You upgrade the base ram because you anticipate users needing at least that much memory in order for macOS to run smoothly, not because an arbitrary amount of time has elapsed.
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 M3 MacBook Air Models Expected Around March 2024
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You upgrade the base ram because you anticipate users needing at least that much memory in order for macOS to run smoothly, not because an arbitrary amount of time has elapsed.
Ohhhh you can run the OS? Cutting edge. ... Until you can't.
People want their machines to last a couple years in this economy, and selling end of cycle technology specs doesn't cut it.
Try Mobile Tech Review with Lisa.
She's honest and neutral and adds some humour to her reviews, Mac and PC products.
Is there any reason to suspect that macOS will somehow become so bloated over the next couple of years that you will need 16gb ram to comfortably run it? I purchased my base model M1 MBA in 2020 when it was released. It worked well for me then, it still works great for me 3 years later, and unless my needs radically change (eg: I quit teaching to become a YouTuber), I expect it to continue working well for me until it stops getting updates or I finally do decide to upgrade to something better.
Apple controls the chip, the hardware and the underlying OS, and the majority of Macs sold compromise of the base model with 8gb ram (it does not make sense that Apple would intentionally flood the market with default specs that don't sell that to earn a little extra from users who choose to upgrade).
It stands to reason that Apple is able to optimise macOS to run properly on a base Mac with 8gb ram because they know that is what the majority of users have, and are committed to supporting their hardware for a predetermined period of time. If and when my M1 MBA (base model) does stop receiving software updates, it will not because of insufficient ram (the implication is that an M1 Mac with more ram will also stop being supported at the same time; it won't magically receive a stay of execution).
When you put it that way, and you are absolutely correct, it's actually pretty amazing how petty and stingy Apple are being.
Totally. It's even worse to me that base storage is so low when those chips are also so cheap. Apple compound that with appealing upgrade costs. £400 extra just to get a 1TB SSD they probably pay $30 for?
I'm on a 10 year old computer with those specs, and you're trying to Apple'splain why I don't need more?
Here's a reason or two: I need to run more than MacOS. Don't you?
I need to be able to run third party plugins and applications that are recommended 16gb minimum or when they run on 8gb you don't get all the features. I'd like to be able to finally update my most used applications, call me crazy. When I run an Adobe program, I don't want the newest features to be blocked out. When I opened 500 browser windows, and I will, because I'm a fully functional adult, I don't want to deal with a beach ball when I go to check my email while an ad autoplays in the background that I can't shut off. I want to be able to do all that and use AI. I want my new laptop to have more ram than a phone. Is this your first Apple? They do not support hardware forever, and the developers rewrite for the latest technology. You are 2 models behind already.
The 8gb vs. 16gb wars were really interesting 3 years ago, but stop it. They sell upgrades....for a reason.
I run pretty much the basic stuff on my MBA. Office, stock apps (mail, calendar, safari, chrome, notes, QuickTime, VLC, photos, music, pdf expert), occasionally iMovie. The number of tabs in my browsers rarely ever hit double digits (so I guess I am not a fully-functional adult by your metrics), and I don't see why I would be exposed to beachballs and ads while checking my mail (either via the mail app or the gmail web client in chrome).
If you are running Adobe software, it sounds like you would be using the pro MacBook models with the more powerful processors, and these come with at least 16gb ram. If you were to upgrade today, you likely won't be getting the MBA models, so whether they come with 8gb ram or not seems immaterial.
Not to mention this isn't a case of the iPhone 6+ where 1gb ram was insufficient to support the larger display. Users do have the option to pay for more ram if they need it, and they are more likely the exception than the norm.
Financial industry massively is based on windows. If not, what caused the 30% crash in Apple sales? Open to others analysis.
You are misinformed. Mac sales didn't crash after the change to Apple silicon.
No they do not.
Plenty of pro users are switching to the lower models btw, that's not the bottleneck or why a plugin would be greyed out. Plenty of non pro users have Adobe programs.
I'm not going to keep arguing with a lightweight user and the naivety to think 16gb is immaterial in 2023. That's laughable. You can do a lot with 8gb, and you will, but that's an end of life spec and respect those of us who know we need more, and expect it in a base model.
Like I said, I don’t deny that there are users out there who need 16 or more ram. I simply disagree that the MBA somehow “needs” to come with that much ram as default or it’s automatically crippled or neutered.
Need more, pay more, but the 8gb model is still a very capable device which more than suffices for the 90% of Mac users whom I believe have fairly basic needs.
It’s as simple as that.
How would you know?
You already admitted you don't use third party applications. You're cluelessly sitting on a 3 year old computer trying to argue that the base tech doesn't need upgrading for the same price and we should accept the same tech limitations as your 3 year old purchase. That's some opinion.
Disclaimer, the numbers I am going to post are my own. I subscribe to AboveAvalon, an analyst who looks at all things Apple, and here are his Mac sales estimates.
We know that the Mac likely benefited both from pent-up demand for Apple Silicon and the shift to working from home. The problem then comes when the majority of users who were in the market for a new Mac had likely already gotten one during this time. Macs also have a way longer upgrade cycle compared to say, a smartphone, and they are probably not going to upgrade for another couple of years.
The problem here is that the M1 chip was simply too good, and it continues to be overkill for the vast majority of Mac users who simply don't utilise pro software. Instead, those Macs are being used primarily for web browsing, word processing, video playback, and other somewhat basic workflows, and more ram and faster speeds just doesn't bring about any meaningful improvement, and Apple knows this. There is no conspiracy to deliberately gimp the entry model to make half the Mac user base run out and pay extra for more ram in custom BTO models.
This is the opposite of the "forced obsolescence" narrative that people love to push out. Talk about Macs coming with "just" 8gb ram soldered to the processor is meaningless when you realise most laptop users don't upgrade their ram ever, even if they had the ability to.
Second, Neil Cybart (author of AboveAvalon) also posits that the 30% (he believes it's closer to 22%) drop in Mac sales is in part due to product launch timing, along with supply and channel inventory shifts. Taking all these into consideration, we are actually looking at closer to 10% dip in the sales of Macs.
A drop is a drop, but nowhere near as bad as the press would have you believe.
He also estimates that about 75-80% of active Macs in use today are Intel Macs, which may explain why Apple keeps comparing their latest Apple Silicon to older M1 or Intel chips, because that's who they are marketing their newer Macs to. And I believe people eventually will upgrade with time; they just aren't trashing their perfectly good Intel Macs overnight. I am personally still holding on to my 2017 5k iMac while I continue to contemplate my next move. It's not that M2 Macs are any bad, but that since my iMac is still going strong, I see no good reason to toss out a perfectly good desktop (and monitor) yet.
I think we can assume that sales to new Mac users are spread out and then combined with relatively flat year-over-year upgrading numbers, the end result is a somewhat consistent Mac unit sales level of 20M to 25M users, of which about half would be new to Mac (eg: switching over from Windows). For that unit sales range to jump ~30% to 30M, Apple would need either a 30% increase in upgrading and new users or a higher percentage in one category (to offset less growth in the other category), which doesn't seem realistic.
So we may be seeing a new normal where even as the Mac becomes more powerful and capable due to Apple Silicon, sales remain flat because people just don't run out and upgrade their Macs on a whim the same way they do with smartphones. We may even see users opting to switch to an iPad or even the Vision Pro in place of a Mac, a phenomenon which Apple likely isn't losing sleep over (they are still buying Apple products and invested in the ecosystem either way).
In summary, that's my takeaway as well. Apple will continue to update the Mac as and when they can, people will upgrade as and when they feel that it's time, expect around 20+ million units of new Macs sold every year, and whether they come with 8gb or 16gb ram is immaterial to this.
Interesting discussion on the base model Airs… thanks. Costco is currently selling base M1 Macboox Air (8/256) for $749. I’ve considered picking one up for basic productivity stuff when a laptop is more usable than an iPad and MacBook would be much more convenient to get to Apple photos, music playlists, etc than on our old Windows laptop. I don’t foresee ever doing video editing or even photo editing beyond the stock MacOS photo editing tool. I have an upgraded M2Pro Mac Mini for anything more demanding. I’m also not a browser tab hoarder so I think I might pick one up. About the cheapest I’ve seen a “new”, non-refurb MacBook with Apple warranty (plus Costco adds another year, FWIW).
im holding off buying til m3 goes in the studio. m2 felt like a stopgap🤷♂️
A 3-year old laptop which, by my experience, continues to work pretty well for me. It's not about accepting limitations but about acknowledging the progress that Apple Silicon has made, while also being cognisant of the options available for users desiring more ram (ie: pay more, get a MBP etc)
And maybe that's the conundrum here. If the base MBA is good enough for say, 95% of Mac users, do we raise the ram to cater to the small group of power users (possibly increasing the price for everyone), or try to nudge them towards the other more powerful (and expensive) options, that may turn out to be a better fit for them?
The base model of the MBA in Apple Stores and third party retailers all come with 8gb ram. If you want more ram, you have to customise it online, which significantly increases the waiting time. Apple is a trillion dollar company whose revenue comes from moving inventory as quickly as possible. They are not some tiny boutique outlet specialising in built-to-order desktops.
What is more likely? That Apple dedicates so much of their manufacturing capacity to producing Macs with 8gb ram that they know are "gimped" and won't sell (and thus clogging up their channel), just to get a small number of users to pay more for ram,
Or...
They do this because their data shows that based on what the majority of Mac users do on their computers, 8gb ram more than suffices for them? Most people buy the base Mac because it's good enough for their needs, and users desiring more ram for third party applications would likely benefit from the pro models anyways, (MBP, Mac Studio), if only because those also support multiple monitors.
Given Apple's size and financial success, I don't deny that they could easily afford to include 16gb ram as default in their MBA. That was never the point of contention. My question to you then is - where's your data that shows 8gb ram isn't sufficient for the general Mac populace? You make it sound like Macs are barely chugging by on 8gb ram and I imagine if performance were that bad, we would have seen more of this being reported in the news or something.
It's a great deal, and if someone were waiting for newer comps and/or Apple to stop the configuration games, that model or the M2 Mini are priced right for a secondary computer or light usage. There's no shopping dilemma in your scenario.
Well you definitely don't represent 95% of the people shopping today.
Are you in the market for a new computer or sitting tidy because oh I don't know, they're selling the same damn specs and you're not even using third party apps. So you just want to feel better about your purchase.
It's like someone with a 18 year old bubble iMac who thinks everyone who isn't satisfied with Apples base model must need their platinum models.
They couldn't possibly be limiting things like storage or RAM because ... well because all their computers test relatively the same now and we've seen $1100 models pace the $3000 models. Last year's MacBook pros main benefit were inputs and being able to connect a second monitor. They are absolutely crippling their specs. It's a $35 part they are upcharging $200 for, and spoiler alert, crippling it. If you're doing animation, you need the higher end models, but it's overkill if you're doing standard creative work. You can do creative work with the 8gb, but like I said, when they release the cool new features, you will be excluded from using half of them. FCP X (another crippled Apple product) is set up for short form content creation, and it requires 8gb but they say "16gb recommended". Because they know!
The GPU isn't the bottleneck.
3 years later, yeah there are expectations. The storage and RAM are unacceptable.
Last edited by a moderator:
Please don't. The mini is the desktop for those of us who don't like the idle fan noise of a Mac Studio. I don't mind fan noise when loaded, but when streaming or browsing the fans should be silent... like the mini. Making it the size of a small SBC means much less heat dissipation. That has to be countered with less power or more fan.
I got a Mac Studio and had to return it because of the fan noise. I realize some people don't have good enough hearing to notice. I and many others do. The mini, while not as beefy as the Studio, is good enough. Ideally, Apple would design a Studio with less idle fan noise.
I thought the same until a couple of things occurred to me. Let's say it's a matter of a March '24 vs. June '24 release. What would that extra 3 months allow for?
Lately I've read about 2 upcoming technologies, Wifi 7 and Thunderbolt 5. For a fairly high-end, very powerful but expensive computer some of us would want to use for several years (at least!), a bit of forward-thinking 'future proofing' would be welcome.
I don't know how much Thunderbolt 5 may speed external SSD drive read/write speeds, but Wifi 7 looks to have some substantial advantages over Wifi 6 or 6e. Given the lifespan of a well decked-out Mac, the Studio might be in use when Wifi 8 comes out.
So my questions are: 1.) Would a June release likely offer one or both of these? 2.) How much advantage will either provide over time to many users?
The Studio needs the M3 Ultra being ready. With the rumored TSMC yield "issues", and that the nature of June release means WWDC announcement, together with a Mac Pro update since this is the Ultra, then it is obvious they need to wait til June. But lately we can't really predict anything with regards to Apple release schedules since so much is out of the norm right now.
Last edited:
Yes sir! I have 16GB ram and 512 ssd version and it won’t be replaced any time soon.