2gb can hold its own. everything is flash so it uses the ssd when it needs more memory, you don't notice a slow down like if you had a hard drive. I selected all of my programs in the application (about 50) and opened them at the same time. I had itunes playing and opened programs like slingplayer, all office 2011 programs, all of iLife '11 and everything worked at good speed with no beach ball.
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.
Is Stock 2 GB Ram Enough?
- Thread starter gostan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The 11" & 13" MBA's are full blown computers.
Think? Only 2GB?
Do you plan on limiting your use, or offing it in a year or less? Who will want it with 2GB when Lion is the current OS?
I wouldn't buy it with anything less than 4GB, that's the best $100 I spent so I could use it for what I want today & into the future.
Think? Only 2GB?
Do you plan on limiting your use, or offing it in a year or less? Who will want it with 2GB when Lion is the current OS?
I wouldn't buy it with anything less than 4GB, that's the best $100 I spent so I could use it for what I want today & into the future.
Exactly... If you're ready to jump for a 1K+ $ machine in the first place, then go for the 4GB if you're worried about it.
Last edited:
Quite the contrary, 2GB of RAM will be perfectly sufficient now, in 2 years time and in 5 years time for the OP's requirements.
I used to work on a 5GB Mac Pro workstation. I now use the MBA for mostly everything (except resource-absorbing video or audio stuff). The 2GB is more than enough for mostly everything. Seriously: If someone is using more than 2GB on web browsing or emails, there is a software problem somewhere.
I use MemoryMeters, which sticks a circle graph of memory usage in my menu bar. When I notice the "free RAM" section get to ~1/4 of the graph, I just close out a bunch of programs and it returns to normal. Granted, I rarely ever get to that point, and when I do it's when I have a bunch of documents open in PS.
Day-to-day tasks like web browsing and email checking will have that 2GB bored.
I use MemoryMeters, which sticks a circle graph of memory usage in my menu bar. When I notice the "free RAM" section get to ~1/4 of the graph, I just close out a bunch of programs and it returns to normal. Granted, I rarely ever get to that point, and when I do it's when I have a bunch of documents open in PS.
Day-to-day tasks like web browsing and email checking will have that 2GB bored.
I would say its enough.
Consider just picking up the base for right now. The second revision of the mba line is bound to be much better than the first. I wouldn't put too much money in the first revision of the product..they end up having really bad resale value if you want to move up to some better offerings down the pipeline.
Consider just picking up the base for right now. The second revision of the mba line is bound to be much better than the first. I wouldn't put too much money in the first revision of the product..they end up having really bad resale value if you want to move up to some better offerings down the pipeline.
Just a question of nomenclature here. The current version is the 4th revision (Rev D), or alternatively, the third major version (Original - 2/08, Rev B w/NVIDIA 9400m - 11/08, Rev D w/NVIDIA 320m and new form factor - 10/10).
The next update ought to be more than minor (i.e. Sandy Bridge Core i3/i5), but I wouldn't expect any significant changes to the form factor.
You are right. What I mean is 2nd revision of the 11.6".
And I agree. What I mean is changes to the specs offered. Could have been more clear on my part.
In any case, the question to me is whether the next generation is likely to be enough of a step up to justify upgrading from the current generation. If they just swap the Core 2 Duo/NVIDIA 320m combo for a straight Sandy Bridge Core i3, I'm guessing Rev D owners won't be tempted to upgrade and will wait for the 2012 update.
Although the CPU specs have barely moved since the Rev A, the Air has had a lot of other, more significant updates. In retrospect, Apple likely would have been better off using a low voltage Merom with the Rev A (say the 1.2GHz) rather than the 1.6GHz given all the overheating issues, and then switch to the 1.4GHz Penryn with the later versions. The heat issues got marginally better with the Rev B, but it wasn't until the Rev D that Apple really figured out how to vent it properly, thus getting the full benefit of the processor speed. At the same time, the integrated graphics improved about 8-fold, and the SSD improved 3 to 4-fold.
By comparison, the Rev E may be more like the Rev C in that it simply keeps pace rather than provides a significant update.