And there we have it, the reason I'm hoping I can build a Hackintosh and never touch Apple's desktop hardware again.
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.
New 27-Inch iMac Supports Up to 64GB of RAM, OWC Offering Upgrade Kits
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm from the future. 64GB of RAM? What a joke. We have 1TB RAM minimum on the cheapest machine.
I remember buying a PC with Windows XP. I upgraded it to 128MB RAM, and that was overkill.
I remember buying a PC with Windows XP. I upgraded it to 128MB RAM, and that was overkill.
Depends on your definition of the OS. Libraries are read off disk, it seems. Probably other things too since the entire OS installation may take up more disk space than one would have in RAM. As someone else mentioned, the system will do a lot more RAM caching with more RAM, so that's nice.
It's never been easier, I literally plugged in my hard drive from my dead macbook into my pc (built with known compatible parts) and it booted up with clover right away!
i remember when i had a 20MB HDD sitting next to my commodore amiga, when i was a young lad. you could install all 11 discs of monkey island 2 on it and still have room to spare (probably for syndicate). now, get off my lawn !
I think you'd find NASA use VASTLY more than a paltry 128GB.
---> http://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson...tional_electromagnetics_laboratory/index.html
4GB per core. Belch. EC2 has high mem nodes better than that. How about this for RAM: http://psc.edu/index.php/bridges
You can't upgrade the 21" model, only the 27". If you buy the 8GB it comes with two 4GB chips. You can add 2x16GB and have 40GB. Or add 2x8GB and have 24GB. If you want to add more you need to throw out the 4GB chips. For example 4x16GB, throw out the old 8GB, and you have 64GB.
Huh? Nobody in their right mind writes 32 bit software for MacOS X anymore. And even 32 bit software has a limit of 4GB _per application_, so now you can run sixteen 32-bit applications that each use 4GB.
You see it as "making decisions". I see it as "let the computer to the boring, stupid work for me".
Last edited:
This "update" kills the iMac, because it loses its position as mid-range desktop performance. Now you can either choose between a low-end with features comparable to the Mac Mini (no discrete GPU, and unserviceable) and a higher-end whose price rivals the Mac Pro when you try to configure it properly (you get to $3000 or higher and even then you're getting only a 4GB GPU, which isn't the size of high-end GPUs anymore).
So, at least for me it kills the iMac, because this "update" makes me look at two other Macs which now become much more interesting: The Retina Macbook if you want low-end features (because you're getting them in a silent fanless machine, and with a much more beautiful design than the iMac), and the Mac Pro (price rivaling with the "high-end" iMac but offering what you expect to get when you pay that price).
However, both the Retina Macbook and the Mac Pro are in desperate need of an update in this moment. But they're a much better choice than these "new" iMacs, just we need to wait for them to be updated.
So, at least for me it kills the iMac, because this "update" makes me look at two other Macs which now become much more interesting: The Retina Macbook if you want low-end features (because you're getting them in a silent fanless machine, and with a much more beautiful design than the iMac), and the Mac Pro (price rivaling with the "high-end" iMac but offering what you expect to get when you pay that price).
However, both the Retina Macbook and the Mac Pro are in desperate need of an update in this moment. But they're a much better choice than these "new" iMacs, just we need to wait for them to be updated.
Agreed.. Also, there should really be an option to use JUST the screen and leave the computer turned off. I use my old 2009 iMac for Target Display Mode sometimes, but it requires me to boot it up first, and when using TDM it gets very hot, so much that the fans turn on. Seems pretty wasteful for just using the screen.
64GB RAM is useless to most people. If you needed that much RAM I don't think you'd even be using a Mac for whatever it is you're doing.
Of course, it's an option so now people with more money than sense will buy it. I have 16GB in my PC and even that's a bit overkill for gaming. Most people don't need any more than 8GB these days.
I honestly think Apple should put in a proper SSD and better GPU instead of all this RAM.
Of course, it's an option so now people with more money than sense will buy it. I have 16GB in my PC and even that's a bit overkill for gaming. Most people don't need any more than 8GB these days.
I honestly think Apple should put in a proper SSD and better GPU instead of all this RAM.
You forget how much it would cost to add a comparable 5K display to the Mac Pro. The display is what makes the 5K iMac a good deal over the Mac Pro.
External Ram possible?
Please forgive me if I ignore some technical facts, but in former times you could have a RAM expansion in form of cards plugged into the expansion slots of the machine (I know for sure this was possible with the Commodore Amiga, which even supported multiple cards in one machine - don't know about other platforms). The cards would usually offer standard sockets of that time to take user-defined cominbations of memory modules (like e.g. SIMM's). Example: DKB 3128.
With Thunderbolt being actually nothing more than some kind of "external PCIe slot", wouldn't it be possible to create something similar for modern Macs with soldered Ram? Even with a hit in access speed, such Thunderbolt-connected memory could still be better than no extended memory at all.
I don't know if the Mac would support PCIe-connected Ram in the first place, but perhaps someone with more insight than myself could comment on this?
Please forgive me if I ignore some technical facts, but in former times you could have a RAM expansion in form of cards plugged into the expansion slots of the machine (I know for sure this was possible with the Commodore Amiga, which even supported multiple cards in one machine - don't know about other platforms). The cards would usually offer standard sockets of that time to take user-defined cominbations of memory modules (like e.g. SIMM's). Example: DKB 3128.
With Thunderbolt being actually nothing more than some kind of "external PCIe slot", wouldn't it be possible to create something similar for modern Macs with soldered Ram? Even with a hit in access speed, such Thunderbolt-connected memory could still be better than no extended memory at all.
I don't know if the Mac would support PCIe-connected Ram in the first place, but perhaps someone with more insight than myself could comment on this?
Suddenly a Mac Pro doesn't sound like a bad machine for a high-end gaming rig...oh wait. They used a non-standard connector so you can't put a gaming GPU in there and the Pro cards aren't for gaming. So of course we have the high-end gaming iMac...oh wait. It can barely handle its own GUI at those 5k resolutions and costs as much as a Mac Pro....
Apple once worried about the Mac Mini cannibalizing the iMac and Mac Pro and so it dumbed down the 2014 models? It seems to me that Apple is now trying to cannibalize the Mac Mini instead....
It's a damn shame that Apple no longer makes premium computers. They make pretty computers that cost a fortune but a properly configured $1200 PC would run circles around every single model Apple makes save perhaps some 12-core type configuration of the Mac Pro and then only if graphics didn't matter....
What's the chance of the Mac Pro getting Thunderbolt 3 next year? Or any kind of spec bump at all? Based on past history, I'd give it less than 20% odds. Maybe in 7 more years....
I bought a Mac because I hated Windows. It's been a struggle, though because Mac hardware is so damn limited in choices, but once in awhile they would release something decent and the notebooks were often quite good (as long as you didn't expect a gaming machine). But make no mistake, it is the Operating System that makes Macs special. That is why I've put up with a lot of crap from Apple in the past, but let's face it, that only gets you so far, especially when Windows 10 isn't anywhere near as awful as something like Vista was and it even has many OS features now that Macs and Linux had cornered (e.g. Spaces/Mission Control functionality) and have now gone ahead with Cortana while Siri is nowhere to be found in El Capitan. Microsoft has pulled ahead of Apple in many areas and stability and lack of malware is about all that's left. Other features have gotten worse over the years (i.e. Perian + Quick look used to equal AWESOME but when Apple changed Quicktime to AVFoundation in "Quicktime X" it's like its now OS X's cheap cousin or something. "You should convert all those 'old' formats". Yeah, why should I have to? You lose quality when you convert lossy formats into other lossy formats.
Apple is losing site of the forest for a few damn trees (called quick profits rather than quick look) on almost every front. Tim Cook is a business man interested in profits (buy-backs, dividends and features like a stylus that Steve Jobs hated and would never support.) It's sad, but unless things change, I'm afraid Apple is headed in the wrong direction at best and has its days numbered as a desktop OS (I'm sure phones will continue unabated for quite some time). The sad thing is I don't think Tim Cook really cares one way or another. I believe people under him could fix the situation, but that would mean getting past Jony Ive's massive EGO and getting back to the rationality of someone like Scott Forestall who got iScrewed by Apple over something beyond his control (i.e. you can't make Maps perfect overnight).
Apple once worried about the Mac Mini cannibalizing the iMac and Mac Pro and so it dumbed down the 2014 models? It seems to me that Apple is now trying to cannibalize the Mac Mini instead....
It's a damn shame that Apple no longer makes premium computers. They make pretty computers that cost a fortune but a properly configured $1200 PC would run circles around every single model Apple makes save perhaps some 12-core type configuration of the Mac Pro and then only if graphics didn't matter....
What's the chance of the Mac Pro getting Thunderbolt 3 next year? Or any kind of spec bump at all? Based on past history, I'd give it less than 20% odds. Maybe in 7 more years....
I bought a Mac because I hated Windows. It's been a struggle, though because Mac hardware is so damn limited in choices, but once in awhile they would release something decent and the notebooks were often quite good (as long as you didn't expect a gaming machine). But make no mistake, it is the Operating System that makes Macs special. That is why I've put up with a lot of crap from Apple in the past, but let's face it, that only gets you so far, especially when Windows 10 isn't anywhere near as awful as something like Vista was and it even has many OS features now that Macs and Linux had cornered (e.g. Spaces/Mission Control functionality) and have now gone ahead with Cortana while Siri is nowhere to be found in El Capitan. Microsoft has pulled ahead of Apple in many areas and stability and lack of malware is about all that's left. Other features have gotten worse over the years (i.e. Perian + Quick look used to equal AWESOME but when Apple changed Quicktime to AVFoundation in "Quicktime X" it's like its now OS X's cheap cousin or something. "You should convert all those 'old' formats". Yeah, why should I have to? You lose quality when you convert lossy formats into other lossy formats.
Apple is losing site of the forest for a few damn trees (called quick profits rather than quick look) on almost every front. Tim Cook is a business man interested in profits (buy-backs, dividends and features like a stylus that Steve Jobs hated and would never support.) It's sad, but unless things change, I'm afraid Apple is headed in the wrong direction at best and has its days numbered as a desktop OS (I'm sure phones will continue unabated for quite some time). The sad thing is I don't think Tim Cook really cares one way or another. I believe people under him could fix the situation, but that would mean getting past Jony Ive's massive EGO and getting back to the rationality of someone like Scott Forestall who got iScrewed by Apple over something beyond his control (i.e. you can't make Maps perfect overnight).
i remember when i had a 20MB HDD sitting next to my commodore amiga, when i was a young lad. you could install all 11 discs of monkey island 2 on it and still have room to spare (probably for syndicate). now, get off my lawn !
Now they were the days, I loved my Amiga 500. Had it set up in my bedroom and spent days playing Monkey Island along with Formula One Grand Prix.
Just look at those graphics...beautiful! 16 FPS - lightning fast!
Last edited:
Whilst I do agree things like soldered RAM are a pain in the ass, I do love how people cry and bitch like someone is holding a gun to their head and they HAVE to buy a mac. It is what it is people. No likey, buy something else, choice is good.
Now they were the days, I loved my Amiga 500. Had it set up in my bedroom and spent days playing Monkey Island along with Formula One Grand Prix.
Just look at those graphics...beautiful!
Love the miggy, I have 3 and FS-UAE too. Plus 2 raspberry Pi's that can run the emulator.
What is it with Apple nowadays soldering the memory on the motherboard. Come on now! It's rediculous! What do you guys think?