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.
New Lowend 13" Macbook air to have 2 gb?
- Thread starter waloshin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Maybe. Or the low end will have 4 and the high end will have 8. Or 8 and 16, or 3 and 6, or maybe they won't have RAM at all.
In this day and age, and notwithstanding that my RiscPC is perfectly happy with 32Mb, anything less than 4Gb for a $1000+ premium product is piss poor.
2GB is looking worse and worse as other companies release new products, although this has never held Apple back in the past (think C2D chips in the 2010 MBA). If the "4GB as base" rumors are true, I'd love to see a 6GB option; more affordable than 8GB, and still sufficient for myself and plenty of other MBA users, I suspect.
2GB is ridiculous... why would Apple release a new computer with last gen's specs?? Next you're going to say it will have C2D processors as well...?
They'll probably release it with 4GB but honestly RAM is the most overrated component of computers.
Are you sure about that? If you're going to run a lot of applications simultaneously (and especially virtual machines), you will eventually get to the point where the lack of RAM affects performance really bad. This is because the computer will have to utilize virtual memory in your hard disk storage - which better not be a mechanical drive, in which case having the fastest CPU in the world won't help very much.
Of course this might seem a bit far-fetched if you're not into multitasking or virtualization. But considering the fact that RAM in a MacBook Air can't be upgraded by the user after purchase, saying that RAM is overrated is like saying that the CPU is overrated.
Last edited:
We're talking about soldered RAM here, different cost and form factor than having swappable modules. Either you see higher price, or stay 2GB. Most people are perfectly happy with 2GB RAM.
I got the current MBA 13" ultimate, but if it's not because of needing to do audio production which required more RAM space, I would have just go for 2GB, perfectly fine for everyday task, and I would have bought from resellers which some offer quite a bit of discounts off retail price.
I got the current MBA 13" ultimate, but if it's not because of needing to do audio production which required more RAM space, I would have just go for 2GB, perfectly fine for everyday task, and I would have bought from resellers which some offer quite a bit of discounts off retail price.
Lion doesn't need 4 GB as a minimum. But 2 GB should be an absolute minimum, if you know what I mean. Therefore, if Apple skimps on the memory by releasing any upcoming Mac (esp. MBA) with 2 GB RAM as default config, it's a mockery of the users. 4 GB should be default in the upcoming Air, with option of at least 6 GB. This is because the RAM is soldered onto the board.
Last edited:
Lion having a 4GB minimum is something I would not even bet $.01 on. Just think of all the Apple computers out there that have less than 4GB of RAM... probably like 90% (I would safely bet that at least 3/4ths, to be honest). Even Macs as late as last year still shipped with 2GB of RAM. They would lose such a huge amount of business if they made 4GB a minimum. It just doesn't seem particularly economical to just ditch the majority of your cliental when your smaller one demands an extra 2GB.
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't buy a Mac without at least 4GB standard, but at the same time, I wouldn't say I'm part of Apple's main targeted demographic (of which whom simply loads one instance of a web browser and calls it a day).
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't buy a Mac without at least 4GB standard, but at the same time, I wouldn't say I'm part of Apple's main targeted demographic (of which whom simply loads one instance of a web browser and calls it a day).
And rightfully so. When I have started up OS X Lion, it uses only 1.6 GB of RAM. Maybe it would use even less if I got rid of the Dashboard.
BUT this wouldn't allow for much more than running Safari and iTunes simultaneously if all I had was 2 GB of RAM. And if I wanted to be sure to keep the page-outs low (preferably less than 1/5 of page-ins), I better be using Chrome instead of Safari. Using virtual memory extensively to "compensate" for severe lack of RAM causes significant underperformance. Better to have a cheaper CPU and more RAM then.
2010 MBs came with 2 gigs of RAM; you're saying that like it wasn't just last year. There's a reason Apple releases laptops for a grand with sub-par specs. They charge an arm and a leg for upgrades because people keep buying them.
I agree with your conclusion, but stating a requirement to be x doesn't mean y will be the result. *grabs into to Logic book* That's a formal fallacy.
I agree with your conclusion, but stating a requirement to be x doesn't mean y will be the result. *grabs into to Logic book* That's a formal fallacy.
x= y if apple doesnt want alot of angry customers..
Releasing one laptop with 2 gigs instead of 4 would anger "a lot", however it would be the least of the worries.
(requiring you to pay 1.6 grand for a laptop with a separate graphics card? Not allowing your own HDD in the new iMacs?)
Agreed they already do things that piss people off, because it benefits them, they know ppl will still pay for their stuff. Although I do believe it will be 4gigs std.
Uh huh; hey don't get me wrong, I do hope and believe 4 gigs will come standard. Apple knows that they can only milk the market so much until they need to increase the specs of their machine. It's the least they can do seeing that the graphics chip won't be as good, to say the least.
The battery life is going to be the only thing holding me back.
2GB will still be standard IMO, with the option to upgrade to 4GB, or maybe more. Why would Apple give people 4GB at the base price when so many are ready to pay the extra $100 to upgrade? After all, what they want most is to make money.
From what I've noticed with Apple's releases, they tend to provide the least they can (spec-wise, that is. In design and innovation, I think most would agree that they lead the pack). Everytime, users have wanted more, and Apple has, time and again, disappointed in one way or another. However, despite competition with better specs, Apple still has the biggest piece of the pie.
From what I've noticed with Apple's releases, they tend to provide the least they can (spec-wise, that is. In design and innovation, I think most would agree that they lead the pack). Everytime, users have wanted more, and Apple has, time and again, disappointed in one way or another. However, despite competition with better specs, Apple still has the biggest piece of the pie.
Last edited:
1) You are right, Apple does want money, however.... they know that there are tons of people out there that still don't have Macs yet. Your statement might apply to the percentage of people who have already used or own a mac right now. I personally love the OS and build quality + battery life and coming from an upgraded black macbook, i'm definitely sticking with at least 4 gigs of ram. I'll pay for it if I have to.
2) Apple also knows, however, that they only make up, what a small percentage of the market right now. They have to expand and capture more of the market share. When going in the face of Windows, they have to keep the specs of their machines relevant as well. You can't always sell on "experience and build quality" when there are other competitors offering MORE for your money (Thinkpads are a big one).
Thinkpads, the high end ones, have amazing, if not better durability than MacBook Pros, just as long battery life (optional battery upgrades) and higher spec'd internals. All under the price of a matching MBP.
To the business man or families who have never used a Mac, you can no longer offer a 1000 dollar notebook with no CD drive with only 2 gigs of RAM. With modern Windows notebooks on Best Buy's shelves having 4 gigs of ram at 500 bucks, you just can't do it, not if you want to sell more laptops.
3) Yes. Time and time again, Apple has offered great products that aren't "all the way there". Having to pay at LEAST 1.6 grand for a laptop with a dedicated graphics card is absurd. ABSURD. There is no reason for it.
I'm not referring to build here (overheating if they stick it in a 13 inch probably), but price. There's no reason I should have to pay that much to get a MBP, 15 inch, with a separate graphics card.
I agree with your post for the most part. However, even though they only hold about 10% of the computer market (in the US, less elsewhere), I don't see Apple trying to make computers for the average Joe Schmoe. They have now reached a status where they can charge a premium price for products because they come with a premium brand name. The way I see it, its like a consumer buying a $1500 Gucci bag versus a $150 D&B that you could pick up at any Macys. Similar form and function, different brands, way different price points. People who want a Mac will buy a Mac, regardless of whether it has 2GB or 4GB. If they want the 4GB, they'll pay for the upgrade, just as they did last fall (with the latest refresh). For the general population that doesn't really care about specs, Macs sell, in a big part, due to the strength of Apple's name. If price was that big of a consideration (going with your example), then those consumers would go with the $500 4GB windows laptop regardless of what specs the Mac has. But if they want a Mac, they'll pay the extra $5-6-7-8-900 and get the Mac, just as they always have.