So Apple essentially lied about 32 GB RAM in MBP

[Nik]

Phil Schiller stated that they were not able to put 32GB of RAM in the MacBook Pro because low power DDR4 was not available yet.

But here we are with 32GB in the MBP because they made the battery a little bigger. That possibility was well known back then.

They essentially lied to us.

 

[Schranke]

they did another reasoning back then, the complaints and wishes from users has led to a change. I do not think we would have seen 32GB RAM without the increase in battery capacity as the 10hour is more important to apple then a subset of the market.

So lied no, they did not put in 32GB back then due to battery concerns

 

[maflynn]

They essentially lied to us.

Not at all the LPDDR memory that Apple used in prior generations was maxed out at 16GB. Using DDR4 in the 2018 is using more power, but apple increased the battery size, thus cancelling out the issue.

 

[Rapp]

LPDDR4 wasn't available then and isn't now so how is that a lie? Was higher capacity batteries that fit the same space available back then?

They've probably held out for the LPDDR4 support which has yet to come and decided to now go down the DDR4 route instead.

 

[afir93]

I was curious since I was reading something like that a number of times now, and what Phil Schiller said, according to the MacRumors-article from back in the day, is:

"The MacBook Pro uses 16GB of very fast LPDDR memory, up to 2133MHz. To support 32GB of memory would require using DDR memory that is not low power and also require a different design of the logic board which might reduce space for batteries. Both factors would reduce battery life."

and

"To put more than 16GB of fast RAM into a notebook design at this time would require a memory system that consumes much more power and wouldn't be efficient enough for a notebook. I hope you check out this new generation MacBook Pro, it really is an incredible system."

I don't see anything being a lie about this statement. He didn't say they weren't be able at all to put 32GB of RAM into the MacBook Pros, he said they weren't be able to do that without huge compromises at that point in time. And that is most likely true. Remember, this statement is almost two years old, and we don't (yet) know what changes they needed to make in the 2018 models to accommodate for the larger batteries (for example I read a while ago that Coffeelake might allow them to make the motherboard smaller, which could have increased the potential battery size).

The 2016 MBPs were controversial enough as it is; if they had DDR4 RAM and therefore a much smaller battery size due to the different motherboard, both of which would have been necessary according to Schiller's quote, then they might have lasted only 5 hours instead of 10 or something like that, which would have been terrible for an already controversial redesign.

And who knows how much of that quote still stands today. I've ordered a new 15" MBP myself but one thing I'm a little bit anxious is how the standby time will be affected by it. I know the battery of the current model is larger but only slightly so, and who knows if that's enough to compensate for DDR4 RAM and a potentially more energy-hungry CPU.

 

[mctrials23]

Its all a big conspiracy and apple just didn't want to offer people 32gb ram and make more money from them 2 years ago.

 

[Juicy Box]

The 2016 MBPs were controversial enough as it is; if they had DDR4 RAM and therefore a much smaller battery size due to the different motherboard, both of which would have been necessary according to Schiller's quote, then they might have lasted only 5 hours instead of 10 or something like that, which would have been terrible for an already controversial redesign.

It might sound strange, but they could have made the 2016 MBP a little thicker to accommodate a larger battery for users needing 32GB of ram, while not sacrificing battery life.

 

[maflynn]

It might sound strange, but they could have made the 2016 MBP a little thicker to accommodate users needing 32GB of ram, while not sacrificing battery life.

How? The current coffee lake chipset does not support the LPDDR4 memory needed, this isn't about thickness AFAIK

 

[theluggage]

Not at all the LPDDR memory that Apple used in prior generations was maxed out at 16GB. Using DDR4 in the 2018 is using more power, but apple increased the battery size, thus cancelling out the issue.

So the question is, what has changed to allow them to enlarge the battery in the same space (...or, rather, undo the reduction in battery size that came with the 2016 design)?

Its plausible that it is just progressive improvement in battery tech... or maybe the exploding Galaxy Note 7 made them over-cautious with the 2016 battery, but that's now the dim and distant past....

Looking forward to the iFixit teardown...

 

[Juicy Box]

How? The current coffee lake chipset does not support the LPDDR4 memory needed, this isn't about thickness AFAIK

It is about battery life, which is increased or decreased by many factors, one being the space available.

Take this quote from Schiller:

The MacBook Pro uses 16GB of very fast LPDDR memory, up to 2133MHz. To support 32GB of memory would require using DDR memory that is not low power and also require a different design of the logic board which might reduce space for batteries. Both factors would reduce battery life.

Maybe I am wrong, but it sounds like to me if the 2016 MBP was a little thicker, a larger battery could have been used.

 

[Audit13]

This is only my personal opinion but Apple is in business to make as much money as possible regardless of what people may think. Obviously, there is demand for a 32 GB model and I'm sure Apple would have produced a Macbook with 32 GB of ram if technically possible at the time and priced it sky-high.

 

[Bryan Bowler]

Apple could have made the 2016 MBP ever so slightly thicker and included 32GB of RAM, but the current leadership at Apple cares more about aesthetics and magic weight numbers far more than they care about the needs of their customers.

 

[jerryk]

They lied? Because engineers are never allowed to create a solution to get around a limitation. Right?

 

[Rogifan]

Apple could have made the 2016 MBP ever so slightly thicker and included 32GB of RAM, but the current leadership at Apple cares more about aesthetics and magic weight numbers far more than they care about the needs of their customers.

How do we know thickness was the issue? Is the 2018 laptop thicker than the 2016 model?

 

[maflynn]

So the question is, what has changed to allow them to enlarge the battery in the same space (...or, rather, undo the reduction in battery size that came with the 2016 design)?

When the 2016 MBP was released there was chatter about the small battery and why Apple did not use a terraced battery configuration. I think word on the street that they ran into technical issues that would have affected the release date. Well in 2018, it looks like they overcame that issue and can better utilize the space in the enclosure to hold a larger capacity battery.

 

[Ma2k5]

There was nothing stopping them from increasing battery before and adding 32 GB DDR ram. They decided it just wasn't worth it at the time - perhaps they were waiting on LPDDR to come out. Now in 2018, they realised it is even further down the road, maybe another 2 years before LPDDR is available - so they have a choice, stick to creating machines with LPDDR ram or make the jump as others have to DDR.

They haven't lied, but changed their mind. They never said they couldn't make 32 GB RAM machines before, just that they decided not to due to higher power consumption.

I think even now, despite a slightly larger battery, they would have preferred not to have to go the DDR route, just that their hands was forced (to keep up with competition).
[doublepost=1531488958][/doublepost]

When the 2016 MBP was released there was chatter about the small battery and why Apple did not use a terraced battery configuration. I think word on the street that they ran into technical issues that would have affected the release date. Well in 2018, it looks like they overcame that issue and can better utilize the space in the enclosure to hold a larger capacity battery.

I don't know if they implemented the terraced battery yet, the capacity hasn't increased by much, we will have to wait for the tear down.

 

[rdowty]

I'm not excited about the 32gb. Its great if you need it but I did some benchmarks and I really don't and would have rather had the low powered memory and longer battery life. It would have been nice if the 16gb models had low power memory and the 32gb option didn't. It may not make a big difference anyway because I think that the battery savings were during standby and not as much during active use.

 

[NT1440]

Phil Schiller stated that they were not able to put 32GB of RAM in the MacBook Pro because low power DDR4 was not available yet.

But here we are with 32GB in the MBP because they made the battery a little bigger. That possibility was well known back then.

They essentially lied to us.

Uh...the new chipset is also more power efficient.

You’re doing math without all the variables.
[doublepost=1531490270][/doublepost]

Apple could have made the 2016 MBP ever so slightly thicker and included 32GB of RAM, but the current leadership at Apple cares more about aesthetics and magic weight numbers far more than they care about the needs of their customers.

Yea, of the tens of millions of macs being sold each quarter how many of those users do you think need 32gb?

Or now that it’s available, what percentage of users would you guess are going to pony up for more than 16gb to begin with?

I’m all for the option being there but your final line is clearly just griping by projecting your needs onto what is clearly a consumer user base.

 

[rdowty]

They didn't say it was impossible just they weren't willing to make the tradeoff. I think the push for things like AR and high resolution video editing and the reason they're willing to do it now. AR is new but not long ago if someone said they wanted to edit video on a laptop you'd laugh and say get a desktop workstation. I like the direction Apple is going mostly. I think they're starting to see more people using laptops as replacements for things you would have expected to need a desktop for. I don't think we'll be getting a 17" laptop back but I think a 16" with a 4k display is something that would be welcomed by a lot of users although they still sell more 13" laptops than 15" and not all of them for price reasons so I don't know.

 

[theluggage]

When the 2016 MBP was released there was chatter about the small battery and why Apple did not use a terraced battery configuration.

Possible, but I thought the main point of the terraced battery would be to allow a tapered design, like the 12" Macbook, that would make the thing look sleek while actually being thicker around the CPU/GPU area.

 

[alphaswift]

They essentially lied to us.

Come on. They made a business decision last year. Things changed, they made another business decision and now we have 32 GB MBPs.

If you aren't hungry at 10AM but then you are at 1PM, were you lying to yourself earlier?

 

[NT1440]

Come on. They made a business decision last year. Things changed, they made another business decision and now we have 32 GB MBPs.

If you aren't hungry at 10AM but then you are at 1PM, were you lying to yourself earlier?

Not to mention it took both the combination of the power savings on the new processors AND a 10% bigger battery capacity to include in. Basic math should tell anyone that Apple was not going to hit their target of 10 hour battery life without those improvements.

 

[macintoshmac]

Phil Schiller stated that they were not able to put 32GB of RAM in the MacBook Pro because low power DDR4 was not available yet.

But here we are with 32GB in the MBP because they made the battery a little bigger. That possibility was well known back then.

They essentially lied to us.

Or, they hoped to get LPDDR4, and could not. So, this time around, they decided to bump the battery to support DDR4. Why the cynicism? Give them credit for bringing it now and move on.
[doublepost=1531500496][/doublepost]

I was curious since I was reading something like that a number of times now, and what Phil Schiller said, according to the MacRumors-article from back in the day, is:

"The MacBook Pro uses 16GB of very fast LPDDR memory, up to 2133MHz. To support 32GB of memory would require using DDR memory that is not low power and also require a different design of the logic board which might reduce space for batteries. Both factors would reduce battery life."

and

"To put more than 16GB of fast RAM into a notebook design at this time would require a memory system that consumes much more power and wouldn't be efficient enough for a notebook. I hope you check out this new generation MacBook Pro, it really is an incredible system."

I don't see anything being a lie about this statement. He didn't say they weren't be able at all to put 32GB of RAM into the MacBook Pros, he said they weren't be able to do that without huge compromises at that point in time. And that is most likely true. Remember, this statement is almost two years old, and we don't (yet) know what changes they needed to make in the 2018 models to accommodate for the larger batteries (for example I read a while ago that Coffeelake might allow them to make the motherboard smaller, which could have increased the potential battery size).

The 2016 MBPs were controversial enough as it is; if they had DDR4 RAM and therefore a much smaller battery size due to the different motherboard, both of which would have been necessary according to Schiller's quote, then they might have lasted only 5 hours instead of 10 or something like that, which would have been terrible for an already controversial redesign.

And who knows how much of that quote still stands today. I've ordered a new 15" MBP myself but one thing I'm a little bit anxious is how the standby time will be affected by it. I know the battery of the current model is larger but only slightly so, and who knows if that's enough to compensate for DDR4 RAM and a potentially more energy-hungry CPU.

I personally think the integration of SMC and other components in the T2 is what might have enabled them to make the motherboard smaller.

 

[maflynn]

Possible, but I thought the main point of the terraced battery would be to allow a tapered design, like the 12" Macbook, that would make the thing look sleek while actually being thicker around the CPU/GPU area.

Yes, but it also be be used to squeeze in battery cells where you normally couldn't

 

[Bryan Bowler]

[doublepost=1531490270][/doublepost]
I’m all for the option being there but your final line is clearly just griping by projecting your needs onto what is clearly a consumer user base.

My point exactly. Apple was designing their Pro laptop for their consumer base. I am a Pro user and I can assure that every colleague of mine wanted 32GB of RAM when Apple released the 2016 laptop.

The 2018 MBP is now a pro laptop, but it certainly did not live up to those standards from late-2016 until now.