End of the line in sight?

[jpietrzak8]

1. Why should non upgradeable RAM reduce the useable lifespan of a computer?

Hmm. My mother has a late 2009 mac mini, which she uses mostly for e-mail, browsing, and photos. Never had a problem with it, until earlier this year, it suddenly slowed to a crawl. I took a look at it, and the thing was completely out of RAM; even with no apps running, it barely had any free RAM left. The problem turned out to be that she had upgraded the machine to OSX 10.10, and the default amount of RAM that came with the machine (2 GB) just wasn't enough to run both the OS and an application at the same time.

So, I upgraded her machine to 4 GB, and she's a happy camper again.

I guess the thing here is, what seems to be plenty of RAM now might not be years down the road. That 2009 Mini is still perfect for her needs; but if its RAM couldn't be upgraded, it would have needed to be completely replaced. (That, or downgrade the OS and try to avoid any future updates...)

 

[MarcoCapa]

I think that the ability to upgrade is really useful, but the worst thing is the greediness of Apple... Besides their love for the money people who don't upgrade in a reasonable span of time force the brand to support their technology ( Apple and others without difference) leading to a software with more error and less performance
I think that the correct lifespan for a Mac used to work is 5/6 years... For the MacBook Pro circa two redesign...
For some casual use maybe good, but remember your time is precious and limited and the less you invest in working ( meaning the time spent waiting something to be done by the cpu/GPU power) the more you have to enjoy with your family/friends
Have a nice day from a cloudy Tuscany

 

[Ebenezum]

1. Why should non upgradeable RAM reduce the useable lifespan of a computer? How long is that anyway? Previous generations had upgradeable RAM because the requirements of OS, apps and hardware were increasing exponentially. We have probably moved beyond that now.

Those running pro apps, such as those for audio and video productivity, may require more RAM for them to work well. However, Joe or Jill average, with undemanding use of basic apps can get by with 4 GB RAM. Want or desire more? 8 GB RAM is available, off the shop shelf. Need more? Custom order, and wait a few days for delivery.

2. It depends on your requirements. Higher specs may offer more bang for your buck should you need or desire them, but why cough up for more then your current or anticipated needs?

Bragging rights, if you have the bucks, I guess.

3. While some folks needs may change radically in a short space of time, for many, if not most they do not change much over the lifespan of a computer.

If needs do change markedly, you are probably better off with a new computer sporting current tech, rather than upgrading an old one. If they no longer meet requirements, Mac Minis hold their value quite well, so they can be off loaded on the second hand market, to offset some of the cost of a new computer………..

So, no, you don't have to throw your old computer in the trash can. Strikes me as being a win / win situation

1. That is assuming 4 Gb of RAM is enough for the lifespan of the Mac. My previous iMac was usable over 7 years because I could increase its RAM to 6 Gb. Without that capacity I would have to purchase new Mac much sooner for much higher cost! I would be surprised if RAM needs of software are going to stop increasing.

As for the upgrades Apple charges ridiculous prices for RAM compared to third party sources. I don't see how soldered RAM is going to benefit user?

3. I seriously doubt prices of used Macs with soldered RAM would be as high as previous models with upgradable RAM.

Furthermore upgrading current Mac is most cases more economical compared to purchasing new and selling old model.

To me it seems current situation is win/ win for Apple, not necessarily win for user.

 

[MacRobert10]

How about these theories:

1. Tim Cook is an idiot.
2. The sales and reviews for the new super-duper iPad haven't been good, so he's trying to push it off on consumers as a viable Mac replacement.

 

[Micky Do]

1. That is assuming 4 Gb of RAM is enough for the lifespan of the Mac. My previous iMac was usable over 7 years because I could increase its RAM to 6 Gb. Without that capacity I would have to purchase new Mac much sooner for much higher cost! I would be surprised if RAM needs of software are going to stop increasing.

As for the upgrades Apple charges ridiculous prices for RAM compared to third party sources. I don't see how soldered RAM is going to benefit user?

3. I seriously doubt prices of used Macs with soldered RAM would be as high as previous models with upgradable RAM.

Furthermore upgrading current Mac is most cases more economical compared to purchasing new and selling old model.

To me it seems current situation is win/ win for Apple, not necessarily win for user.

How much RAM did your last iMac start with?

My early 2009 base modelMini started with 1 GB. I added an extra 4 when I did the upgrade to Mountain Lion. I anticipate getting a couple or three more years, based on my present use, which seems unlikely to change much.

The minimum RAM needs of of OS X did increase quite a bit through the earlier iterations, but it has remained 2 GB since 10.7. Beyond that how much a user actually needs is more a factor of use rather than OS. For basic use 4 GB is probably enough. For more demanding use and pro apps, get more.

As to whether OS requirements will continue to increase, your guess is as good as mine, but with the move to soldered RAM it suggests that it is not going to be the case any time soon.

Get what you need, or anticipate needing, rather than whinging about soldered RAM, which is likely here to stay for consumer level computers, and not just from Apple.

How about these theories:

1. Tim Cook is an idiot.
2. The sales and reviews for the new super-duper iPad haven't been good, so he's trying to push it off on consumers as a viable Mac replacement.

The iPad Pro has been out for just a few days, and the reviews I have seen have generally been quite favourable.

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/tablets/ipad-pro-1269255/review

http://time.com/4113160/ipad-pro-review/

http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/11/9705966/apple-ipad-pro-review

As to sales, it is early days yet. The iPad Pro is not for everyone, but for some it may replace a laptop. For others it may complement a laptop or a desktop. And then there are those of us for whom a small desktop is all the computer we need.

Tim Cook may, or may not be an idiot, but cynics suggesting that the iPad Pro is a failure after just a few days are are not displaying much savvy.