mSATA doesn't fill Apple's needs. The biggest mSATA drives, right now, are 512GB - yet Apple can get 768GB on their custom designed blade SSDs. They're also a totally different shape, and if you take a look at the space in which the SSD fits in both 13 and 15" rMBPs you'll work out that an mSATA drive simply wouldn't fit as they are significantly wider (but shorter).
Same goes for the RAM - it's an engineering decision. RAM slots take up space, particularly in depth, and dual slots even more so as they're stacked ontop of each other. The rMBP is thinner than two RAM stacked RAM slots...so please, explain how Apple were supposed to fit that in to the design?
To produce a thin computer like the rMBP you have to make sacrifices. RAM slots are too thick, and mSATA/normal SSDs are too large or the wrong shape. Apple had to go with what would actually physically fit, which is soldered RAM and a blade SSD.
It could fit in 13". Actually, the new Scorpio Black 5mm is perfect.
I was talking about development stage, going the mSATA route instead of proprietary one. But I wasn't aware about the capacities.
About RAM, i was never talking about it, in favor of it perhaps (due to bandwidth optimization)
I understand your point but was stating it from a software stance (not in hand with hardware). I believe that many people need to clarify how or provide evidence for their claims. Also you should keep in mind that you can develop drivers for the Mac (not saying this will solve our problems just keep in mind there are other solutions).
I see how you say it is closed in a software support in terms of the hardware. I agree, though isn't that one reason why we buy Apple? Because Apple studies both to work hand in hand to get true results and great results? Instead of just trying to push hardware to be bigger, power hungry, investment heavy R&D into physical law limits why not push the boundaries with clever software? I'm not saying Apple is perfect, I just think they are trying to take usually higher end hardware (or mid-high end) and push it with clever software.
I buy Apple for that reason because they merge the two.
That is exactly why we buy apple. And exactly why am I not at all shocked that rMBP was only offered with soldered RAM.
And I'm very very pleased with what they did. Other manufactures just solder RAM, Apple squeezed every bit out of it.
I never get tired of this link:
http://macperformanceguide.com/mbpRetina2012-speed-memory-bandwidth.html
No, the "average user" won't try to de-solder and re-solder the chips, but I'm sure they can install a driver or two. Installing a driver is much like installing RAM.
It's not the same as "writing drivers". Writing drivers is like making your own RAM chips. And I'm sure not many of us make our own RAM chips.
Yeah, my point about Apple (osx) being a closed system, and how hackintosh works.
A key distinction is that most "upgrades" in the notebook era are for specifications and capacities that could have been ordered initially. In other words, upgradability enables someone to purchase a cheaper end PC now and upgrade it later on to something that was already available at the original purchase date.
This is not to say that there are no benefits of upgradability, or that all else equal I wouldn't prefer to see upgradable RAM in the MBA or rMBP. However, I can understand Apple's thinking here. By making things non upgradable, they are more likely to upsell on Day 1. If you are already spending $2199 on a 15" rMBP, you are more likely to spend the extra $200 to bump it up to 16GB (and profit Apple more than if you bought the 8GB and were able to buy the 8GB upgrade later on from a third party for $75 or so).
We are talking about a very small % of users, most of people already deem laptop a completely closed system and they sooner buy an external drive than get an internal one swapped.
I do agree though that the prices are outrages... Considering 8GB is 50$, and 16GB is 80$ (but you get the 8GB anyway when you buy the cMBP) the memory upgrade on the rMBP should be cheaper for at least 50$.
What a terribly thought out analogy.
1. As far as I know Tvs have never been user-upgradeable.
2. TV technology does not progress at anywhere near that of computers.
Yeah, that's exactly why you have to upgrade your whole computer not just bump up jiggawatts, because it's progressing to fast to be able to keep up the pace with only upgrading RAM. If you
need the latest and greatest. Big IF there.
I don't know if this is a safe move for apple. People have bought apple for their high quality and dependability. They generally want them to last as long as they can run. Minor upgrades have allowed us to enjoy our macs for those precious couple years longer and without this flexibility I wonder if some people won't go elsewhere when buying their next computer. I think I speak for a general group of average users, not the hard cores or the rich guys who don't/won't think too hard about it...
People who initially bought apple, perhaps ("creative professionals"), people nowadays buy it because its in the movies, it has a great trackpad, a great battery, is light, thin and portable, and has a shiny apple on the back. That's your general group of average users today. Not people who frequent these forums anyway.
As far as Pro users go, apple hasn't even updated Logic Pro to support retina resolution.
The current tablet and ultrabook boom is entirely their fault.