

[john123]

Aside from actual investors, please don't make it seem like putting $200 in a piggy bank or stock market for that matter is going to make a world of a difference in your life. Low-No risk investments yield less than a percent now-a-days and inflation is roaring far above that.

I trade stocks for a living. If you know anything about investments—and your 40 shares of AAPL doesn't suggest to me that you do—then you know that long-term equity investors generate a significant return. I generate 15-20% annually with below-market volatility. I don't expect that most investors can achieve what I do, since they lack the professional knowledge and experience I have, but even a 5% rate adds up over the long haul due to compounding.

Depreciation? $200 ?!?!?! .. I'm already buying a luxury laptop .. and even then, I'm buying their top of the line model. Getting into discussions about depreciation and opportunity cost w/ $200 is an asinine conversation at this price level.

Actually, it isn't. If you create a model of flipping, including factoring in basic rates of return per the above, you come up with a very compelling path to purchase base models each and every time, flip them regularly, and always be enjoying the latest technology. But nice job making all kinds of assumptions.

Now lets see if you can figure out the limiting factor here.... SURPRISE : RAM

Yawn. Putting aside your pretentious diatribe, go to my very first post about the follies of extrapolating one user's needs onto an entire population.

----------

If you understood anything about SSD's, you'd understand the last thing you want to be happening is chunk pages of data being dumped and read off of it constantly because you don't have enough ram. SSD's have a lifetime and it's specifically tied to how much data you are dumping to them and reading off of them.

Actually, if you knew anything about SSDs, you'd know that the concerns about them being worn out are way overblown. There have been mathematical simulations on this fact. Also, if you actually read my posts, you'd realize that implementing my strategy would made it someone else's problem anyway—if it were a problem, which it isn't.

Why am I not surprised that it's the same guy lacking knowledge of investments that's blowing the "MY SSD WILL DIE OMG" horn? Some people...

 

[Hitch08]

Among other investments, I own 40 shares of AAPL's stock. So, that extra $200 was made probably in an hour and is going to come right back to me as a shareholder. Aside from actual investors, please don't make it seem like putting $200 in a piggy bank or stock market for that matter is going to make a world of a difference in your life. Low-No risk investments yield less than a percent now-a-days and inflation is roaring far above that. Depreciation? $200 ?!?!?! .. I'm already buying a luxury laptop .. and even then, I'm buying their top of the line model. Getting into discussions about depreciation and opportunity cost w/ $200 is an asinine conversation at this price level.

Please, let him go. John123 is on a roll and I really need a good laugh tonight. First, he saves the $200 for a return, then he's buying every couple of years, then he's flipping. Turns out $200 can't count as much of anything as he is "getting" new rMBP's for his father and sister within the next few months. I need to invest wherever he is.

Wait! Forget that. I just need what he's taking for next Saturday night.

 

[emptysands]

and yet computers are getting cheaper (chromebooks, cheap laptops) as people start using more and more tablets with less and less ram. Believe me, we've reached a point in computing where people are focused on efficiency AND performance instead of just performance.

95% probably can just use a tablet for home use, excluding high end gaming. I certainly do. Top end MBP really should be only for work - I include education in that.

Tablets use case is very different from a laptop. Also tabs don't tend to stick around. They have aggressive memory management, and people are often ok with a little latency.

 

[adnbek]

Why are you referring to yourself in the third person? So odd.

It isn't sound advice because it assumes that RAM is the big determinant. Virtual memory used to suck quite a bit more when HDDs were involved. Now, with SSDs being the default, and virtual memory working better all around, it's not as big a pain.

And, like I said above, you're assuming an awful lot about users and their needs. I can guarantee you my dad and my sister, for whom I'm getting new rMBPs in the next month, will be just fine with 8GB for the next few years and beyond.

Probably forgot to change accounts before posting that he agrees with his original opinion.

 

[raybies]

I see a lot of threads/posts where people are getting 8 GB, or are unsure if they should get 16 GB.

Trust me, those are the same people who will be starting threads in 3 years wondering what they can do to speed up their computer and the answer will be nothing since the RAM is soldered to the logic board.

I'm surprised to see people say "For your uses 8 GB is enough". History has shown that that never proves to be true as the computer ages, proof being in all the threads where someone asks how to speed up their computer as it's become slow and everyone says upgrade the RAM. Trust me, get the 16 GB now and be done with it, then by the time software gets hungry enough to eat your 16 GB of RAM the computer will probably be 5+ years old and due for a replacement anyway. The last thing you want to do is have a 2-3 year old beachball paperweight because of RAM you can't upgrade because you didn't want to part with $200, which isn't much spread out over the life of the computer. Not to mention you could get 8 GB 4 years ago, so it's time to bump that.

Really for the basic user 4 GB should theoretically be enough, but I don't see many people suggesting a 4 GB purchase. Same should apply to 8 GB, it should be enough but reality over time shows it won't be and there will be page outs doing basic tasks. I know my mid-2010 with 4 GB gave me page outs doing fairly basic tasks on a clean install of Mountain Lion, I wouldn't expect today's MBP to be any different X years down the line with 8 GB.

You can never, ever have too much RAM, so you should *always* max it out.

My 6 year old PC with 4GB has more than enough memory... the bottle necks is the CPU and GPU (can't play 1080p youtube).

Why don't you show us your memory usage stats, bcos to me it reads like you're tell people to buy a bus, bcos they may have a dozen kids in the future.

Show me one App which "Requires" more than 2GB system memory for a notebook.

 

[puma1552]

I trade stocks for a living. If you know anything about investments—and your 40 shares of AAPL doesn't suggest to me that you do—then you know that long-term equity investors generate a significant return. I generate 15-20% annually with below-market volatility. I don't expect that most investors can achieve what I do, since they lack the professional knowledge and experience I have, but even a 5% rate adds up over the long haul due to compounding.

This is complete and utter ********. You don't generate a 15-20% annual return on investments - especially in this economy - unless you are a white collar criminal. Any experienced investment professional from a legitimate brokerage will tell you 8-10% annual is about the best you can expect long term. If you walked into any boardroom with serious wall street tycoons and said that, they'd laugh you right out the door, how dumb do you think people are to believe that?

Sorry but you just lost all credibility with not just the statement itself, but your arrogance about it that nobody can do the impossible like you can.

 

[emptysands]

When everything is moving to html5 and co pronsites still use a lot of flash
But what the hell are you doing to get 3gb?! ^^

I often have a lot of tabs open. Plus Google Music, Gmail. Plus I have multiple profiles - one for work google apps, one for personal. Multiple google doc files, with work in progress.

Maybe I was watching a youtube video or two, and either it's not finished or I want to rewatch it later. This maybe for either personal or work reasons.

That is one thing that does seem more stable in win8 over win7 - chrome.

 

[unimac]

i think that's why the crux of your argument is flawed. it's not just several years, you have no way in knowing or saying or proving how many years it woudl take for 8gb to be the new 4gb and 16gb to be the new 8gb.

don't get me wrong, i totally respect people for spending their own money

like i said, it's insane to think that people who purchased a top of the line macbook air will be left with a worthless piece of brick in a couple years. 8gb is here to stay for a while. and if anything, you should try to convince me why RAM usage will skyrocket if tablets are the new norm? Tablets are viewing the same website as computers right? If I would know any better, my ipad example was just to prove that people are focused on efficiency now instead of big jumps in performance.

of course, you can always get 16gb of ram and just get ramdisk

If you owned and upgraded a computer system in the last 10 years, you'd vividly recall how 1GB was (insane) .. then 2GB .. then 4 GB .. then 8GB .. Funny how 8GB is a standard (now) and has been for some time .. guess what's up next? 16GB.

Further, if you've followed tech in any way over the years, the improvements in hardware have all generally centered on storage and memory.... CPU tech is stagnant and if anything, having a core i7 processor (even the base model) is ridiculous for 90% of the users .....

So, the CPU is already insane...
then you are getting PCI-E (SSD) Fastest storage..
But then you opt for 8GB ram... That's the weakest link and by getting 16GB I ensured, in the coming years, that it wont be.

Tablets are the norm because instead of creating content, the majority of people just use thing clients to read content. Contrary to popular belief, Macbook pros have always held to be a professional's productivity machine. As I shareholder, I think its great that randos are buying quad core i7 processor based systems to browse the web... But, i'm sorry, a MBP will always be held as a productivity machine in my mind. So, it's hard for me to relate to someone who feels a tablet suits them just fine. I have never and probably will never own a tablet due to its clear limitations. Owning a 15" MBP that weighs nothing is how I compute mobile. If i need to access data and don't have it, I have an iphone. When I'm out and about, the last thing I want to be is connected.

Tech has become a fashion/accessory/bling to a lot of people who don't work in the industry.... Great for me as a shareholder, but no I can't relate to the mindset of someone who drops a couple of grand on a quad-core i7 laptop to browse the web. You've already over-stepped the bounds of what's necessary for you at even the base-level 15" MBP. Thus, debating w/ you about the future road map of tech and the necessity of 16GB seems like a stupid proposition.

 

[Breedlove]

I'm not, because it's an asinine, blanket claim without regard to how different people use their computers. For some users, 16GB absolutely makes sense. For others, depending on their usage and their upgrade horizons, 8GB makes sense.

Telling people what they "need" to do, and basing that statement on a whole bunch of assumptions, is the height of arrogance.

Welcome to the internet, a place where people voice their opinions strongly and others with equally strong opinions rebuke them with the same if not greater conviction.

 

[mslide]

you should *always* max it out.

Totally disagree with that. Someone who only uses their computer for web browsing, iTunes, word processing, etc, won't need 16GB... even in 5 years. Telling someone to always max out ram without knowing their needs is just telling them to throw their money away.

 

[john123]

This is complete and utter ********. You don't generate a 15-20% annual return on investments - especially in this economy - unless you are a white collar criminal. Any experienced investment professional from a legitimate brokerage will tell you 8-10% annual is about the best you can expect long term. If you walked into any boardroom with serious wall street tycoons and said that, they'd laugh you right out the door, how dumb do you think people are to believe that?

You mean you don't. I can name off several people who do. Are you even aware of how hedge funds work? Or when you hear the term, do you just think "Bernie Madoff" because you don't know anything else? Maybe you should look up a legitimate name, such as Lee Ainslie. Or realize that it's easier for a smart individual investor to generate high rates of return because liquidity is easier for them than it is for the big boys. Or, most important, you should realize that talking about rates of return—like you did—is utterly meaningless without talking about risk. You might also look up something called "leverage."

Edit: Actually, I'll save you the work. If you invest in whatever instruments you were using to get "8-10 percent," but lever up at 2x, then you'll be getting double the rates of return. Unfortunately, you'll have vastly increased your risk. Risk-adjusted return is a concept few investors understand, sadly, but has been around for decades. In finance, the most rudimentary metric is something called a Sharpe ratio. You might look that one up too.

You don't know anything about investing, clearly. You probably shouldn't have latched onto this issue as one to talk about. I'd also suggest that maybe you shouldn't be taking your investment advice from some guy at a brokerage house, but hey, you do what you wanna do. You clearly have much to learn.

nobody can do the impossible like you can.

You sure do love your silly blanket statements, don't you? What a riot.

 

[T-Bob]

Guise get 64GB! damn these ghetto macs. Waiting for coke can pro to hit.

 

[john123]

Welcome to the internet, a place where people voice their opinions strongly and others with equally strong opinions rebuke them with the same if not greater conviction.

Haha, so true, but my rebuke avoids the blanket assumptions. Does that make me King of the Internet?

 

[Count Blah]

Let's be honest, even if you're not a typical computer user, has your computing habits changed that much over the past several years? Think about it, do you spend that $200 now, or put that as money down to buy another computer in 3 years where the graphics/processor/batterylife will make a significant jump and probably a redesign will be here by then?

i'd rather put $200 now for the future.

What I would prefer is to put off any upgrade as long as possible so I could maximize what that $200 would buy. It's what I've always done, and I have gotten way more for my money, than what apple was giving me at the time of original purchase.

 

[unimac]

This is complete and utter ********. You don't generate a 15-20% annual return on investments - especially in this economy - unless you are a white collar criminal. Any experienced investment professional from a legitimate brokerage will tell you 8-10% annual is about the best you can expect long term. If you walked into any boardroom with serious wall street tycoons and said that, they'd laugh you right out the door, how dumb do you think people are to believe that?

Sorry but you just lost all credibility with not just the statement itself, but your arrogance about it that nobody can do the impossible like you can.

Couldn't have said it better myself... Also suspect is that this guy trades stocks for a living and makes uber money yet is debating adding $200 to the cost of a $2000 machine to ensure the weakest link is no longer the weakest link....

Further, he talks about SSD's as if it hasn't been scientifically shown that they have a finite data throughput life.
"Intel's documentation for the Intel 320 says it is rated for 20GB per day for the full 5 year warranty. That's about 36TB."

Now go play w/ your virtual memory and swap settings .. use your laptop for a day and tell me how much is being written/read from it. I can hit that in less 1/2 a day w/ my current SSD mainly because I have 8GB and my SSD keeps getting paged. Guess what happens when i hit 16GB? Oh ***** my SSD wont get slammed so much.