Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Programming on MBA
- Thread starter Catdog12349
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Guys, what does RAM have to do with programming ? Someone really needs to explain that to me. Why is programming a RAM intensive operation ?
I use to write OpenGL code on Win32 with 32 MB of RAM. A lot of people wrote tons of BASIC code on computers with less than 128 KB of RAM...
For screen real-estate, there's a MDP on the MBA that is just fine. No need to sacrifice the portability of the laptop you buy. An external monitor can be had for less than 200$ with very high resolution these days.
Why are you bringing this up? This historical piece of information is totally irrelevant to the discussion.
Programming often requires to have multiple programs running at once, and even if it's a personal choice to have them all open. Yes I prefer to listen to music while programming so I have iTunes running. Add in Mail, Safari with reference documents, Wikis and code snippets, MindManager for organizing the work, Skype for team collaboration, OmniOutliner and Internet Explorer in Parallels and you nicely end up at 4 GB *easily*.
Oh, I forgot Xcode and Interface Builder.
Uh ?
I used to write Perl code in Linux, using Kate, running Kopete (for MSN+ICQ), having Konqueror up for documentation (perldoc on CPAN, various other web ressources) and various websites, with Kmail for my e-mail. I had Apache setup on the same box, running mod_perl and the site I was coding, all up in X with various open Konsoles with transparency enabled (that's how I rolled)...
On 128 MB of RAM.
What does IE in parallels have to do with programming ?
What do you think the computer I did OpenGL on with its 32 MB of RAM was running ? IE, ICQ, Visual Studio, OE, etc.. etc.. etc..
There is nothing about programming that is so RAM intensive. Nothing you described is RAM intensive and a lot of it has nothing to do with programming at all. I think a lot of you have just started programming recently and don't quite understand how overpowered the machines we use these days are.
I'm all for the 4GB of RAM, it's ludicrous not to spend the upgrade money on it seeing how you can only do so at purchase time. But to say programming requires 4GB of RAM... come on.
That proves that you are way beyond our capabilities. Congratulations. It does, once again, not answer the original question, though.
That's what you infer from my post. I'm simply correcting the assertion that "4GB is required for programming!", not trying to show any superiority. You might not have been born as early as I have and thus have not been exposed to what the computer industry was in the 80s and 90s. Having more experience does not make one superior, only more experienced. Why do you get the feeling I'm out to prove superiority ? Someone stated something which is wrong, should it not be corrected so as not to mislead the OP ?
However, I am asking what makes you guys think it isn't wrong and why you think you need so much RAM to run a glorified text editor and a compiler when we've been doing this stuff on lesser machines for about 30 years ? Something you haven't actually answered by just providing a list of tools we have all used for the last 10 years when machines with 4 GB of RAM were beasts that cost a lot of money (and anyway, without PAE and with 32-bit architectures of the time in the consumer world, we're quite impractical anyway).
Actually, yes it does. The derived answer from my post is simple :
Get whatever Air you want because anyway, any computer sold today is a fine machine for programming. I didn't think I needed to spell it out at this point.
+1 you don't need a high end machine for coding. I program all the time on my 13 inch air just fine. I mostly program video games and I also run Unity 3D, Maya, ZBrush and some others on my 13 inch air with no problem. (Its not my first choice but if I need to travel and do work its perfect).
As others have stated screen real estate is what you want for coding. A 13 inch will work fine for a beginner programmer but the more in depth you go the more documentation and code files you will need open on a screen. Its always good to have an external monitor to hook up to your macbook air incase of heavy coding tasks.
EDIT: Also +1 to what KnightWRX is saying. You don't need a huge powerful system for coding, its not an intensive task. And, like he also mentioned, the programs you create may be intensive, but its highly doubtful that they would max out your system.
Last edited:
So it's all those other applications that eat up GBs of memory. Just the programming and software development itself do not.
An MBA 11 is plenty powerful enough for programming. It's easily 10X to 1000X more powerful than what most computer programming languages were designed on and for.
Wait for the refresh, definitely, and you would fair better with the 13" due to its higher resolution and larger screen size which would be better for programming. After the update, the baseline 13" would be fine for your needs, most likely!
+1 I would recommend waiting as well. If Apple does release the new Sandy-bridge processors on the new MBA, then, your purchase will be very "future proof."
Another +1
Although it seems like I am contradicting myself, this would be the second choice. If you do plan on waiting (IMO the best thing to do) and Apple's updates to the MBA are not sufficent for your needs, I would go along and purchase a baseline MBP 13inch.
You may not need a lot of ram to compile the code, but running some of the applications I work on requires quite a bit of memory. Real-time modeling and simulation - especially running thousands of entities during a scenario will eat a lot of ram.
I can code and test parts of the applications I work on, but not the full suite of apps.
But, I agree with what you're saying. You don't need a powerhouse to program with.
I can code and test parts of the applications I work on, but not the full suite of apps.
But, I agree with what you're saying. You don't need a powerhouse to program with.
Maybe it's just me, but as far as RAM goes, I find XCode 4 to be quite a bit more resource hungry than its predecessor. 4 GB was cutting it a bit close for me. I wasn't swapping much so it wasn't dire or anything... but I certainly wouldn't want to be using 2 GB.
WTF is wrong with your Xcode ?
I seriously doubt it's consuming the RAM you think it is.Attachments
WTF is wrong with your Xcode ?
Maybe it's just my impression... and I'm not saying that it always eats away memory. But I have the feeling that ever since I've started using XCode 4 my memory usage has gone up.
And you never checked with Activity Monitor to confirm ?
It's not like Xcode is such a RAM intensive application. It's a glorified text editor.
People had all those apps open 4 years ago, on slower computers, with 1 GB, perhaps 2 GB of RAM. Some people still do.
I'd still go with 4 GB of RAM due to the "why the heck not?" factor, but to say that someone needs lots of RAM for programming is wrong. And if you require more RAM for programming, even if you're running a web browser, then you're doing something wrong.
Forget RAM, CPU speed, etc etc. The only things you really need for programming are:
1. A comfortable keyboard.
2. A nice screen with reasonable resolution.
I think the 13" MBA is better for programming, but if you can hook up to an external screen when you're going to sit and program for many hours, then the 11" MBA is also perfect.
And you never checked with Activity Monitor to confirm ?
It's not like Xcode is such a RAM intensive application. It's a glorified text editor.
You know, I didn't really bother checking... 8GB is like $70 bucks I just upgraded. And I'd say it's a very glorified text editor. Once you get a few large projects open it does a lot of cross referencing and it gets all this auto completion going. Anyway, perhaps it wasn't merely XCode that did it and I'm mistaken so I'll stop stealing this thread. I do however stand by my claim that I wouldn't want to run around programming with anything less than 4GB.
Visual Studio did all that 10 years ago on computers 100x less capable than the MBA.
If you don't want to have less than 4GB for programming, that's your perogative. I just don't see the need to have RAM that is sitting unallocated and how it helps you write code in any way.
Again, I'm in the "Just go for 4 GB" camp. It's cheap, it's a one time chance to upgrade, and really there is no reason to get the 2GB model unless you're strapped for cash, which if you are, don't buy a MBA to begin with. But there is no reason to link programming and 4GB together. That's just talking without having actually investigated the need properly.