You and I do not know what Apple have planned for the next few years. If they know that more than 8GB will be required, then moving on to a higher specification base model is entirely reasonable. It might not be Apple Intelligence which requires the increase. Or at least, not the current implementation.
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.
8GB RAM in M3 MacBook Pro Proves the Bottleneck in Real-World Tests
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think it is unreasonable to expect an older phone to get all the features a newer one might with a software update. Apple has been pretty good about it, but even teh Pros like mine didn't get everything either.
Which is irrelevant to a marketing and pricing strategy; just because some people want 16GB at an 8GB price doesn't mean the 8GB machine is flawed or nah Apple should do it. Apple will go to 16 when it deems it needed to adequately run the OS and its features.
I agree; the machine does everything it did when you bought it; that it might not run some programs well that require more memory is not an inherent flaw.
No, it proves if you need to run Blender don't buy an M1 8gb Air. If all you need is email, Safari and AppleWorks, the 8GB Air will handle that quite well.
It also proves that 8GB in a “Pro” (ie M3 MBP) in a 2024 2000 euro laptop is a disgrace. Unreal how people can defend this…It is not illegal, but it is just ridiculous.
Then don’t buy one. Pro isn’t a “Professional” machine but a marketing strategy. If someone wants more ports then the 8gPro fits the bill.
I personally don’t think it adds enough value over the Air but others find it to meet their needs at the price point.
It may be laughable when it comes to business and pricing decisions, since clearly Apple knows what it's doing there. And they have info. we do not. But I wouldn't make that as a general statement about all of Apple's decisions, especially when it comes to product design.
I don't have a dog in the base RAM fight—my working machine has 128 GB RAM, so this doesn't affect me personally. Further, I think Apple knows exactly what's it's doing with the starting RAM—they're offering a cheap machine for students, who are critical to bring into the Apple ecosystem and thus ensure its future growth—while maintaining profit margins by charging huge upgrade prices to everyone else.
[Yes, it's not all base model = students, but they are a key part of that market.]
But I disagree with the general position that 'Apple always knows best.'
For instance, many, myself included, thought the Trashcan MacPro was a compromised design at the time it was introduced, and Apple later acknowledged we were right. This was a clear case of Apple's users understanding their needs better than Apple itself. Apple finally wised up and put together a "Pro Workflow Team" of various pro-level users to provide them with much-needed outside "boots on the ground" input.
Another example was the poor thermal design on their last generation of 27" Intel iMacs (leading to noisy operation under load), which could have be easily corrected at a low BOM by adding an 2nd fan and some extra plastic ducting.
And then there's the butterfly keyboard.
And this applies to their software as well. Users can often see what the company cannot.
Last edited:
A non-gaming laptop of 2000 euros, containing the monicker “pro”, but it is not meant for professionals. Great piece of marketing.
Yes, by making RAM and storage non-upgradeable in their desktops, Apple has made desktop ownership much more expensive for those who need significant amounts of either (as was probably their intention). And I agree they don't offer a good external monitor alternative for non-pro/prosumers users.
But, at least here in the US, there is is an easy solution for this: Buy used product that's a generation old. Often you can find used Apple gear in pristine condition (and that has AC+, which is transferrable) for far less than what you'd pay for new product. And, with the M-series, unless you have specific needs that are only accommodated by the latest gen, you don't give up much performance by buying the previous gen.
For instance, an M2 Studio with 32 GB RAM/2 TB SSD costs $2,600 new. A used M1 with those same specs can be had for <= $1,500. And when the next-gen Mac Studio comes out, you'll be able to get used M2's similarly discounted.
But I'm not sure what the used market in the EU is like.
Last edited:
It's simply branding, not that somehow it's a "professional machine," which really has no meaning, anymore than the iPhone Pro is aimed at "professional" phone users. What is a professional iPhone user, anyway?
Using MBP doesn't somehow make someone a pro, anymore than using can Air means they aren't a pro.
Pro and Air are a convenient way to distinguish between two product lines with different specs; Apple could as easily kept the Air and MacBook naming convention, but adding "Pro" adds some better differentiation.
Yes, it is, given Apple's sales and market cap.
Apple should start all machines with at least 32 GB at the appropriate (higher) price and all those who only need 16 or (gasp) 8GB just pay the added cost and be grateful for the added ram.
We are in a time of change, the migration from Intel to M entails applications that require more hardware, in all aspects, Ram, disk space and improvements in graphics, with the arrival of video 4k cameras... there are no options.
And Buying second hand is not an option. my Photoshop license no longer updated Lightroom, more limitations of use for Pixinsight, (an astrophotography software process) or for example...Dxo Pure Raw, is a technological obsolescence.
I'm just an amateur with two screens, 5k imac and 21:9 but after 9 years of evolution by Apple, now I can't do anything without tripling the budget, and without the possibility of expansions, and the budget for Ram and NVME space is absolutely disproportionate, it has no justification.
Someone has said that they sell computers with little hardware for students, an M3 for 1600€ with only 8Gb and 500Gb is a scam. Just by synchronizing the Icloud you already run out of space.
Huh? Gotta love the reverse logic. How about you pay extra for 32GB and let those who have NO problems with 8GB, pay less?
I have not felt like my M1 MBA was garbage simply because it could not run blender.
Which brings me back to my original point - too much emphasis on specs (going on and on about 16gb ram like it's the be-all and end-all of what makes a PC great), and not enough on the user experience (the video by MAC address touches on a number of pros of the MBA, from the better battery life to the better trackpad to build quality).
Saying this as someone who also has a windows laptop for work with i7, 16gb ram and 512gb storage and well, I am reminded every day why I prefer macOS. And if it means I have to pay a little more to get what I want, I will glad fork out the extra cash.
But your original assertion was “an M1 MBA still performs better than a windows laptop with 16gb ram even today.” That comes with quite an asterisk when your source for the claim has the MBA failing a test that the other laptop succeeded in, and when RAM is the reason.
No, people shouldn’t run Blender (or any video, 3D, etc. tool) on a laptop with 8 GiB RAM, and that isn’t Apple’s fault — but their continued choice to offer 8 as the standard at all is.
But that’s the topic of this thread.
No doubt MacBooks are great laptops. The build quality is high, the trackpad is best in class, OS integration such ad time to wake up is good. My M1 Pro MBP is fantastic, as were the three MBPs I had before that (though each of those had issues, such as with heat), and the iBook before those.
But the RAM base config is not.
Because people are apparently incapable of speccing out the laptop that they want or need?
If I thought that my work needed my to use a macbook with 32gb or even 64gb of ram, that's what I would get. Nobody is holding a gun to my head and forcing me to stick with a 8gb MacBook for editing 4k video. I went with the entry level model because that's what I knew would suffice for me, given the work that I do, and 4 years later, it's still doing fine.
You all want 16gb ram as standard, but are you all okay with raising the starting price as well? Is everyone okay?
I mean, kind of? Apple makes paternalistic choices all the time. They don’t even tell you at all how much RAM iPads have.
Same, but that’s not a relevant standard for the average user.
They need to be able to say “I want a Mac I can afford that gets the job done”. The 8 GiB config is getting to the point where it doesn’t.
As I said, I’m OK with the price going up $100 for a while. The M2 Air can stick around at $100 or $150 less, and will still come with 8.
Why only $100 and not the full $200 it takes to add 8gb of ram?
Why only $100 and not the full $200 it takes to add 8gb of ram?
Because it doesn’t take Apple $200. Meet in the middle.
Average user? Professional Product Managers realize there’s no such thing an ”average“ user. That perspective is a proven path to failure as it leads to building products for a fictional “average user“ that only exists on paper. Instead, professional Product Managers recognize that every user is unique and likewise has their own unique set of requirements and preferences. To accommodate the varying needs and preferences of real world users, Professional Product Managers build configurable options into their products to allow the product to align more closely with the unique requirements and preferences of a wide range of real-world users.
Why only $100 and not the full $200 it takes to add 8gb of ram?
People want their cake and eat it too; to which Tim Cook say "Let them eat cake..."
That's not how pricing works. If the $200 upgrade yields more revenue than that generated by sales of machines with $100 price range you go for teh $200 price point.
The contention is obviously that at some point, making it a $200 upgrade won’t yield more revenue.
The only argument is how close we are to that point.
thats the thing if it is 16GB as standard the price will be higher.
How about fitting 32GB but charging to permit access - initially 8, then 16, 24 or 32.
A quick visit to Apple store and pay for the next memory increment. Seconds to minutes later, your machine needs to restart and has more available memory.
(I'm sure this will be a lead balloon suggestion! But if memory is so cheap, they could reduce SKUs considerably for little cost. It would also allow most of us to purchase from non-Apple retailers even if we want more than entry level memory. And it means that machines in the field which have not yet paid for memory increases up to the max. might continue to be a modest revenue stream for quite some time.)
How about fitting 32GB but charging to permit access - initially 8, then 16, 24 or 32.
There may actually be regulatory issues with this. E.g. the EU might mandate allowing access.
It’s probably a few dollars’ worth of difference. But, four bucks times ten million MacBook Airs a year is still $40M.
See also AirPods. AirPods 4 with or without noise cancellation are almost identical; one difference is that the ones with it have a slightly larger mic. Does that cost Apple $40? Probably more like $2, if that. But at scale, that’s still a fair bit of money.
Subscription memory. You don't own it, you pay for usage.
Meant tongue in cheek.
Yes - there could be such issues. And, having little understanding of legal systems and trade laws, I have no idea if it could be made to fly.