You're missing the point. At the starting price of the base MBP, more than 8GB should be standard - irrespective. It's just bad optics; customers are getting nickel and dimed. Hard.
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.
How can Apple sell a Mac with 8GB of RAM in 2023 and call it "Pro"
- Thread starter parseckadet
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's all part of their pricing ladder thing. I can get a MacBook Air with better specs for the same price, but I'm compromising on the screen and extra ports, etc. But, if I'm already spending $1600 on an Air, I might as well upgrade to the Pro. Though the Pro's memory is now too small for me, so I might as well spend $200 on more memory. All of a sudden, I'm buying a $2000 laptop from Apple. I think this MacBook just exists to get us to buy a better one. Like what they do with all of their products.
And that’s how you get every customer to pay as much as they can afford. A MacBook Air without miniLED isn’t incredibly worse and neither is a MacBook Pro with only 8 GB RAM. And then there are refurbished and secondhand Macs. As a customer you pick what’s best for you. And if you can’t make any sacrifices, you pay $7,199.
Max Tech has just posted a quite damning video comparing the base M3 with 8GB and 16GB.
We all know why they do it, t just sucks that they do.
Apple is not the little upstart, underdog anymore. They’re not on the verge of bankruptcy.
The truth is MBP, specifically the base model, is a rounding error in their revenue stream.
Apple could avoid all the negative press and still make truckloads of money.
In fact, I’d say they’d get more sales/money back if they weren’t so punitive.
Apple is not the little upstart, underdog anymore. They’re not on the verge of bankruptcy.
The truth is MBP, specifically the base model, is a rounding error in their revenue stream.
Apple could avoid all the negative press and still make truckloads of money.
In fact, I’d say they’d get more sales/money back if they weren’t so punitive.
I disagree. The 16gb exists and costs what it does. Taking away the 8gb model would just be introducing a barrier for entry by removing a lower cost model.
What this debate really boils down to is that people think the 16gb Mac is too expensive. Let’s not dress it up in any other way.
We’re not arguing anything different. For $1600, yes, it should start at 16GB.
Here’s the thing.
If 8GB of Ram costs Apple $10 in 2020 and 16GB costs Apple $10 in 2023 Apple should use the drop in memory prices to improve the base model.
This is how progress is supposed to work. As transistors and memory become less expensive per unit the amount you get for your money should increase.
Apple no longer seems to care about making progressive improvements on a reasonable time scale. Every year that goes by keeping the base at 8GB becomes less and less defensible as it is less and less capable. I expect Apple won’t stop selling the 8GB model until memory makers stop selling them 4GB modules (I think the m3 still uses two 4GB modules)
I’m waiting for those like you to realize that Apple didn’t name this device the “MacBook Normal™”. Is this machine “usable” for “normal” uses of a Mac? Yes. Is the base model M1 MacBook Air also usable for normal uses? Also yes. Your argument isn’t making the point you think it is. This machine is supposed to be more capable, not just acceptable.
Perhaps others are doing that, but that is not the basis of my complaint. My wife has been using her M1 MacBook Air for 2 years now and still loves it. I never said that 8GB is almost useless. I merely said that a machine marketed as “Pro” is expected to be more capable.
Except this ISN’T an entry level machine. If someone wanted an entry machine they should buy an Air, which can be upgraded to actually be quite capable.
I haven’t been able to keep up with this thread over the last few weeks because of work demands (I’m a software engineer and it’s demo season), but I’ve seen a lot of responses to this thread along the lines of “My sister uses her <insert lower spec machine here> for work all the time and she’s happy with it,” or “I run my business from machine X every day.” Some of these people seem to be taking my original post as a slight against them and their professions, and that I have somehow indicated that these people aren’t “professionals” and therefore their needs aren’t “worthy” of a machine with Pro in the name. That’s not my intention at all. I’m quite confident that you can use whatever machine you have to do all sorts of work, whether that’s as a manager (or even a CEO) of a Fortune 500 company, a mental health professional (such as my wife), an educator, or whether you’re running a lawn care company. I’m also certain you can even develop software with any machine that your budget allows.
All that being said, I’m defining a “Pro” machine as one that is more capable of performing computationally intensive tasks than a machine that is not “Pro”. Considering that we’re talking about computer hardware here, I think that’s a pretty fair definition. I mean, Patrick Mahomes is clearly a “professional” of a certain type. He requires professional quality equipment, such as shoes, helmets, shoulder pads, etc. But he doesn’t require professional quality equipment that a “professional” of a different sort needs. He doesn’t require a professional quality hockey stick, piano, nor a professional quality computer. Just because your profession doesn’t require a computer that is more capable of performing computationally intensive tasks, that doesn’t make your profession less important, nor you less of a “professional.” Your profession just has different requirements than mine does.
As for the base M3 MBP, I think it is pretty clear that there is nothing about that machine that meets my definition of a “Pro” machine. The actual hardware inside the machine is not more capable than the base M2 MacBook Air. The only benefit is the screen quality. But anyone who actually requires that screen, instead of the one in the MacBook Air, for their profession is going to be sorely disappointed when they try to do anything other than just look at a static image on that screen. This base machine just doesn’t meet the requirements of creative professionals. Or even higher level amateurs for that matter.
As a software engineer, between the upteen browser tabs I have open, at least one IDE (if not more), Mail, etc, I typically am using 10GB. And that’s before I try compiling anything, or starting Docker containers or Virtual Machines. Could I do all of this on an 8GB machine? I mean I guess, but it would be really really painful.
While people complain that Apple is miserly with how they equip memory and ssds on the base 'consumer' macs, everyone should understand that those configs are probably great for many use cases. Your argument makes sense for this group of buyers/devices. If you argue that "Apple got it right" in this case, you'd have a good argument.
This issue, more specifically, is about Apple marketing a "pro" device that's targeted at "pro" users that's severely limited for anybody that's doing even a modest amount of multi-tasking. It's a bad choice for those "pro" users. MacRumors readers may know and avoid this, but someone purchasing a base "MacBook Pro" might feel regret soon after their purchase because of it.
While the use cases for these machines are many the RAM limits do limit the ability to ever do more with them. You can't grow with these machines, instead if your needs grow you have to buy a new machine.
It is not just about marketing for me. It is about Apple ending progress on improving base model memory and storage. When Steve Jobs was running the company storage and memory were increased whenever the costs dropped, so they kept the amount they paid for the RAM they were putting into each machine constant but because of the progress of technology the total amount of memory increased over time.
Tim Cooks Apple by contrast is unwilling to upgrade base storage or memory until they are physically no longer being sold the chips. How long did they keep 16 GB in the base iPhone when it was clear it was no longer acceptable. How many years is it acceptable to have 8GB, based on the comments in this forum they should never increase it as long as at least some users can still get by on 8GB. Does Apple pass on the savings in falling RAM prices? No, so they are just defending an increase in margin over time on their Macs.
The most important thing about being called pro is that is's more expenseive, bigger and heavier.
It's more capable than an Air. It has a better screen, better loudspeakers, better port selection and currently also a better CPU & GPU than the base model of Air.
It’s just a brand name to make it appeal to a certain group. The 8gb must sell well otherwise Apple wouldn’t sell it. Which means they’ll keep on selling it until it genuinely is no use for people.
ATP pointed out the other day that the base MacBook Pro has come with 8GB of RAM since 2014. RAM prices have dropped in the last 9 YEARS! Not ok.
In 2018 my company bought me a MacBook Pro with 32GB and 4TB of disks plus the highest end i9 you could get.
My wife's M1 MacBook Air M1 puts it to shame except for VM work and disk space, have not tested that.
At the time I opted for the M1 13" with 16GB and 2TB, the max config. Never looked back and still happy with it.
Nothing here holds a candle to my now outdated M1 Studio Ultra with 4TB disks (pluse multiple T34 M2 added.)
It's all relative. I will recommend 16 - 24GB and 1TB to my daughter for professional audio recording work. For now, I would stay with M2. For this application, there is not a huge difference, unless she wants to pay the M3 delta for games (shaders.)
Forget the labels; buy what you need. If you do not really know, the base config is likely totally fine, and the only issue is your preference for screen size.
My wife's M1 MacBook Air M1 puts it to shame except for VM work and disk space, have not tested that.
At the time I opted for the M1 13" with 16GB and 2TB, the max config. Never looked back and still happy with it.
Nothing here holds a candle to my now outdated M1 Studio Ultra with 4TB disks (pluse multiple T34 M2 added.)
It's all relative. I will recommend 16 - 24GB and 1TB to my daughter for professional audio recording work. For now, I would stay with M2. For this application, there is not a huge difference, unless she wants to pay the M3 delta for games (shaders.)
Forget the labels; buy what you need. If you do not really know, the base config is likely totally fine, and the only issue is your preference for screen size.
Yeah, it basically feels like there are two camps arguing over one another.
I have to wonder - imagine if the base 8gb ram model did not exist, and the 16gb/512gb MBP model was the default (and priced more accordingly). Would people still complain that it was too expensive now that there really isn't anything cheaper to compare it to? Or would they just see a pricey but still reasonably specced machine and just go with it?
Really mind blowing that they're still sticking with 8gb, on a Pro model too lmao. I thought they were at least going to make 12gb as base ram since they're doing those strange ram configs (24, 48, 96gb).
Your argument isn't as great as you think. You're literally complaining only about a name!
Not a tangible drawback, like how the new iMacs now come with 50% less Apple stickers.
Phil Schiller: At what point isn't this just a MacBook Pro?
• Unibody chassis
• High color gamut display
• Revolutionary built-in battery
• LED backlit keyboard
• SD card slot
• FireWire 800
• Up to 8 GB RAM
• Up to 256 GB SSD
2023 MacBook Pro lineup lacks Firewire 800. Clearly not Pro.
Arguing over the name is stupid. It's meaningless.
$1600 USD for a laptop with 8GB of RAM and only supports a single external monitor in 2023 is ridiculous though. The problem with these gimped base configs is that they are what's stocked at places like Best Buy and it's what people buy thinking they're getting a good computer that will last years because they're spending $1600 not realizing it will start choking on anything but the lightest of tasks.
Thunderbolt inherited all the protocols of Firewire. That's why there is a Thunderbolt to Firewire Adapter (MD464ZM/A).
Exactly, especially since the new MacBook Pro has all the capabilities of the old MacBook Pro and then some more.
So spend your money on something else. 🤷
If you buy your computers at BestBuy and allow a retailer to limit your choices, then you're likely not a customer who cares much about dual external monitor support.
It's not my money. It's my friends and families' money. Then they call me and complain their $$$ thing won't do what the old one did.
Prior Intel models did and so do most PCs made in the past decade?
"Old one" here is their old one, not the last one Apple sold.