Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'm actually surprised Apple doesn't have multi-year contracts for RAM. It's not like they don't have a new iPhone out every year so I'd have thought it would make sense for Apple to lock in a decent amount of RAM allocation every year. Then again, maybe they do have a contract but it was for guaranteed numbers of wafers and didn't lock down the price?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnWick1954
So that sucks - I wouldn't want to switch back to Windows and/or Android. So, I hope Apple recognizes the potential threat and tries to act in both their and consumer's best interests. Ok, I know this is almost fairy tale wishful thinking, 😎

Well, you just said it: you wouldn’t want to switch back to a Windows PC (which already have raised prices), and Apple knows you don’t want to go back so… They’re going to push. Because they know they can.

Honestly I think part of the problem (or the biggest part) is the lack of more competition. Smartphones? A duopoly between Apple and Google. Computers? A duopoly between Apple and Microsoft. Yes, we have Linux with its good and not so good particularities, but… I still don’t see it as a reliable and accessible alternative.

As for components, something similar happens: Memory chips? A few specialized companies such as SK Hynix, Micron and Samsung. CPU/GPU chips? Almost a monopoly by TSMC. Yeah, there’s Intel’s foundries (and thank God they still exist), and a few Chinese ones, and Samsung, of course. But I would say TSMC is growing at a pace that is becoming a giant.

I may be a bit naive thinking this but maybe with a more diversified market, even with one or two more actors, we could see a different outcome. They all would compete more fiercely. See the AI field -I know, bad example- where there are three big players competing, OpenAI, Google and Anthropic, plus some smaller companies such as Perplexity or X AI (Gork), has thrived with affordable -yeah, subsidized, I said it was a bad example- and rapidly growing capabilities. On the other hand we have, for instance, another “almost” duopoly between gaming console manufacturers. Assuming Nintendo plays on its own league, Microsoft and Sony are going to start raising prices because of manufacturing costs and lack of competition. Nintendo, as I said, plays on its own category, so they can afford to hold their games prices high no matter how many years pass… because with their exclusive games (Mario, Zelda…) they have some sort of “family-friendly videogame monopoly”.

What happens with refrigerators? There are many manufacturers and dozens of brands. So maybe there’s the answer. We need more competition, at many levels. Sadly, only giant corporations like Apple, Google or Microsoft are capable of offering such complex and expensive products and services… there is already a too big investment and legacy requirement to enter this mature markets. That’s why a trillion dollar company such as Apple has already said they won’t enter into the manufacturing market creating their own foundaries… but I bet that, if they had known just a decade ago what was coming with the RAMaggeddon and the NANDpocalypse due to the disruption AI companies are creating, they would have started working towards their own chip foundries.

TL;DR: in my opinion, more competition would have been better to avoid the current situation with the tech industry.
 
I'm actually surprised Apple doesn't have multi-year contracts for RAM. It's not like they don't have a new iPhone out every year so I'd have thought it would make sense for Apple to lock in a decent amount of RAM allocation every year. Then again, maybe they do have a contract but it was for guaranteed numbers of wafers and didn't lock down the price?
I think they do but eventually that contract runs out and you can't renew at the same prices. I think whatever buffer Apple had is used up and they are now faced with the same reality as every other company.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mw360 and wyliej
TL;DR: in my opinion, more competition would have been better to avoid the current situation with the tech industry.
There's plenty of competition, just look at how many brands of Windows pc's there are.

I don't think this is a lack of competition. This is the result of ram production being it what it has been for years combined with a new thing (AI) that needs a lot of ram and companies (which never bought that much ram before) now buying loads of ram.

It's a scarcity thing, comparable to what people thought would happen with toilet paper during covid.
 
Well, you just said it: you wouldn’t want to switch back to a Windows PC (which already have raised prices), and Apple knows you don’t want to go back so… They’re going to push. Because they know they can.

Honestly I think part of the problem (or the biggest part) is the lack of more competition. Smartphones? A duopoly between Apple and Google. Computers? A duopoly between Apple and Microsoft. Yes, we have Linux with its good and not so good particularities, but… I still don’t see it as a reliable and accessible alternative.

As for components, something similar happens: Memory chips? A few specialized companies such as SK Hynix, Micron and Samsung. CPU/GPU chips? Almost a monopoly by TSMC. Yeah, there’s Intel’s foundries (and thank God they still exist), and a few Chinese ones, and Samsung, of course. But I would say TSMC is growing at a pace that is becoming a giant.

I may be a bit naive thinking this but maybe with a more diversified market, even with one or two more actors, we could see a different outcome. They all would compete more fiercely. See the AI field -I know, bad example- where there are three big players competing, OpenAI, Google and Anthropic, plus some smaller companies such as Perplexity or X AI (Gork), has thrived with affordable -yeah, subsidized, I said it was a bad example- and rapidly growing capabilities. On the other hand we have, for instance, another “almost” duopoly between gaming console manufacturers. Assuming Nintendo plays on its own league, Microsoft and Sony are going to start raising prices because of manufacturing costs and lack of competition. Nintendo, as I said, plays on its own category, so they can afford to hold their games prices high no matter how many years pass… because with their exclusive games (Mario, Zelda…) they have some sort of “family-friendly videogame monopoly”.

What happens with refrigerators? There are many manufacturers and dozens of brands. So maybe there’s the answer. We need more competition, at many levels. Sadly, only giant corporations like Apple, Google or Microsoft are capable of offering such complex and expensive products and services… there is already a too big investment and legacy requirement to enter this mature markets. That’s why a trillion dollar company such as Apple has already said they won’t enter into the manufacturing market creating their own foundaries… but I bet that, if they had known just a decade ago what was coming with the RAMaggeddon and the NANDpocalypse due to the disruption AI companies are creating, they would have started working towards their own chip foundries.

TL;DR: in my opinion, more competition would have been better to avoid the current situation with the tech industry.
More competition in the smartphone OS and ecosystem market would be great. The problem is developers DO NOT WANT to support multiple platforms, whether that be for anti-competitive purposes like google, or because of time/effort/return on investment reasons. Additional platforms cannot exist without developers making their apps and services available on those platforms, which they refused to do when Windows Phone existed.
 
They're such nice guys that back in the normal times they were fleecing you like crazy for RAM upgrade pricing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: krspkbl
More competition in the smartphone OS and ecosystem market would be great. The problem is developers DO NOT WANT to support multiple platforms, whether that be for anti-competitive purposes like google, or because of time/effort/return on investment reasons. Additional platforms cannot exist without developers making their apps and services available on those platforms, which they refused to do when Windows Phone existed.
You can't blame developers. There's a huge difference between supporting only iOS and making a million from it and supporting 4 platforms and making that same million. For starters, you'll need more developers for your app, unless you want to go crazy, do it all yourself and go crazy while trying to keep up with changes in 4 platforms.

I used to have an iOS app which did ok-ish. I figured I'd try do the same on Android but it never made any real money. That was 15 years ago and in those days supporting all of Androids screen sizes wasn't fun. Android also had this weird scheme where users could buy apps and get a refund if they asked for it with 15 minutes or so. So you get a bunch of bored people who just download a bunch of apps, then ask for a refund.

There was no money in Android.

Funny enough there was money in Windows Phone. Until they killed it of course.
 
You can't blame developers. There's a huge difference between supporting only iOS and making a million from it and supporting 4 platforms and making that same million. For starters, you'll need more developers for your app, unless you want to go crazy, do it all yourself and go crazy while trying to keep up with changes in 4 platforms.

I used to have an iOS app which did ok-ish. I figured I'd try do the same on Android but it never made any real money. That was 15 years ago and in those days supporting all of Androids screen sizes wasn't fun. Android also had this weird scheme where users could buy apps and get a refund if they asked for it with 15 minutes or so. So you get a bunch of bored people who just download a bunch of apps, then ask for a refund.

There was no money in Android.

Funny enough there was money in Windows Phone. Until they killed it of course.
I can, and do, blame developers. These are the same developers who claim to want more competition because there are currently only 2 platforms, but don’t want to put the work in when they had the chance.
 
I can, and do, blame developers. These are the same developers who claim to want more competition because there are currently only 2 platforms, but don’t want to put the work in when they had the chance.
Developers don't put the work in if a platform turns out not to make money. Or if they consider the platform too small. Read: Vision Pro.

Developing and supporting software isn't just some hobby, you know? It costs time and money to build things, update them and support them. At some point there needs to be bread on the table. Go and build apps for Tizen and webOS and let us know how that works out financially for you. 😀
 
Developers don't put the work in if a platform turns out not to make money. Or if they consider the platform too small. Read: Vision Pro.

Developing and supporting software isn't just some hobby, you know? It costs time and money to build things, update them and support them. At some point there needs to be bread on the table. Go and build apps for Tizen and webOS and let us know how that works out financially for you. 😀
Users won’t move to a new platform without the apps. Therefore developers have to take a leap of faith and support these platforms before there is a critical mass of users to make it worthwhile.

Not doing so guarantees no new platforms can exist.

As with all businesses, your risk might not pay off.
 
The RAM crisis presents the computing industry with a unique opportunity to slow down chipset production to better innovate in software. I imagine if there were no AI Apple would be ramming 12/16gb chips into all its phones but instead we're in a position that power has stagnated so optimisation has taken hold.

OS27 is genuinely the best update they've ever put out. Everything they said about optimisations and speed is true to the point that the Beta 1 adds no battery drain and speeds up everything. The things that have been bugging me for years (like the latest Watch taking so long to load the 'now playing' interface you may as well just get out your phone) are now gone.

Its the same with the videogame market. Sony and Microsoft seem to think that launching their next consoles in 2027 at close to $1000 in cost is a sensible idea, all the while the current crop have barely been pushed at all. Waiting 5 years for the market to settle whilst optimising software development for current devices makes a lot more financial sense.
 
  • Love
Reactions: mw360
Users won’t move to a new platform without the apps. Therefore developers have to take a leap of faith and support these platforms before there is a critical mass of users to make it worthwhile.

Not doing so guarantees no new platforms can exist.

As with all businesses, your risk might not pay off.
Maybe the EU could do something about it. Bankroll their own unique mobile OS, then pass a law mandating that all developers have to support it or loss access to the EU market. 😉
 
Tim Cook says Apple Price increases are 'unavailable' due to _____

Insert any reason that seems appropriate today, pick another tomorrow 😉
 
Maybe the EU could do something about it. Bankroll their own unique mobile OS, then pass a law mandating that all developers have to support it or loss access to the EU market. 😉
Absolutely, the DMA does nothing to foster competition in this regard.
 
'We need to maintain profit margins' Says the company who charged $999 for a monitor stand, $19 for a polishing cloth, $230 for a knitted sock to put your phone in, $699 for the pro wheels kit and $69,99 for the Apple water bottle
Today, I learnt that Apple has their branded water bottle, though it's only available at their headquarters in the US? 😛
 
You have to think of poor old Apple. They won't make as much profit anymore unless they raise prices. They really don't want to raise prices but they have to if they want to survive. We should all pay more to help them out in these tough times!
 
Not that big of a deal. Apple is in great spot for this. An apple m1 air is still a great solid machine for most people. Plenty of m2, m3 machines out there.

Phones are in the same boat. They can last for years and years.

I’ve been hoping that this ram and storage problem last about two-three years. Mostly to force companies and programmers to get better. If people are not going to get upgrades, you better not be making unoptimized and sloppy software.

Apple users are in a great spot for this. PC people may be screwed but they always have been.
 
Apple was never absorbing costs to begin with because their memory tier upgrades were so ridiculously and comically expensive to begin with. Even when every other manufacturer was raising prices Apple still enjoyed a healthy margin and they rode the wave of goodwill by not raising prices. Now that high prices are the new normal, they can say finally say they don't have a choice but to pass it on to the consumer. In reality, they just want their margin of profit to be where it was before, if not slightly higher.
Probably the best response in here, and you still get down voted smh
 
  • Like
Reactions: podycust
Users won’t move to a new platform without the apps. Therefore developers have to take a leap of faith and support these platforms before there is a critical mass of users to make it worthwhile.

Not doing so guarantees no new platforms can exist.

As with all businesses, your risk might not pay off.
I don’t know what to tell you, except it does not work like that. Let’s say that a 3rd mobile OS launches. Let’s call it Number 3 for the sake of argument. Number 3 is unknown to the masses. A dozen devs porting their exiting apps to Number 3? Yeah, that would make no difference.

You would require a combined effort of all developers to port their apps to Number 3, so that Number 3 would have a similar App Store compared to iOS and Android.

And then there would have to be a massive shift of existing iOS and Android users to buy devices that run Number 3.

And then Number 3 users would have to be of the kind that want to spend money on apps.

See all those “and thens”? Every “and then” decreases the chance of developer making money. Well, it’s not just about making money. You could make $10 and it would be useless.

It’s about making enough money to feed your family.

There’s also the fact that the 2 biggest mobile operating systems are good at what they do. Regardless of its privacy issues, I’m sure Android has its strengths too. What would Number 3 even bring that iOS and Android do not?

You say that developers want more competition. I wonder where you got that from. Developers are lazy. The last thing a developer making a living developing iOS apps wants is for a completing platform to appear, with half his customers moving to that new platform. Because not only does that mean losing half his income, it also means he has to learn a new platform and hope he can recuperate that missing income.
 
Apple was never absorbing costs to begin with because their memory tier upgrades were so ridiculously and comically expensive to begin with. Even when every other manufacturer was raising prices Apple still enjoyed a healthy margin and they rode the wave of goodwill by not raising prices. Now that high prices are the new normal, they can say finally say they don't have a choice but to pass it on to the consumer. In reality, they just want their margin of profit to be where it was before, if not slightly higher.
Well yes. They are a business.

A business exists to make money. A business that doesn’t make money, is a hobby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thettareddast
I don’t know what to tell you, except it does not work like that. Let’s say that a 3rd mobile OS launches. Let’s call it Number 3 for the sake of argument. Number 3 is unknown to the masses. A dozen devs porting their exiting apps to Number 3? Yeah, that would make no difference.

You would require a combined effort of all developers to port their apps to Number 3, so that Number 3 would have a similar App Store compared to iOS and Android.

And then there would have to be a massive shift of existing iOS and Android users to buy devices that run Number 3.

And then Number 3 users would have to be of the kind that want to spend money on apps.

See all those “and thens”? Every “and then” decreases the chance of developer making money. Well, it’s not just about making money. You could make $10 and it would be useless.

It’s about making enough money to feed your family.

There’s also the fact that the 2 biggest mobile operating systems are good at what they do. Regardless of its privacy issues, I’m sure Android has its strengths too. What would Number 3 even bring that iOS and Android do not?

You say that developers want more competition. I wonder where you got that from. Developers are lazy. The last thing a developer making a living developing iOS apps wants is for a completing platform to appear, with half his customers moving to that new platform. Because not only does that mean losing half his income, it also means he has to learn a new platform and hope he can recuperate that missing income.
The story I hear is that developers want competition to the Apple App Store and google play store, but also don’t want to have to do any work to facilitate that competition.
 
Maybe the EU could do something about it. Bankroll their own unique mobile OS, then pass a law mandating that all developers have to support it or loss access to the EU market. 😉
That would never work for the same reason that “The United States” bankrolling a new mobile OS would never work.

The layer on top of those states would have to deal with every state’s requirement, just like the EU has to deal with requirements from the different countries it sits on top of.

The result would be something watered down that stands for everything and nothing at the same time.
 
The story I hear is that developers want competition to the Apple App Store and google play store, but also don’t want to have to do any work to facilitate that competition.
What developers really want is to be able to build and ship iOS apps without Apple taking its 30% or 15% pimp margin, depending on how you sell your apps. 😉

I can fully understand (and agree) with that. 😂
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.