Hacker News Reader

Comment by ajharrison | Hacker News Reader

Seriously though what’s the connection between it being 2020 and there being more default RAM? Are you suggesting that in the year 2030 we should expect 100gb of RAM?

The goal shouldn’t be to increase ageing technology but to replace it with something better.

View on HN

If you do anything like virtualization 8GB of RAM is absolutely paltry, borderline unusable - due to the need, e.g. to allocate a specific amount of RAM to a running VM.

To be honest, I find even 16GB to be limiting. The lack of offering of a 32GB configuration killed the immediate sale for me, absolutely no exaggeration.

Because you can't upgrade it post-market, I'd consider these to be some of the least future-proofed releases from Apple in a while.

> Are you suggesting that in the year 2030 we should expect 100gb of RAM?

100GB sounds like paltry for 10 years of technological advancement. In 2010 DDR4 didn't exist yet and DDR3 only supported up to 16GB per ram stick (8 on Intel at the time). Now we have ram sticks with capacities up to 256GB. The 2010 MacBook Pro only came with 4GB! But really "640K ought to be enough for anybody", am I right?

Well, I get where you're coming from, but would compare it maybe to electric or hydrogen vs gas cars. If I was in the market for a new car and drove certain distances regularly, I probably wouldn't be the first to buy something that could only go half the distance less conveniently, but does it faster.

> Are you suggesting that in the year 2030 we should expect 100gb of RAM?

You can buy a Thinkpad P15 with 128GB of RAM today, so I'd expect more like multi-TB RAM by 2030.

I think I'm with you here.

I've had 16 gigs for the last 8 years. I thought about getting 32, but I haven't noticed needing more memory and it does use (battery) energy so I decided against it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com