Phil Schiller again defends Touch Bar MacBook Pro's 16GB RAM limitation

12346»

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 119
    strells said:
    jorgie said:
    Yeah because there's no way you could make the device thicker and give it a bigger battery.
    This.

    The thin and light design requirement is the problem, not the technology.  Trust me, I honestly want one of these machines, but I don't care if it weighs an extra pound and is a little bit thicker due to a bigger battery that can power more RAM.  I'm sure most pros don't care as well.
    IF you want a big old piece of plastic crap that will break down but can support up to 64GB of RAM, here you go:
    https://system76.com/laptops/bonobo


    macplusplus
  • Reply 102 of 119

    ...well I bought one, and am still hunting for a solution to possible DisplayPort connectivity... The screen is beautiful, and it is lighter, and faster, and the control strip is elegant, if incidental. Weight & battery are less issues for me, vs 17" & 1980x1200+, needing more a portable desktop (aka pro?) The potential for up to 4 displays seemed compelling, yet the inflexibility in monitors (no displayport), future ram and drive options seem nagging. MacOS memory management is remarkable given the limits, yet if I cannot find a reliable DisplayPort solution this may be going back. If I could buy Apple TB Displays then maybe (discontinued), but I don't feel I should have to, and I have no interest in plastic LG displays... Unfortunately when Apple chooses for us, the way they seem to do, there always seems to be something...
    The machine comes with display port.  Just get a USB-c to display port adapter, there are many of them on amazon.
  • Reply 103 of 119
    Schiller should be fired...
    If you have to defend the bad design features of a product, then the product is bad...
    If you need to come up with a lame damage control discount adaptor policy, then the product is worst...

    Schiller is putting lame excuse after lame excuse for the bad design of the Macbook Pro.
    We do not need 30 days of Stand by....
    We need 32GB ram.

    We do not need 5 adaptors to carry with the Macbook.
    We need to be able to connect the iPhone and iPad without them...

    Exactly the same thing happened with the Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is a complete disaster and it seems that they did not learn anything from that failure...
    Now They are discontinuing the Airports.

    IT seems that innovation in Apple is dead and they are in the path of self destruction. 
    They only care about making money with iphones...

    Pretty lame...
    cjones
  • Reply 104 of 119

    anome said:

    It doesn't really matter what Apple does at this point. Someone's going to complain.

    Apple are kind of stuck. If they hadn't released the new shell, they still couldn't have put 32GB of RAM in, so people would still be complaining. Then, when they did release the new shell, even if it had 32GB RAM as an option, they would have copped all the flak about USB-C/TB3 and dongles. So, by releasing the new shell now, with the new ports, they cop flak for both of those things, which hopefully will have died down by the time the next version, with Kaby Lake and LPDDR4, comes out.

    The other thing that bothers me is all the people complaining "After 20/30/40 years using Apple products, I'm now going to switch to Windows/Linux/an abacus" as if we (or Apple) should care. It's perfectly legitimate to say "I don't like it, I'm buying something else", but that's just your decision. Likewise my decision to buy it because it has a bunch of neat features is just my decision. Apple will look at their sales figures at the end of the quarter, and decide whether this was the right model to bring out, they're not going to listen to a bunch of people whining on the internet about it. (Nor will they listen to a bunch of people on the internet praising it as the greatest thing ever.) Spending ages whining about how Apple have failed you, and you now have to buy Windows instead doesn't really do anything other than make you look self-involved. The only thing Apple will care about is whether you actually go buy something else instead of a Mac, and then only if enough people do it to make a bump on their sales figures.

    It seems that you are NOT familiar what happen to the Mac PRO latest design. The round thing was a complete failure and very few people actually bought it. Leaving Pro users with no option. Many pro users are using iMacs, Modified old towers or Hackingtoshes.

    Apple can realease whatever they want, but do not call it "PRO". 
    The new Macbook design is a disaster and completely overpriced for what it is.
    It uses old Ram, it cannot be updated (RAM or SSD), they removed ALL the ports that we need (SD, USB, etc)...
    IN addition you cannot connect your own iPhone-iPad....

    If that is innovation, Apple is certainly going the wrong way. 
    It is such a failure that they needed to come and do damage control by discounting the adaptors...

    It is sad that Apple does not care anymore about its Pro users. They only care about making iphones and consumer products.
    Fastest Apple growing product category is Adaptors....pretty lame I must say...
    cjonesbloggerblog
  • Reply 105 of 119
    wigginwiggin Posts: 2,265member
    spheric said:
    A point I never see mentioned is that we're talking about laptops here: 

    their primary function is portability! 

    Form IS function. 

    If you prioritise power over portability, do what those pros do who can't compromise and buy a Pelican case for your iMac, end of story. 
    Perhaps a refresher on the concept of "point of diminishing returns" is in order. Otherwise you'd eliminate the laptop altogether and do all your work on your phone. Much more portable than a silly laptop. Hyperbole? Absolutely. But isn't that the primary function of this forum?
    cjones
  • Reply 106 of 119
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,273member
    flabber said:
    I might indeed be mistaken. But as I said, that screenshot is from an iMac with 32GB of ram which I'm indeed not using all. :)

    Here's a screenshot of all 3 fields like you mentioned. If you'd consider the MacBook Pro having only 16GB of RAM, that would mean that one would be hitting that limit a lot faster compared to the screenshot below right?
    That screenshot right there says you're only USING 8.31 GB of RAM. 

    If this is your normal workload: 

    Considering that OS X actually compresses memory when it gets tight long before it starts to swap out to disk, 16 GB is probably more than you'll ever need in the lifetime of that machine. 

    Even with the 5 GB of cached information being used to speed up your machine, you're currently wasting eighteen gigabytes of RAM. 
    flabberSolimacplusplus
  • Reply 107 of 119
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,273member
    Almost ALL professional editors use FireWire or Thunderbolt for external storage, and the SD as an internal library.
    Firewire hasn't been available on any of the retina 'Books without a dongle, ever.
    Rayz2016
  • Reply 108 of 119
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,273member
    wiggin said:
    spheric said:
    A point I never see mentioned is that we're talking about laptops here: 

    their primary function is portability! 

    Form IS function. 

    If you prioritise power over portability, do what those pros do who can't compromise and buy a Pelican case for your iMac, end of story. 
    Perhaps a refresher on the concept of "point of diminishing returns" is in order. Otherwise you'd eliminate the laptop altogether and do all your work on your phone. Much more portable than a silly laptop. Hyperbole? Absolutely. But isn't that the primary function of this forum?
    Heh. Point of diminishing returns, a refresher. Cute. 

    Look. I use my computer to make money. I have it, and the iPad, with me, pretty much always. 

    My 2011 13" MBP is "okay" for size and weight. Carrying this thing around all the time, I'd LOVE for it to be lighter. But since the CPU became the limiting factor on my old machine, my next one is definitely going to be a quad-core. So, grudgingly — VERY grudgingly — a 15" machine it is.

    What I really wanted is a quad 13".

    Turns out, the 15" is now only ever so slightly larger, but the same weight, as my old 13" 'Book.
    I get the power I need, and it still doesn't completely fuck up my remaining good shoulder. 

    I'm not everybody, but I AM the mobile professional — in audio — that Apple designed these machines for.
    Go ahead. Blame me.

    …and get stuffed. :wink: 
    anome
  • Reply 109 of 119
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,273member
    wiggin said:
    Apple decided they wanted to prioritize the thinness and weight of the new laptop. Ok, cool, tell us why that's important and why the trade-off of lower max RAM was the way to go. Tell us how Apple feels that is more important to the majority of their customers. Own that design decision, don't use it as an excuse for compromises elsewhere in the design. If they blame battery life then they are just blaming themselves because the size of the battery was also their design decision.

    If they can't defend the thinness design decision and explain the benefits, then you really have to wonder if it was a valid design requirement to begin with.
    There is nothing to defend.

    People are attacking mobile machines for being, first and foremost, mobile machines. 

    It's THEIR compass that is off, not Apple's. 
    Rayz2016anome
  • Reply 110 of 119
    wigginwiggin Posts: 2,265member
    spheric said:
    wiggin said:
    spheric said:
    A point I never see mentioned is that we're talking about laptops here: 

    their primary function is portability! 

    Form IS function. 

    If you prioritise power over portability, do what those pros do who can't compromise and buy a Pelican case for your iMac, end of story. 
    Perhaps a refresher on the concept of "point of diminishing returns" is in order. Otherwise you'd eliminate the laptop altogether and do all your work on your phone. Much more portable than a silly laptop. Hyperbole? Absolutely. But isn't that the primary function of this forum?
    Heh. Point of diminishing returns, a refresher. Cute. 

    Look. I use my computer to make money. I have it, and the iPad, with me, pretty much always. 

    My 2011 13" MBP is "okay" for size and weight. Carrying this thing around all the time, I'd LOVE for it to be lighter. But since the CPU became the limiting factor on my old machine, my next one is definitely going to be a quad-core. So, grudgingly — VERY grudgingly — a 15" machine it is.

    What I really wanted is a quad 13".

    Turns out, the 15" is now only ever so slightly larger, but the same weight, as my old 13" 'Book.
    I get the power I need, and it still doesn't completely fuck up my remaining good shoulder. 

    I'm not everybody, but I AM the mobile professional — in audio — that Apple designed these machines for.
    Go ahead. Blame me.

    …and get stuffed. :wink: 
    Everybody prioritizes their preferences differently. And the point of diminishing returns is a different point for everyone...but there is always a point of diminishing returns. Your preference is for the lightest weight possible. And my preferences don't invalidate your preferences, just as your preferences don't invalidate mine. Apple has chosen to only offer a single lineup of "pro" laptops.*  So it's up to them to try to figure out where the diminishing return point is at, which preferences get priority. Based on the feedback so far, which has by far been more negative that any Apple product release in at least the last decade, we should at least consider the possibility that perhaps they went just a tad too far on the thinness scale.

    * Apple still offers the 2015 15" integrated graphics MPBs, so they haven't exactly retired the previous chassis design just yet. Clearly they saw that there might still be a market for a laptop with all of the legacy ports.
    cjones
  • Reply 111 of 119
    spheric said:
    wiggin said:
    spheric said:
    A point I never see mentioned is that we're talking about laptops here: 

    their primary function is portability! 

    Form IS function. 

    If you prioritise power over portability, do what those pros do who can't compromise and buy a Pelican case for your iMac, end of story. 
    Perhaps a refresher on the concept of "point of diminishing returns" is in order. Otherwise you'd eliminate the laptop altogether and do all your work on your phone. Much more portable than a silly laptop. Hyperbole? Absolutely. But isn't that the primary function of this forum?
    Heh. Point of diminishing returns, a refresher. Cute. 

    Look. I use my computer to make money. I have it, and the iPad, with me, pretty much always
    Many professionals carry more than one device, this is where thinness and lightness enter into play.

    If one makes money with the computer getting a second one is not a problem. If one confines all of his computing power to one computer only, that doesn't seem as much professional life to me as it sounds, or those may be just "beginner professionals" at best. 

    A professional is the one who do not depend on Apple and who is technically mature enough to find a way around.
  • Reply 112 of 119
    spheric said:
    wiggin said:
    Apple decided they wanted to prioritize the thinness and weight of the new laptop. Ok, cool, tell us why that's important and why the trade-off of lower max RAM was the way to go. Tell us how Apple feels that is more important to the majority of their customers. Own that design decision, don't use it as an excuse for compromises elsewhere in the design. If they blame battery life then they are just blaming themselves because the size of the battery was also their design decision.

    If they can't defend the thinness design decision and explain the benefits, then you really have to wonder if it was a valid design requirement to begin with.
    There is nothing to defend.

    People are attacking mobile machines for being, first and foremost, mobile machines. 

    It's THEIR compass that is off, not Apple's. 
    Actually Apples Compass is off. They introduced the new Mac Book as a Pro Machine when they showed the Setup with 2x 5K monitors and 2 Promise Raid's they more or less are trying to Sell a Portable Machine as a Fully capable Desktop Pro. So they will have to face the Music when they get called out for Cutting Corners in the Department of "PRO" 
    cjonesjasenj1avon b7
  • Reply 113 of 119
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,273member
    spheric said:
    wiggin said:
    spheric said:
    A point I never see mentioned is that we're talking about laptops here: 

    their primary function is portability! 

    Form IS function. 

    If you prioritise power over portability, do what those pros do who can't compromise and buy a Pelican case for your iMac, end of story. 
    Perhaps a refresher on the concept of "point of diminishing returns" is in order. Otherwise you'd eliminate the laptop altogether and do all your work on your phone. Much more portable than a silly laptop. Hyperbole? Absolutely. But isn't that the primary function of this forum?
    Heh. Point of diminishing returns, a refresher. Cute. 

    Look. I use my computer to make money. I have it, and the iPad, with me, pretty much always
    Many professionals carry more than one device, this is where thinness and lightness enter into play.

    If one makes money with the computer getting a second one is not a problem. If one confines all of his computing power to one computer only, that doesn't seem as much professional life to me as it sounds, or those may be just "beginner professionals" at best. 

    A professional is the one who do not depend on Apple and who is technically mature enough to find a way around.
    I dunno. I've been doing this a long time. And I'm perfectly fine with a single main computer that balances my needs in a portable package. 

    Plus the backup machine waiting in the cupboard at home in case of catastrophe. 
    cjones
  • Reply 114 of 119
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    wiggin said:
    spheric said:
    wiggin said:
    spheric said:
    A point I never see mentioned is that we're talking about laptops here: 

    their primary function is portability! 

    Form IS function. 

    If you prioritise power over portability, do what those pros do who can't compromise and buy a Pelican case for your iMac, end of story. 
    Perhaps a refresher on the concept of "point of diminishing returns" is in order. Otherwise you'd eliminate the laptop altogether and do all your work on your phone. Much more portable than a silly laptop. Hyperbole? Absolutely. But isn't that the primary function of this forum?
    Heh. Point of diminishing returns, a refresher. Cute. 

    Look. I use my computer to make money. I have it, and the iPad, with me, pretty much always. 

    My 2011 13" MBP is "okay" for size and weight. Carrying this thing around all the time, I'd LOVE for it to be lighter. But since the CPU became the limiting factor on my old machine, my next one is definitely going to be a quad-core. So, grudgingly — VERY grudgingly — a 15" machine it is.

    What I really wanted is a quad 13".

    Turns out, the 15" is now only ever so slightly larger, but the same weight, as my old 13" 'Book.
    I get the power I need, and it still doesn't completely fuck up my remaining good shoulder. 

    I'm not everybody, but I AM the mobile professional — in audio — that Apple designed these machines for.
    Go ahead. Blame me.

    …and get stuffed. :wink: 
    Everybody prioritizes their preferences differently. And the point of diminishing returns is a different point for everyone...but there is always a point of diminishing returns. Your preference is for the lightest weight possible. And my preferences don't invalidate your preferences, just as your preferences don't invalidate mine. Apple has chosen to only offer a single lineup of "pro" laptops.*  So it's up to them to try to figure out where the diminishing return point is at, which preferences get priority. Based on the feedback so far, which has by far been more negative that any Apple product release in at least the last decade, we should at least consider the possibility that perhaps they went just a tad too far on the thinness scale.


    Have to disagree with you there. The number of complaints is irrelevant, because they're from people who have not seen or tried the product. What is relevant is the number of sales. If this product is a failure then sales will tank; it's as simple as that. 

  • Reply 115 of 119
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    strells said:
    jorgie said:
    Yeah because there's no way you could make the device thicker and give it a bigger battery.
    This.

    The thin and light design requirement is the problem, not the technology.  Trust me, I honestly want one of these machines, but I don't care if it weighs an extra pound and is a little bit thicker due to a bigger battery that can power more RAM.  I'm sure most pros don't care as well.
    IF you want a big old piece of plastic crap that will break down but can support up to 64GB of RAM, here you go:
    https://system76.com/laptops/bonobo


    Wow. :-0

    I've seen desktops smaller than that. 
  • Reply 116 of 119
    Rayz2016 said:

    Have to disagree with you there. The number of complaints is irrelevant, because they're from people who have not seen or tried the product. What is relevant is the number of sales. If this product is a failure then sales will tank; it's as simple as that. 

    Unfortunately there is more than this simplistic look.
    As Apple is not offering any real alternative people are forced to buy this MPBs if they need MacOS.
    Apple is really good at managing sales numbers. First let all availability of State of the Art products dry up by not refreshing the product in a useful way.
    Then force decisions on your customers that might not be the best for your customers. Then argue: But it is selling!
    Furthermore Apple will not split up the sales numbers between the machines. So you have pent up demand for the new ones and possibly a very stable number of the older machines sold.
    Apple will never tell us.

    I don't know if that is the plan for MacPro and MacMini also: now innovation for 3-4years, keep the price at very high level -> EOL product, because "It didn't sell"
    cjones
  • Reply 117 of 119
    As if swapping from ultrafast RAM to a PCIe SSD that's twice the speed of the previous PCIe SSD is such a big performance problem…

    16GB of RAM is a lot. If you are pushing data so hard and so fast that you can continuously saturate 16GB of RAM and you find swapping to wicked fast disk hurts you, then please publish some real test results. Don't just say you ran out of RAM because of the disk cache in RAM. Memory pressure matters. 

    Morons use memory cleaners or the flush dev tool to clear RAM disk cache which actually hurts performance. Also try software without memory leaks (bugs). 

    If you really need 32GB of RAM then don't buy the new MacBook Pro and quit your complaints. Go buy a 6lbs Dell, HP, Lenovo with a number keypad and a power supply the size of an actual brick. The rest of us will buy the 3lbs MacBook Pro with portability and energy efficiency. 
  • Reply 118 of 119
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,273member
    smxp said:
    Let me summarize the responses - You don't need more than 16GB No Pro needs more than 16GB A Pro isn't who you say it is Why are you using a $4K laptop as your primary? The only way to get better specs is to get a laptop twice as heavy or heavier The ridiculousness of these apologetic excuses should be obvious, but it apparently it isn't. I never bought into the concept of blind fanboy levels of Apple support, but it clearly exists. Wow.
    You can misrepresent any standpoint to make it sound idiotic. 
  • Reply 119 of 119
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,428member
    copeland said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    Have to disagree with you there. The number of complaints is irrelevant, because they're from people who have not seen or tried the product. What is relevant is the number of sales. If this product is a failure then sales will tank; it's as simple as that. 

    Unfortunately there is more than this simplistic look.
    As Apple is not offering any real alternative people are forced to buy this MPBs if they need MacOS.
    Apple is really good at managing sales numbers. First let all availability of State of the Art products dry up by not refreshing the product in a useful way.
    Then force decisions on your customers that might not be the best for your customers. Then argue: But it is selling!
    Furthermore Apple will not split up the sales numbers between the machines. So you have pent up demand for the new ones and possibly a very stable number of the older machines sold.
    Apple will never tell us.

    I don't know if that is the plan for MacPro and MacMini also: now innovation for 3-4years, keep the price at very high level -> EOL product, because "It didn't sell"
    That is pretty much spot on. First, purely on price, these machines are out of the range of many potential buyers. Those potential buyers will have to decide if they want to go with the cheaper, older machines (laptops) or wait and see if Apple rethinks the situation and releases a truly transitional machine or simply cut prices to try and push sales on price alone. Rather than swallow their pride, I think the second option is more likely if sales flatten out.

    Another point that is niggling me is that Schiller has had to come out and speak to users through interviews on a few occasions. I haven't seen any interviewers mention the lack of new iMacs/iPads for the holiday season. This is MAJOR news in anybody's book (especially after the 'Hello Again' borefest) but no one is sticking it to Phil in the interviews when he is there for the taking.

    The only reason that I can come up with to justify that is that Apple is making certain topics 'untouchable' before granting the interviews.

    If that's the case then it's poor showing but very indicative that something didn't go as planned this year (for whatever the reason)
Sign In or Register to comment.