Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

fathergll

macrumors 68000
Sep 3, 2014
1,849
1,603
MBPs have been all SSD since the Retina era and MBA since the 2010 refresh. What are you referring to?


I am talking about the non retina mid 2012 models that were not discontinued until Q4 2013. I literally know people who got duped into buying those models when SSD was completely the standard.

At least with the Apple Silicon and 8GB an average user can't tell the difference at all.... but those HDDs Macs were just terrible no matter what your workload was. The best analogy I have is internet speeds. 8GB is like someone having a 50MB/s connection speed. You can't tell any difference for majority of use cases(web browsing, Youtube, basic downloading files) until you start hitting it hard with multitasking or you really download/upload huge files...etc. The HDD Macs were like having dial up from the get go.
 

Analog Kid

macrumors G3
Mar 4, 2003
9,360
12,603
Being in stock and available doesn't tell me anything about how many are actually being sold.
But it tells you what they expect to sell. Apple's supply chain is a masterclass in just-in-time production, and the base models are the ones they choose to keep in inventory. They don't bait you into the store with a low price and then say "sorry, we don't have those in stock, but we can get it for you in two weeks or for a few hundred more you can get this beauty". No, they have the base models on hand ready to go.

When you go to Amazon, as far as I can tell, the base models are the only ones available with a choice of storage options.

Again, reconsider the leap in logic between "I don't want one" and "nobody wants one" and things start to look different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dmr727

flybass

macrumors regular
May 1, 2015
162
268
What would Mother Nature say about a computer with 8gb of ram that can never be upgraded.. in the year 2023?

Apple can certainly afford more RAM at lower prices. The latest filing for Apple has gross margin at ~45%. As a PC reference point, Lenevo's GM is ~16%.
 

nathansz

macrumors 68000
Jul 24, 2017
1,692
1,950
People are performing high-demand tasks on MacBooks Pros and iPads Pros with 8GB with lightning-fast performance. It's absolutely enough RAM for the vast majority of customers due to that incredible Apple SoC.

Not sure what you define as “high-demand tasks”


Regardless, it does not change the fact that 8GB of ram on apple silicon macOS not equal 64GB of ram on intel macOS
 

Analog Kid

macrumors G3
Mar 4, 2003
9,360
12,603
The latest filing for Apple has gross margin at ~45%. As a PC reference point, Lenevo's GM is ~16%.

Gross margins exclude engineering costs among many, many other things. It includes the material cost of the M3 chip, but none of the design cost of creating it. Meanwhile Lenovo buys chips from Intel and Intel has a profit attached to that chip that covers their engineering costs. So Lenovo's gross margins do account for the engineering costs of the processor they use (but not whatever engineering cost Lenovo expended designing the circuit boards and plastics).

Likewise with the OS development.

That's not all of it, but it's notable.

Apple can certainly afford more RAM at lower prices.

That would just undermine the price signal in the market. When you give things away at below the profit maximizing price you can't track what people truly value.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fomalhaut

henkie

macrumors regular
Aug 30, 2023
162
281
Let me help you understand: it's enough, for a lot of people. Those people will buy it. If the machines were somehow nonfunctional due to 8 GB of RAM, people wouldn't buy them, and Apple wouldn't sell them. You have no argument when the reality is: they sell, and the people that buy them, have no problem with them.

It's impossible NOT to justify it, because reality takes care of that.
Well the 34% decline in Mac sales beg to differ…People are getting fed up I feel. Again: 8GB in a 2000 euro laptop (taxes and stuff) would be criminal in 2014. Let alone in 2023. But the Apple apologists are in full force here, while the rest of the internet shakes their head in wonder (eg https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/3/...hould-come-with-more-than-8gb-of-ram#comments).
 

flybass

macrumors regular
May 1, 2015
162
268
Gross margins exclude engineering costs among many, many other things. It includes the material cost of the M3 chip, but none of the design cost of creating it. Meanwhile Lenovo buys chips from Intel and Intel has a profit attached to that chip that covers their engineering costs. So Lenovo's gross margins do account for the engineering costs of the processor they use (but not whatever engineering cost Lenovo expended designing the circuit boards and plastics).

Likewise with the OS development.

That's not all of it, but it's notable.



That would just undermine the price signal in the market. When you give things away at below the profit maximizing price you can't track what people truly value.
Fair point on including R&D expenditure - viewing operating margin Apple comes in at ~30% vs Lenovo at 2%.

Not going to argue your second point - it is essentially inherency. Because Apple maximizes profit and they do "X", then "X" must be optimal.
 

Abazigal

Contributor
Jul 18, 2011
20,392
23,890
Singapore
Well the 34% decline in Mac sales beg to differ…People are getting fed up I feel. Again: 8GB in a 2000 euro laptop (taxes and stuff) would be criminal in 2014. Let alone in 2023. But the Apple apologists are in full force here, while the rest of the internet shakes their head in wonder (eg https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/3/...hould-come-with-more-than-8gb-of-ram#comments).
I could also argue that the drop in Mac sales is because the M1 chip was so good (8gb ram and all) that people simply don't feel compelled to upgrade. That's the exactly opposite of the forced obsolescence argument that people so love to trot out against Apple.

Remember - people are not trashing their Macs and flocking over to windows. They just aren't buying new Macs in the quantities that they did during the pandemic (which is itself a whole different context altogether), but they are staying Mac users, and I feel that is testament to the longevity and the utility of the Mac.
 

Fomalhaut

macrumors 68000
Oct 6, 2020
1,993
1,724
They could just get a macbook air then. What you described is light office use, not heavy work
Of course. My point is that the name “MacBook Pro” has nothing to do with its suitability or not for “professional use” (i.e. for work). Any Mac would serve well for the vast majority of work tasks.

I wish they had kept names like “Powerbook” or “Mac Plus”, which convey the idea of a more powerful variant of a base model.

When people make blanket statements like “Professionals need x”, they really haven’t considered the whole spectrum of professional computer usage.
 

QCassidy352

macrumors G5
Mar 20, 2003
12,066
6,107
Bay Area
I have a MacBook Air M2 with 8 GB RAM, and more would not improve my user experience in any way. That said, I think it should be 16 GB for a machine with the price of the pro.
 

Fomalhaut

macrumors 68000
Oct 6, 2020
1,993
1,724
You take it in chin while buying and then on trade in/reselling as the loaded models go for almost the same as the base ones too.
Very true. I took a big financial hit when I sold my upgraded 2019 MBP 16”. Despite upgrading RAM, SSD, and GPU, I barely recouped any money on the upgrades compared to a base spec machine.

I do have a pretty good idea of the specs that I need though, so I reluctantly bought what I needed, and just had to suck up both the purchase price and relatively poor resale price.
 

boss.king

macrumors 603
Apr 8, 2009
6,394
7,647
I could also argue that the drop in Mac sales is because the M1 chip was so good (8gb ram and all) that people simply don't feel compelled to upgrade. That's the exactly opposite of the forced obsolescence argument that people so love to trot out against Apple.

Remember - people are not trashing their Macs and flocking over to windows. They just aren't buying new Macs in the quantities that they did during the pandemic (which is itself a whole different context altogether), but they are staying Mac users, and I feel that is testament to the longevity and the utility of the Mac.
Exactly. When we were on Intel Macs, a bunch of people I know would upgrade every couple of years for more power. Now those same people are still on M1 Pro and Max machines and have no plans on upgrading.

Regularly having to replace a machine is a failure, not a success.
 
Last edited:

GoetzPhil

macrumors member
Dec 30, 2019
54
30
Because People become dumb and dumber over the last few years, in 2 years they will sell 4GB and in 5 years its "768MB ought to be enough for everyone" ... And people will hail Apple for its foresight...
 
  • Like
Reactions: flybass

mode11

macrumors 65816
Jul 14, 2015
1,452
1,172
London
But it tells you what they expect to sell. Apple's supply chain is a masterclass in just-in-time production, and the base models are the ones they choose to keep in inventory. They don't bait you into the store with a low price and then say "sorry, we don't have those in stock, but we can get it for you in two weeks or for a few hundred more you can get this beauty". No, they have the base models on hand ready to go.

When you go to Amazon, as far as I can tell, the base models are the only ones available with a choice of storage options.

Again, reconsider the leap in logic between "I don't want one" and "nobody wants one" and things start to look different.
All that tells you is that Apple’s pricing is so high / its upgrade charges so prohibitive that most people go for the base model regardless of what would be ideal. All the more reason for Apple to provide a sensible amount of RAM and storage in the base model. Otherwise, most of its user base are using anemic spec that’s hurting their experience (you can’t argue that even casual users benefit from miserly storage).
 

phillytim

macrumors 68000
Aug 12, 2011
1,784
1,272
Philadelphia, PA
The Verge: “Actually, yes, a brand-new $1,600 computer should come with more than 8GB of RAM.”

 

oldmacs

macrumors 601
Sep 14, 2010
4,941
7,182
Australia
I'm not going to bother reading 19 pages of people defending Apple. My work provided M2 Air has run out of ram one too many times for my liking. Regardless of whether some people can get away with 8GB of ram, it's going to reduce the lifespan of these devices as software becomes more demanding.

It's a ridiculous amount to charge for a meagre amount of ram, plain and simple.
 

sarga

macrumors newbie
Feb 14, 2021
8
5
I'm curious to see when the 8/256 proponents will be selling their Macs at the bazaar in 5-8 years.Judging by the arguments, it looks to me like they're throwing the Macs in the trash.It's already a problem to sell a Mac with 8 GB of RAM at the bazaar today, let alone in 5 years.
 

henkie

macrumors regular
Aug 30, 2023
162
281
I could also argue that the drop in Mac sales is because the M1 chip was so good (8gb ram and all) that people simply don't feel compelled to upgrade. That's the exactly opposite of the forced obsolescence argument that people so love to trot out against Apple.

Remember - people are not trashing their Macs and flocking over to windows. They just aren't buying new Macs in the quantities that they did during the pandemic (which is itself a whole different context altogether), but they are staying Mac users, and I feel that is testament to the longevity and the utility of the Mac.
I do not argue the power of the m series: they are fantastic. But I have also think the refurbished market is doing really well because of these idiotic prizes: at least it is somewhat palatable. M1 is not the bottleneck, is is the 8GB ram or 256gb ssd. Would love to see the numbers.
 

traderdude123

macrumors member
May 12, 2023
81
50
This must be April.

16 GB RAM is not enough these days. I made a mistake thinking 16GB is sufficient for my mac mini. Now i m stuck with low performance machine for quite some time and its frustrating.

Anyone working with images/videos/developer needs 32 GB at MINIMUM and if apple thinks 8GB is pro, they are the biggest fools ****ing their customers.
 

davidespinosa

macrumors member
Oct 4, 2013
31
30
YES, this is really a problem.
8gb isn't even enough for web browsing in 2023.
I have to convince my non-technical friends to buy 16gb, and they don't always believe me.
The video above will certainly help.
 

picpicmac

macrumors 65816
Aug 10, 2023
1,239
1,833
8gb isn't even enough for web browsing in 2023.
I'm sitting here browsing the web with 5GB. On occasion I have to be careful with Chrome as if I load too many YouTube tabs my Mac will stall for some seconds (usually) but not so much in Firefox.

Of course people will browse the web just fine with 8GB.

You lot just want to whine.

Or, the reality is you are complaining because the price of Apple is more than you have.

In that case then just go build yourself a tiny box PC built around some low cost AMD processor. All sorts of hobbyist boxes can be built for less than $500. Do yourself a favor and go do that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlphaCentauri

Fomalhaut

macrumors 68000
Oct 6, 2020
1,993
1,724
What does that look like when it happens? I'd like to know what to look for on my machine.
The symptom of RAM starvation is generally an increasing lack of responsiveness to user interaction (e.g. text input) especially when switching between applications, but also when moving between documents in the same applications (e.g. switching between browser tabs).

Opening new applications may result in "beach balls" (the rotating colour wheel cursor) and long wait times.

Some applications may stop responding, which can be "remedied" by option-cmd-escape and force-quitting an unresponsive application.

Eventually, the machine can just lock up completely (no cursor or keyboard response), requiring a hard power down (pressing the power button until the machine turns off). With most applications, you won't lose data, but it's best avoided.

Some people claim they've never had this happen on their Mac; my experience is that if you have a lot of apps & browser tabs open, that it's pretty easy to crash macOS. I also find that my M1 Max MBP does a "quiet reboot and restore" every so often when it's sleeping because of some rogue process causing a kernel panic - I think this is probably related to connected peripherals more than anything else.

It's a good practice to monitor your RAM usage and which processes are using it. This can be a relatively complex topic because there are lots of different metrics available. This article is an example of some explanations: https://eclecticlight.co/2022/08/13/activity-monitor-meanings-and-misleadings/#:~:text=Real Memory is physical memory,is shared with other processes.

In Activity Monitor you can get an overview in the "memory" tab, and individual process metrics to see if any individual process is hogging memory, or increasing memory usage, which might indicate a "memory leak" in an application.

The overview and the simple memory pressure "colour graph" should give you an idea if you need to start some remedial action. Here is mine at the current time:

1699087968028.png


You can see that no swap is being used and that memory pressure is green. This is a good sign, but if you notice that you are using significant swap (say more than about 25% of your physical RAM), you may be starting to tax your system. That said, it is the actual amount of reading and writing to swap that causes the slowdown because the OS is having to moving active chunks of application memory onto much slower SSD to make space in RAM. These are "page ins" and "page outs", which you used to be able to see in the Activity Monitor memory overview, but now require other tools (vm_stat or third party tools).

I use iStatMenus, which gives me this overview:

1699088277835.png


Again, swap memory is showing as zero, but also I have no reads and writes to swap. Even if I had multiple GB of swap memory, it would be the page ins/outs that kill performance. If you close a lot of apps/documents, you will free memory, but if these were already in swap, you won't suddenly see your free RAM increase, although over time, swap usage will decrease.

Other metrics to look out for are: wired, application, compressed, cached, and free memory. Broadly speaking "wired" memory is for OS code that has to stay in memory, application is for apps, compressed is for "infrequently used" parts of application code that can be made smaller until needed, but still stay in memory, cached keep recently used application code and data in memory in case it is need again in the short term, and free memory is memory with no assigned data.

There is a common misunderstanding that having lots of "free" memory is a good thing, like having a healthy bank balance; this is not so. Any free memory should be used for some benefit to the system, generally for caching files and code, so that it can be very quickly referenced (e.g. when you switch applications or documents). Free memory is wasted memory!

You will generally see the memory pressure turn yellow when you start to increase compressed memory to close to about half of your physical RAM (e.g. around 15GB on my 32GB system), or when swap is close to a third of your RAM (c. 10GB in my case), or a combination of both. In my experience high amounts of compressed memory can cause memory pressure warnings, even if swap usage is not particularly high.

TLDR; keep a watch on your memory usage if you are the kind of user who opens lots of apps/documents/brower tabs and doesn't bother to close them, and have a "tidy up" every day or so to prevent getting into a memory starved situtation. I probably have 100 Safari browser tabs open at the moment so it's time I cleared my "virtual desktop"! (Safari doesn't have a "tab sleep" function like Chrome & Edge to reduce memory impact)
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.