Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
256GB ssd is bull
- Thread starter 4743913
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It works fine for my wife. My mom and my mother-in-law are never going to need more than 256GB. Quite frankly, both would be fine with 128GB.
I agree - even 128gb seems like too much.
64gb would be better so people would have options
I'm running out of space on my PC, and want to replace my 230gb SSD with a beefier 1TB ssd. That will cost me $99 for a decently high end one. That same upgrade in a macbook air is $400, and it doesn't include the 256gb SSD that Apple doesn't use.
My MBP 17 has a CompactFlash slot so I bought a 48 GB CompactFlash SSD and ran the MacBook Pro off of that. macOS was a lot smaller back then though. I do create macOS Virtual Machines with 60 to 80 GB of storage if they are throwaways.
Nobody needs that much storage.
16 GB should be fine as the base
What the OP and others are complaining about isn't the real issue.
It's not about the starting configuration per se, since Apple gives us the choice of more storage.
Instead, it's about money. When people are complaining they want the base to have more storage, what they really mean is they want more storage for the same base price.
And what motivates this complaint is that Apple's upgrade prices for storage are high.
It's not about the starting configuration per se, since Apple gives us the choice of more storage.
Instead, it's about money. When people are complaining they want the base to have more storage, what they really mean is they want more storage for the same base price.
And what motivates this complaint is that Apple's upgrade prices for storage are high.
Dell's prices are always "sale" prices. I don't think I've ever looked at a Dell price and not seen something like "
So, what those ads actually say is that, comparing two otherwise similar machines, $1000 gets you 8GB/256GB, i5 whereas $1350 gets you 16GB/512GB and an i7.
With the MBA, the equivalent jump is $1000 for 8/256 to $1449 for 16/512 and an extra GPU core... So, yeah, they are similar, but still Apple is almost 30% more for a comparable upgrade.
I think what we can agree on is that the Dell website is still a dumpster fire... I think that the disparity in the UK is even more than in the US (as per my previous post) and that the UK equivalent of the $999 model already comes with 512GB... but it's such a mish-mash of superficially identical machines, I wouldn't want to bet on it.
The UK site does let me choose BTO options, and one you disentangle them from other options and insane troll logic of what you can have with what, it's looking like £50 for the 256-to-512GB ssd upgrade and £100 for the 8 to 16GB RAM. At least Apple keeps it simple at £200 for each whether you're buying a MacBook Air or an iMac... (NB: I'm using the Exchange Rate According to Apple which has always been $1=£1 and isn't too far off once you divide by 1.3 for the exchange rate and multiply by 1.2 for the UK sales tax... Mind you, that was also the rate back in the good old days when £1 was closer to $2 and published computer prices didn't include tax...)
...and, yeah, Microsoft Surface and Razer have always been there for people who want to buy PCs at Mac prices
The question of whether Apple charge more for SSD upgrades, and offer worse base specs than (say) Dell is rather relevant to the topic. (TLDNR: yes, they do once you disentangle them from other upgrades).
I would agree with this, 800$ for a 2TB drive is beyond absurd. 200$ for 8gb of additional ram is also a little high but not completely terrible.
Okay. So, if we go back to user upgradeability (after purchase, that is)… Even before the SSD and RAM were soldered, the Mac models immediately preceding weren’t exactly user upgrade friendly. In fact, upgrading the storage on iMac’s has required removing the display, etc for a long time now. And, let’s not forget the need for SSD adapters. In other words, beyond a certain skillset level requirement, it is relevant to include time spent in the upgrade cost. Again, we return to, will most users do it? (I’m voting: no).
There's a post in the MacBook Pro forums about someone toasting his old MacBook Pro just taking it apart to clean it. When you take these things apart, especially when iFixit rates it as difficult, you run the risk of breaking it. What's also annoying is when you've removed 30 screws and you run into one of them for which you have to run to Home Depot to buy a tool to remove the next one. Or you drop a screw in the wrong place. Of course you can take it to a store to have it done and I'd do that if I thought the change was beyond my skill level.
I don't think high speed NVME 256gb in a $999 machine is so bad, but once you start hitting that $1500+ range... come on.
That’s actually somewhat of the point.
As pointed out earlier...
But many of us aren’t restrained by that, we can select what options work — an overall win-win with caveats. We’re amidst the Apple Silicon transition and some necessary/desired configurations aren’t yet available, plus we’d all like to have cheaper upgrade pricing.
EDIT:
In other words, the base/default configs are just that, the minimum. Apple implies this by having a customer “select” a base/default config, then view/add upgrades as needed/desired before “add(ing) to bag”.
Also @turbineseaplane To satisfy your request to address the original post (again)… @4743913 is unhappy about the 256GB storage size but did admit at the same time there were other options, and wasn’t even complaining about price — mentioned a willingness to do a trade-in, presumably a trade up if it were currently possible. The cost topic was sparked by other MR members.
Last edited:
BigSur occupies only 15-16Gb.
Only "bloat" are unneeded languages in the System partition and 1Gb occupied by wallpapers, which is stupid.
Everything rest is Data partition - which can contain your backup of installation files, which can be removed (check my other posts).
Additionally - universal apps can be trimmed down to get extra space (using CleanMyMac X or in terminal with lipo command).
So I find BigSur incredibly efficient when it comes to occupying space on HD, compared to Windows.
256Gb is not enough if your work generates huge files (esp video editing) or if you install many large games.
I also use 256Gb along with T7 external drive for TimeMachine and external bootable BigSur
Last edited:
Not so:
Upgrading storage from 256 GB->512 GB: Apple's pricing is double Dell's:
Dell XPS: $100
Apple MBA: $200
Upgrading storage from 512 GB -> 1 TB, and 1 TB -> 2 TB: Apple's pricing is 1/3 higher than Dell's:
Dell XPS, 512 GB -> 1 TB: $150
Apple MBA, 512 GB -> 1 TB: $200
Dell XPS, 1 TB -> 2 TB: $300
Apple MBA, 1 TB -> 2 TB: $400
Furthermore, as @vs40 mentions immediately below, the Dell storage (and RAM) are user-upgradeable, which further reduces the cost of putting a large SSD in the Dell. E.g., you could buy the base model, and add a top-of-the-line 2 TB Samsung 980 Pro PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD for ~$430 (about $100 less than getting the SSD OEM from Dell); and for ~$330, there's the 2 TB Crucial P5 and the Samsung 970 Pro (not sure which of these you'd need to get to match the performance of the Dell OEM model).
DELL XPS AT TOP, APPLE MBA AT BOTTOM:
Last edited:
And you not forced to buy upgrades directly from Dell/Lenovo/etc.
You can upgrade SSD later by yourself and use standard one in external case or in other laptop/pc.
It makes it not only much cheaper, but also environment friendly, because user will generate less e-waste by reusing SSD and replacing just one component in case of failure instead of throwing away whole mainboard.
I'm pretty sure my 1st Apple ][ had 28k, I eventually upgraded to 64k and that was the duck's nuts.
I know this is not the answer to everybody's needs, NAS.
I get it is an extra expense, though it's a long term solution for a lot of options.
The base storage is probably enough for Joe public, if you're doing pro stuff, you need pro kit, the base model is not for you.
I don't do pro "stuff" and have nearly always purchased minimal or close too, minimal storage, I keep most of my data on my NAS or in the cloud (various) and or both.
I think as we say in Australia, " it's horses for courses" whatever suits you is the best option.
I get it is an extra expense, though it's a long term solution for a lot of options.
The base storage is probably enough for Joe public, if you're doing pro stuff, you need pro kit, the base model is not for you.
I don't do pro "stuff" and have nearly always purchased minimal or close too, minimal storage, I keep most of my data on my NAS or in the cloud (various) and or both.
I think as we say in Australia, " it's horses for courses" whatever suits you is the best option.
I actually thought the premium would be a lot more than this. I know this disparity will seem outrageous to many, but it actually makes me feel less gouged.
I don't have a problem with Apple charging a modest premium though I REALLY don't like that I can't do my own upgrades.
Would I want the premium to be zero or even negative? Of course I would! I'm not crazy. I'm just not outraged that it's not.
Yes, that's an excellent point—the RAM and storage in the XPS is upgradeable post-purchase, while that in Apple laptops is not.
This thread is about 256 GB and 512 GB options. Dell, Lenovo, Razor are more expensive to about the same as AAPL. If you need or want more storage internally, then pay up or buy from someone else or find another solution. The reason we have corporations is to maximize shareholder value.
You could also just buy a thousand shares and pay for your storage off capital gains.
The other benefit of NAS is that your files are available to other computers and devices on your network. It's quite convenient to have video, music and photo libraries on a NAS. Some people have a plan on storage by thinking it out.