4 ms·

Why not 64GB? Why not 128GB of server class ram and 16TB SSD drives? Why not let us configure whatever insane arrangement we want at this point and make it what

by lvspiff 10y ago

Why not 64GB? Why not 128GB of server class ram and 16TB SSD drives? Why not let us configure whatever insane arrangement we want at this point and make it whatever ungodly price Apple wants? You know we would pay for it...

gaze 10y ago
For the same reason Apple always restricts choice. "There's 128 gigs of ram in this machine but the battery life is pretty bad." People have no idea what they actually want.
- instaclay 10y ago
  This is exactly how I got my 2.5k MBP for 1.5k on CraigsList. I think it's great personally. Me: "So why are you getting rid of this machine?" Craig: "Well.. I just wanted it to browse Facebook and my phone does that." (16Gb i7 2015 for a web-browser)
  - poikniok 10y ago
    That is exactly what I would say if I had a stolen MBP to sell. Always better to feign stupidity, people will eat it up :)
    - instaclay 10y ago
      Hah! Yeah I would think so, but he also transferred the Applecare warranty license to my name through Apple support while we were at the coffee shop.
- eternalvision 10y ago
  Top poster noted exactly what many of us want: modularity. Being able to put in your own drive and RAM to whatever capacity is technically feasible is a good start. An innovative battery design might be one where the thickness of the laptop increased when a larger capacity battery (attached to the bottom) is chosen. The forthcoming OWC machined aluminum battery/port case offers relevant insight here, and such a solution devised instead by Apple would be clearly superior. Those who have been around long enough know no huge company, Apple included, is innocent of releasing sub-optimal products from time to time. I have personally bought and returned two 15" 2016 MBP's (one had an actual keyboard defect whereby one of the keys became temporarily stuck in the down position) and do plan on buying Apple products in the future on the expectation that any current shortcomings will be addressed in reasonable time. Apple is a solid company and they are not going anywhere. The question is, where will the users head? As an established geezer, I'll probably be using what we know of as 'laptops' for the next 5 years, at least.
  - guitarbill 10y ago
    If modularity is the main thing your care about, Apple hasn't really catered to that for ages. Changing the SSD and RAM is useful, but most people wouldn't use that. I know I haven't in my last 2 models. > no huge company, Apple included, is innocent of releasing sub-optimal products This is usually solved by having competition, but doesn't work if you care about the OS. Same for phones. It's a new-ish problem with no solution so far.
    - eternalvision 10y ago
      Sure, my response was a bit tongue-in-cheek. However, Apple could conceivably offer a model with a thick and beefy battery. Burly programmers with strong backs, for instance, would find this configuration to be appealing.
fumar 10y ago
Not sure, why you are getting downvoted here. I believe the point you make is valid, Apple configurations have diminished as their product line expands. I would rather the opposite be true.
- guitarbill 10y ago
  Because a "more, more, more" attitude without a real use-case is just dreaming. If you don't understand compromise, this isn't a realistic argument - it's making shit up. What price are we talking about for such a machine? $15,000+? Because it's likely you'd need new tooling for a bigger unibody, and that's just the start. And it isn't like there's no alternatives, like just using a desktop, or connecting to a more powerful server from a less powerful laptop to do work.
- burntrelish1273 10y ago
  The 13" mid-2012 non-Retina was the last reasonably-upgradable MBP (granted thickness, old CPU and display): 16 GiB RAM (2 x 8 GiB SODIMMs), 2x SSDs (deleting optical drive with 3rd-party tray). It was available until the release of TouchBar-equiped models.
duskwuff 10y ago
Because building a machine that can support ridiculous options like those increases cost and introduces tradeoffs. Supporting 128GB of RAM would constrain the machine to certain unusual, expensive, power-hungry chipsets, and would require the machine to be physically larger to hold all of that memory. Trying to build one product that satisfies everyone's needs will inevitably end up with a product that satisfies nobody.
runeks 10y ago
Honest question: what would you use 64GB of RAM for? I rarely use half of the 16GB I have in my MacBook.
- PopsiclePete 10y ago
  Lots of people develop on full-blown VM's, and test on a whole different set of VM's. Especially true in the Windows world, where Docker is still not widely spread. So I might run VS2017 inside VM A and test on VM's B, C, D.
- AznHisoka 10y ago
  so i can replicate my production environment as much as i can locally.

by lvspiff 10y ago

gaze 10y ago

For the same reason Apple always restricts choice. "There's 128 gigs of ram in this machine but the battery life is pretty bad." People have no idea what they actually want.

instaclay 10y ago
This is exactly how I got my 2.5k MBP for 1.5k on CraigsList. I think it's great personally. Me: "So why are you getting rid of this machine?" Craig: "Well.. I just wanted it to browse Facebook and my phone does that." (16Gb i7 2015 for a web-browser)
- poikniok 10y ago
  That is exactly what I would say if I had a stolen MBP to sell. Always better to feign stupidity, people will eat it up :)
  - instaclay 10y ago
    Hah! Yeah I would think so, but he also transferred the Applecare warranty license to my name through Apple support while we were at the coffee shop.
eternalvision 10y ago
Top poster noted exactly what many of us want: modularity. Being able to put in your own drive and RAM to whatever capacity is technically feasible is a good start. An innovative battery design might be one where the thickness of the laptop increased when a larger capacity battery (attached to the bottom) is chosen. The forthcoming OWC machined aluminum battery/port case offers relevant insight here, and such a solution devised instead by Apple would be clearly superior. Those who have been around long enough know no huge company, Apple included, is innocent of releasing sub-optimal products from time to time. I have personally bought and returned two 15" 2016 MBP's (one had an actual keyboard defect whereby one of the keys became temporarily stuck in the down position) and do plan on buying Apple products in the future on the expectation that any current shortcomings will be addressed in reasonable time. Apple is a solid company and they are not going anywhere. The question is, where will the users head? As an established geezer, I'll probably be using what we know of as 'laptops' for the next 5 years, at least.
- guitarbill 10y ago
  If modularity is the main thing your care about, Apple hasn't really catered to that for ages. Changing the SSD and RAM is useful, but most people wouldn't use that. I know I haven't in my last 2 models. > no huge company, Apple included, is innocent of releasing sub-optimal products This is usually solved by having competition, but doesn't work if you care about the OS. Same for phones. It's a new-ish problem with no solution so far.
  - eternalvision 10y ago
    Sure, my response was a bit tongue-in-cheek. However, Apple could conceivably offer a model with a thick and beefy battery. Burly programmers with strong backs, for instance, would find this configuration to be appealing.

fumar 10y ago

Not sure, why you are getting downvoted here. I believe the point you make is valid, Apple configurations have diminished as their product line expands. I would rather the opposite be true.

guitarbill 10y ago
Because a "more, more, more" attitude without a real use-case is just dreaming. If you don't understand compromise, this isn't a realistic argument - it's making shit up. What price are we talking about for such a machine? $15,000+? Because it's likely you'd need new tooling for a bigger unibody, and that's just the start. And it isn't like there's no alternatives, like just using a desktop, or connecting to a more powerful server from a less powerful laptop to do work.
burntrelish1273 10y ago
The 13" mid-2012 non-Retina was the last reasonably-upgradable MBP (granted thickness, old CPU and display): 16 GiB RAM (2 x 8 GiB SODIMMs), 2x SSDs (deleting optical drive with 3rd-party tray). It was available until the release of TouchBar-equiped models.

duskwuff 10y ago

Because building a machine that can support ridiculous options like those increases cost and introduces tradeoffs. Supporting 128GB of RAM would constrain the machine to certain unusual, expensive, power-hungry chipsets, and would require the machine to be physically larger to hold all of that memory. Trying to build one product that satisfies everyone's needs will inevitably end up with a product that satisfies nobody.

runeks 10y ago

Honest question: what would you use 64GB of RAM for? I rarely use half of the 16GB I have in my MacBook.

PopsiclePete 10y ago
Lots of people develop on full-blown VM's, and test on a whole different set of VM's. Especially true in the Windows world, where Docker is still not widely spread. So I might run VS2017 inside VM A and test on VM's B, C, D.
AznHisoka 10y ago
so i can replicate my production environment as much as i can locally.