jdw

Sorry, but all the defenses of Apple on this are total poppycock.  I'm a huge defender of Apple, and have been since 1984.  People who go around doing nothing but trashing Apple are trash themselves.  But let's face it, folks, RAM is one area Apple has ALWAYS failed the consumer on.  Apple Silicon and RAM efficiency talk is garbage.  What matters is PRACTICAL USABILITY.  Does somebody online talking about efficiency magically make 8GB good enough for YOU?  No.  No, it does not.

I purchased an M1 MacBook Air with that "efficient" 8GB of RAM for my daughter as she entered college 3 years ago.  (I knew she would need more storage space than the default too, so I ordered 512GB of SSD space.)  I based that 8GB decision largely on what others were saying and based on my own online research about have special "unified memory" is.  Skip forward a few months and one of the biggest issues she's had is with inadequate RAM, and I've had to spend a lot of time with her to bring her so-called "modern" Mac back to 1984 days.  That's right, I've had to tell her to launch only a single app at a time.  Remember those days when you could only do that with System 1.0 all the way up to MultiFinder?  Well, it's back in a different form today.  When your 8GB Mac slows to a crawl or has apps that exit due to inadequate RAM, you have to quit all apps but the RAM hungry one you need to run, and then and only then your 8GB RAM-constrained M1 Mac starts to work well.

Having had that ridiculous experience with my daughter's M1 MBA, when my son needed a new Mac for school, I purchase him the current Air out at the time, which was an M2 13" MBA, but this time I didn't play the idiot consumer.  I spent extra money so it would come with 16GB RAM, and I also ordered the more reasonable 512GB storage too.  Guess what?  Not a single memory issue, and he uses pretty much the same apps his older sister does.  That practical experiences takes everyone who defends 8GB of RAM and kicks them square in the fanny.

Moral of the story? Don't listen to Apple.  Don't listen to Cupertino-worshippers in Apple-centric forums like this one.  Listen to practical experiences from people like myself who have loved and known Macs for years.  And consider well you will likely need more RAM than you think, either immediately or soon down the line.  And that more RAM means anything more than 8GB.

Full disclosure, I am against all these crazy and pathetic lawsuits against Apple, especially because I am an AAPL investor.  I want to see Apple succeed because I believe in Tim Cook, Apple engineers, their design team, and their great products. I laugh every single time I hear the name EPIC or Merrick Garland because these idiots are seeking to trash Apple and force it to do things that really don't positive impact me as a consumer much at all.  However, nobody is trying to force Apple to put more usable amounts of RAM and storage in its baseline products.  I guess you can argue it's impossible to do that in a free market society, so oh well.  But let's face it, too little RAM is what we've been faced with since the 128K Mac, and it needs to change.  And while not as important, I think the same is true of baseline storage too.  The manufacturing cost differential between 8GB vs. 16GB RAM and 256GB vs. 512GB of storage in 2024 is so insignificant that Apple is totally insane for charging all the money it does for those RAM and storage upgrades, especially so on machines that cannot be consumer-upgraded after purchase.  Yes, my friends, Apple can still be a wildly profitable company even if they start offering 16GB of baseline RAM and 512GB of storage, and nothing less than that.

I love Apple and its products, but RAM and STORAGE amounts are as infuriating as the mindless people who defend "8GB is enough." But I say, efficiency be darned!  Give us more RAM and STORAGE in baseline product models!  And bump baseline iCloud storage from 5GB to at least 15GB too.  It's 2024 for crying out loud!

"Why is it a bad thing," Ternus?  Because you aren't considering the long term implications of what happens when a device gets so old Apple stops making parts for it.  And while one can argue that for an iPhone, it matters less than a Mac, the fact remains that your are effectively killing off old devices that cannot get official parts anymore after a certain number of years.  Nobody is talking about that and they should. Ternus arguments are only sound when you consider a device that still is young enough for Apple to still offer parts for it.

Everybody should recuse themselves, and nobody should take over.  The US Gov. is yet again throwing tax payer dollars away, in the name of defending those very taxpayers. Utter insanity. 

Leave American business success stories like Apple alone.  Consumers must decide if they are around 100 years hence, not Uncle Sam.

Although some would disagree with the rainbow flag waving of Apple, which is highly political, it can be argued that is different than war.  War, of course, being much more "life & death" in a daily basis for a long period of time.  People supporting either side of a given conflict can get more riled than people would over sexual preferences.  So I disagree with Godofbiscuitssf that this is "rank hypocrisy."  It's not.  Apple sees sexual preferences as somewhat culturally acceptable in 2024 USA, while opinions about war are not.

Was Apple right in firing this employee in light of the fact the employee had been given permission in the recent past?  In order to determine that, we need more facts.  For example, if the employee had been told by managers at the store they could wear certain things, but later upper management in Cupertino decided otherwise regarding a policy for all stores, then it would boil down to how Apple spoke to this employee.  Personally, I would have treated it very delicately, apologizing to the employee for conflicting information, but letting them know that rules handed down by Cupertino are the final word.  If the employee heard and understood that but continued to wear the symbols anyway, they should be given a formal warning, but no further action.  If the employee continued to disobey, they should be given a second warning and asked to go home for one work day.  If they returned to work and continued to ignore the rules, then and only then should they be fired.  That is how I personally would have handled it.

But I am surprised anyone gets fired anymore with the crazy USA being as litigious as it is.  But I guess Apple employee's have to sign a lot of legal documents to become an employee that prevents many lawsuits against Apple in the event that employee is ultimately fired.

paisleydisco said:

LOLOLOLOLOL 

the rich guy looking for a handout 

Sorry but Canstorm's reply to you was spot on.  No doubt you have refused to purchase any AAPL stock too.  I first bought AAPL in 1999 when Steve Jobs was back, the stock was rising a little, because I believed in the company since 1984, and because I said to myself, "why the heck not?"  I've never sold a single share.  I was not wealthy, nor did I come from a wealthy family.  Ever dollar in my possession at the time mattered to me.  Yet I chose to invest a little anyway.  Glad I did.

It never ceases to shock and amaze me how people who deliberately refuse to become financially savvy are the first to chastise anyone and everyone they deem rich, who in reality is anyone a tiny bit wealthier than themselves.

Here's some great advice...

Stop criticizing everyone, even truly bad people.  Take charge of your own life.  Follow the lead of those who have become a success even if you don't know them personally.  Don't let failure stop you because you will fail.  Keep going.  One day, you will be pleasantly surprised with your nest egg, and your kindness in not criticizing others will be a shining beacon to all around you.