Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
And, do you really need to install all those sound libraries from Logic, when in the end, you will be using your 3rd party plugins and samples that can be stored somewhere on an external drive? I haven’t used one single stock sound from Logic at all if I am honest.
Yeah, but, Why should you? It's more convenient to have them all in one place, with fast, low-latency access - and if you don't use the Logic libraries you're probably going to have a bunch of third-party samples which will also benefit from being on the fast SSD. Even more so on laptops where you don't want to be continually plugging and unplugging external drives.

If you're doing video then, yes, you're probably going to have externals for your video projects, but you'll still have multiple large applications installed which may be creating large temporary files on the system drive.

It's 2024 and a fast 1TB PCIe4 SSD stick costs half of what Apple are asking for an extra 256GB. The way Apple controls their SSDs might be different but there's nothing magical about the flash chips they're using to justify a 4x markup over retail. Not being able to fit everything you use regularly on the internal drive is not a problem that should need working around.
 
Also $200 to upgrade to the full chip. 8 CPU/8GPU cores base, $200 for 10/10.
The price of a year of Geforce Now Ultimate or two years of Priority for 2 more GPU cores and two mostly useless efficiency cores? And actually storing games on the Mac makes costly storage upgrade necessary, meaning additional years of a vastly superior experience.
 
Yeah - you have to start with the "better" or "best" model to get the 32GB option - but, honestly, that pretty much makes sense. 256GB SSD is pretty pitful and probably too tight if you're using any "pro" apps so you'd need an odd workload to actually need 32GB RAM and 256GB storage (the storage is still far too mean, though).
What about Apple lets the "pros" decide what they need?
 
Looking forward to hearing the reflexive complainers say that they have new reasons, aside from the base RAM, to never ever buy what Apple is selling and to complain about Cook, innovation, etc.

... and yet I would rather read topical complaints than people complaining about people complaining. Much as I'm sure nobody wants to hear me complaining about people complaining about people complaining.

More on topic, I wonder if the new 'display engine' will allow these iMacs to be put into target display mode. 🤔
 
  • Like
Reactions: iMac The Knife
Don’t people use servers and external hard drives with video editing rather than just local SSD only?

And, do you really need to install all those sound libraries from Logic, when in the end, you will be using your 3rd party plugins and samples that can be stored somewhere on an external drive? I haven’t used one single stock sound from Logic at all if I am honest.
I certainly do. Why on god's green earth would you install your samples on your internal drive?

Personally, when I used Logic (I switched to Cubase, but that's a whole different discussion), I had the Logic sounds installed externally. I hardly ever used them, but on the occasion I did, such as for a synth patch, riser, etc., they were very useful!
 
That's still just about Macs being expensive.
No. It's also about why, and what the value proposition trade-offs are.

A for price x with good value for money and B for price x without good value for money is a scenario where neither A nor B is more expensive, but one is more worthwhile.
Macs are more expensive than buying a Windows PC. It's a complaint as old as the first shipping Mac.
When something is more expensive than a similar product, it invites scrutiny and challenge. That's a good thing. As some Windows PCs move into Qualcom Snapdragon-based systems with more similar hardware issues compared to Apple Silicon Macs, we get better comparisons.
It kind of gets old after the 10th, or 100th time (by now millions of times) , and just sounds like pointless whining.
If it is so pervasive and repetitive that it gets that old, then a great many people have considered the issue and share similar laments. No, that does not sound like 'pointless whining' (a condescending insult), it sounds like a large consensus from a sizable portion of the user base.

Some companies even listen to customer feedback like that. Some even send out surveys with questionnaires seeking that sort of feedback because they consider it valuable. Not saying Apple does.
I see little evidence that endless forum complaints help pricing, after decades and millions of complaints.
Who knows what they'd offer and what they'd charge for it if nobody ever pushed back?

And none of us will ever have the 'fly on the wall' perspective that would come from being in some of their strategic meetings. That said, they do sometimes react to customer criticism.

I grant that Apple seems to have the attitude that the tail does not wag the dog, customers are the tail and Apple is the dog. That said, they did express some chagrin long after-the-fact over the 'trash can' version of the Mac Pro, and argued defending selling Macs with only 8-gig RAM.

Apple cares when criticism gets sufficiently negative, vehement and widespread that it may damage their reputation. When enough people online raise enough of a stink about something, back it with credible rationales, and some of their more egregious practices become a running joke, even the mighty Apple on rare occasion may decide to...change!

Hockey puck mouse. Butterfly keyboards on laptops. Trash can Mac Pro. And now...8-gig RAM base.
 
Last edited:
Cue the perpetual defenders now ripping Apple for "forcing too much RAM" into a computer when- as they have written countless times including throughout 2024: "8GB is plenty for 99% of users."

But I expect crickets... as all that passion rolls with whatever Apple rolls out. Such conviction in support of a point that evaporates as soon as Apple makes a change! Are people writing their own GENUINE opinions or just towing the company line? (rhetorical- we know that one).

The only reasons 16Gb is needed is because of a LLM being part of Apple Intelligence. If you don't want to use a local LLM, 8 Gb of RAM will be good for a lot of users. LLMs are like Adobe software or Chrome, memory hungry.

I have never said it was good for 99% of users, my estimation has been about 30-50% of users depending on if they used Chrome or not.

I have no problem with Apple providing more memory when they deem it approbiate without increasing the price. They're the expert, they know best how their customers use their computers and their needs.

In my own country, the base iMac is now more expensive than the outgoing model.
 
Last edited:
It’s not a new complaint though…256 GB has been a problem since the moment Apple chose to charge the market value of 2 TB to add another 256 GB.

Apple could make this complaint go away with user replaceable storage though. Their base configurations are only problematic because Apple over charges on upgrades and blocked third party options from being available. RAM is understandably tied to the CPU, but the SSD isn’t.

I wish people on this forum wouldn’t reflexively defend Apple’s profiteering that comes at comes at their expense (literally).

Apple is a company that wants to make money. If you don't like that, you'll be an unhappy customers for years. If I cared about paying as little as possible, I would never have become an Apple customer.

I have never used as much money as after switching to Apple about 15 years ago. But I am also a very happy Apple user which you don't seem to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
In a number of threads people criticizing Apple's appalling low 8-gig RAM base have been labeled 'whiners' and told 'just upgrade it' (at appalling upcharges). But there's a problem that gets missed.

Not only was the price difference between 8 and 16-gig RAM bad to begin with, when a number of vendors offered Macs on sale, they often only offered the base 8-gig RAM versions. I've seen this in sales announced via Mac Rumors, e-mails or deal sites. Trumpeting how great $150 (or whatever) off is to grab my attention, only to find the product on offer is hamstrung by limited RAM. And yes, I know, people who only do basic, low-demand stuff and/or don't mind excess swap usage adding wear on their SSD could get by with that.

We didn't miss it. It stilled boiled down to this: Getting the Mac you wanted was too expensive for the value you got.
 
Good, they finally did it. This should have happened at least 5 years ago, to be honest, but glad they've finally acknowledged that 8 GB of RAM is unusable. I still find it utterly ludicrous that they still charge you $400 to upgrade to 32 GB, where getting 32 GB in a PC would cost less than half, if not a quarter, of that. Also, the 256 GB base storage and lack of 10 gigabit ethernet is still frustrating to me.

Apple did it because of Apple Intelligence. Without it, they would probably have shipped with 8Gb of memory.

Apple only upgrades the base model when it becomes unusable for a majority of their basic users.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rm5
Yeah, but, Why should you? It's more convenient to have them all in one place, with fast, low-latency access - and if you don't use the Logic libraries you're probably going to have a bunch of third-party samples which will also benefit from being on the fast SSD. Even more so on laptops where you don't want to be continually plugging and unplugging external drives.

If you're doing video then, yes, you're probably going to have externals for your video projects, but you'll still have multiple large applications installed which may be creating large temporary files on the system drive.

It's 2024 and a fast 1TB PCIe4 SSD stick costs half of what Apple are asking for an extra 256GB. The way Apple controls their SSDs might be different but there's nothing magical about the flash chips they're using to justify a 4x markup over retail. Not being able to fit everything you use regularly on the internal drive is not a problem that should need working around.

You don't need to work around it. Just pay! It's the simplest solution there is as long as you have money. It doesn't require any work.
 
No. It's also about why, and what the value proposition trade-offs are.

A for price x with good value for money and B for price x without good value for money is a scenario where neither A nor B is more expensive, but one is more worthwhile.

When something is more expensive than a similar product, it invites scrutiny and challenge. That's a good thing.

No, it isn't. It doesn't solve your problem there and then. Don't complain, just buy the product which provides the best value.

If hotel A offers better value than hotel B for the same price, I don't go on the Internet to complain about hotel B. I just book a room at hotel A.
 
It's crazy to see how much faster the base M4 (2024) is compared to the M1 Pro (2021).

Screenshot 2024-10-28 at 21.57.01.png
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.