Yeah "computer needs more RAM" not the same thing as you need a new computer with more RAM.
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.
Apple's Regular Mac Base RAM Boosts Ended When Tim Cook Took Over
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
NOt a strawman.
They sell Macs with more RAM. What's the issue? YOu don't like that other people are buying Macs with less RAM than you need?
YOu don't like that people are buying Macs with as much RAM as an Iphone becasue you need more than 8gb of RAM?
Are you trying to save everybody from themselves? Is everybody's computer going to blow up and go into the trash next year because they bought 8gb?
I think your argument entirely boils down to complaining about the price.
Yes it is with Apple Silicon. That is why I listed both if you have an old Intel iMac or Intel Mac Pro where you can upgrade the RAM.
"computer needs more RAM" can mean close some windows/apps. And that isn't necessarily a showstopper at all.
I don't grok what's wrong about complaining about the price, especially the BTO prices for parts that aren't even Apple's
People interpret the Apple docs to install more memory. Not close apps to give more free RAM.
Computer needs more RAM implies this.
Application needs more RAM can imply what you are stating.
nothing wrong with it per se ... I'm guilty myself. Just some people seem to lose track of what they are actually complaining about.I don't grok what's wrong about complaining about the price, especially the BTO prices for parts that aren't even Apple's
Nevermind some don't have a good grasp of the futility of it given Apple has been doing this for 20+ years while Mac share market share has increased from ~3% to ~16% over that timespan (at least in the US.)
Last edited:
"If memory pressure is yellow, red, or has spikes, check to see if an app is using up memory and causing the memory pressure to increase. If you no longer need to have the app running, you should quit the app."
The only real boost was going from 4 GB to 8 GB in the late 2010s, so yeah, I've noticed that pattern as well.
When looking for a later-generation Intel-based Mac laptop to use at my workplace after my 2015 Retina 15" MacBook Pro wouldn't run the latest versions of Slack and Apple Configurator, I wanted something that had 16 GB of RAM, due to all the multitasking I do, and generally at that time, only the 15" MacBook Pros came with that as standard. But early this month I lucked out and managed to find a 2018 Retina 13" MacBook Air that came with 16 GB of RAM AND a 512 GB SSD to boot!
I was able to wipe and "restore" the Air's SSD by hooking it up to my M1 MacBook Air via Thunderbolt 3 and using Apple Configurator to do the task. I attempted a Mac OS install via Internet Recovery, and it was SLOW because the built-in battery was practically dead, but once I got it installed and I could get into the System Information, I was pleased to see it was configured with 16 GB of RAM! Then among replacing the battery, I succeeded in getting it operating like it's supposed to, and while it's not as fast as my M1 Air (also with 16 GB of RAM) or even the 2015 Retina Pro I used before it, for work purposes it's completely adequate.
This was the first MacBook Air to actually have a 16 GB RAM configuration! Especially now that the Air was Apple's entry-level laptop for consumers and education markets.
When looking for a later-generation Intel-based Mac laptop to use at my workplace after my 2015 Retina 15" MacBook Pro wouldn't run the latest versions of Slack and Apple Configurator, I wanted something that had 16 GB of RAM, due to all the multitasking I do, and generally at that time, only the 15" MacBook Pros came with that as standard. But early this month I lucked out and managed to find a 2018 Retina 13" MacBook Air that came with 16 GB of RAM AND a 512 GB SSD to boot!
I was able to wipe and "restore" the Air's SSD by hooking it up to my M1 MacBook Air via Thunderbolt 3 and using Apple Configurator to do the task. I attempted a Mac OS install via Internet Recovery, and it was SLOW because the built-in battery was practically dead, but once I got it installed and I could get into the System Information, I was pleased to see it was configured with 16 GB of RAM! Then among replacing the battery, I succeeded in getting it operating like it's supposed to, and while it's not as fast as my M1 Air (also with 16 GB of RAM) or even the 2015 Retina Pro I used before it, for work purposes it's completely adequate.
This was the first MacBook Air to actually have a 16 GB RAM configuration! Especially now that the Air was Apple's entry-level laptop for consumers and education markets.
I freely admit I complain about Apple pricing - especially upgrade pricing - as do many others. I still buy them because they have (good) value to me.
I think Apple's focus on generating profit via non-upgradeable ram and storage is lazy. If they set their minds to it, I'm sure they could find other ways to boost HW profits. For example - maybe setting higher 'early adopter' pricing for their new products - or even allowing customers to 'bid' on pre-release models to extract that additional profit out of those willing to pay a nice premium. Many Apple customers are willing and able to pay higher prices. Apple needs to find a better way to extract that value, while still holding onto those unwilling to pay a higher price.
At any rate, getting back to the subject of this thread, which you keep trying to change - My argument, boils down to Apple's hypocrisy on the matter. They're saying (and you are fiercely defending) it's fine to sell a multi-tasking computer - even a "Pro" computer with the same amount of memory as a single-tasking phone.
My indignation arises from my feeling that these devices will end up in a landfill well earlier than they should because they become too limited over time.
So people shouldn't be allowed to buy a Mac with 8gb RAM nor should Apple be allowed to sell them one because you have deemed no Mac can be sold with the same amount of RAM as a phone?
The customers don't get a say in this nor the companies? Just you?
Do I have to pretend like my M1 8gb Mini doesn't work perfectly for my needs? Do the millions who bought 8gb MBAs the past few years have to pretend the same?
Last edited:
Again, bugs are a completely other story. If you have a bad memory leak that is an issue that needs to be fixed. That's a straw-man argument, FYI. This discussion is around general RAM required for operating day to day with functional software. 8GB is pathetic on any new machine at the price point Apple charges. Sure, I have an 8GB RasberryPi that is great with 8GB and even 4GB, but it's a small embedded computer not meant to do much at the end of the day and costs less than $100. Come to think of it, it has 8GB RAM and costs less than $100 for the whole thing. For what Apple is charging, it should start at 16GB for even the base model. If you are consistently seeing red memory pressure on your system (and the software you are working with isn't bugged), You need more RAM. Period.
Just a note, the RaspberryPi 5 uses LPDDR4X-4267 SDRAM, which happens to be the same as the memory used with the M1. The newer Macs and all Pro versions use LPDDR5X, which does probably cost a couple dollars more, sure.
Last edited:
I can only assume that the argument these people are failing to make is that the base models (8/256) should be priced lower. I feel that this is entirely fair.
It's one thing to complain about Apple's upgrading pricing, it's another to imply that Macs 8gb ram are utterly gimped and incapable of performing even the most basic of tasks (people here seem to think that you need 16gb ram just to open a few chrome tabs).I don't grok what's wrong about complaining about the price, especially the BTO prices for parts that aren't even Apple's
I spent 2 months on a base M2 Mac Mini
The project is over. About 2 months ago now, a friend of mine sold me a base 8/256 Mac Mini M2 for a stupid low price which I couldn't turn down. It was his first ARM Mac after his old 16" Intel lap burner gave up. He bought an M3 iMac to replace the mini with so wanted to dump it off. I...
forums.macrumors.com
I mean, if we want a real-world example of what a 8gb Mac mini is capable of...
Spoiler - quite a lot, actually.
I have a 32GB model and am shocked how often it runs of of memory and swaps. Basically, open any major non-Apple app (Adobe, Microsoft, etc) and within minutes the thing is swapping...
Yes, but, I also hope they keeping improving or they will lose it fast.What do you think Apple has been experiencing for the past 2 decades? They are reaping the benefits of having an integrated ecosystem because they were the only company willing to invest in having an ecosystem in the first place.
So yeah, I for one certainly hope that Apple continues to reap these benefits for a good long time to come.
I'd like to see the new base for all MACs to be 32 GB... and then they can hold steady for a while.
The down side of wanting this is, they can make the older computer obsolete faster, by making the new software require the more memory.
The down side of wanting this is, they can make the older computer obsolete faster, by making the new software require the more memory.
8 GB of RAM is enough to do quite a bit of decent 4k video editing work and Photoshop work. One of my clients have several base M1 iMacs that have this workflow.
This is not a strawman argument because the context is "Red memory pressure = get more RAM". And you explained why this isn't a binary decision in your first two sentences. RAM discussion is more than a one sentence recommendation. I have SAVED many of my clients from wasting money on RAM upgrade moving away from RAM heavy Adobe to Affinity for example. They had lower RAM usage and it performed better for their workflow.
People are just being overly dramatic in this whole RAM discussion. Like I said, There is NO WAY I can use a system less than 128GB of RAM. But I don't go around saying how horrible 64GB of RAM is. I would personally prefer 128GB of RAM to be the base! I don't think anyone would argue otherwise. I also wish RTX 4090s don't cost $1,500+. I also wish my crappy Microsoft Surface Laptop didn't cost $2,000+
Buy the RAM you need and be done with it.
Wow. I had to look up the minimum system requirements for Final Cut Pro, and... it's 8GB (16GB recommended). I can't imagine doing editing on a system with 8GB RAM. Especially in 4K.
Oh, and don't badmouth my 64GB RAM video editing system! (kidding)
It certainly won’t cover extreme 4K editing. That is why RAM recommendations are more conversational. And when you deal with clients that have departments that have 50+ computers, forcing unnecessary upgrades can cost thousands or hundreds of thousands.Wow. I had to look up the minimum system requirements for Final Cut Pro, and... it's 8GB (16GB recommended). I can't imagine doing editing on a system with 8GB RAM. Especially in 4K.
Oh, and don't badmouth my 64GB RAM video editing system! (kidding)
The problem is that it is 10x the cost of the same thing on Windows. How is that hard to understand?
Sure it does make sense.
When I play a game, it's a single task on both platforms and these games are the primary use case for 8GB. Also iPhone has a major use case that Mac doesn't: AR which uses TONS of memory.
I already criticized Apple for failing to drop unnecessary features from Vision Pro that would have easily dropped the price tag substantially.
Did you not know that SSDs wear out? This is a known fact.