Nope, the opposite. They're doubling down.
> In an interview with IT Home, Mac marketing executive Evan Buyze spoke in favor of Macs equipped with 8GB of RAM. According to Buyze, the 8GB of RAM in entry-level Macs is enough for most of the tasks that most users do with these computers. He used web browsing, media playback, light photo and video editing, and casual gaming as examples.
Also note that he's probably not using a Chromium-based browser for his "web browsing" experience... base Safari does fine with 8GB, even with a large amount of open tabs.
Perhaps the contrary: 8GB is already a humongous RAM size. Especially if backed up by a fast SSD.
That really should be enough for everyday jobs like the examples mentioned (waaay more than enough, imho).
As for pro-level / servers / serious gamers / engineering jobs etc: sure, go ahead and deck it out to whatever budget & product offerings allow.
Just remember this is a decidedly different market segment than average consumer.
Ooh, relying on swap to your limited write cycle irreplaceable mass storage seems like a bridge too far to me. I know they do it, but I worry it will shorten the device lifespan if it’s relied on too much.
I am not a fan of the idea that we’d engineer a device to consume a limited resource like that in normal operation.
If you're using any Jetbrains IDE and want to also run your app/nodejs/etc. you mac will start freezing and and input lagging. Of course it's a pretty bloated Java app that could be optimized a bit more but I can't really blame them, RAM is so cheap nowadays that there is no reason why you'd have less than 16GB or even 32...
Also having any mildly memory intense app + Chrome (with > 10-20 tabs opened) is a no go etc.
So while I agree that creating what looks like arbitrary limitations some of the lower models is very annoying ( particularly around external monitor support [1] ) - you can see why commercially they might have done so.
ie when your base computer is 'fast enough' how do you segment the market? ( bearing in mind Apple doesn't have that hardcore gaming market to drive sales at the high end )
Local AI ? Perhaps - their unified memory arch could give them an edge here.
Yeah, I'm still on an M1 MBP. I remember when I upgraded, it 2x'd my code's performance, and... it's more than good enough.
The -only- reason it's an MBP is for the external displays. If it wasn't for that segmentation I'd happily be on an MBA.
I'm still on my M1 MBP from when they launched in Fall 2021 and I feel like I could use this thing for another several years easy. There's no chance of the average programmer hitting a wall (except maybe people deeply involved in running local LLMs) that requires an upgrade and they pretty much fixed every single issue with their laptops in one shot.
I do see these artificial limitations in their product lineup. For example, you can't get a 1TB SSD in their 16" MBP unless you get the M3 Max as opposed to the M3 Pro which is a $600 upgrade. Vs in their 14" you can get a 1TB at their middle configuration for only a $200 upgrade from their base configuration.
What else can they really do to get people on an upgrade treadmill ala iPhones (another area which has slowed down significantly)? If they let you configure the base models with 32GB of ram and a 1TB SSD there'd be literally nothing else to upgrade.
They already introduced a new color for the conspicuous consumption types (I haven't even seen one of those super dark gray ones in the wild.)
That's odd. I have no trouble clicking the 1TB button when configuring a 16" M3 Pro system, and seeing the price go up by only $200. But I'm also seeing only $400 to upgrade from M3 Pro to M3 Max (assuming both are configured with 36GB of RAM), so maybe you're in a different country with different pricing and options?
If I could spec an M4 MacBook Air up to 32GB of RAM, and it was better with local models, I would strongly consider it, but man… this M1 is still more than enough.
Even better, I got it at a steep discount because I bought it after the M3 came out and M3 Pro/Max was on the horizon.
I like it even more than I did my old 2015 15” pre-touchbar, which is saying something.
This is Apple's strategy for segmenting their products. Their lower priced models typically have a painful limitation or missing feature. For the macbook air it's lack of support for external displays.
Lack of support for a third display (counting the internal display). And that's not specific to the MacBook Air but rather to the base SoC vs the Pro and Max chips. IIRC the M3 added the slight improvement that closing the lid disables the internal display and allows for driving a second external display.
I am not willing to spend this much money on a product if it will not serve me well for 4-5 years.
The idea that people should be getting the new machine every year is new, and bad.
Found the ideal Apple consumer
Dell does the same thing in the business world. You void your sales contract if you open up those laptops, too.
FWIW, you can get multiple displays on an MBA with a DisplayLink hub.
> macbook pro max ultra ultimate m4$
The 14" MBP starts at $1599.
Side note: the 14" monitor is a game changer if your priorities are light weight and portability. Roughly half the weight of an iPad and even bigger and only like 60 euros. I went with the 2K resolution model and it's great price/quality ratio wise (using BetterDisplay to bump up into HiDPI mode).
But I agree with you as a generality: there’s a lot of ways for savvy people to buy an Apple system at a somewhat reasonable price that has the features that are segmented away to Pros.
For example, get a previous model. The M2 Pro 14” either Apple refurbished or lightly used. You can also get the current models refurbished (that’s full warranty and essentially new condition).
Could go all the way back to the M1 Pro and it’s really a very similar machine.
Another example: the education discount they’ll give to anyone without verification.
Further example: authorized resellers. Costco has the M3 Pro for $1799.
I used a factory refurb for a while last year, an M1 Pro with 16GB of RAM. It handled everything I threw at it (mostly backend dev using Docker Compose) easily, and it was only $1300, which is cheaper than an M3 MBA with the same memory.
Apple would likely keep M2 or M3 Mac around with 8GB Ram as entry level with limited AI capabilities or with enhancement from cloud.
This reasoning makes no sense.
You are talking about the cheapest and lowest spec laptop Apple sell, designed for consumers, not pros.
Do you complain the base level Porsche is slow? Do you complain the base level Tesla has a short range? Do you complain Nvidia’s base card can’t run monster models?
None of those make any sense, those are the cheapest base model from each company, and each company sells higher spec versions of those products.
The base model is slow and cheap. If you need higher performance, buy the model that has ‘pro’ in the name, that is what its for.
It's certainly not "slow" though...
> Do you complain the base level Tesla has a short range?
Again, the range is still pretty good compared to most other EVs
> The base model is slow and cheap. I
RAM is relatively cheap and the impact on price would be minimal. However Apple's business model is in large part based on making money from upgrades because they can charge obscenely inflated prices for memory/storage because their customers don't have a choice.
The base level Porsche is absolutely slow compared to the top-end.
The base level Tesla has vastly less range than the top-end.
The base level card from NVidia is a joke compared to the top end.
Companies make a range of products to suit a range on consumers and needs.
The idea that the cheapest, smallest and lightest laptop Apple make should be more geared towards pros is laughable, doubly so when they literally have a product called "Pro" that doesn't precisely what you want.
It's still very fast compared to a 100 hp budget car (HP is selling 8GB laptops for $300 and you can get a 16 GB one for $500 with 512 GB of storage, the Air starts at $1000, is Porsche offering models with 100 engines?)
> The base level Tesla has vastly less range than the top-end.
Vastly is an exaggeration but let's say so. It still has a much larger battery than budget EV with ~30 kWh batteries)
> You missed the point entirely.
I don't think so.
> geared towards pros is laughable
I didn't say anything about pros. A 16GB + 512GB laptop is certainly not "geared towards pros" and Apple only gives you half that.
> Companies make a range of products to suit a range on consumers and needs.
Maximizing profits comes first in this case. Apple uses segmentation to up charge their customers for upgrades (at obscene margins) because their clients have no other options if they want macOS. Again an extra 8GB would cost peanuts...
Utter nonsense.
I think you just want something to complain about.
The whole thread was basically about Apple purposefully crippling base/cheapest configs (which most uninformed people tend to buy) to maximize their profit margins and make their laptop less future proof
> Apple sell a laptop with specs you don't want, while they sell a laptop that does have the specs you want
Of course they actually don't. There is no 32 GB or 64GB MacBook Air.
> I think you just want something to complain about.
Perhaps, other people prefer complaining about other people complaining so to each his own, I guess...
Also, in the past, I could have bought the base device and bought a couple sticks of memory to upgrade the memory. Now, I cannot do this because of anti-consumer decisions that apple made to prevent user upgrade of memory. The least they could do is offer me the possibility to pay their inflated price for more ram.
I think you'll find that they don't.
So I am not very sure about "selling like hotcakes".