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.
Phil Schiller Says 32GB RAM on New MacBook Pro Would Have Required Battery Compromising Design
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
-
- Tags
- macbook pro mbp phill schiller
- Sort by reaction score
You do any gaming on it? Curious how it holds up for that use seeing as it's such a small form factor.
Edit: Also, crazy that you get those specs for less than a new fully loaded MBP.
I certainly do gaming on it, and I under load I get consistent framerates and very reasonable temperatures (mid-80s to low-90s F).
And that's my problem with the MBP and the contention that it's the best one can do for the money. The RBP shows that it the engineering challenges can be overcome.
For me personally, 16GB and the 2.7 quad core i7 with the Pro 460 will be plenty, but I'm not trying to game or do constant intensive CPU/GPU tasks. I do sometimes, but I can definitely get by with the 15" I ordered, so I like that it's really thin and portable with a great looking premium feel and design the rest of the time.
I have one question though, which doesn't have an obvious answer unless you really know the market, R&D costs, and margin per unit associated here. Would it make them more money to make one that is a true powerhouse for those professionals who really do need it? A thicker and heavier laptop with crazy specs and crazy price tag? This current laptop will be great for someone in the market for a laptop with a premium build who values portability and form factor and doesn't need absolute top of the line specs. I researched the alternatives and still ended up with this one for my needs. I don't need Razer Blade Pro specs. I think Apple knows that most of their market is like this, and unfortunately that leaves out options for some people. I'm not sure if developing another design to house Razer Blade Pro specs would benefit their margins. I imagine not in their opinion, bc I'm sure they have done analysis on this.
Wow, Apple's nostrils just submerged beneath their own Flavor Aid. The "Coffee Table Book" and now this BS really was the last few millimeters of freeboard. Their arrogant "design above all else" attitude blinds them so much that a few extra millimeters of thickness to support 32 Gb has become not acceptable.
IF they did build one, the next complaint would be why it would cost $8K for a top-of-the line model.
How many would sell?
If there was a significant market for such a laptop, someone would fill the market gap. I'm not anti-32GB, just realize that Apple decided to draw the 'trade-off' line at a high-end sweet spot that appeals to the buyer.
.
They have, for Windows. But the problem is that we're stuck with Apple if we want OSX. Maybe that's next? License the OS to a third-party hardware company?
Oh for the days of Franklin and licensed operating systems....
It's using a custom dual memory module to achieve it. It does not natively support it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UniDIMM
This thing uses way more power than it suppose to use when using the integrated module.
Hence why no one else bother using it.
There's nothing high-end about 16gig anymore. Windows mobile workstations carry up to 64GB now. And they don't cost like 8K or necessarily weigh 4Kg.
If Apple would drop their proprietary lighting port on iOS devices and switch to USB-c you could charge them with your MacBook Pro cable and vice versa.
I think the people who are left out are the ones we hear from the most on these forums. Vocal minority.
To your question... I don't know how many super-expensive maxxxed-out models Apple would sell. But it's probably the same percentage as other PC makers.
Dell sells 15" laptop workstations with 32GB of RAM... so we know it's possible. But they're almost 5 pounds and likely have terrible battery life.
But at least Dell gives people the option to have a ton of RAM.
People have the choice between 32GB of power-hungry RAM or 16GB of power-sipping RAM.
Apple only offers the latter. You don't even have the option of 32GB of RAM in an Apple laptop.
And that seems to be the issue here.
Last edited:
OK...that's kind of odd though...The following article specifically talks about copying RAM to disk after just over one hour (the 70 mins I referred to) on older Macs and after 3 hours on newer Macs.
https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT202124
A stated reason is: "Mac notebook and desktop computers have a power standby feature that conserves energy. During standby, the state of your session is saved to flash storage (SSD). Then, the power turns off to some hardware systems such as RAM and USB buses."
So, perhaps standby is not *quite* the same as full-blown hibernate - perhaps leading to the 30 day limit, rather than indefinite for hibernate (I assume). But, regardless, one of the main things that is powered down is the RAM. If so, it seems that the power draw (LPDDR3 vs DDR4) is irrelevant, since both will be zero. What am I missing?
What's with all the empty spaces around the battery?
Can't put in a bigger battery? My ***!
Expention room... Sounds stupid but the lack of it caused the Galaxy Note 7 to explode.
(not sticking up for apple, just saying why there is so much space)
Apple not selling enough MacBook pros will be their (Tims) argument that this market is dead, that no one uses laptops anymore, that everything is iOS.
So many whiners here. The new Macbook is fine. I got it and am happy with it. If you want a gaming laptop or something that is "high end," then go buy a gaming laptop from ASUS or MSI.
This is total crap. Back in 2009 when Apple introduced unibody design intel chips didn't support dynamic graphics switching. What did Apple do under Jobs? They designed their very custom chip with firmware to bypass this limitation.
What did Apple do in 2016? Come up with excuses. What old Apple would do? They would design custom chip that would shut down additional memory when not used to save energy and remove limits.
This notebook will become obsolete in couple of years, after couple macOS updates just because of RAM
What did Apple do in 2016? Come up with excuses. What old Apple would do? They would design custom chip that would shut down additional memory when not used to save energy and remove limits.
This notebook will become obsolete in couple of years, after couple macOS updates just because of RAM
Oh, I understand the issue. It's just that this is how Apple has been for a long time. They have a pretty limited product line. They've actually expanded too much certain places and not enough in others imo. None of this is new, yet people always complain. I get why you'd complain, but it's like there's no point in saying the same thing over and over every time a product launches. But hey, I guess we all have too much time on our hands or we wouldn't be scouring Mac threads. I wish they'd make "almost" everyone happy so MR wasn't littered with articles with negative responses, but alas, I will just wait to get mine and use the hell out of it and see if it warranted the price I paid before the 14 days is up lol.
To run parallels with windows to do 3d modelling in 3ds max, draw in Autocad and edit textures in Photoshop while checking their email in Safari and listening to music. This simple task will eat 16 gigs like that with just native Windows, imagine that with parallels and couple of more tabs in Safari?
Its got absolutely nothing to do with gaming. How about people who do graphics intensive work? They aren't going to get very far with the weedy graphics cards in the MacBook Pro or an iMac?
Yea, virtual machines were the only thing I could think of. Do we think this use case is common?
It's because they're obsessed with weight and economy (New Apple) as opposed to function and utility (Old Apple). I'm sure Jonny Ive could still make it look sleek, even if it was a tad thicker and heavier.
What do they not understand about what pro users care about?
What do they not understand about what pro users care about?
I just think Apple today is a consumer company first and foremost and caters to the most common usage. I don't think 32GB is needed for the majority. Right or wrong.