3 ms·

I don't know if this is more of a testament to what MacOS can do with so little RAM, or a confidence that their PCI-e SSD access is so fast you won't feel much

by booi 3y ago

I don't know if this is more of a testament to what MacOS can do with so little RAM, or a confidence that their PCI-e SSD access is so fast you won't feel much difference.

hdjjhhvvhga 3y ago
Or an illusion of a choice. Frankly, a machine with a "pro" in their name and 8 GB RAM is an oxymoron. When you look at the apps Apple advertises as playing nicely with their M chips, most of them are memory hungry.
- riscy 3y ago
  Wouldn't there have been widely circulated press about how those apps are unusable with 8GB RAM in the past however-many years it's been the base model? Do you think Apple would advertise that it is suited for those "pro" apps and workloads without having tested it with that model? Imagine the mountain of negative press if it were true that it can barely run Final Cut Pro.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    You can edit video on an iPad with 4gb of RAM, for all the power and comfort it's worth to you. For $1600, in 2023, a Pro machine ought to treat the user better. This thing is like those 4gb Macbook Pros, with the cruel twist that you can't upgrade the memory and make them usable again after an upgrade brings it to it's knees. If your "Pro" machine cannot upgrade it's storage or memory, it ought to ship with all the storage and memory you're going to need for the lifetime of the device. The old Macbook Pro base models did reflect that, even with the paltry phone-sized SSD they shipped. The 13" Macbook Pro had outdated specs that cannot be expected to last into the next decade. Replacing it with an even more expensive, even more outdated model is setting up their customers for regret. Without a doubt in my mind, I am certain that Apple could sell a 16gb Macbook Pro 14" at $1600 and still turn a profit. Their BOM is not tight, Apple margins are not like a console manufacturer.
Boatfaceing 3y ago
[dead]
acdha 3y ago
It’s more the former: I used an 8GB M1 for a bit over a year as a development box and it was fine even with Java stuff running in a Podman container. I was expecting it to swap but very rarely saw that –the base OS is pretty lean and Apple Silicon has hardware accelerated memory compression. One factor: I don’t use Chrome. They have reportedly made some improvements but using Firefox or especially Safari is going to save a lot of RAM.

by booi 3y ago

I don't know if this is more of a testament to what MacOS can do with so little RAM, or a confidence that their PCI-e SSD access is so fast you won't feel much difference.

hdjjhhvvhga 3y ago

Or an illusion of a choice. Frankly, a machine with a "pro" in their name and 8 GB RAM is an oxymoron. When you look at the apps Apple advertises as playing nicely with their M chips, most of them are memory hungry.

riscy 3y ago
Wouldn't there have been widely circulated press about how those apps are unusable with 8GB RAM in the past however-many years it's been the base model? Do you think Apple would advertise that it is suited for those "pro" apps and workloads without having tested it with that model? Imagine the mountain of negative press if it were true that it can barely run Final Cut Pro.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  You can edit video on an iPad with 4gb of RAM, for all the power and comfort it's worth to you. For $1600, in 2023, a Pro machine ought to treat the user better. This thing is like those 4gb Macbook Pros, with the cruel twist that you can't upgrade the memory and make them usable again after an upgrade brings it to it's knees. If your "Pro" machine cannot upgrade it's storage or memory, it ought to ship with all the storage and memory you're going to need for the lifetime of the device. The old Macbook Pro base models did reflect that, even with the paltry phone-sized SSD they shipped. The 13" Macbook Pro had outdated specs that cannot be expected to last into the next decade. Replacing it with an even more expensive, even more outdated model is setting up their customers for regret. Without a doubt in my mind, I am certain that Apple could sell a 16gb Macbook Pro 14" at $1600 and still turn a profit. Their BOM is not tight, Apple margins are not like a console manufacturer.

Boatfaceing 3y ago

[dead]

acdha 3y ago

It’s more the former: I used an 8GB M1 for a bit over a year as a development box and it was fine even with Java stuff running in a Podman container. I was expecting it to swap but very rarely saw that –the base OS is pretty lean and Apple Silicon has hardware accelerated memory compression. One factor: I don’t use Chrome. They have reportedly made some improvements but using Firefox or especially Safari is going to save a lot of RAM.