Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

macworld.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 409 posts

Re: Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

#391

Post by NobleLie »

wilsonnb3 wrote: post #286
pentae wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you missed the point - we're talking about computers marketed as "Pro" devices which should be able to handle "Pro" workloads. 8GB on the Airs is a completely different issue as these are not marketed as Pro devices. Consumers place a lot of faith in Apple as a brand so when they go and purchase a "Macbook Pro" they should be able to assume Apple has their back and it's actually going to do what it says on th…

People understand that Apple just uses Pro to mean “better than the not pro version”. We’ve had AirPods Pro and the iPhone Pro for years now, the days of the word pro meaning “for professionals” are long gone.

In short, "plus"

Re: Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

#392

Post by seec »

isleyaardvark wrote: post #383
pentae wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the problem with skipping through things like this - you missed the part about real world chrome performance. It’s okay to be happy with 8gb, but it doesn’t mean you are right. Ignorance may be bliss but try not to spread it

You know, instead of being rude and berating someone who makes a good faith effort to watch an 11 minute video to try and find your argument, you should instead just go ahead and just make your argument. I don't know why you'd expect me to spend my time trying to find a needle in your haystack.

You are the one arguing in bad faith to satisfy the cognitive dissonance created by being scammed buying a computer at way too high price considering its real-world performance in the configuration you got.

If anything, you are the one who really needs to prove why he feels the need to defend the indefensible commercial choices of an extremely rich company.

At best you are like a weirdo using short in 5°C winter and telling everyone it is fine and do not understand why everyone is telling him he is crazy and that must be uncomfortable. At worst you are the used car salesman minimizing every single problem the car he is selling to keep the price high.

In any case, your behavior is not normal nor commendable, you shouldn't be the one requesting better behavior from other people...

Re: Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

#393

Post by seec »

torginus wrote: post #53
aurareturn wrote: post #8

8GB is still good enough for office workers and students. Heck, I used an M1 8GB Air for 1 year as a dev. Although I wish I had more RAM, it still served me well. For $899 (on sale sometimes), the 8GB M2 Air is absolutely a steal. The screen quality, thinness, battery life, build quality, SoC, quietness, coolness, metal enclosure, touchpad, and speakers are simply unmatched by anything in the PC world at that price -…

No it's not. A ton of programs used by regular people (Chrome etc.) are RAM hogs, if you are a dev, then Docker is also an egregious example. If you happen to play games (a big thing for average people), that 8GB will be shared between the CPU and the GPU. Even the Steam Deck, admittedly a budget device, comes with 16GB. It's often mentioned that macOS is more frugal with RAM, a claim which I flat out found to be unt…

The reality is that the exact same hardware uses less RAM on a base install of Windows than it does on a base install of macOS. Having used both hackintosh and real Mac booted on Windows (without bootcamp, as a "real" PC) I am certain of that fact.

And in usage I also find macOS and its Apps to more often than not actually take more RAM. It isn't a bad thing pe se, it often means more speed because more things are cached, available fast and the like.

However, it is quite annoying when Apple simultaneously pretend the contrary and at the same time upcharge for their soldered RAM in a greedy way. If anything, a "Pro" PC laptop in this price range will have not only at least 16GB as default but is highly likely to have 4-8GB for its dedicated GPU when with Apple Silicon, the RAM advertised has to be shared and any GPU activity lower even more what can comfortably be used as system memory.

The more time passes, the more Apple Silicon feels like the ultimate scam. At this you better have a very real need for battery life because it really does not make a lot of sense otherwise. In fact, if it is only autonomy that you need and not true mobility, it would be better to buy cheaper performance equivalent PC and buy one of those large carriable battery.

Re: Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

#394

Post by seec »

musha68k wrote: post #178
aurareturn wrote: post #8

8GB is still good enough for office workers and students. Heck, I used an M1 8GB Air for 1 year as a dev. Although I wish I had more RAM, it still served me well. For $899 (on sale sometimes), the 8GB M2 Air is absolutely a steal. The screen quality, thinness, battery life, build quality, SoC, quietness, coolness, metal enclosure, touchpad, and speakers are simply unmatched by anything in the PC world at that price -…

It’s not in my experience. “Normal users” are starting to run into this issue as I can anecdotally pass along (browsing, google suite, slight photoshop use, etc). I actually had lots of reservations before I “green lighted” those first gen M1 MacBook Airs at 8GB across family and friends. Unfortunately I unreasonably fell for the rather over hyped reviews across the board (“I want to believe”). It’s especially on me…

Thank god I'm not the only one to know the truth. My experience is similar to yours and I agree on everything.

I started using Macs with Mac OS 9.2 but now I want out. The pricing is absurd and there is no way to circumvent that since no upgrade possible.

I don't care much about battery life/power consumption and the actual use case is overblown, if you get one of the powerful chips and push it, you are looking at 30-50W power consumption; so even with a 100kWh battery, we are talking 2-3H at best.

In other words, if you want to game, compute, encode, render, or whatever high performance task you are still going to need a cord anyway. The rest of low power task is actually done very nicely on much cheaper devices that have more than enough battery life (from cheap tablets, including iPads to Chromebooks).

Also macOS currently has a software problem in my opinion and Apple stupidly push for subscription out of greed. If I have to subscribe for my computing needs I might as well get the cheaper devices and use software that can run anywhere, including sub 500$ potato.

Apple has made a terrible mistake strategically; you can't have your cake and eat it too. If they want to sell expensive, limited hardware they need to have cheap non-subscription software that is best in class in enough categories. If their hardware is only useful to run competitors' software and subscription stuff they have to be competitive on the hardware price...

Re: Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

#395

Post by seec »

coldtea wrote: post #156
pjmlp wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that is forced obsolence and damaging for the environment, the computer from today should be perfectly usable in 4-5 years. The upgrade treadmill from the 20 century computers is no longer relevant for most users, besides storage.

> Because that is forced obsolence and damaging for the environment, the computer from today should be perfectly usable in 4-5 years. And for most users it will be. If we're talking "forced obsolence" Apple is probably the last to blame, given their stuff retains high ratio of original-vs-resale value (meaning they have long second hand careers).

That used to be true. It is not at all true for the recent Macs. The Intel Macs with soldered everything already old a worse value but the low-end Apple Silicon Macs seems to be even worse. It is unsurprising considering the limitation, the configuration is set in stone and any problem, especially on the storage means the end of the machine.

If you believe that will not make their second-hand value and their longevity much worse, I don't know what to tell you. It is already happening. Even relatively recent Intel macs are worthless if they were not top of the line with lots of storage and RAM. The only thing keeping somewhat of a value is what Apple does not want to sell anymore: big display iMacs (27"). But that's really not surprising since half the value comes from being a good display in the first place...

On top of all that, even low-end hardware is good enough for basic task, so second-hand inventory is piling up, especially at the low end. Macs are nice but old Macs not that much nicer than cheap Huawei's and the likes...

Re: Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

#396

Post by seec »

Joeri wrote: post #331
elevation wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The company is the problem here The author feigns indignance at Apple's margins, as if the only possible purpose for that markup is to line the pockets of Apple execs. But this isn't pure profit for Apple. Apple develops feature and security updates which they make available for free (at the point of use) for years to their hardware customers. The significant hardware markup is what enables this! Contrast this to c…

You mean do the right thing by shareholders. Apple spends on the order of a 100 billion a year lining shareholder pockets through buybacks and dividends. That is three times what they spend on r&d. This company is making obscene amounts of profit only to hand most of it over to people whose contribution to apple’s success is zero, instead of spending it on improving the products or customers actually responsible for…

Tim Cook has a choice, Apple actually started doing that right after Steve Jobs passed away. Steve categorically refused to do that kind of stuff precisely because of those problems. Tim Cook also has a vested interest in lining his own pockets, he has targets that are about revenue and profits, not user experience and customer satisfaction. So, he maximise his own benefit and this is what we get.

People who pretend Apple wasn't different under Job are magnificent gaslighters and should not be taken seriously about anything really...

Re: Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

#397

Post by seec »

dns_snek wrote: post #151
goosedragons wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weren't they $800-900 a second ago?

Perhaps it was $900 new, then a $400 discount would explain the mysterious hinge damage. ;-) Next we'll find out that the system didn't have an SSD, had all manner of crapware installed and had its intake ducts filled with dust. Typical fanboy comparisons.

Yeah my opinion and experience as well. I also use Apple stuff but the level of dishonesty and lying coming out of typical Apple fans is absolutely unreal.

One hilarious thing I have noticed about those type of peoples, is that they will defend their overpriced MacBook to the teeth but also go for the cheapest nastiest food possible and defend their stingy choices with a "it's the same thing" type of argument even though you can clearly taste a difference and it is clearly nutritionally worse.

It makes you wonder... I try to avoid those peoples nowadays, always more trouble than they are worth...

Re: Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

#398

Post by runjake »

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #278
runjake wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tech’s stagnated for over a decade I don’t know where to begin with this, but on topic, the M1 came out in 2020 and was a big tech leap in how PCs are done. Sure, all the individual technologies within existed elsewhere first. But Apple executed and delivered great products.

M1 was not that big of a leap for trillion dollar company. If you looked in A12 bionic or other processor from Apple before M1, M1 wasn't that different in IPC/core or any metric. Also Apple was 2 generation in semiconductor process ahead due to TSMC contracts. If you look closely, yes apple is bit better in manufacturing, bit better in materials etc. and I have many apple products, but its products isn't that differ…

It's entirely subjective and I'm going to disagree. I ran an A12Z Developer Transition Kit and then immediately upgraded to an M1 Mini and the raw performance was staggeringly faster.

My followup question: if it's so easy and unimpressive, why aren't other companies doing it -- especially at similar performance-per-watt? The market is obviously there and they release "answers" to Apple Silicon that aren't really answers (again, perf-per-watt isn't there).

Re: Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

#399

Post by aurareturn »

goosedragons wrote: post #137
aurareturn wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What on earth are you doing to your laptops that has you convinced that six years is an exceptionally long lifespan!?!? When I was a poor college student, I kept buying $500 Windows laptops and they kept breaking after 1-2 years.

Weren't they $800-900 a second ago?

>Weren't they $800-900 a second ago?

These also break much faster than Macs in my experience.

Re: Apple has a memory problem and we're all paying for it

#400

Post by aurareturn »

tntaben wrote: post #390
aurareturn wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, there is no guarantee that Macs are trending that way. However, I have a feeling that Apple Silicon Macs, even with 8GB, will last very longer than Intel Macs with the same amount of memory in the past.

Ten years ago, Macbook Pro was equipped with 4GB RAM. Back then, the Macbook Pro hardware led the PC industry. Pro is a real Pro. today, you’re saying that it’s enough.

Macbook Pro hardware still leads the industry in my opinion. And has a bigger lead than ever.
Post reply on HN