How can Apple sell a Mac with 8GB of RAM in 2023 and call it "Pro"

[bcortens]

For laptops, 1080p is quite sharp so long as subpixel rendering is enabled. Since Apple disabled it, 1080p looks awful on macOS. My old 2010 17" MBP was only 1920x1200 but looks great on Windows/Linux, just not macOS.

But it still seems like it's mostly cheap PC laptops that have 1080p anyways. For desktop, 1440p/4k are the norm and aren't expensive ($200-300 for 27" 4k IPS displays).

While I love the 5k Apple display, I'm fully aware that 5k only exists because of Apple's janky scaling that requires integer-mulitples of their base resolutions. 75% more pixels than 4k for a very slight increase is perceived resolution is hardly worth it if Apple could be bothered to have better scaling. Same with their 4.5k display in the 24" iMac.

Not really, 5K also is barely meeting Apples definition of retina which is that at normal sitting distances the pixels should be impossible to identify.

I get it, you don’t care for apples decision to disable subpixel aliasing, however, retina is a visually superior solution. Avoiding aliasing via more pixels is always going to be sharper than using, what is essentially blurring, to fake it.

Why fake it if you don’t have to?

(I agree that Apple should have continued to support sub-pixel aliasing on non-retina displays)

 

[henkie]

33% decrease in Mac sales and the comments, at least under the biggest Dutch tech website confirm the sentiment of the OP: this is a result of people getting tired of these idiotic base amount of ram/storage and the arguably even more idiotic upgrade prizes. You can get a decent and fast 2tb ssd for ~100 euro, but the upgrade costs 920 euro. It is insane and people are fed up.
Why buy an M3, while the M1 is plenty of fast, and thus the ram and storage will be your main bottleneck for your computing needs? Thus, why buy a base 8GB m3 mbo pro if you can get a 16GB/1tb m1pro somewhere for less?
The Fact that the base m3 mbp is already on sale tells me enough…Same with the 15 inch mba: crippled by the 256/8 base config and crazy upgrade prizes. Would have sold like hotcakes at 512/16, even at a slightly higher price (+50-100 dollar or so).

 

[NT1440]

For laptops, 1080p is quite sharp so long as subpixel rendering is enabled. Since Apple disabled it, 1080p looks awful on macOS. My old 2010 17" MBP was only 1920x1200 but looks great on Windows/Linux, just not macOS.

But it still seems like it's mostly cheap PC laptops that have 1080p anyways. For desktop, 1440p/4k are the norm and aren't expensive ($200-300 for 27" 4k IPS displays).

While I love the 5k Apple display, I'm fully aware that 5k only exists because of Apple's janky scaling that requires integer-mulitples of their base resolutions. 75% more pixels than 4k for a very slight increase is perceived resolution is hardly worth it if Apple could be bothered to have better scaling. Same with their 4.5k display in the 24" iMac.

Every single Lenovo ThinkPad or Dell xps we’ve ordered has 1080p (until the T16 line upped to 1600x1200). The base configs are also 8GB/256GB. Given enterprise sales are the bread and butter of the industry it’s a bit disappointing. Sharp or not, Outlook is barely useable on it if you actually want to read an email without having to actually open it outside the reading pane.

Perhaps it’s because my exposure to my Retina display on my 2015 13” MBP, but I honestly can’t fathom how people can spend all day using 1080p on a 15” laptop.

 

[NT1440]

33% decrease in Mac sales and the comments, at least under the biggest Dutch tech website confirm the sentiment of the OP: this is a result of people getting tired of these idiotic base amount of ram/storage and the arguably even more idiotic upgrade prizes. You can get a decent and fast 2tb ssd for ~100 euro, but the upgrade costs 920 euro. It is insane and people are fed up.
Why buy an M3, while the M1 is plenty of fast, and thus the ram and storage will be your main bottleneck for your computing needs? Thus, why buy a base 8GB m3 mbo pro if you can get a 16GB/1tb m1pro somewhere for less?
The Fact that the base m3 mbp is already on sale tells me enough…Same with the 15 inch mba: crippled by the 256/8 base config and crazy upgrade prizes. Would have sold like hotcakes at 512/16, even at a slightly higher price (+50-100 dollar or so).

Or, so many people bought new machines during Covid and the release of the M series that we’re in the lull of update cycles because only crazy tech people are perpetually updating their laptops?

Notice how the entirety of the M3 launch was focused on people who have yet to upgrade from an Intel based machine?

Seeing as FIRST time Mac buyers are still the majority of sales (close to a 50/50 split), evidence rather than sentiment would point to your assertion not being based on anything but your personal gripes.

 

[Apple_Robert]

for 8GB RAM, €1945 in 2024? yes it is.

Some people don't mind paying that price because the base model is all they need. You judging the price as criminal means you won't buy and that is fine. It doesn't mean it is a rip off for everyone else.

 

[Altis]

Not really, 5K also is barely meeting Apples definition of retina which is that at normal sitting distances the pixels should be impossible to identify.

I get it, you don’t care for apples decision to disable subpixel aliasing, however, retina is a visually superior solution. Avoiding aliasing via more pixels is always going to be sharper than using, what is essentially blurring, to fake it.

Why fake it if you don’t have to?

(I agree that Apple should have continued to support sub-pixel aliasing on non-retina displays)

"Not really" what? 5k vs 4k on a 27" display is a very, very marginal difference, but requires considerable more resources and expense. I say this as someone who adores the 5k display (and with very sharp eyesight), but mostly for the glass and colours. If it were 4k I'd still love it.

Where did I say that retina was inferior? Random strawman... My point was that 1080p on a laptop display with subpixel rendering can look quite good. Even on the very large 17" MBP with an old TN panel, it looks good. 1080p IPS on a 13-14" budget laptop? Most people will find that great.

Pushing super-high resolution displays (with hi-dpi assets) with only 8 GB of shared CPU/GPU RAM just makes it stretched even more thin. 6x more pixels than the 2012 13" MBP with same 8GB RAM 11 years later. Magical.

 

[JouniS]

Not really, 5K also is barely meeting Apples definition of retina which is that at normal sitting distances the pixels should be impossible to identify.

I get it, you don’t care for apples decision to disable subpixel aliasing, however, retina is a visually superior solution. Avoiding aliasing via more pixels is always going to be sharper than using, what is essentially blurring, to fake it.

Why fake it if you don’t have to?

Because displays are always compromises. By requiring one good thing, you make it impossible to get other good things for a reasonable price.

For example, if you accept 4k resolution, you can find plenty of good 32" 144Hz monitors in the $600 to $700 price range. Those are already premium products, and they would be good enough for most Mac users for the same reasons 8 GB configurations are good enough. But Apple expects very high pixel density, which makes smaller monitors with a lower refresh rate 2x to 3x more expensive.

While I'm a demanding computer user in some aspects, I'm just a casual user when it comes to displays. I mostly just work with text, browse the internet, and watch some videos on my Macs. I've been using a 27" 4k monitor next to a 5k iMac for years, and while the displays look different, the internal display is not better in any meaningful sense.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

But I guess, some people here are okay with paying 2000 euro for a laptop with 8GB or pay 230 euro extra for a mere 8GB extra (!!!).

Well, I mean, they HAVE to be ok with it. Not like they’re going to find anything else that runs macOS and macOS apps quite as well. And being OK with it is a better mental place to be in than NOT being ok with it, but buying it anyway and not being ok with it day after day after day.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Like this: https://imgflip.com/memetemplate/98055174/Joey-how-can-you-not-care

How can you not care that Apple makes a thing that I personally think shouldn’t exist!!??!?

 

[redpandadev]

All of this is so very simple. Apple makes a non-pro Pro model because people buy it, which means it suits many - enough that they keep making one. They've made a non-pro Pro model for decades. This happens to actually be one of the most Pro of these models they've ever done.

If you don't like it or it doesn't meet your needs don't buy it. You can customize this particular model with 16gb or 24gb of ram if that's what you need. You could also go to the higher end version if you need. If you want to spend less money and get 16gb or more of ram, you can get an Air and customize that. There's a great deal of choices in the MacBook lineup. If you don't like this one, buy a different one - or none at all.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

It is not just a performance and usability problem, it’s a sustainability and environmental one, too. This is because RAM, historically one of the easiest components to upgrade in order to get more life out of your computer,

I always find it funny how people bring out how sustainable upgrading memory is without taking into account that the memory that gets swapped out simply goes to the landfill ahead of the laptop. What ends up in the landfill? The laptop and its packaging PLUS all the swapped out parts and THEIR packaging.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

What would Mother Nature say about a computer with 8gb of ram that can never be upgraded.. in the year 2023?

Thanks for not supporting the mass production, packaging and delivery of billions of replacement parts, some of which never sell and are buried in their packaging?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

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.

YouTube must be doing some really inventive things with tracking nowadays as YouTube tabs are problematic regardless of how much RAM a person has.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

No, you shouldn't be allowed. It gets boring after a while when it happens every time Apple release a new Mac.

I believe some folks are no longer in the target demographic for Apple, but they THINK they are, thus the disconnect.

 

[3xBoom]

You are making a wrong assumption about the meaning of "Pro" in the name. It doesn't mean "Professional" but "Profane".

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Or, so many people bought new machines during Covid and the release of the M series that we’re in the lull of update cycles because only crazy tech people are perpetually updating their laptops?

Notice how the entirety of the M3 launch was focused on people who have yet to upgrade from an Intel based machine?

Seeing as FIRST time Mac buyers are still the majority of sales (close to a 50/50 split), evidence rather than sentiment would point to your assertion not being based on anything but your personal gripes.

No, can’t be that, tech websites wouldn’t report misleading or incorrect information in order to get more views to their site, WOULD THEY? /s

I do like how the discussions always assume that the ONLY folks buying Macs are folks that have bought them previously, when it’s been 50/50 for quite a long time. I think Apple’s focus is always on first time buyers, creating a value proposition to make those folks want to pay up. If someone that already owns a Mac happens to want what Apple’s selling, bonus! That also clearly highlights why the longer it’s been since someone’s bought a Mac, the less likely they are to feel connected to the latest product lines and in fact, will find a significant amount wrong with the latest product lines.

 

[Altis]

I always find it funny how people bring out how sustainable upgrading memory is without taking into account that the memory that gets swapped out simply goes to the landfill ahead of the laptop. What ends up in the landfill? The laptop and its packaging PLUS all the swapped out parts and THEIR packaging.

Yes because replacing the whole device (chassis, display, battery, keyboard, on-board chips, ports, trim, speakers, camera, mics, etc) is so much more sustainable than just replacing the one bottleneck (that shouldn't be there) and extend its life by years.

You can even use the old RAM to revive another machine, keeping it in service longer too! Amazing

 

[dumastudetto]

That must be painful

Nope.

The power of Apple Silicon makes editing in Final Cut smooth and delightful even with 8GB.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Yeah, but Apple isn't merely looking to break even. If they seriously thought they could sell 100m Macs a year at a decent profit margin, they obviously would. But there aren't enough rich people that Macs appeal to.

Ultimately, Apple aim to squeeze the maximum possible profit from the maximum number of Mac users. To substantially grow the user base though, they'd probably need to substantially lower their prices. But they're BMW, not Ford, so that's not a route they're interested in.

Right, not looking to break even, they’re looking to make a profit worth continuing investing in Macs. At current values, that’s some unknown number that is less than 20 million Macs, with half of that number coming from folks that have never used a Mac before.

 

[Fomalhaut]

I always find it funny how people bring out how sustainable upgrading memory is without taking into account that the memory that gets swapped out simply goes to the landfill ahead of the laptop. What ends up in the landfill? The laptop and its packaging PLUS all the swapped out parts and THEIR packaging.

Yes, true, but….the idea is that the timeline of those events is much longer. The purpose of the RAM/SSD upgrade is to extend the life of the laptop to perhaps twice what it would otherwise have been. So you get one old laptop plus old RAM/SSD in the landfill after 8-10 years, rather than two complete computers.

Of course renewing the whole computer after 4-5 years brings lots of tech benefits, but it’s not really the greenest thing to do unless the machine is largely recyclable.

I have a 2011 Mac Mini (quad core) that I upgraded with max RAM and 2xSSDs, and a 2020 M1 Mini. The old Mini still works OK and isn’t an awful experience, but the M1 Mini runs circles around it.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Yes because replacing the whole device (chassis, display, battery, keyboard, on-board chips, ports, trim, speakers, camera, mics, etc) is so much more sustainable than just replacing the one bottleneck (that shouldn't be there) and extend its life by years.

You can even use the old RAM to revive another machine, keeping it in service longer too! Amazing

When you consider the MASSIVE amount of environmental expenditure to mine materials for, produce, package and ship TONS of replacement parts (some percentage of which never get used and some which never make it to their destination), yeah. Quite clearly, actually.

 

[MBAir2010]

Apple has made it clear that 8GB is base RAM, as ridiculous as we all think it is.

which is good becuz I can only counts to nine

 

[flybass]

When you consider the MASSIVE amount of environmental expenditure to mine materials for, produce, package and ship TONS of replacement parts (some percentage of which never get used and some which never make it to their destination), yeah. Quite clearly, actually.

Putting the words in all caps doesn’t make the argument any more valid.

 

[redheeler]

While I love the 5k Apple display, I'm fully aware that 5k only exists because of Apple's janky scaling that requires integer-mulitples of their base resolutions. 75% more pixels than 4k for a very slight increase is perceived resolution is hardly worth it if Apple could be bothered to have better scaling. Same with their 4.5k display in the 24" iMac.

I don’t like the non-integer scaling at all. It puts stress on the GPU to blend the pixels and causes issues with image quality like fuzzy lines that would normally appear sharp even on a non-Retina display. Apple made that the default on some Macs like my 2019 16” MacBook Pro, I manually changed it back to integer scaling in the display settings.

While I haven’t played around with the Linux or Windows implementation of non-integer scaling, it’s still at best a compromise for inferior hardware.

 

[Altis]

When you consider the MASSIVE amount of environmental expenditure to mine materials for, produce, package and ship TONS of replacement parts (some percentage of which never get used and some which never make it to their destination), yeah. Quite clearly, actually.

A drop in the bucket compared with the waste of replacing the entire machine (including the wastefully low RAM it came with) years ahead of its time.

If you even remotely cared about sustainability, you'd oppose Apple selling a machine with such an obvious bottleneck that will age it years ahead of the rest of the device. But if you're more concerned with AAPL, well...