In all fairness, the lack of 32GB on any model and 4-Cores on the 13" are squarely on Intel. They have a low-power 4-core chip perfect for the 13" but that just arrived this year. This cannot go on much longer. I'd really like to have something new by this time next year or sooner, preferably before Xmas.
If the 32GB is purely the fault of Intel, how does Dell manage to have 32GB in some of the XPS configurations ?
Those laptops weren't using LPDDR4 RAM.
That is a totally irrelevant technical detail, when one needs a lot of RAM
Battery life is kind of a big deal for the particular market that the MacBookPro is designed to, so yeah, the choice of LPDDR4 memory is an especially relevant technical detail.
More to the point, you seem to be quite happy buying Dells and running Linux, with a mix of MacBookPro's. Why the sad?
And what's the particular market the Macbook Pro is designed for?
1) What market do you think a laptop is marketed toward? If the term mobile user isn't come up right away then we're so far away from being on the same page that we're not even in the same library.
The mobile user is not only battery life. There are users that need more than 16GB of RAM, USB and even discreet graphics in the small notebooks, and there are market that need and even require those things. I have a MBP 13" 2017, and have no issues with it. But it's non sense to think that battery life is the only or even the most important criteria in a mobile device.
2) Even on this tech-focused forum understanding what LP means in
relation to RAM is oddly limited so Apple having an entirely new design
of notebooks where the average customer has to choose between DDR4 and
LPDDR4 doesn't seem like a good idea. Too much choice is bad for
business. The Good-Better-Best model is solid strategy, and the fact
that you (and many others) are still bitching about this years later
when there's now no chance of this happening with mobile Intel chips
supporting LPDDR4 being on the horizon. Two years ago, your argument had
a lot more foundation, but now it's now like pointing out 8 years later
that you can still buy a laptop with a Blu-ray player and wanting to
know why Apple doesn't offer this, too. It's not going to happen and if
you don't understand why Apple will never not only not offer a built-in
BRD or bring back the ODD then you're out of your depth.
You comment is based that the most important thing for mobile users is battery life, and that's not true at all. Again, you read the long list people asking for a 32GB MBP, and I'm sure that many of them need that. Personally I saw a customer move their workstations to 32GB of RAM, with obvious benefits. It's true that too much choice is bad, same as few choices are bad too. Lenovo mobile workstations have the P52s entry models and the and P52 high end models. See, nothing complicated. Would be nice to see Apple doing the same for their customers.
Where
does this notion that Apple couldn't do the same come from? I'd like to
give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you meant to ask why
Apple wouldn't do the the same, but since this topic has been
covered countless fucking times I'm not sure I can extend that logic to
anyone that is still asking that question.
English is not my main language, but at least looks like you understood my question. But seems that there is no logic answer yet.
In all fairness, the lack of 32GB on any model and 4-Cores on the 13" are squarely on Intel. They have a low-power 4-core chip perfect for the 13" but that just arrived this year. This cannot go on much longer. I'd really like to have something new by this time next year or sooner, preferably before Xmas.
If the 32GB is purely the fault of Intel, how does Dell manage to have 32GB in some of the XPS configurations ?
Those laptops weren't using LPDDR4 RAM.
That is a totally irrelevant technical detail, when one needs a lot of RAM
Battery life is kind of a big deal for the particular market that the MacBookPro is designed to, so yeah, the choice of LPDDR4 memory is an especially relevant technical detail.
More to the point, you seem to be quite happy buying Dells and running Linux, with a mix of MacBookPro's. Why the sad?
And what's the particular market the Macbook Pro is designed for? Would be nice to hear that response from Apple, so people can make the right choice. And still, it's obvious that just one model is not enough to cover all professional users needs. They even lack a discreet GPU in the MBP 13". Compare that to Lenovo and HP mobile workstations, that have a low end (4-core processors, 32GB of RAM, thinner + lighter) and high end models (6-core processors, 64GB of RAM, larger + heavier) . Wouldn't be nice if Apple could do the same?
Easy.
It's the market niche that makes the bulk of the profit in the PC business.
Hence, why MS is so keen to compete against Apple with it's Surface product line; that's where the money is.
It's always sad when company goes for the profit instead for the customers. That's when you start to see lack of upgrades and bad keyboards, among other things. As you said, MS it's in the same business, but at least, if they don't give Windows customers what they need, they can go to HP, Dell or Lenovo. Different from macOS users, that have no options a part from Apple.
In all fairness, the lack of 32GB on any model and 4-Cores on the 13" are squarely on Intel. They have a low-power 4-core chip perfect for the 13" but that just arrived this year. This cannot go on much longer. I'd really like to have something new by this time next year or sooner, preferably before Xmas.
If the 32GB is purely the fault of Intel, how does Dell manage to have 32GB in some of the XPS configurations ?
Those laptops weren't using LPDDR4 RAM.
That is a totally irrelevant technical detail, when one needs a lot of RAM
Battery life is kind of a big deal for the particular market that the MacBookPro is designed to, so yeah, the choice of LPDDR4 memory is an especially relevant technical detail.
More to the point, you seem to be quite happy buying Dells and running Linux, with a mix of MacBookPro's. Why the sad?
And what's the particular market the Macbook Pro is designed for? Would be nice to hear that response from Apple, so people can make the right choice. And still, it's obvious that just one model is not enough to cover all professional users needs. They even lack a discreet GPU in the MBP 13". Compare that to Lenovo and HP mobile workstations, that have a low end (4-core processors, 32GB of RAM, thinner + lighter) and high end models (6-core processors, 64GB of RAM, larger + heavier) . Wouldn't be nice if Apple could do the same?
Easy.
It's the market niche that makes the bulk of the profit in the PC business.
Hence, why MS is so keen to compete against Apple with it's Surface product line; that's where the money is.
It's always sad when company goes for the profit instead for the customers. That's when you start to see lack of upgrades and bad keyboards, among other things. As you said, MS it's in the same business, but at least, if they don't give Windows customers what they need, they can go to HP, Dell or Lenovo. Different from macOS users, that have no options a part from Apple.
Putting in 32GB of DDR RAM into a laptop because foolish customers only know that 32 is higher than 16 without any consideration for actual need or how it affects the rest of the machine is the epitome of of going after profit instead focusing on the customer base. We see the same thing in countless other areas of CE, like when people talk about pixel count without the slightest consideration for the quality and accuracy of each pixel because it's easy for Dell to sell an ignorant customer on "more is better" but getting the customer to pay more for an actual better display experience isn't. So, yeah, I agree with you that it's sad when companies dupe people like you into thinking you're getting more because you can only understand the most superficial aspects of the machine.
More to the point, I wonder how many MacBookPro users are actually impacted by lack of 32 GB memory. You certainly have no use for it if you are currently using a 2011 MBP maxing out at 8GB. For you, it's just another day of bench racing.
4 GB of RAM is installed as two 2 GB modules, no slots free.
*Apple officially supports a maximum of 8 GB of RAM, but third-parties have determined that this model actually is capable of using up to 16 GB of RAM with two 8 GB memory modules.
Cool story, bro. — Sent from my 2011 MBP with 16 GB of RAM.
How does "Cool story bro" work when his comment says that it can support 16 GiB of RAM? Surely you don't begrudge tmay for not knowing the technical specs from a 7yo laptop. He did due diligence by researching the data pertaining to your MBP model.
Huh, the original post was edited to include that bold text at the bottom, the first time I tried to post the editor hung and I had to requote and paste and didn't notice the edit. First time around it sure looked like they were correcting me and saying that the official spec was 8GB. Either way, it's 16GB.
More to the point, I wonder how many MacBookPro users are actually impacted by lack of 32 GB memory. You certainly have no use for it if you are currently using a 2011 MBP maxing out at 8GB. For you, it's just another day of bench racing.
4 GB of RAM is installed as two 2 GB modules, no slots free.
*Apple officially supports a maximum of 8 GB of RAM, but third-parties have determined that this model actually is capable of using up to 16 GB of RAM with two 8 GB memory modules.
Cool story, bro. — Sent from my 2011 MBP with 16 GB of RAM.
How does "Cool story bro" work when his comment says that it can support 16 GiB of RAM? Surely you don't begrudge tmay for not knowing the technical specs from a 7yo laptop. He did due diligence by researching the data pertaining to your MBP model.
Huh, the original post was edited to include that bold text at the bottom, the first time I tried to post the editor hung and I had to requote and paste and didn't notice the edit. First time around it sure looked like they were correcting me and saying that the official spec was 8GB. Either way, it's 16GB.
Bro, if I'm questioned, I attempt to find a link that is accurate, which I did. It does support what you state, but it is also likely that Avon b7 had, at best, the maximum memory available from Apple. Since Avon b7, didn't comment, I don't know what amount of RAM he actually had.
Nonsense. The OS is supremely important, and your chinese knockoff simply doesn’t pass muster since it cannot run the superior macOS.
If I had to choose between a MBP running Windows or an HP running macOS, i’d pick the macOS every time.
I say this as a professional enterprise Windows software developer. Mac is simply a better OS that works better, lasts longer, and has a lower TCO (tho admittedly this is hard to separate from the complete package of mac OS + Apple hardware). I rarely need to reboot or fidget my mac OS compared to constant voodoo with my Windows work machines.
Enjoy the knockoffs, man. I’m not here to correct or convert you. But understand how insane you appear, to visit an apple site and carry a torch for some clone garbage (both the notebook in question and the OS).
More to the point, I wonder how many MacBookPro users are actually impacted by lack of 32 GB memory. You certainly have no use for it if you are currently using a 2011 MBP maxing out at 8GB. For you, it's just another day of bench racing.
4 GB of RAM is installed as two 2 GB modules, no slots free.
*Apple officially supports a maximum of 8 GB of RAM, but third-parties have determined that this model actually is capable of using up to 16 GB of RAM with two 8 GB memory modules.
Cool story, bro. — Sent from my 2011 MBP with 16 GB of RAM.
How does "Cool story bro" work when his comment says that it can support 16 GiB of RAM? Surely you don't begrudge tmay for not knowing the technical specs from a 7yo laptop. He did due diligence by researching the data pertaining to your MBP model.
Huh, the original post was edited to include that bold text at the bottom, the first time I tried to post the editor hung and I had to requote and paste and didn't notice the edit. First time around it sure looked like they were correcting me and saying that the official spec was 8GB. Either way, it's 16GB.
Even more to tmay's credit his pre-edit comment (which you can see in my reply #138) he ends his comment with "That's the official spec for the early 2011 MacBookPro; perhaps it's upgradeable to 16GB," and then proceeded to immediately look into it.
My comment both verified your claim and addressed his closing suspicion. Based on his edit I think it's clear he didn't see my post before he edited and you having copied his edit means he updated before you hit Reply to respond to him. I love when people look into these things and wish we had more posters like tmay (and you) that were more concerned about being accurate over being right.
Nonsense. The OS is supremely important, and your chinese knockoff simply doesn’t pass muster since it cannot run the superior macOS.
If I had to choose between a MBP running Windows or an HP running macOS, i’d pick the macOS every time.
I say this as a professional enterprise Windows software developer. Mac is simply a better OS that works better, lasts longer, and has a lower TCO (tho admittedly this is hard to separate from the complete package of mac OS + Apple hardware). I rarely need to reboot or fidget my mac OS compared to constant voodoo with my Windows work machines.
Enjoy the knockoffs, man. I’m not here to correct or convert you. But understand how insane you appear to visit an apple site and carry a torch for some clone garbage (both the notebook in question and the OS).
It's true that OS are extremely important, but there is no perfect OS. macOS has it benefits and advantages over Windows and viceversa, and I work with both in a daily basis.
In all fairness, the lack of 32GB on any model and 4-Cores on the 13" are squarely on Intel. They have a low-power 4-core chip perfect for the 13" but that just arrived this year. This cannot go on much longer. I'd really like to have something new by this time next year or sooner, preferably before Xmas.
If the 32GB is purely the fault of Intel, how does Dell manage to have 32GB in some of the XPS configurations ?
Those laptops weren't using LPDDR4 RAM.
That is a totally irrelevant technical detail, when one needs a lot of RAM
It is when using a *mobile* computer, like a notebook. If you need power *at all costs* then what you want is a desktop.
Just as Apple had the 17" 'mobile computers' (that most who ever owned one absolutely adored btw) despite the bulkiness that 17" brought, if you need 32GB of RAM AND mobility, it can be done. To be specific, I think Dell has had 32GB capable mobile computers for many years now.
Yes, 32GB will eventually filter down into more lightweight, and even more energy efficient machines but as cropr clearly stated, the option is out there if you need that RAM (for whatever the reason). The Dells are also rugged specced too, I believe.
There is no technical reason Apple couldn't do it. Throwing out the 'but it isn't low power RAM' counter, doesn't cut it. First, the machine would have been designed with battery life in mind and second, ALL potential buyers of such a machine would be perfectly well aware of why it didn't have the form factor of an ultrabook.
That is a design philosophy not a technical one.
The 2016/17 MBPs were designed to be thin. That was clearly a design goal. There were rumours of dissenting voices within Apple on that issue. No doubt the details will float to the surface at some point.
Your point that a laptop 'sucks' if it doesn't run macOS is strange in a world that is so cloud connected and moving evermore in that direction. You seem to think that cropr must have got half his business strategy wrong by using Dells.
I have never ever used Windows myself as a day to day machine but general consensus seems to be that Windows 10 has got a lot right. I have no idea but if I could get a MateBook X Pro for US pricing I would seriously consider getting one instead of paying what Apple is asking.
In the scheme of things, the puck is going to be at high performance , high efficiency, CPU's that support 32 GB of memory anyway next year, barring yet more delays at Intel. Then, Apple is going to look smart for not creating a new design just to be able to use 32 GB of DDR4 or DDR5 memory. Profit!
More to the point, I wonder how many MacBookPro users are actually impacted by lack of 32 GB memory. You certainly have no use for it if you are currently using a 2011 MBP maxing out at 8GB. For you, it's just another day of bench racing.
I think other companies are the smart ones for designing devices that are already in the market and had no issues supporting 32GB of RAM, and even more. BTW, you mention about Intel delays, and they already released the 8th generation CPU's. Now it looks like Apple is the one with the delays. And would be nice too if the puck goes in the direction of making a good keyboard. I have no idea how something as important as the keyboard passed Apple QC.
In all fairness, the lack of 32GB on any model and 4-Cores on the 13" are squarely on Intel. They have a low-power 4-core chip perfect for the 13" but that just arrived this year. This cannot go on much longer. I'd really like to have something new by this time next year or sooner, preferably before Xmas.
If the 32GB is purely the fault of Intel, how does Dell manage to have 32GB in some of the XPS configurations ?
Those laptops weren't using LPDDR4 RAM.
That is a totally irrelevant technical detail, when one needs a lot of RAM
Battery life is kind of a big deal for the particular market that the MacBookPro is designed to, so yeah, the choice of LPDDR4 memory is an especially relevant technical detail.
More to the point, you seem to be quite happy buying Dells and running Linux, with a mix of MacBookPro's. Why the sad?
And what's the particular market the Macbook Pro is designed for? Would be nice to hear that response from Apple, so people can make the right choice. And still, it's obvious that just one model is not enough to cover all professional users needs. They even lack a discreet GPU in the MBP 13". Compare that to Lenovo and HP mobile workstations, that have a low end (4-core processors, 32GB of RAM, thinner + lighter) and high end models (6-core processors, 64GB of RAM, larger + heavier) . Wouldn't be nice if Apple could do the same?
Easy.
It's the market niche that makes the bulk of the profit in the PC business.
Hence, why MS is so keen to compete against Apple with it's Surface product line; that's where the money is.
It's always sad when company goes for the profit instead for the customers. That's when you start to see lack of upgrades and bad keyboards, among other things. As you said, MS it's in the same business, but at least, if they don't give Windows customers what they need, they can go to HP, Dell or Lenovo. Different from macOS users, that have no options a part from Apple.
Putting in 32GB of DDR RAM into a laptop because foolish customers only know that 32 is higher than 16 without any consideration for actual need or how it affects the rest of the machine is the epitome of of going after profit instead focusing on the customer base. We see the same thing in countless other areas of CE, like when people talk about pixel count without the slightest consideration for the quality and accuracy of each pixel because it's easy for Dell to sell an ignorant customer on "more is better" but getting the customer to pay more for an actual better display experience isn't. So, yeah, I agree with you that it's sad when companies dupe people like you into thinking you're getting more because you can only understand the most superficial aspects of the machine.
If you noticed, I posted examples of mobile workstations. Most of the customers that have these devices know the benefits of 32GB of RAM, and there are cases where it's what they need for their workflow. I prefer to call them "high end users" or "professionals" instead of "foolish customers".
In all fairness, the lack of 32GB on any model and 4-Cores on the 13" are squarely on Intel. They have a low-power 4-core chip perfect for the 13" but that just arrived this year. This cannot go on much longer. I'd really like to have something new by this time next year or sooner, preferably before Xmas.
If the 32GB is purely the fault of Intel, how does Dell manage to have 32GB in some of the XPS configurations ?
Those laptops weren't using LPDDR4 RAM.
That is a totally irrelevant technical detail, when one needs a lot of RAM
It is when using a *mobile* computer, like a notebook. If you need power *at all costs* then what you want is a desktop.
Just as Apple had the 17" 'mobile computers' (that most who ever owned one absolutely adored btw) despite the bulkiness that 17" brought, if you need 32GB of RAM AND mobility, it can be done. To be specific, I think Dell has had 32GB capable mobile computers for many years now.
Yes, 32GB will eventually filter down into more lightweight, and even more energy efficient machines but as cropr clearly stated, the option is out there if you need that RAM (for whatever the reason). The Dells are also rugged specced too, I believe.
There is no technical reason Apple couldn't do it. Throwing out the 'but it isn't low power RAM' counter, doesn't cut it. First, the machine would have been designed with battery life in mind and second, ALL potential buyers of such a machine would be perfectly well aware of why it didn't have the form factor of an ultrabook.
That is a design philosophy not a technical one.
The 2016/17 MBPs were designed to be thin. That was clearly a design goal. There were rumours of dissenting voices within Apple on that issue. No doubt the details will float to the surface at some point.
Your point that a laptop 'sucks' if it doesn't run macOS is strange in a world that is so cloud connected and moving evermore in that direction. You seem to think that cropr must have got half his business strategy wrong by using Dells.
I have never ever used Windows myself as a day to day machine but general consensus seems to be that Windows 10 has got a lot right. I have no idea but if I could get a MateBook X Pro for US pricing I would seriously consider getting one instead of paying what Apple is asking.
In the scheme of things, the puck is going to be at high performance , high efficiency, CPU's that support 32 GB of memory anyway next year, barring yet more delays at Intel. Then, Apple is going to look smart for not creating a new design just to be able to use 32 GB of DDR4 or DDR5 memory. Profit!
More to the point, I wonder how many MacBookPro users are actually impacted by lack of 32 GB memory. You certainly have no use for it if you are currently using a 2011 MBP maxing out at 8GB. For you, it's just another day of bench racing.
I think other companies are the smart ones for designing devices that are already in the market and had no issues supporting 32GB of RAM, and even more. BTW, you mention about Intel delays, and they already released the 8th generation CPU's. Now it looks like Apple is the one with the delays. And would be nice too if the puck goes in the direction of making a good keyboard. I have no idea how something as important as the keyboard passed Apple QC.
Since you seem to dwell on the keyboard issue, and 32 GB, I would note that debris seems to be the culprit with Apple's keyboard, and yes, as a matter of fact, Intel has not delivered the class of processor, no matter the generation, that supports LPDDR4, leaving both Apple and MS Surface Book stranded until next year. At least Apple has been driving TB 3, something that has a great deal of benefit over Surface USB Type C connectors limited to 5GB; sad.
Still, it's fair to state that I don't have to do much of a search to find numerous issues with Surface products, but I would be remiss if I didn't comment on that god awful Surface Book hinge. How the hell did that ever get into production?
In all fairness, the lack of 32GB on any model and 4-Cores on the 13" are squarely on Intel. They have a low-power 4-core chip perfect for the 13" but that just arrived this year. This cannot go on much longer. I'd really like to have something new by this time next year or sooner, preferably before Xmas.
If the 32GB is purely the fault of Intel, how does Dell manage to have 32GB in some of the XPS configurations ?
Those laptops weren't using LPDDR4 RAM.
That is a totally irrelevant technical detail, when one needs a lot of RAM
Battery life is kind of a big deal for the particular market that the MacBookPro is designed to, so yeah, the choice of LPDDR4 memory is an especially relevant technical detail.
More to the point, you seem to be quite happy buying Dells and running Linux, with a mix of MacBookPro's. Why the sad?
And what's the particular market the Macbook Pro is designed for? Would be nice to hear that response from Apple, so people can make the right choice. And still, it's obvious that just one model is not enough to cover all professional users needs. They even lack a discreet GPU in the MBP 13". Compare that to Lenovo and HP mobile workstations, that have a low end (4-core processors, 32GB of RAM, thinner + lighter) and high end models (6-core processors, 64GB of RAM, larger + heavier) . Wouldn't be nice if Apple could do the same?
Easy.
It's the market niche that makes the bulk of the profit in the PC business.
Hence, why MS is so keen to compete against Apple with it's Surface product line; that's where the money is.
It's always sad when company goes for the profit instead for the customers. That's when you start to see lack of upgrades and bad keyboards, among other things. As you said, MS it's in the same business, but at least, if they don't give Windows customers what they need, they can go to HP, Dell or Lenovo. Different from macOS users, that have no options a part from Apple.
Putting in 32GB of DDR RAM into a laptop because foolish customers only know that 32 is higher than 16 without any consideration for actual need or how it affects the rest of the machine is the epitome of of going after profit instead focusing on the customer base. We see the same thing in countless other areas of CE, like when people talk about pixel count without the slightest consideration for the quality and accuracy of each pixel because it's easy for Dell to sell an ignorant customer on "more is better" but getting the customer to pay more for an actual better display experience isn't. So, yeah, I agree with you that it's sad when companies dupe people like you into thinking you're getting more because you can only understand the most superficial aspects of the machine.
If you noticed, I posted examples of mobile workstations. Most of the customers that have these devices know the benefits of 32GB of RAM, and there are cases where it's what they need for their workflow. I prefer to call them "high end users" or "professionals" instead of "foolish customers".
Fair enough, but Apple doesn't build those, albeit that having TB 3 does give you a pretty good go at running an eGPU, or other external hardware, which certainly looks to give a lot of "mobile workstation" benefits, while not actually requiring that Apple produce such a niche device.
More to the point, I wonder how many MacBookPro users are actually impacted by lack of 32 GB memory. You certainly have no use for it if you are currently using a 2011 MBP maxing out at 8GB. For you, it's just another day of bench racing.
4 GB of RAM is installed as two 2 GB modules, no slots free.
*Apple officially supports a maximum of 8 GB of RAM, but third-parties have determined that this model actually is capable of using up to 16 GB of RAM with two 8 GB memory modules.
Cool story, bro. — Sent from my 2011 MBP with 16 GB of RAM.
How does "Cool story bro" work when his comment says that it can support 16 GiB of RAM? Surely you don't begrudge tmay for not knowing the technical specs from a 7yo laptop. He did due diligence by researching the data pertaining to your MBP model.
Huh, the original post was edited to include that bold text at the bottom, the first time I tried to post the editor hung and I had to requote and paste and didn't notice the edit. First time around it sure looked like they were correcting me and saying that the official spec was 8GB. Either way, it's 16GB.
Even more to tmay's credit his pre-edit comment (which you can see in my reply #138) he ends his comment with "That's the official spec for the early 2011 MacBookPro; perhaps it's upgradeable to 16GB," and then proceeded to immediately look into it.
My comment both verified your claim and addressed his closing suspicion. Based on his edit I think it's clear he didn't see my post before he edited and you having copied his edit means he updated before you hit Reply to respond to him. I love when people look into these things and wish we had more posters like tmay (and you) that were more concerned about being accurate over being right.
No worries. fast asleep's comment was fair, in the context of an aftermarket upgrade.
In all fairness, the lack of 32GB on any model and 4-Cores on the 13" are squarely on Intel. They have a low-power 4-core chip perfect for the 13" but that just arrived this year. This cannot go on much longer. I'd really like to have something new by this time next year or sooner, preferably before Xmas.
If the 32GB is purely the fault of Intel, how does Dell manage to have 32GB in some of the XPS configurations ?
In my company we have standardized on a mix of Dell XPS and MacbookPro machines. Back-end SW developers who need lots of RAM for testing and simulating, are now all using Dell (with Linux)
/shrug
Been through all this before. Either iMacs or AWS and modern devops. If you aren’t testing in the deployed environment you really aren’t testing anyway. AWS deployment using docker is easy and often lower cost than buying a bunch of XPS laptops. I guess if your devs use a dozen containers, fly a lot and don’t have internet it would be better but the number of devs in that pool of users is tiny.
In all fairness, the lack of 32GB on any model and 4-Cores on the 13" are squarely on Intel. They have a low-power 4-core chip perfect for the 13" but that just arrived this year. This cannot go on much longer. I'd really like to have something new by this time next year or sooner, preferably before Xmas.
If the 32GB is purely the fault of Intel, how does Dell manage to have 32GB in some of the XPS configurations ?
Those laptops weren't using LPDDR4 RAM.
That is a totally irrelevant technical detail, when one needs a lot of RAM
It is when using a *mobile* computer, like a notebook. If you need power *at all costs* then what you want is a desktop.
Just as Apple had the 17" 'mobile computers' (that most who ever owned one absolutely adored btw) despite the bulkiness that 17" brought, if you need 32GB of RAM AND mobility, it can be done. To be specific, I think Dell has had 32GB capable mobile computers for many years now.
Yes, 32GB will eventually filter down into more lightweight, and even more energy efficient machines but as cropr clearly stated, the option is out there if you need that RAM (for whatever the reason). The Dells are also rugged specced too, I believe.
There is no technical reason Apple couldn't do it. Throwing out the 'but it isn't low power RAM' counter, doesn't cut it. First, the machine would have been designed with battery life in mind and second, ALL potential buyers of such a machine would be perfectly well aware of why it didn't have the form factor of an ultrabook.
That is a design philosophy not a technical one.
The 2016/17 MBPs were designed to be thin. That was clearly a design goal. There were rumours of dissenting voices within Apple on that issue. No doubt the details will float to the surface at some point.
Your point that a laptop 'sucks' if it doesn't run macOS is strange in a world that is so cloud connected and moving evermore in that direction. You seem to think that cropr must have got half his business strategy wrong by using Dells.
I have never ever used Windows myself as a day to day machine but general consensus seems to be that Windows 10 has got a lot right. I have no idea but if I could get a MateBook X Pro for US pricing I would seriously consider getting one instead of paying what Apple is asking.
In the scheme of things, the puck is going to be at high performance , high efficiency, CPU's that support 32 GB of memory anyway next year, barring yet more delays at Intel. Then, Apple is going to look smart for not creating a new design just to be able to use 32 GB of DDR4 or DDR5 memory. Profit!
More to the point, I wonder how many MacBookPro users are actually impacted by lack of 32 GB memory. You certainly have no use for it if you are currently using a 2011 MBP maxing out at 8GB. For you, it's just another day of bench racing.
I think other companies are the smart ones for designing devices that are already in the market and had no issues supporting 32GB of RAM, and even more. BTW, you mention about Intel delays, and they already released the 8th generation CPU's. Now it looks like Apple is the one with the delays. And would be nice too if the puck goes in the direction of making a good keyboard. I have no idea how something as important as the keyboard passed Apple QC.
Since you seem to dwell on the keyboard issue, and 32 GB, I would note that debris seems to be the culprit with Apple's keyboard, and yes, as a matter of fact, Intel has not deliver the class of processor, no matter the generation, that supports LPDDR4, leaving both Apple and MS Surface Book stranded until next year. At least Apple has been driving TB 3, something that has a great deal of benefit over their USB Type C connectors limited to 5GB; sad.
Do you think that a well designed keyboard should have issues with debris? Obviously not. Compared that to Thinkpads, that even are spill resistant. There is no excuse for Macbook keyboards. And while it's true that Intel haven't released CPU's with support for LPDDR4, they release the 8th gen processors, which MS already included in the i7 SurfaceBook 2 since November from last year, while there are zero Macbooks with the 8th gen processors. You mention before about Intel delays, but Apple is not better.
Still, it's fair to state that I don't have to do much of a search to
find numerous issues with Surface products, but I would be remiss if I
didn't comment on that god awful Surface Book hinge. How the hell did
that ever get into production?
The issues with the last gen of Surfaces was awful, and I personally had them in my SP4. But it looks like those issues were solved, and even you don't hear many issues with 2017 models. Compare that to Apple, that had keyboard issues starting with 2015 models, and people still have the same keyboard issues in the 2017 models. Again, there is no excuse for this, neither for MS. That's the reason most of the time I recommend Thinkpad to my customers.
Since Avon b7, didn't comment, I don't know what amount of RAM he actually had.
Sorry, I missed that bit. I upgraded that machine a few years ago (RAM, Battery, 512GB SSD). Off the top of my head I can't remember what the RAM is but it is way more than the minimum I need. I'll check it when I get home.
That upgrade is partly the reason why I don't need a new machine today. I was very interested in the 2016 MBPs but baulked when I saw the pricing and all the issues associated with them.
Btw, I had to change the battery due to swelling (almost killed the trackpad) and Apple told me there were no batteries available from them for that machine even though it wasn't vintage. It was probably one of the last machines with a user replaceable battery. I had to get one from a third party.
[...] I think the problem here is that Apple sees their system (hardware and software) in terms of tasks: what do people use them for? What is the quickest way for this person to get from the start of the task to completion.
That is an excellent observation. The difference between you and me is that I come away with exactly the opposite conclusion -- after having spent a couple years working with a touchscreen computer and a year-and-a-half with a Touch Bar Mac, I think a touch screen better satisfies that particular criterion.
There will be cases in which the Touch Bar will be a better solution, but a touch screen is faster and more intuitive much more often. Instead of having to look away from the screen to identify a target, I simply point where I'm already looking. Further, I am not at the mercy of the developer to decide whether or not they want to implement access to particular control on the Touch Bar (or, as in the case of Avid, to not to use it at all), *I* can decide whether a particular action is best accomplished with the keyboard, a pointing device, or a screen touch.
Rayz2016 said: But of course, you don't know this for sure, because you have no idea why Mac sales are staying steady or increasing in volume. You say that if Apple did this or that then sales would be even better, but you haven't considered that the reason that Apple, to a certain extent, has bucked the trend with regard to stagnating PC sales is because more people actually want thinner, cooler and lighter laptops.
And you shouldn't ignore the fashion element that makes Mac much cooler than PCs. Most college age or entry level career young adults and even many millennials don't need cutting edge performance. These customers make up a much larger base for Apple than the power users. The year old tech in Macs works just fine for them. They, for the most part aren't using half of the capabilities that the machines offer anyway. Along with the convenient integration with their iPhones, and Apple watches they're making a fashion statement that fits their lifestyle.
So, what’s your point?
This is Apple’s core customer base. They build machines for them, not you.
In all fairness, the lack of 32GB on any model and 4-Cores on the 13" are squarely on Intel. They have a low-power 4-core chip perfect for the 13" but that just arrived this year. This cannot go on much longer. I'd really like to have something new by this time next year or sooner, preferably before Xmas.
If the 32GB is purely the fault of Intel, how does Dell manage to have 32GB in some of the XPS configurations ?
Those laptops weren't using LPDDR4 RAM.
That is a totally irrelevant technical detail, when one needs a lot of RAM
Battery life is kind of a big deal for the particular market that the MacBookPro is designed to, so yeah, the choice of LPDDR4 memory is an especially relevant technical detail.
More to the point, you seem to be quite happy buying Dells and running Linux, with a mix of MacBookPro's. Why the sad?
And what's the particular market the Macbook Pro is designed for? Would be nice to hear that response from Apple, so people can make the right choice.
Why do you need Apple to make the choice for you? Look at the machines, check the specs, see if it fits what you want to do. If it doesn't then buy something else.
I just can't understand folk who's self-esteem is so tied to the Apple brand that they'll forgo a machine that will suit them better, and just wait for years for a machine that may not ever show up. There's a machine built for you out there, right now. What are you waiting for?
No doubt a 32GB machine will turn up, but then you'll want USB-A ports, and Firewire Ports and SCSI ports, and so you'll still be here complaining and waiting for Apple to build a machine that doesn't fit their core customer base as it is now.
Comments
If I had to choose between a MBP running Windows or an HP running macOS, i’d pick the macOS every time.
I say this as a professional enterprise Windows software developer. Mac is simply a better OS that works better, lasts longer, and has a lower TCO (tho admittedly this is hard to separate from the complete package of mac OS + Apple hardware). I rarely need to reboot or fidget my mac OS compared to constant voodoo with my Windows work machines.
Enjoy the knockoffs, man. I’m not here to correct or convert you. But understand how insane you appear, to visit an apple site and carry a torch for some clone garbage (both the notebook in question and the OS).
My comment both verified your claim and addressed his closing suspicion. Based on his edit I think it's clear he didn't see my post before he edited and you having copied his edit means he updated before you hit Reply to respond to him. I love when people look into these things and wish we had more posters like tmay (and you) that were more concerned about being accurate over being right.
Still, it's fair to state that I don't have to do much of a search to find numerous issues with Surface products, but I would be remiss if I didn't comment on that god awful Surface Book hinge. How the hell did that ever get into production?
Oops, that one slipped out of my hands...
http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-internal-memo-surface-book-return-consumer-reports-survey-2017-8
Fair enough, but Apple doesn't build those, albeit that having TB 3 does give you a pretty good go at running an eGPU, or other external hardware, which certainly looks to give a lot of "mobile workstation" benefits, while not actually requiring that Apple produce such a niche device.
Been through all this before. Either iMacs or AWS and modern devops. If you aren’t testing in the deployed environment you really aren’t testing anyway. AWS deployment using docker is easy and often lower cost than buying a bunch of XPS laptops. I guess if your devs use a dozen containers, fly a lot and don’t have internet it would be better but the number of devs in that pool of users is tiny.
The issues with the last gen of Surfaces was awful, and I personally had them in my SP4. But it looks like those issues were solved, and even you don't hear many issues with 2017 models. Compare that to Apple, that had keyboard issues starting with 2015 models, and people still have the same keyboard issues in the 2017 models. Again, there is no excuse for this, neither for MS. That's the reason most of the time I recommend Thinkpad to my customers.
That upgrade is partly the reason why I don't need a new machine today. I was very interested in the 2016 MBPs but baulked when I saw the pricing and all the issues associated with them.
Btw, I had to change the battery due to swelling (almost killed the trackpad) and Apple told me there were no batteries available from them for that machine even though it wasn't vintage. It was probably one of the last machines with a user replaceable battery. I had to get one from a third party.
This is Apple’s core customer base. They build machines for them, not you.
Why do you need Apple to make the choice for you? Look at the machines, check the specs, see if it fits what you want to do. If it doesn't then buy something else.
I just can't understand folk who's self-esteem is so tied to the Apple brand that they'll forgo a machine that will suit them better, and just wait for years for a machine that may not ever show up. There's a machine built for you out there, right now. What are you waiting for?
No doubt a 32GB machine will turn up, but then you'll want USB-A ports, and Firewire Ports and SCSI ports, and so you'll still be here complaining and waiting for Apple to build a machine that doesn't fit their core customer base as it is now.