If Apple can do one of these upgrades for free on a MBA, which would you rather have?

[digitalbreak]

I will got for more storage given that you already have 16GB RAM. Cloud storage still requires you to download/offload files to manage space and do anything wrong, you may as well delete the copy in the cloud. External drive is a mess with USB-C specs and you may not get the advertised speed due to the port specs.

Just because you can get cloud storage or external drives doesn’t mean storage isn’t an issue. Depends on your use case of course but having more internal faster always accessible storage goes miles ahead in terms of performance - especially considering photo/video editing, working with large files and also helps MacOS manage swap memory better.

 

[pshufd]

I will got for more storage given that you already have 16GB RAM. Cloud storage still requires you to download/offload files to manage space and do anything wrong, you may as well delete the copy in the cloud. External drive is a mess with USB-C specs and you may not get the advertised speed due to the port specs.

Just because you can get cloud storage or external drives doesn’t mean storage isn’t an issue. Depends on your use case of course but having more internal faster always accessible storage goes miles ahead in terms of performance - especially considering photo/video editing, working with large files and also helps MacOS manage swap memory better.

I have a Windows desktop with i7-10700, 64 GB of RAM and 5 TB SSD. That's my NAS. If I need to do something big, I use that. But it otherwise serves all of the other devices at home. Storage on that system is cheap.

If I needed more, I'd go with a 5950X or ThreadRipper.

 

[senttoschool]

So far, only 6.4% of users chose a better webcam. I know it's probably not statistically significant but it gives us a pretty good idea.

It's highly likely that Apple has done these surveys as well and found that people would rather have other upgrades for the money than a 1080p camera.

But for some reason, these 6.4% and reviewers are very vocal about the 720p webcam. It's clear that people generally don't care about the webcam quality and would prefer the money spent elsewhere. In other words, people buy Macbook Airs regardless of webcam quality.

I honestly would not want Apple to spend the engineering costs and higher camera costs on a better camera. Give me 16GB of RAM all day.

 

[jdb8167]

Something else being support for 2 4k 60fps external monitors. The lack of this must have been cost reduction. So for the extra $200 give me multiple external monitor support.

 

[aleni]

Don't really care about 1080p. It's not like I want people in zoom to see my face's pores super clear. Meanwhile 8 to 16gb of ram as default is nice.

 

[armoured]

It was a PCIe card with DIMM slots that is presented as a disk. My idea would be to use it as a swap drive.

No reason that a company couldn't make one that runs over USB 4 or TB.

Fast external SSDs are a real product that can be bought and used today. External ram drives are not (as far as I'm aware) available, and if so, would be quite expensive.

And I think over USB4/TB you'd find that an external ram drive as you're suggesting would be speed constrained/throttled. This is NOT a system replacement for ram, since as you say, it would present as just a fast drive.

We could come up with hypotheticals about advantages but it seems to me would be a pretty expensive bit of gear with advantages mostly at the margin for specific uses. (Frankly I think almost all the advantages could be achieved by putting larger ram cache on an ssd drive or in a fusion-type specialised bit of kit).

RAM in comparison is universal in application for all users at system level.

Anyway, all that to say: right now it is absolutely possible to buy an external SSD with few disadvantages (inconvenience being the main one); there is no 'external ram' product widely available at reasonable pricing, and no, even if it did exist, it's still not on-board ram and would have major disadvantages compared to on-board ram.

I'll take the on-board ram and deal with external drives when the time comes.

 

[jeanlain]

Ultimately, microphone quality is way more important than 1080p for video conferencing.
Max Tech has been making comparisons between M1 laptops and PC counterparts, and the Mac is always noticeably better than the PC.
Like many of you, I've been video conferencing a lot lately. Many of my coworkers call from PCs with awful built-in microphones, and those who have Macs sound way better. This has a much higher impact on our discussions than webcam quality, 720p being more than good enough anyway.
That's an example of what Apple does best. They don't try to show higher number in specs that only geeks care about ("duh, 720 is lower than 1080"), they make improvements that are not immediately quantifiable, but which matter the most for the majority of users.

 

[armoured]

Like many of you, I've been video conferencing a lot lately. Many of my coworkers call from PCs with awful built-in microphones, and those who have Macs sound way better. This has a much higher impact on our discussions than webcam quality, 720p being more than good enough anyway.
That's an example of what Apple does best. They don't try to show higher number in specs that only geeks care about ("duh, 720 is lower than 1080"), they make improvements that are not immediately quantifiable, but which matter the most for the majority of users.

And actually, they have done something similar with the video cameras: they improved the computational video aspect so that lighting and the image overall looks better. Very similar to what they did with the audio.

As an occasional video conferencer, the thing I notice about video is really bad and unpleasant lighting and colour adjustments - NOT resolution. To me, what they've done is far more useful in actual practice than a technically better camera in some numbered spec.

(Note, I don't have one yet so can't comment on how much better it is, but reviews seem to say yes, it is better. So I guess my above should be read as potentially more valuable - ultimately right now don't care at all about a higher resolution camera)

 

[nothingtoseehere]

Something else being support for 2 4k 60fps external monitors. The lack of this must have a been cost reduction. So for the extra $200 give me multiple external monitor support.

Yep! This is the reason why I also clicked „something else“.
In more general terms, more ports/more connectivity for a more versatile machine is what I would prefer.

 

[alien3dx]

Out of curiosity, which would you rather have?

We hear a lot of complaints about the 720p webcam, but do people really care?

not soldered ssd , nvme so we can backup if anything problem

 

[alien3dx]

Fast external SSDs are a real product that can be bought and used today. External ram drives are not (as far as I'm aware) available, and if so, would be quite expensive.

And I think over USB4/TB you'd find that an external ram drive as you're suggesting would be speed constrained/throttled. This is NOT a system replacement for ram, since as you say, it would present as just a fast drive.

We could come up with hypotheticals about advantages but it seems to me would be a pretty expensive bit of gear with advantages mostly at the margin for specific uses. (Frankly I think almost all the advantages could be achieved by putting larger ram cache on an ssd drive or in a fusion-type specialised bit of kit).

RAM in comparison is universal in application for all users at system level.

Anyway, all that to say: right now it is absolutely possible to buy an external SSD with few disadvantages (inconvenience being the main one); there is no 'external ram' product widely available at reasonable pricing, and no, even if it did exist, it's still not on-board ram and would have major disadvantages compared to on-board ram.

I'll take the on-board ram and deal with external drives when the time comes.

external ram drive? are this even exist ? if external boot yeah im using one in intel macos

 

[pshufd]

Fast external SSDs are a real product that can be bought and used today. External ram drives are not (as far as I'm aware) available, and if so, would be quite expensive.

And I think over USB4/TB you'd find that an external ram drive as you're suggesting would be speed constrained/throttled. This is NOT a system replacement for ram, since as you say, it would present as just a fast drive.

We could come up with hypotheticals about advantages but it seems to me would be a pretty expensive bit of gear with advantages mostly at the margin for specific uses. (Frankly I think almost all the advantages could be achieved by putting larger ram cache on an ssd drive or in a fusion-type specialised bit of kit).

RAM in comparison is universal in application for all users at system level.

Anyway, all that to say: right now it is absolutely possible to buy an external SSD with few disadvantages (inconvenience being the main one); there is no 'external ram' product widely available at reasonable pricing, and no, even if it did exist, it's still not on-board ram and would have major disadvantages compared to on-board ram.

I'll take the on-board ram and deal with external drives when the time comes.

The ones from 15 years ago were cheap. And you just used discarded DIMMs from upgrades.

The reason these left the market is that you could get more and more RAM on your system. DIMMs got bigger and bigger to where you can get enthusiast boards that can hold up to 256 GB of RAM or higher-end enthusiast that can hold far more (8 or more DIMMs). The idea of using RAM is only a consideration for systems that are RAM-constrained as a swap disk.

 

[Falhófnir]

Going to a 14.1" display would be my #1 pick. Though still a loss from 15.4" it would at least start to become interesting to me with the existing price points and storage/RAM configurations. I'm sure you could fit such a display in the footprint of the pre-retina Air, and I don't remember anyone complaining about that being cumbersome.

I would also 100% say 16GB RAM.

I'm not necessarily saying it should be included in the base model, because it is not uncommon to still see 8GB RAM / 256GB SSD offered in the industry.

I do think, however, that the upgraded stock model that comes with 512GB SSD should also include 16GB RAM for the $200 up charge.

Unfortunately Apple's strict upgrade prices mean for that to happen at $1,249 the $999 model would have to get it too. 16GB is always a $200 option over 8GB as is 512GB over 256GB storage, so if the models were $999 for 256/8GB and $1,249* for 512/16GB you'd be getting $400 of upgrades for $200 (by Apple's reckoning). It seems quite steep as component upgrades go, but actually the $1,249 machine as-is is already quite competitively priced by wider market standards, it only gets egregious as you pile up the BTO options (or if you compare DIY component upgrades).

*The $50 discrepancy is the 7 vs 8 core GPU.

 

[pshufd]

Going to a 14.1" display would be my #1 pick. Though still a loss from 15.4" it would at least start to become interesting to me with the existing price points and storage/RAM configurations. I'm sure you could fit such a display in the footprint of the pre-retina Air, and I don't remember anyone complaining about that being cumbersome.


Unfortunately Apple's strict upgrade prices mean for that to happen at $1,249 the $999 model would have to get it too. 16GB is always a $200 option over 8GB as is 512GB over 256GB storage, so if the models were $999 for 256/8GB and $1,249* for 512/16GB you'd be getting $400 of upgrades for $200 (by Apple's reckoning). It seems quite steep as component upgrades go, but actually the $1,249 machine as-is is already quite competitively priced by wider market standards, it only gets egregious as you pile up the BTO options (or if you compare DIY component upgrades).

*The $50 discrepancy is the 7 vs 8 core GPU.

I would be happy if they would stock the 512/16. It's clear that the 1/16 is popular as it's sold out far more often than the other models offered in the stores. I think that a 512/16 would be even more popular so you wouldn't have to wait a month.

 

[sky87]

I would be happy if they would stock the 512/16. It's clear that the 1/16 is popular as it's sold out far more often than the other models offered in the stores. I think that a 512/16 would be even more popular so you wouldn't have to wait a month.

Agreed, I would have ideally gone for a 16GB/512GB Air but didn't want to wait a month. And I knew from stalking my local Apple store stock that they intermittently restock the 16GB/1TB. So just kept stalking it until I managed to get one for store pickup.

 

[darngooddesign]

I voted for RAM since I prefer a 1TB drive and that wasn't an option.

 

[armoured]

The ones from 15 years ago were cheap. And you just used discarded DIMMs from upgrades.

The reason these left the market is that you could get more and more RAM on your system. DIMMs got bigger and bigger to where you can get enthusiast boards that can hold up to 256 GB of RAM or higher-end enthusiast that can hold far more (8 or more DIMMs). The idea of using RAM is only a consideration for systems that are RAM-constrained as a swap disk.

I think more likely a bigger reason for these leaving (or not reappearing anyway) is that fast SSDs are cheaper even than cheap ram (back then they were competing with spinning drives_, and over usb3 not noticeably faster than ssd. (Over usb4 somewhat faster but usb4 recent and not such a huge advantage). For use as a swap disk, probably not a big gain. It's still not system ram.

 

[pshufd]

I think more likely a bigger reason for these leaving (or not reappearing anyway) is that fast SSDs are cheaper even than cheap ram (back then they were competing with spinning drives_, and over usb3 not noticeably faster than ssd. (Over usb4 somewhat faster but usb4 recent and not such a huge advantage). For use as a swap disk, probably not a big gain. It's still not system ram.

Well, we're talking about free memory as you usually wind up with a bunch of old DIMMs from upgrading. The disadvantage of RAM Disks is that they aren't persistent.

The idea is still around though. But the solutions are in software. There's free software to make RamDisks in Windows 10. OWC has an App for creating a RamDisk on macOS. The idea today is that RAM is so cheap that you can just turn part of your system memory into a non-persistent RamDisk.

Some of the old systems also had battery backups for the RAM so that the storage was persistent for a certain period of time.

 

[pshufd]

I think more likely a bigger reason for these leaving (or not reappearing anyway) is that fast SSDs are cheaper even than cheap ram (back then they were competing with spinning drives_, and over usb3 not noticeably faster than ssd. (Over usb4 somewhat faster but usb4 recent and not such a huge advantage). For use as a swap disk, probably not a big gain. It's still not system ram.

You can see the usefulness of RAM in databases. Oracle added In-Memory-Database to its main RDBMS many years ago (I think that I started working on it around 2014). They also had the Times Ten In Memory database product.

There's no downside to more RAM.

 

[armoured]

You can see the usefulness of RAM in databases. Oracle added In-Memory-Database to its main RDBMS many years ago (I think that I started working on it around 2014). They also had the Times Ten In Memory database product.

There's no downside to more RAM.

An external ramdisk is not system ram, it's just a fast disk. And I'm not saying there's a downside, but that over consumer level interfaces, external ram for most purposes is constrained by that interface - so much so that ssds are going to beat the pants off them on a price/performance basis for most uses.

Now note: I said most uses. I'm sure for very large databases and other specialised uses such as oracle might use/sell, sure - but then I doubt oracle/heavy oracle users are doing this by means of external ram boxes (which I still haven't actually seen) over usb3/4. More likely they max on-board ram first and then any extra by much faster interfaces or other specialised server configs. There are also people who want (apparently) 1tb+ ram such as on the macpro.

But sure, maybe there are some who find it does work for them - I'd put those in category of specialised uses.

 

[pshufd]

An external ramdisk is not system ram, it's just a fast disk. And I'm not saying there's a downside, but that over consumer level interfaces, external ram for most purposes is constrained by that interface - so much so that ssds are going to beat the pants off them on a price/performance basis for most uses.

Now note: I said most uses. I'm sure for very large databases and other specialised uses such as oracle might use/sell, sure - but then I doubt oracle/heavy oracle users are doing this by means of external ram boxes (which I still haven't actually seen) over usb3/4. More likely they max on-board ram first and then any extra by much faster interfaces or other specialised server configs. There are also people who want (apparently) 1tb+ ram such as on the macpro.

But sure, maybe there are some who find it does work for them - I'd put those in category of specialised uses.

The RAM issue is only for Apple equipment because they charge ridiculous prices for RAM. With Oracle, you buy an Exadata system or you buy Autonomous Database Cloud Service. I've used their Cloud systems and have been provisioned for up to 1.2 TB of RAM on systems. Cloud-scale is just off-the-charts on hardware.

 

[svish]

I would choose RAM. You can easily buy an external SSD to increase storage.

 

[Apple_Robert]

Ideally I would prefer a BOGO on the M1 MBA. Outside of that, more storage.

 

[Falhófnir]

I would be happy if they would stock the 512/16. It's clear that the 1/16 is popular as it's sold out far more often than the other models offered in the stores. I think that a 512/16 would be even more popular so you wouldn't have to wait a month.

Yeah particularly at the moment with BTO times being so long it would be good if they kept a few more options in stock. I guess that's both very expensive for them and probably quite logistically difficult for machines that aren't meant to be stock options though.

 

[Arthur75]

More ports!