I refuse to buy an Apple Silicon Mac with only 8 GB RAM!

[kasakka]

I’ll be getting 16GB of RAM in my new Mac, but I still don’t know which model yet. My use case isn’t the same as everyone else, so to say 16GB is a minimum for everyone (including consumers who just surf the internet, check email and light work) is a bit ridiculous.

My parents wouldn’t need more than the base RAM. They’re currently running a 21-inch iMac 2019 with Intel Core i3, but it’s doing fine after I did some clean up. The Core i3 is complete trash. When they go to the iMac 24”, they’ll need a 512GB hard drive at least, but no more than 8GB of RAM.

I don't think we should hold what "the layperson" does as any sort of yardstick here. My parents also use rather old machines with probably no more than 4 or 8 GB RAM and they're fine for their needs.

Apple sells machines with 8 GB RAM and 256 GB disk drive because their beancounters have determined it will sell at the price they set. They could probably make it 16 and 512 GB for a marginal price increase but instead choose to price those very expensive as they also know people will want the machine with those and will reluctantly pay it.

I tried the M1 14" Pro and M2 Air base models at a store recently and for basic everyday web browsing and whatnot they would perform pretty identically. But I know that for my uses 16 GB and dual monitors is a definite must and that put the Air out of the race immediately. The 14" Pro is only marginally larger, thicker and heavier than the M2 Air but that fingerprint magnet blue certainly does look great.

I could totally see myself spending the money on either a M2 14" Pro base model or a discounted M1 14" Pro. Base model M2 Air would have to be a helluva lot cheaper than it is in Europe right now.

 

[pastrychef]

Yes it is. There’s no practical reason to do it in most cases, it degrades the experience and has multiple downsides (especially for a laptop) and by suggesting it, he only gives the idea that this is somehow necessary. It’s not. Just use your laptop normally.

No. It's not. It's a means to maintain a useable Mac if/when SSD is on the brink of failure.

If course it will degrade the experience, but it's better than not being able to use the Mac.

It's up to the users whether or not to do this. Do you do it on his advice? C'mon, man. Stop trying to make up excuses for what was a stupid comment.

 

[ahurst]

We've been having this conversation for so long and it repeats ad infinitum.

In most recent times, go back to the first of the usb-c MacBook Pros and you'll see people saying 8GB is never enough and within 3 years you might as well chuck your laptop in the trash if you only have 8GB RAM due to macOS becoming ever-more bloated and apps getting larger and larger.

You can go back a whole decade! The first MBP with soldered RAM was the 2012 15" Retina, and there are a ton of 2012 threads you can find where people are asking whether 8 GB RAM will be enough for keeping the machine 2-3 years:

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/retina-macbook-pro-is-8gb-ram-enough.1428174/

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/should-i-cancel-my-macbook-pro-retina-8gb-ram-and-switch-to-16gb.1419187/

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/will-i-regret-not-getting-16gb.1481047/

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/is-8gb-enough-ram.1383874/

EDIT: Incredible, user Xcelerate here posting from 2012 with a crystal ball:

I don't know... if you're looking for upgradeability, I feel like there are other brands that are more made for that sort of thing. Apple wants to provide a good product that is "future-proof" for a while.

I'm actually a bit of the opposite opinion. Suppose Apple could integrate every single computational part together -- GPU, CPU, motherboard, RAM -- in one giant fabrication process (not gonna happen, but bear with me). This would drastically reduce power consumption, size, heat production, etc. And they wouldn't be able to overprice their offering because then nobody would buy it. So you get some huge benefits, but the downside is that it's no longer upgradeable. Not too bad of a trade-off, at least for me personally.

 

[aevan]

No. It's not. It's a means to maintain a useable Mac if/when SSD is on the brink of failure.

If course it will degrade the experience, but it's better than not being able to use the Mac.

It's up to the users whether or not to do this. Do you do it on his advice? C'mon, man. Stop trying to make up excuses for what was a stupid comment.

His advice is not to do it as a temporary solution if your SSD is acting strangely and you assume it's on the brink of failure, his advice is to, basically, use the new MacBooks like this from the start - which is bad advice for many reasons. Unless I misunderstood him.

 

[usagora]

I don't think we should hold what "the layperson" does as any sort of yardstick here.

Well, these are laptops marketed towards non-pro consumers, so why not? The only exception is the 13" MB Pro, but it's priced quite a bit lower than the 14"+ MB Pro models (all of which come standard with at least 16/512).

Apple sells machines with 8 GB RAM and 256 GB disk drive because their beancounters have determined it will sell at the price they set. They could probably make it 16 and 512 GB for a marginal price increase but instead choose to price those very expensive as they also know people will want the machine with those and will reluctantly pay it.

You say all that as if it's somehow a bad thing. A business would be stupid to not price their products for maximum profit. If people are paying for them, reluctantly or not, they're voting with their wallet and saying "it's worth it", regardless of what they may say on internet forums. Money speaks louder than words.

 

[pastrychef]

His advice is not to do it as a temporary solution if your SSD is acting strangely and you assume it's on the brink of failure, his advice is to, basically, use the new MacBooks like this from the start - which is bad advice for many reasons. Unless I misunderstood him.

It's ADVICE!! Whether or not to take the advice is up to each individual!

Even in the video he said that option is EXTREME.

 

[aevan]

It's ADVICE!! Whether or not to take the advice is up to each individual!

Even in the video he said that option is EXTREME.

View attachment 2043727

Ok, I guess I misunderstood him then. Still, I don't think this babying of the drives is, actually, necessary.

 

[pastrychef]

Ok, I guess I misunderstood him then. Still, I don't think this babying of the drives is, actually, necessary.

That's opinion.

What the guy gave was advice, not spreading FUD.

 

[aevan]

That's opinion.

What the guy gave was advice, not spreading FUD.

I disagree, but let’s leave it at that.

 

[vigilant]

I'm aware that 8 GB RAM as of now fits most people's needs. And that the Si/ARM SoC technology isn't as RAM dependent as x86.

But macs are so expensive that I want them to last for regular use for a very long time. We know nothing of that now.

I have had my 2012 mini since 2013 and it works just fine. But, then, I installed 16 GB RAM immediately, and feel secure with that. 8 GB RAM for the future, not upgradeble, no way.

If the entry level gets 16 GB of RAM, and today's prices continue, I'll buy one. But not otherwise.

What do you think?

The thing with RAM is if you need it you know it.

I ran on my wife's M1 MacBook Air with 8GBs for a month and I had to REALLY stress it for me to see an issue. So is the question of real world use cases, or opinions.

The RAM being on the same socket as the CPU means high efficiency in use of memory. I have a special build just because of what I do, but for all my personal stuff I largely use an iPad.

Always be pragmatic when configuring a system, and build based on your use case. If you need more time to save to get what you want, do it. If you'd rather get a Dell Latitude or XPS, go for it. There's nothing wrong with it.

 

[ADGrant]

I've been a developer for roughly twenty years. Mostly React stuff, but I dabble in SwiftUI.

Last year I decided that my 2016 16" MBP had reached the end of the line, but the 16" M1 MBP wasn't ready yet. I decided to get the cheapest M1 Mac I could get my hands on (Macbook Air, 8gb, refurb)

There was no 16" MBP, I assume you mean the 2016 15" MBP, the one with the Touch Bar and butterfly keyboard? Any M1 Mac will feel fast compared to that machine which I don't think was much faster than the 2015. I have 2014 15" MBP which is somewhat slower than the last Intel MBA.

 

[ADGrant]

100% my colleagues and I issues. They are opting for the 14" base model because there is no SKU available in the retailers with 16GB of RAM.

Plus the 14" base has been around 1899-1935€ in most retailers in Europe this last couple of weeks.

The 14" base MBP is a much better choice for most people. Unless you are carrying a laptop around a college campus all day, the extra weight is not that big of a deal and the 14" is better in almost every other respect.

 

[kasakka]

You say all that as if it's somehow a bad thing. A business would be stupid to not price their products for maximum profit. If people are paying for them, reluctantly or not, they're voting with their wallet and saying "it's worth it", regardless of what they may say on internet forums. Money speaks louder than words.

Apple does have a bit of a captive audience. If you want MacOS then you buy a Mac. Hackintosh is increasingly less viable and is not exactly a straightforward option.

So Apple is able to get away with bad offerings easier than other manufacturers. If their upgrade pricing was more reasonable or their devices were upgradable (at least for the SSD) then I would not have much complaints. But as is the best I can do is not buy e.g a base model Air and not recommend it to anyone either.

 

[MrGunny94]

The 14" base MBP is a much better choice for most people. Unless you are carrying a laptop around a college campus all day, the extra weight is not that big of a deal and the 14" is better in almost every other respect.

Well some people would like the extra battery life instead and don't need that much power to be honest. But everyone is happy with a 14" because they can hook up dual 4K displays that work got us.

 

[ascender]

The 14" base MBP is a much better choice for most people. Unless you are carrying a laptop around a college campus all day, the extra weight is not that big of a deal and the 14" is better in almost every other respect.

But for "most" people, i.e. the majority, they'll probably be able to do everything they need-to on the base MacBook Air. So why would they want to spend more on a heavier, 14" laptop when they don't have-to?

Even if they're not in full time education, having a smaller, lighter laptop is a selling-point to many people, especially now that with the M series chips, they're incredibly capable machines in their own right.

The proper MBPs are objectively better than the other laptops, but in ways where some potential buyers just won't notice them in day to day use.

 

[mpetrides]

You may not know what RAM is if you think your Kindle has that much.

Oops! Actually I'm well aware of the difference between RAM and storage. But you are correct. Brain fart! The Kindle Fire I was thinking about has 16 GB storage but only 2 GB of RAM. I can't believe I made such a rookie mistake. To be fair I haven't turned on said Kindle Fire in several years.

 

[usagora]

Apple does have a bit of a captive audience. If you want MacOS then you buy a Mac. Hackintosh is increasingly less viable and is not exactly a straightforward option.

So Apple is able to get away with bad offerings easier than other manufacturers. If their upgrade pricing was more reasonable or their devices were upgradable (at least for the SSD) then I would not have much complaints. But as is the best I can do is not buy e.g a base model Air and not recommend it to anyone either.

And just to be clear, nothing you just said here contradicts what I said. Regardless of the reason why people who buy these machines think it's worth it (whether it's because they think it's worth it in and of itself or worth it because they're invested in the Apple "ecosystem"), they're still voting with their wallet and Apple would be stupid to throw away money by undercharging. Obviously, if the sales of these configurations plummeted, Apple would reevaluate their pricing strategy, etc. - they have people (or contract people) studying the market for a living that know what they're doing.

 

[spcopsmac21]

Nope, OpenCore is just another way of building an Hackintosh and, like any Hackintosh, has very specific hardware limitations:

Hardware Limitations | OpenCore Install Guide

dortania.github.io

Plus it has all the other usual issues that come with a Hackintosh (it's a fun hobby for those who want to play with their PC, and not an viable option for those who just want to buy a Mac and get work done on it) (I'm not saying you can't do work on a Hackintosh, nor am I criticizing the Hackintosh community, which seems pretty cool; rather, I'm saying you have to spend a significant percentage of time monkeying around with your PC--especially when Apple breaks it with an OS update--rather than getting stuff done). Your claim misleadingly omits all that.

And after Apple stops producing OS's that run Intel, you'll no longer be able to keep your Hackintosh updated, which is unfortunate for the Hackintosh community.

I have a “ Hackintosh” that gets regular updates to code and works perfectly. There are so many people behind opencore than even apple silicon code won’t be able to stop it from helping deliver thousands of working machines. All built at home, all working perfectly. All running on components that apple hasn’t even thought to integrate into their systems. My opencore machine makes an intel Mac Pro look like a calculator. And for 1/3rd the cost.
I still own apple devices. But open core existing shows that it’s much more than just a hobby.

 

[pastrychef]

I have a “ Hackintosh” that gets regular updates to code and works perfectly. There are so many people behind opencore than even apple silicon code won’t be able to stop it from helping deliver thousands of working machines. All built at home, all working perfectly. All running on components that apple hasn’t even thought to integrate into their systems. My opencore machine makes an intel Mac Pro look like a calculator. And for 1/3rd the cost.
I still own apple devices. But open core existing shows that it’s much more than just a hobby.

I've had a few hackintoshes myself.

While OpenCore is works great, it will not be able to help when Apple drops Intel Mac support in macOS.

 

[ADGrant]

But for "most" people, i.e. the majority, they'll probably be able to do everything they need-to on the base MacBook Air. So why would they want to spend more on a heavier, 14" laptop when they don't have-to?

Even if they're not in full time education, having a smaller, lighter laptop is a selling-point to many people, especially now that with the M series chips, they're incredibly capable machines in their own right.

The proper MBPs are objectively better than the other laptops, but in ways where some potential buyers just won't notice them in day to day use.

I think most people would notice the mini-led screen with the faster refresh rate and better sound system but I wasn't comparing the 14" to the base MBA, I was comparing it to the M2 MBA with 16gb of RAM and 512gb which costs about the same as the 14" MBP.

If the base M2 MBA is sufficient to all meet someone's computing needs, in most cases the much cheaper M1 MBA would probably work just as well.

 

[ADGrant]

Well, these are laptops marketed towards non-pro consumers, so why not? The only exception is the 13" MB Pro, but it's priced quite a bit lower than the 14"+ MB Pro models (all of which come standard with at least 16/512).

It isn't priced much lower if you spec one with 16gb of RAM and a 512gb SSD.

 

[usagora]

It isn't priced much lower if you spec one with 16gb of RAM and a 512gb SSD.

But that's my point - it's priced much lower because it doesn't come standard with 16/512.

 

[ADGrant]

But that's my point - it's priced much lower because it doesn't come standard with 16/512.

There are a lot of other things it doesn’t come with either. It’s possibly the most overpriced MacBook that Apple sells.

 

[unixfool]

While you refuse to buy, I recently bought two with 8 GB RAM. I haven't had an issue yet.

 

[usagora]

There are a lot of other things it doesn’t come with either. It’s possibly the most overpriced MacBook that Apple sells.

As I always say, overpriced products don't sell well (all other things being equal) and the price will change to accomodate that or the product will be discontinued. But I notice people claim a lot of things are "overpriced" that sell very well. In that case, they don't really mean "overpriced" in terms of the market, but overpriced for them personally (i.e. either not in their budget or they personally don't see value where many others do).