7 ms·

Making components replaceable increases volume, weight, and cost. If you want replaceable components, go buy a computer for which that is a feature - and know

Making components replaceable increases volume, weight, and cost. If you want replaceable components, go buy a computer for which that is a feature - and know that you will get a machine which is larger, heavier, and more expensive (all other factors being equal). Swapable components require additional casing, connectors, testing, sales channels, etc. You're not going to get a 3/4" 5-lb 7-hour 256GB-SSD 8GB-RAM MBA Retina for $2200 and be able to swap out darn near everything; something's gonna give. Some of us DON'T want to replace components, having learned over the years that by the time we're replacing components we'd rather replace the whole computer outright. If I need more RAM, it's best matched with a new CPU. If I need more storage, I'll need more RAM to throw around more data. When the battery dies, all those other components are gettin' obsolete anyway. I also know from experience that upgrading parts doesn't always go as planned, and time wasted upgrading can very quickly add up to the cost of a new machine outright. I'd rather have a notebook which is very thin, very light, very fast - and just replace the whole package when the time comes as I see fit. You're welcome to a different POV, and there is a market happy to serve our different needs & desires. However, just because we have a different POV doesn't make me a f*ing idiot.

super_mario 14y ago
Your assumptions are completely wrong, and it only shows that Apple target customers are not really doing any kind of serious computing. Sometimes your processes are not CPU bound at all, sometimes they are I/O bound. Sometimes in RAM caches can increase performance quite a bit etc. This means swapping HDD and putting faster SSD is enough to speed certain things up. Also, updating RAM only is enough to speed things up in certain other criteria. Besides it is well understood in technical circles where Apple is headed. Make no mistake. Their goal is to kill general purpose computers, and replace them with appliances they control.
- ctdonath 14y ago
  Your assumptions are completely wrong, and it only shows that Apple target customers are not really doing any kind of serious computing. Um, you missed the last line of the post you replied to.
- JackC 14y ago
  Your assumptions are completely wrong, and it only shows that Apple target customers are not really doing any kind of serious computing. This is true. I for one do all my computing with a goofy grin on my face, while riding a unicycle. In all seriousness, this product will be perfect for me. The lower weight will help with my unicycling, and the 4-core i7 will look great with my butterfly wings.
  - idspispopd 14y ago
    You're having an argument with a bunch of InstantExperts™ who are clearly motivated by other sources or tied to luddite ideologies. They're more interested in presenting Apple as an evil empire because this fits their personal objectives. Since the overwhelming bulk of computer users(including pro users) have no interest in fiddling with their computer specs post purchase, Apple are simply making a product that fits the market. I'm not going to go into the historical precedence of laptops having limited upgradability, but as you've noted something had to give, and soldering the RAM is by no means a new idea.
    - kamaal 14y ago
      >>Since the overwhelming bulk of computer users(including pro users) have no interest in fiddling with their computer specs post purchase, Apple are simply making a product that fits the market. No one here is saying we tear down our laptops and assemble them back three times a day. But if something like a RAM gets toast on my machine, I would like to get that replaced instead of replacing the whole machine. Why, you might ask. Its because it works out cheaper that way. And besides, I don't throw away my car if some thing little goofs up! Why should I throw away my computer.
      - travisp 14y ago
        You don't have to throw away your car over a small amount of damage (unless it is the frame), but you might have to replace a thousand plus dollar component the size of a macbook.
      - travisp 14y ago
- stouset 14y ago
  > Your assumptions are completely wrong, and it only shows that Apple target customers are not really doing any kind of serious computing. The elitism here is just disgusting. I suppose all the graphic designers, photographers, programmers, and even just plain old novice users who love Apple products should just pack their bags and go back to pencils and paper. After all, if they're not doing any kind of serious computing, we really ought not cater to their needs, wants, or desires. Computers are obviously only for people running batch processes with 95%+ CPU and I/O utilization.
  - kamaal 14y ago
    Its not elitism. Apple is trying very hard to convert a computer into a washing machine. Which is, giving it a specific use, like a TV or a refrigerator and tightly controlling everything behind that use.
    - tsieling 14y ago
      Yeah a washing machine that edits videos, keeps all my stuff together and makes it easy to use. Why don't we just accept that the general purpose, let the user figure it out approach is dead in the water. People are voting with their dollars and they're saying they've had enough of tech that feels like tech. The paradigm changed, we're no longer kings when mom's printer driver is out of date, and it's time to grow up and accept it.
      - kamaal 14y ago
        Washing machine is general enough for its tasks too. A washing machine can wash nearly all kind of clothes. A refrigerator can preserve anything that needs freezing. The defining characteristics of those machines is companies telling me not to worry anything beyond the knobs and dials. And I don't want to worry anything beyond the knobs and dials. But no way in the world would I like to throwaway a washing machine if something small went wrong inside it. That's where the tinkering part comes to play. I don't mind the knobs and dials, but claiming that not having user serviceable parts is not a requisite of usability gets really very difficult to believe in.
- sausagefeet 14y ago
  Why would I run any serious computation on a glorified iPad? I have a MacBook Air and it's great for its purpose: a very light, very portable, thin terminal. Running anything that is seriously bounded by CPU or I/O would be silly.
- scott_s 14y ago
  You're right, the machine in front of me does not do any "serious computing." It's just a device which lets me communicate with the people I work with, look up things on the internet, and enable me to work on a ~500 core cluster. The computer in front of me is basically just an appliance now. That has no bearing on the actual work I do.
- bbwharris 14y ago
  Serious computing? Like gaming? Last I checked typing text files and compiling them is more serious than most users and doesn't require massive clusters to accomplish.
  - super_mario 14y ago
    If Apple gets their way, typing text and compiling it to code and running it on your appliance will become illegal. How often do you run custom code on your other appliances? Exactly. There will simply be no expectation of running custom code on a "computer" once it is turned into an appliance. Look at iPad. It's more powerful than PCs of the 90s yet no one even expects to run their custom code on it. This is where Macs and OS X are headed to.
    - bbwharris 14y ago
      Seriously doubt it, but if that happens most of us will go back to Linux.
      - Anderkent 14y ago
        Not if Apple starts selling macs with secure boot permanently enabled. Which I wouldn't be very surprised about.
    - omgsean 14y ago
      It won't even matter by then because the Illuminati will have already started the New World Order and we'll all be in secret FEMA camps.
      - whateverer 14y ago
        "Most users never program their computers themselves. Anyone can plainly see the historical trend from the late 80s onward that the average user has no interest in the internals of their computers or in investing time in automation which experts can do for them. I support Apple 100% in moving forward and removing the option of running, or producing, unreliable homebrewed code without authorization. Actual programming experts can get a Mac Pro with and their programming license from Apple, or just run Linux on a PC." Yes, I certainly trust that we won't be seeing posts like the above in the eventuality that Apple puts further restrictions on their (customer's) computers.
- mironathetin 14y ago
  "Your assumptions are completely wrong, and it only shows that Apple target customers are not really doing any kind of serious computing." Yeah,... Astro-Physicist here. 90% of my colleagues use Macs and we write most of the software that controls satellites and earth bound observatories on Macs. Just an old science, entertainment, with no real or useable results :o).
  - BitMastro 14y ago
    I'm curious: what language do you working with? Are you using as IDE (if you are using one)?
    - mironathetin 14y ago
      java, jython (90% of the time), C, C++, python, Netbeans, some use Eclipse (cough), emacs, bbedit, vim
      - BitMastro 14y ago
        Thanks!
  - super_mario 14y ago
    Mathematician and software developer here (and the guy you are responding to) and ALL my personal computers are Macs too. I criticize Apple's direction because I sincerely do not think it is good for the future of general purpose computing. The software you write for your scientific computing might become "illegal" if Apple gets it their way, and you will first have to pay Apple a cut before you can run it, or it may become plain impossible to program your computer at all. How often do you run custom code on your other appliances? Exactly. If computers become locked down appliances you won't be able to or expected to run custom code on them either. How many people expect to compile and run stuff on their iPad? None, but it's a perfectly capable machine, more powerful than PCs of the 90s.
    - mironathetin 14y ago
tincansandtwine 14y ago
Specifically in reply to the battery: I work in an enterprise environment where Macs make up about 50-60% of the installed machines. Of these, about 30-40% are laptops. In my experience, Mac laptop batteries have a high rate of failure, higher than our significantly more dated PC hardware. With the most recent revs, replacing the battery has become a huge problem, since relatively new hardware (1-2 years old) is now completely shot, unless we buy a proprietary screwdriver (not a big deal, but every time they change the screw, we have to find a shop that sells it), or send it to a Mac repair shop. Now, if we upgrade to the Retina Macbook Pro, we will not have the considerably cheaper and faster option of replacing it ourselves. Unfortunately, our userbase is such that they "require" Mac hardware, so it puts IT in a rough position (having to explain why we're essentially outsourcing our work, and spending money to do so). Now, this isn't necessarily a typical case, but if you were a regular consumer and your battery died, it isn't that hard to buy a replacement battery for the majority of laptops, though this kind of thing is becoming more prevalent. I would also like to mention that it's not just Apple (I'm looking at you, Ultrabooks), though I would say that they are the trendsetter.
- esonderegger 14y ago
  Why did you put quotes around "require" when describing your userbase and Mac hardware? I'm genuinely curious - do their stated reasons for using Macs differ from how you think they are actually using their machines?
- socialist_coder 14y ago
  You should tell your users to unplug their Macbooks more often. If you leave them plugged in 99% of the time the battery will fail a lot faster. It should drain and recharge every once a while.
  - pasbesoin 14y ago
    At this point, this should be a configurable option in the hardware and system software. Configurable, so that if you want to use it, you can tell it when. (E.g. I work from home on Sundays, so run from battery down to n percent charge before switching on recharging. And/or alert me when I exceed the recommended runtime between charging cycles. Etc.) I suspect, however, that the cost/benefit -- from the manufacturers' perspective -- for implementing this is not favorable.
mark_l_watson 14y ago
+1 I am with you on this. Although I have a MacBook Pro as a hot backup, I do all of my work and writing using a 13" MacBook Air. For me it is a commodity device that I have no interest in upgrading. If it breaks, a new one can be configured using a Time Machine backup while I enjoy a cup of coffee. Life used to be different: I spent a lot of time with extensible PCs, tweaking and running Linux, etc. I have come to realize that this "fun" had an opportunity cost that I am no longer willing to pay. I also tend to replace Apple gear more often but it is easy to find relatives or friends who appreciate being given slightly outdated gear. I like having an easily replaceable commodity laptop in sort of the same way I like server assets sold like electricity (e.g., AWS, Heroku, AppEngine). Ultimately time is the most precious resource. The older I get the more I care about using it wisely.
Spooky23 14y ago
You're not an idiot, you just like Apple and have enough money not to care about getting ripped off. This design decision has nothing to do with reducing "volume, weight and cost". It has everything to do with hosing the customer on memory, as that has been a very lucrative business on the iPad.
- tsieling 14y ago
  Ripped off is subjective. I want someone else to take care of that stuff for me, so that makes Apple's direction a good one for me. I don't like tinkering with my computer, I don't like fucking around with it to make it do what I need. I do what I do with it and it works, it works better than any of the heap of garbage PCs that I sunk countless hours into before I switched. That's why I use it, and I'm neither an idiot nor ripped off. I get what I expect and more and I'm happy to give them my money for it. Levelling slurs at people who happen to be in their market makes you look like, well, you know.
  - Spooky23 14y ago
    I didn't level a slur at you, and as I said, I don't think that you're an idiot. Just wealthy. Before, you had the ability to go to the Apple store or website and have them "take care of" your memory woes at point of purchase. They charge like $500 for an $100 memory stick. Most people call paying 5x more for a commodity product "a ripoff".
    - masklinn 14y ago
      > They charge like $500 for an $100 memory stick. That's definitely the case historically, but you may want to look at this one case right there: 16GB RAM upgrade on the new MBP is $200. 2x8GB SODIMM at crucial is $150. I'm not exactly going to shit my pants over a minor $50 (and 30% of the base part) markup when buying a $2200 kit.
      - subsection1h 14y ago
        16GB RAM upgrade on the new MBP is $200. 2x8GB SODIMM at crucial is $150. Once again, can someone please explain to me why Apple apologists are generally incapable of using a price comparison service that requires maybe 10 seconds to use? Their behavior never ceases to baffle me. CORSAIR 16GB for MacBook Pro - $89.99 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233251 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233...
Symmetry 14y ago
You're mostly right here, but making things specialized to the extent that Apple is doing here often makes things more expensive. If you go the specialized route instead of using commodity hardware there's going to be a big upfront price. Its possible that reduced packaging could make up for that in some cases, but I'm skeptical. There are also some changes that Apple makes simply to prevent user serviceability, like special Apple only screws, that don't help with weight and only serve to increase the price.
wwweston 14y ago
Having a different POV may not make you an idiot, but saying "If I need more RAM, it's best matched with a new CPU" and "If I need more storage, I'll need more RAM to throw around more data" makes you sound like one. Both statements have pretty large and likely counterexample spaces.
rsanchez1 14y ago
"Go buy a computer for which that is a feature" Great, I'll go buy ANY computer that isn't made by Apple.

super_mario 14y ago

Your assumptions are completely wrong, and it only shows that Apple target customers are not really doing any kind of serious computing. Sometimes your processes are not CPU bound at all, sometimes they are I/O bound. Sometimes in RAM caches can increase performance quite a bit etc. This means swapping HDD and putting faster SSD is enough to speed certain things up. Also, updating RAM only is enough to speed things up in certain other criteria. Besides it is well understood in technical circles where Apple is headed. Make no mistake. Their goal is to kill general purpose computers, and replace them with appliances they control.

ctdonath 14y ago
Your assumptions are completely wrong, and it only shows that Apple target customers are not really doing any kind of serious computing. Um, you missed the last line of the post you replied to.
JackC 14y ago
Your assumptions are completely wrong, and it only shows that Apple target customers are not really doing any kind of serious computing. This is true. I for one do all my computing with a goofy grin on my face, while riding a unicycle. In all seriousness, this product will be perfect for me. The lower weight will help with my unicycling, and the 4-core i7 will look great with my butterfly wings.
- idspispopd 14y ago
  You're having an argument with a bunch of InstantExperts™ who are clearly motivated by other sources or tied to luddite ideologies. They're more interested in presenting Apple as an evil empire because this fits their personal objectives. Since the overwhelming bulk of computer users(including pro users) have no interest in fiddling with their computer specs post purchase, Apple are simply making a product that fits the market. I'm not going to go into the historical precedence of laptops having limited upgradability, but as you've noted something had to give, and soldering the RAM is by no means a new idea.
  - kamaal 14y ago
    >>Since the overwhelming bulk of computer users(including pro users) have no interest in fiddling with their computer specs post purchase, Apple are simply making a product that fits the market. No one here is saying we tear down our laptops and assemble them back three times a day. But if something like a RAM gets toast on my machine, I would like to get that replaced instead of replacing the whole machine. Why, you might ask. Its because it works out cheaper that way. And besides, I don't throw away my car if some thing little goofs up! Why should I throw away my computer.
    - travisp 14y ago
      You don't have to throw away your car over a small amount of damage (unless it is the frame), but you might have to replace a thousand plus dollar component the size of a macbook.
    - travisp 14y ago
stouset 14y ago
> Your assumptions are completely wrong, and it only shows that Apple target customers are not really doing any kind of serious computing. The elitism here is just disgusting. I suppose all the graphic designers, photographers, programmers, and even just plain old novice users who love Apple products should just pack their bags and go back to pencils and paper. After all, if they're not doing any kind of serious computing, we really ought not cater to their needs, wants, or desires. Computers are obviously only for people running batch processes with 95%+ CPU and I/O utilization.
- kamaal 14y ago
  Its not elitism. Apple is trying very hard to convert a computer into a washing machine. Which is, giving it a specific use, like a TV or a refrigerator and tightly controlling everything behind that use.
  - tsieling 14y ago
    Yeah a washing machine that edits videos, keeps all my stuff together and makes it easy to use. Why don't we just accept that the general purpose, let the user figure it out approach is dead in the water. People are voting with their dollars and they're saying they've had enough of tech that feels like tech. The paradigm changed, we're no longer kings when mom's printer driver is out of date, and it's time to grow up and accept it.
    - kamaal 14y ago
      Washing machine is general enough for its tasks too. A washing machine can wash nearly all kind of clothes. A refrigerator can preserve anything that needs freezing. The defining characteristics of those machines is companies telling me not to worry anything beyond the knobs and dials. And I don't want to worry anything beyond the knobs and dials. But no way in the world would I like to throwaway a washing machine if something small went wrong inside it. That's where the tinkering part comes to play. I don't mind the knobs and dials, but claiming that not having user serviceable parts is not a requisite of usability gets really very difficult to believe in.
sausagefeet 14y ago
Why would I run any serious computation on a glorified iPad? I have a MacBook Air and it's great for its purpose: a very light, very portable, thin terminal. Running anything that is seriously bounded by CPU or I/O would be silly.
scott_s 14y ago
You're right, the machine in front of me does not do any "serious computing." It's just a device which lets me communicate with the people I work with, look up things on the internet, and enable me to work on a ~500 core cluster. The computer in front of me is basically just an appliance now. That has no bearing on the actual work I do.
bbwharris 14y ago
Serious computing? Like gaming? Last I checked typing text files and compiling them is more serious than most users and doesn't require massive clusters to accomplish.
- super_mario 14y ago
  If Apple gets their way, typing text and compiling it to code and running it on your appliance will become illegal. How often do you run custom code on your other appliances? Exactly. There will simply be no expectation of running custom code on a "computer" once it is turned into an appliance. Look at iPad. It's more powerful than PCs of the 90s yet no one even expects to run their custom code on it. This is where Macs and OS X are headed to.
  - bbwharris 14y ago
    Seriously doubt it, but if that happens most of us will go back to Linux.
    - Anderkent 14y ago
      Not if Apple starts selling macs with secure boot permanently enabled. Which I wouldn't be very surprised about.
  - omgsean 14y ago
    It won't even matter by then because the Illuminati will have already started the New World Order and we'll all be in secret FEMA camps.
    - whateverer 14y ago
      "Most users never program their computers themselves. Anyone can plainly see the historical trend from the late 80s onward that the average user has no interest in the internals of their computers or in investing time in automation which experts can do for them. I support Apple 100% in moving forward and removing the option of running, or producing, unreliable homebrewed code without authorization. Actual programming experts can get a Mac Pro with and their programming license from Apple, or just run Linux on a PC." Yes, I certainly trust that we won't be seeing posts like the above in the eventuality that Apple puts further restrictions on their (customer's) computers.
mironathetin 14y ago
"Your assumptions are completely wrong, and it only shows that Apple target customers are not really doing any kind of serious computing." Yeah,... Astro-Physicist here. 90% of my colleagues use Macs and we write most of the software that controls satellites and earth bound observatories on Macs. Just an old science, entertainment, with no real or useable results :o).
- BitMastro 14y ago
  I'm curious: what language do you working with? Are you using as IDE (if you are using one)?
  - mironathetin 14y ago
    java, jython (90% of the time), C, C++, python, Netbeans, some use Eclipse (cough), emacs, bbedit, vim
    - BitMastro 14y ago
      Thanks!
- super_mario 14y ago
  Mathematician and software developer here (and the guy you are responding to) and ALL my personal computers are Macs too. I criticize Apple's direction because I sincerely do not think it is good for the future of general purpose computing. The software you write for your scientific computing might become "illegal" if Apple gets it their way, and you will first have to pay Apple a cut before you can run it, or it may become plain impossible to program your computer at all. How often do you run custom code on your other appliances? Exactly. If computers become locked down appliances you won't be able to or expected to run custom code on them either. How many people expect to compile and run stuff on their iPad? None, but it's a perfectly capable machine, more powerful than PCs of the 90s.
  - mironathetin 14y ago

tincansandtwine 14y ago

Specifically in reply to the battery: I work in an enterprise environment where Macs make up about 50-60% of the installed machines. Of these, about 30-40% are laptops. In my experience, Mac laptop batteries have a high rate of failure, higher than our significantly more dated PC hardware. With the most recent revs, replacing the battery has become a huge problem, since relatively new hardware (1-2 years old) is now completely shot, unless we buy a proprietary screwdriver (not a big deal, but every time they change the screw, we have to find a shop that sells it), or send it to a Mac repair shop. Now, if we upgrade to the Retina Macbook Pro, we will not have the considerably cheaper and faster option of replacing it ourselves. Unfortunately, our userbase is such that they "require" Mac hardware, so it puts IT in a rough position (having to explain why we're essentially outsourcing our work, and spending money to do so). Now, this isn't necessarily a typical case, but if you were a regular consumer and your battery died, it isn't that hard to buy a replacement battery for the majority of laptops, though this kind of thing is becoming more prevalent. I would also like to mention that it's not just Apple (I'm looking at you, Ultrabooks), though I would say that they are the trendsetter.

esonderegger 14y ago
Why did you put quotes around "require" when describing your userbase and Mac hardware? I'm genuinely curious - do their stated reasons for using Macs differ from how you think they are actually using their machines?
socialist_coder 14y ago
You should tell your users to unplug their Macbooks more often. If you leave them plugged in 99% of the time the battery will fail a lot faster. It should drain and recharge every once a while.
- pasbesoin 14y ago
  At this point, this should be a configurable option in the hardware and system software. Configurable, so that if you want to use it, you can tell it when. (E.g. I work from home on Sundays, so run from battery down to n percent charge before switching on recharging. And/or alert me when I exceed the recommended runtime between charging cycles. Etc.) I suspect, however, that the cost/benefit -- from the manufacturers' perspective -- for implementing this is not favorable.

mark_l_watson 14y ago

+1 I am with you on this. Although I have a MacBook Pro as a hot backup, I do all of my work and writing using a 13" MacBook Air. For me it is a commodity device that I have no interest in upgrading. If it breaks, a new one can be configured using a Time Machine backup while I enjoy a cup of coffee. Life used to be different: I spent a lot of time with extensible PCs, tweaking and running Linux, etc. I have come to realize that this "fun" had an opportunity cost that I am no longer willing to pay. I also tend to replace Apple gear more often but it is easy to find relatives or friends who appreciate being given slightly outdated gear. I like having an easily replaceable commodity laptop in sort of the same way I like server assets sold like electricity (e.g., AWS, Heroku, AppEngine). Ultimately time is the most precious resource. The older I get the more I care about using it wisely.

Spooky23 14y ago

You're not an idiot, you just like Apple and have enough money not to care about getting ripped off. This design decision has nothing to do with reducing "volume, weight and cost". It has everything to do with hosing the customer on memory, as that has been a very lucrative business on the iPad.

tsieling 14y ago
Ripped off is subjective. I want someone else to take care of that stuff for me, so that makes Apple's direction a good one for me. I don't like tinkering with my computer, I don't like fucking around with it to make it do what I need. I do what I do with it and it works, it works better than any of the heap of garbage PCs that I sunk countless hours into before I switched. That's why I use it, and I'm neither an idiot nor ripped off. I get what I expect and more and I'm happy to give them my money for it. Levelling slurs at people who happen to be in their market makes you look like, well, you know.
- Spooky23 14y ago
  I didn't level a slur at you, and as I said, I don't think that you're an idiot. Just wealthy. Before, you had the ability to go to the Apple store or website and have them "take care of" your memory woes at point of purchase. They charge like $500 for an $100 memory stick. Most people call paying 5x more for a commodity product "a ripoff".
  - masklinn 14y ago
    > They charge like $500 for an $100 memory stick. That's definitely the case historically, but you may want to look at this one case right there: 16GB RAM upgrade on the new MBP is $200. 2x8GB SODIMM at crucial is $150. I'm not exactly going to shit my pants over a minor $50 (and 30% of the base part) markup when buying a $2200 kit.
    - subsection1h 14y ago
      16GB RAM upgrade on the new MBP is $200. 2x8GB SODIMM at crucial is $150. Once again, can someone please explain to me why Apple apologists are generally incapable of using a price comparison service that requires maybe 10 seconds to use? Their behavior never ceases to baffle me. CORSAIR 16GB for MacBook Pro - $89.99 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233251 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233...

Symmetry 14y ago

You're mostly right here, but making things specialized to the extent that Apple is doing here often makes things more expensive. If you go the specialized route instead of using commodity hardware there's going to be a big upfront price. Its possible that reduced packaging could make up for that in some cases, but I'm skeptical. There are also some changes that Apple makes simply to prevent user serviceability, like special Apple only screws, that don't help with weight and only serve to increase the price.

wwweston 14y ago

Having a different POV may not make you an idiot, but saying "If I need more RAM, it's best matched with a new CPU" and "If I need more storage, I'll need more RAM to throw around more data" makes you sound like one. Both statements have pretty large and likely counterexample spaces.

rsanchez1 14y ago

"Go buy a computer for which that is a feature" Great, I'll go buy ANY computer that isn't made by Apple.