Apple doubles memory upgrade cost for entry-level 13-inch MacBook Pro [u]

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited June 2020
Apple has made it more expensive for customers to upgrade the memory on the 13-inch MacBook Pro, with the price of the option doubled on the entry-level model as part of a change quietly made on Saturday.




On Friday, buyers of the entry-level model of the refreshed 13-inch MacBook Pro were able to upgrade the memory on the device from 8 gigabytes to 16 gigabytes for $100. In an update first spotted by Reddit users on Saturday, the cost of the upgrade has gone up to $200.

The change in pricing is not just limited to standard customers in the United States, as the Education Store pricing for the same upgrade has also increased from $90 to $180. Customers in other countries are also affected, with UK customers now paying 200 for the upgrade instead of 100, and in Canada the same upgrade has increased to $250.

Apple has previously made adjustments to pricing of its products and upgrade options, altering them based on fluctuations in exchange rates and of the components themselves. The pricing can go down as well as up, such as in the SSD upgrade price drops observed in July 2019.

At this time, it seems that only the entry-level model of Apple's MacBook Pro is being affected by price changes. Given it uses different memory from the unaffected higher-specification variants, it is probable that Apple is altering the price due to the high demand for that particular type of memory.

For the best MacBook Pro deals, be sure to visit the AppleInsider Mac Price Guide where shoppers can save up to $250 on the latest 13-inch MacBook Pro, plus $70 off AppleCare.

Update: In a statement to The Verge on June 1, Apple claimed that the price change is actually a price "correction" meant to bring RAM upgrades on the 13-inch MacBook Pro in-line with those on other Macs. The company added that it will honor pricing for customers who purchased RAM upgrades prior to the change.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    mac_dogmac_dog Posts: 1,066member
    Get your ram @ crucial.com. I have been getting mine thru them for years. 
  • Reply 2 of 16
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,753member
    A "stick" of 8GB DDR3 RAM is $45. 16GB is $100. Both retail, Apple will be paying at most half of that. I guess someone realised they weren't nickel and diming enough on this model so had to double the cost of something, or they were selling too many base models vs the "better" tier. Pretty brazen and frankly, pretty stupid, especially since 8GB is pretty measly these days. MacBooks have had 8GB as standard since 2013, really is about time they made 16gb standard across the board. I frequently have Safari alone using 8+gb, and right now the WindowServer is using 1.5gb.
    hucom2000dysamoriaentropyschemengin1muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 3 of 16
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,753member
    mac_dog said:
    Get your ram @ crucial.com. I have been getting mine thru them for years. 
    Yeah that's fine if you're very handy with a solder rework station...
    chiadysamoriaGeorgeBMacmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 4 of 16
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,911member
    elijahg said:
    mac_dog said:
    Get your ram @ crucial.com. I have been getting mine thru them for years. 
    Yeah that's fine if you're very handy with a solder rework station...
    Exactly. 
    This is the problem - Apple hardwires the ram so you can’t upgrade it yourself (or at all,) then charges over 4x what they should charge for it. 
    elijahgdysamoriaentropysflyingdpGeorgeBMacchemengin1muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 5 of 16
    KITAKITA Posts: 392member



    Ah yes, there's the Apple Tax we all know and love.

    Here's the XPS 13's upgrade costs for comparison:



    But surely Apple isn't ripping us off because the MBP runs macOS, right?
    elijahgavon b7entropyshucom2000chemengin1muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 6 of 16
    caladaniancaladanian Posts: 380member
    Wtf. That’s disappointing. 
    KITAdysamoriachemengin1
  • Reply 7 of 16
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,312member
    My guess is that Apple is reacting to anticipated increases in their supplier costs due to sanctions/tariffs likely to come soon due to escalating tensions between the White House and China. This anticipatory pricing model, or replacement cost model if you prefer, is very analogous to the gasoline prices we pay at the pump on any given day, which are on a hair trigger tied to whatever concerns strike the market at any hour of any given day. As with gasoline, the major suppliers are usually the first ones to react to the changes because everything they do is very data driven and done in real time using complex and finely tuned analytics.

    The other possibility is that their original pricing was simply wrong and once their purchasing and sales analytics machinery kicked into high gear and the data started rolling in they realized their mistake and fixed it. Yeah, fixing it for them kind of un-fixed it for customers, but that's how profitable businesses work.

    Comparing Apple to Dell in this area isn't really a valid comparison because Apple does not engage in the multitude of silly games that Dell engages in. Some of the product configurations that Dell pushes through promotions are really crap, with low resolution screens that harken back to the early 2000s, to cheap plastic builds and disposable Chromebooks, to making you pay for Windows 10 Pro rather than Home. Dell can lowball some upgrades because they can regain the profit elsewhere, like selling you a crap WiFi adapter, 3 hours battery life, sub-HD screen, and loading up you new machine with all manner of Crapware, like McAfee AV, that you cannot delete from the build. 

    Apple doesn't have the broad range of products at various price points that Dell has. This means that Apple doesn't have a lot of levers to pull to manipulate buying behaviors and move profits around from one product to another. Buying from Apple is a straight-up deal with no used-car salesmanship BS going on. I vastly prefer to buy something using Apple's straight deal sales model than having to wade through a bunch of BS both up-front and after delivery, like figuring out how to scrub all the crapware off a brand new machine or pay to upgrade the operating system to minimal acceptable configuration. Too often, the hundred bucks you saved through Dell assumes your time and effort is worth nothing, and that's even before you run into driver problems or have to call tech support. 
    dysamoriawatto_cobraspock1234
  • Reply 8 of 16
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,590member
    Given how weak the base model configuration is from the get go, Apple is doing itself no favours with this adjustment. 

    In one of the original threads on the new model I actually commented on how good the RAM upgrade was. I think it was 50€ (I can't find that comment now) but the new pricing is 250€.

    That stings. 
    elijahgdysamoriachemengin1
  • Reply 9 of 16
    doggonedoggone Posts: 377member
    Cost of memory has always been an issue with Apple.  I, for one, will not buy a laptop unless it now has 16GB ram and 512 SSD HD.  
    BTO options are never a good value.  The best approach is to look for the best configuration that is available from a vendor.  On the Appleinsider price guide you can either get 8GB/256 SSD for 1225 or 16GB/512 SSD for 1499 from Adorama.  Paying the extra 250 for double ram and double SSD is worth it. 

    elijahgwatto_cobraspock1234GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 10 of 16
    That RAM price doubling sucks, but for anyone that really needs the 16GB of RAM (along with 512GB SSD), there is now no reason not to go with the higher spec MBP 13"...

    ...yes, it would be yet another $100, but then not only do you get the 16GB/512GB SSD, you also get the faster, 10th gen CPU and four TB ports.

    Even before the RAM price increase, AI was recommending the higher spec version:
    https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/05/21/review-the-13-inch-macbook-pro-with-10th-generation-processors-is-the-one-to-buy


    watto_cobraspock1234hucom2000chia
  • Reply 11 of 16
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,148member
    Another reason not to buy the base model. Which is probably what Apple wants you to do and the base model is a price point marker only.

    That said, the RAM cost is doubled for the MBA too.
    chia
  • Reply 12 of 16
    AngmohAngmoh Posts: 25member
    That RAM price doubling sucks, but for anyone that really needs the 16GB of RAM (along with 512GB SSD), there is now no reason not to go with the higher spec MBP 13"...
    I was looking at both base and high spec models and the RAM upgrade cost was the reason to consider the base spec: RAM upgrade cost was half for the base spec than for the higher spec and unusually low compared with all other models. Now with the price increase, the base model makes no longer sense.
  • Reply 13 of 16
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,753member
    That RAM price doubling sucks, but for anyone that really needs the 16GB of RAM (along with 512GB SSD), there is now no reason not to go with the higher spec MBP 13"...

    ...yes, it would be yet another $100, but then not only do you get the 16GB/512GB SSD, you also get the faster, 10th gen CPU and four TB ports.

    Even before the RAM price increase, AI was recommending the higher spec version:
    https://appleinsider.com/articles/20/05/21/review-the-13-inch-macbook-pro-with-10th-generation-processors-is-the-one-to-buy


    And this is exactly Apple's ploy: "but for just another $100 you get x, y and z" which soon adds up to $600 more than you were going to pay in the first place.
    chemengin1
  • Reply 14 of 16
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    avon b7 said:
    Given how weak the base model configuration is from the get go, Apple is doing itself no favours with this adjustment. 

    In one of the original threads on the new model I actually commented on how good the RAM upgrade was. I think it was 50€ (I can't find that comment now) but the new pricing is 250€.

    That stings. 

    It seems to me that the base model is only "weak" when measured by pro / power users demands -- or significant future proofing.
    For most people -- browsing the web, doing some word processing, email, etc., the 8Gb base configuration is adequate -- and the increase in base storage was a huge step forward.

    It seems to me that the power of hardware has pretty much caught up to and exceeded the demands of standard, typical users.

    But, that said, $200 is exorbitant.   I just upgraded my Thinkpad from 8Gb to 16Gb for about $35 - $40.  (Now it typically uses about 1/3 of its total memory.)
    chemengin1
  • Reply 15 of 16
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,911member
    avon b7 said:
    Given how weak the base model configuration is from the get go, Apple is doing itself no favours with this adjustment. 

    In one of the original threads on the new model I actually commented on how good the RAM upgrade was. I think it was 50€ (I can't find that comment now) but the new pricing is 250€.

    That stings. 

    It seems to me that the base model is only "weak" when measured by pro / power users demands -- or significant future proofing.
    For most people -- browsing the web, doing some word processing, email, etc., the 8Gb base configuration is adequate -- and the increase in base storage was a huge step forward.

    It seems to me that the power of hardware has pretty much caught up to and exceeded the demands of standard, typical users.

    But, that said, $200 is exorbitant.   I just upgraded my Thinkpad from 8Gb to 16Gb for about $35 - $40.  (Now it typically uses about 1/3 of its total memory.)
    That's the rub - one of the advantages of Mac hardware is that while it may be expensive, it's well designed and will last a long time and remain usable for that time. (My 2011 MBA finally died last year.) Since Apple took away the ability to upgrade the RAM at all, you are stuck paying extortionist fees if you are planing on keeping your device for a long time, or using it for graphics/video editing, etc.
    GeorgeBMacavon b7elijahg
Sign In or Register to comment.