I guess you never upgrade OS X. Every new version feels slower on my iMac.
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.
Official iPhone 6 Plus Reviews Report 1 GB RAM
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How else are they going to sell the 6S?
I'm guessing that by "else" you mean in addition to the usual laundry list of improvements that Apple adds to its "S" models:
- Faster processor.
- Camera improvements (13 MP? OIS on both models?)
- Sensor improvements.
- Perhaps an all-new feature or two.
The else may quite possibly be:
- More RAM
Apple has never released an "S" model with improvements in just one area. There is no reason to expect them to start now.
Also, I don't recall them ever emphasizing the amount of RAM, even when they've doubled it in the past. That's more of an under the hood enhancement than a marketing point. If it happens, it may be obliquely hinted at in their keynote, but the tech blog junkies will have to read every leak and review post hoping for a mention of the "bigger GBs", while the everyday iPhone user won't really be aware.
You do realise that DDR3 pricing doesn't affect the iPhone right?
Apple does not use an off the shelf DRAM chip. It's a design integrated in to the A8 that they license from a DRAM designer. It's basically renting a schematic and so the production cost is included in what Apple pay to Samsung and TSMC to fabricate their A8 processor. It would likely cost them a few cents extra in fabrication per chip, that's it.
And even if they were affected by pricing 2GB of LPDDR3, which again they are not, it only costs about about $8 when purchased in quantities of 1,000.
The real reason Apple has decided not to include 2GB is either chip size constraints, higher latency from having 2GB on the same memory bus, power consumption from needing to store data in twice the physical silicon (RAM must remain powered at all times to keep data) or they just felt the phone really didn't need it. They have afterall added Compressed memory and other similar technologies to the operating system to reduce memory use.
----------
I think it is quite likely that the iPhone 6S will receive everything you listed. Faster CPU, Double RAM, OIS on both models, sensor improvements. I think they may bump the camera megapixels to 10 though, 13 seems a stretch for Apple considering the last 4 or 5 phones they made were all 8 Mega Pixel.
- More RAM means the device will require more power, so battery life would be affected (this is true especially for chips like RAM which are constantly powered)
- iOS is still designed to be not that demanding in terms of RAM (apps are frozen and RAM is freed every once in a while)
- cost of the chip to be added
- additional space needed on the logic board
There must be downside tradeoffs. People accusing them of trying to save a few bucks clearly pay little attention to the borderline psychotic attention to detail that Apple gives to so many components that go in these phones. If a couple dollar part would have provided a superior user experience, I can't imagine them not using it.
----------
Pure and utter hogwash. Either very uninformed about how Apple designs their products, or here for a different reason.
Cost/benefit analysis.
I suspect they've made prototypes with more RAM and put them through various tests. Also prototypes with thicker batteries. And prototypes with edge to edge screens. And prototypes that try to fit everything from the 6+ back into an iPhone 5S size shell. And prototypes with wireless charging. And waterproof down to ten meters. And anything else that you (or someone else) might think is something that you would do if you only had the billions of dollars to spend that they do.
So the question not why are they so reluctant to do this one little thing. It's why are they so reluctant to do EVERYTHING all at once?
Probably because developers are lazy. Once they have access to beefier specs, they stop optimizing for lesser specs and that would be catastrophic for the huge user base still using iPhone 4 (me), 4s, 5, 5s... you get the picture.
Clearly RAM is not the end-all-be-all of better performance. Apple has achieved tremendous performance gains while retaining 1GB of RAM. I call that responsible device design.
It's Apple, they will squeeze every cent that they can get their hands on.
I'm more inclined now towards the S line up, which will cover iOS 9,10,11 more efficiently than dropping dead at 10 or below.
I got the 128 gig 6 (not the plus) for music.
I'll wait for a proper 2 gig RAM for a 1080p screen , I'm not playing that game
I'll wait for a proper 2 gig RAM for a 1080p screen , I'm not playing that game
It's why it took so long to get a 128GB model (and they're still keeping the 16GB model, which is bullocks)
I really don't wanna believe the company that I am such a huge fan of would do something seemingly so "cheap" without it first being exhaustively researched. I don't know though, people on here are screaming that Apple is just penny pinching, and that it will hurt performance. I am torn...
I think this Steve Jobs quote sums up their philosophy pretty well: "People think focus means saying yes to the thing you've got to focus on. But that's not what it means at all. It means saying no to the hundred other good ideas that there are. You have to pick carefully. I'm actually as proud of the things we haven't done as the things I have done. Innovation is saying no to 1,000 things." (Apple Worldwide Developers' Conference, 1997)
Unfortunately, I think it was a mistake saying "no" to the ram upgrade. But Apple has always thrived on incremental upgrades. They have this knack of putting just enough new features in new products to keep people coming back, but almost never anything more. The only iPhone update I can think of that wasn't very incremental was the iPhone 4.
I agree that is was a mistake saying "no" to more RAM. They have held at 1GB for long enough. At this point it seems rather insulting to their users SCREAMING for more RAM.
I don't care about the specs. I just want Safari to stop reloading every 5 minutes. And no, I don't have 8+ tabs opened. Barely 2 or 3.
Someone asked in the iPhone forums why people are so loyal to Apple. If both phones turn out to carry 1GB of RAM it demonstrates one of the qualities I personally admire about Apple as an entity – discipline. I'm sure internally there's plenty of back and forth but outwardly they put a lot of effort into projecting a cohesive plan going forward. I can't say that about many tech companies, admittedly in part because I don't follow other companies as closely.
When the rumored split-screen feature was not announced, it was a strong signal to me that 2GB was not coming in these iPhones. All that remains is for iFixit and their kind to open these phones up and confirm it. As long as Apple keeps their devices at 1GB, developers such as us are forced to design to that hard limitation. When / if Apple decides to allow two apps to run side-by-side, it means one or both of them might be apps that are currently bumping into that 1GB barrier. That's when 2GB of RAM will make sense.
And yes, that does mean previous generation iPhones will not be able to make full use of this rumored split screen feature. We've seen the same thing happen with other features packed into new iOS releases. That's a disciplined plan to taking care of the financial side of their business, which Apple must also do. The path of least resistance would be to just include every new and exciting piece of tech imaginable and see if it works, then try to come up with something glitzy if nothing new has surfaced in time for the next go-around.
Of course, this is the side of the business the likes of us – people who frequent MacRumors and other tech websites – witness. That's probably not the first thing less "enthusiastic" Apple customers see.
When the rumored split-screen feature was not announced, it was a strong signal to me that 2GB was not coming in these iPhones. All that remains is for iFixit and their kind to open these phones up and confirm it. As long as Apple keeps their devices at 1GB, developers such as us are forced to design to that hard limitation. When / if Apple decides to allow two apps to run side-by-side, it means one or both of them might be apps that are currently bumping into that 1GB barrier. That's when 2GB of RAM will make sense.
And yes, that does mean previous generation iPhones will not be able to make full use of this rumored split screen feature. We've seen the same thing happen with other features packed into new iOS releases. That's a disciplined plan to taking care of the financial side of their business, which Apple must also do. The path of least resistance would be to just include every new and exciting piece of tech imaginable and see if it works, then try to come up with something glitzy if nothing new has surfaced in time for the next go-around.
Of course, this is the side of the business the likes of us – people who frequent MacRumors and other tech websites – witness. That's probably not the first thing less "enthusiastic" Apple customers see.
Apple been using the same 1gb ram since iPhone 5, their first 4" device. And also the first Lightning port iPhones.
My theory is Apple want to create a memory effective iOS, so I'm guessing iPhone 5 would be supported until iOS 10 maybe. Ram is important in the operating system no one can deny it, the bigger the better. But the way Apple position these devices to use 1 gb ram would mean optimization for the developer to write the software, because we already have to support multiple screen sizes, and processors, imagine when we have to think about the memory's of each devices. All the iPads also have 1 gb ram.
I would think the first iOS device that would get increase in ram would be the iPads.
My theory is Apple want to create a memory effective iOS, so I'm guessing iPhone 5 would be supported until iOS 10 maybe. Ram is important in the operating system no one can deny it, the bigger the better. But the way Apple position these devices to use 1 gb ram would mean optimization for the developer to write the software, because we already have to support multiple screen sizes, and processors, imagine when we have to think about the memory's of each devices. All the iPads also have 1 gb ram.
I would think the first iOS device that would get increase in ram would be the iPads.
Last edited:
BS. Just tried it. No reloading.
Someone show me how to trigger a RAM fault. If I can't because it's so "intermittent" it never happens, or I have to open 8 tabs in Safari while playing Bioshock, then it's a problem created by abusing the hardware, not through "normal use"
And all this "power user" crap is just that: crap. Whining because something malfunctions doing something nearly no one else uses it for doesn't make you a "power user". It just means you are unable to purchase the right hardware to meet your unusual needs.
For 99.9% of users, 1GB is plenty.
I couldn't care less about the .01%, and evidently, neither does Apple. Neener neener
There was also a vocal subset of users who were SCREAMING for NFC. And another group SCREAMING for bigger screens. Another group has been SCREAMING for 128GB storage. And some were SCREAMING for dual SIM trays. And some were SCREAMING for third-party keyboards. And some were SCREAMING for a Micro SD slot. And some were SCREAMING for Apple to bring back Google Maps as the default maps app.
With all that SCREAMING, and more, Apple was bound to leave some people feeling insulted that Apple never listens to what its customers want, except in the cases where they do listen.
Who's ready for 100s of threads that will flood the iPhone section of the forum for the next year?
Not me.
Not me.
My emphasis should of been on the fact that THEY HAVE HELD AT 1GB FOR wayyyyyyy too long...
Mavericks is great.
----------
This year is the year that Apple responded to most user requests.