I have an aging 2012 rMBP that I'm itching to upgrade. Would have likely had a 2018 MBP if there weren't so many issues with the current gen.
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.
Waiting for the 2020 MBP
- Thread starter Dulcimer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 2020 macbook pro
- Sort by reaction score
I have an aging 2012 rMBP that I'm itching to upgrade. Would have likely had a 2018 MBP if there weren't so many issues with the current gen.
Honestly, the one thing they’d need to do to get me to come back is redesign the keyboard or bring back the old one, finding another way to make up for their beloved thinness.
I know that rationally there probably are lots of people that haven’t had issues with the butterfly design. However, having had issues myself and knowing multiple people who’ve had issues, I just can’t get myself to trust it. I never knew a single person with a keyboard problem with last Mac keyboards. That’s the personal kicker for me, even if anecdotal.
I know that rationally there probably are lots of people that haven’t had issues with the butterfly design. However, having had issues myself and knowing multiple people who’ve had issues, I just can’t get myself to trust it. I never knew a single person with a keyboard problem with last Mac keyboards. That’s the personal kicker for me, even if anecdotal.
For Apple, the number of people having keyboard issues should be irrelevant now. The fact that the issue is prevalent enough thats it's affecting whether people buy the laptop or not should be a cause for concern.
Then, I hope the option of 32gb, to be cheaper than today.
And at some point, 32gb should be the standard for every really professional machine, like mbp.
No more 16gb option, like we live in a decade ago...
If we use the logic you follow, then why the vast majority of professionals need i7?
The world goes on, it is evolution.
I am surprised that 512gb ssd, that still exists as an offer, in base mbp machines.
They should offer 1tb as the base standard.
I have 512gb of ssd in my mbp, since 2014...
256 GB is the base on 15 inch MBP. It's crazy.
SSD storage is getting cheaper and cheaper and Apple is forcing people to spend $600 ontop of the price of their laptop to get 1 TB.
MacOS will always try to use the maximum amount of memory available to maintain smooth performance.
My laptop used 10 out of it's 16 GB RAM on a day-to-day basis with web browsing + using a few apps. That usage goes up significantly with photo/video editing and use of more intensive processes.
Having RAM overhead definitely helps overall. When I got the RAM upgrade on my laptop at purchase, it was definitely overkill but it's definitely served me well in the longterm.
For sure. But MacOS doesn't need 32GB for demanding office work. It can work on 8GB.
So why would we burden the cost of the Macbook with extra memory, which in many cases it doesn't need, and then in turn increase the price of the unit?
Ditto storage. Some people can work fine on 128GB. Why force everyone to pay for 512GB? or 1TB?
That’s a reasonable thought but that type of customer would be adequately served by a regular MacBook or MacBook Air.
The MBP should push the envelope in terms of performance and strive to serve people who are doing more than office work.
Regardless, I’m not proposing Apple raise prices while increasing base RAM and storage. My argument is that with SSD prices dropping, Apple should increase the base storage to 512 GB for the base config and 1 TB for the base upgraded model. Vega 16 should be base GPU. I think Apple supplying base 16 GB RAM is reasonable and I don’t personally know the prices of DDR4 RAM to comment on Apple’s pricing.
That crowd is also the biggest purchasing group of the MBPro. So what you’re suggesting is that Apple take away the option for the users who need higher performance to select that option (making it default) and force the lower end users to move to the Air or MacBook and taking away that middle ground.
I don’t think that really makes sense.
I like the idea of offering the increase at no cost, but we both know that wouldn’t happen.
The biggest potential customer for the Mac Pro was priced out a week ago at WWDC. Those customers are now left to decide on a Mac Mini or iMac to serve their needs.
That’s not really my point though. I’m saying that for its price point, the MBP has continued to increase its price but has not really evolved it’s components. My rMBP from 2012 has the same base storage as the current Macs in 2019. Asking for them to increase that is not a big ask.
I’m actually surprised you’re countering me on this.
It's because of positioning. Making 32GB the default, which nobody actually needs, means that everyone has to pay for 32GB and then they don't need it.
And I know that's a generalization. I know a small number of people did buy 32GB. And of those people who do buy 32GB some of those people actually would need it, but we're talking about a small subset of a small subset.
Again, if Apple was to offer these upgrades for free, sure, that would be great. I would not counter that at all. But we know that they would not.
Ditto storage. Sure some people buy 2TB. Of that group, some people actually need and use that space. But again, small groups.
I'd like to see the base options stay as they are base price and the upgrade prices come down. I'd like to see more for less of course, but that's just not the world we live in. Apple's SSD rates are absurd IMO, but plenty of people pay them so they're ok with them.
Lastly, price and cost are typically not strictly correlated. Price is the maximum amount that the market will pay for the product. Cost is how much the vendor pays.
You're not reading what he is saying.
He is claiming that the prices should remain the same, but specs should be better for the same prices.
For example, base storage goes up from 256GB to 512GB. Next prebuilt model goes from 512GB to 1TB. But the price remains the same.
Since nvme SSD is dirt cheap for some time now, I really can't understand the rational for defending Apple on this?
Apple is being greedy. Not just greedy, but insulting with their prices for upgrades. And YES, macs have always had Apple tax. But at this day and age, that tax has gone up and up, but we don't get anything additional in return.
Check out Samsung 970 EVO nvme SSD prices. And then check how much Apple charges for upgrades. How can anyone defend that?
Not only did I read that, but I explicitly addressed it.
I addressed this too.
The price Apple charges for the SSD is the price that they feel people will pay. It has nothing to do with the cost. Personally I think it's absurd, and so I don't pay it. It's not greed, it's marketing and capitalism.
I think you North Americans (another generalization, sorry) need to decide whether you like capitalism or not. I don't think "I don't like capitalism except when it benefits me directly" is a strong position.
True! So why argue against Apple increasing base storage? Because Apple will pay way less then I payed for the same drive on my X1E.
As I stated earlier, it's nothing more then pure greed.
I'm arguing against the reality based position that bumping the memory to 32GB default and the storage to 512GB to 1TB will unnecessarily increase the price. I don't want to see the base unit price go up to accommodate increased hardware specs which I don't need (and nor do the majority). That's absurd.
If the base specs go up and the price stays the same (or comes down) I'm all for that. There's no reason to believe that this would happen, but yeah, absolutely I'm for that.
It's not greed, it's economics.
Apple could charge the same for the base 15” mbp but with 32 gb ram and 512 ssd because the profit for Apple in 2019 will be the same that it was in 2017 (counted inflation too)
So..
You maybe want an cheaper base price bec is too much for you as it is now?
And yes apple could do that like they did before, keeping 16 gb ram with 256 and lower the price by 200$
So..
You maybe want an cheaper base price bec is too much for you as it is now?
And yes apple could do that like they did before, keeping 16 gb ram with 256 and lower the price by 200$
You realize that that's been a regular occurrence during Jobs (and less frequently during Cook's) Apple right?
The iPhone was launched with base 4 GB storage. Can you imagine the price of the iPhone if they kept the same base storage and made people pay for 1 TB options?
Macs have similarly upgraded their components over time as the price of those components have gotten cheaper.
Apple has failed to upgrade their base storage in the last 7 years for the MBP's. In the meantime, they've soldiered said storage onto the logicboard and are making increasingly difficult (/impossible) for users to do it on their own. If they're going to be so user hostile about this, they should at least upgrade the storage options periodically and follow market trends.
The only reason this hasn't hurt them directly is because it's not a dealbreaker for most customers. But it does leave a bad taste thinking Apple is trying to screw you over.
Of course. Apple used to sell 8GB iOS devices. They used to sell Macs with 4MB of RAM. They do have improve the base spec over time to produce a system that works, they cannot continue with these specs.
That's a world of difference between jumping to 32GB/1TB as a base.
[doublepost=1560347487][/doublepost]
Please show your workings and sources.