• tahoe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      To be fair I had an 8Gb M1 Mac mini for about a year and never even once felt like it was lacking memory. I could open as many things as I wanted and it didn’t slow down, so I can kinda see where they were going with this. Not saying it makes that situation much better though.

      I think the current base iPhones with 4Gb or 6Gb suffer way more from lack of memory than the 8Gb Macs, and people aren’t taking about this enough.

      • datavoid@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        I needed a cheap laptop for audio, so i decided to pick up a second hand m1 air a couple months ago.

        It is honestly pretty impressive for the price, I generally don’t have issues either. Everything is snappy, and it handles multitasking fine. Its even faster than my $2000+ PC at several things, which frustrates me greatly.

        However… When running ableton live (or presumably anything that involves heavy image, video, or audio editing), 8gb of ram is honestly not enough. If you push it too hard, it hangs for a second, then the offending app will just close.

        Also there is a weird delay in factorio, absolutely unacceptable.

        • olympicyes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Base 8GB MacBooks also tend to have base storage, meaning a single NVMe controller instead of dual. If you’re relying on virtual memory then it would make sense to get the Mac that has double the SSD bandwidth. I bought a base M1 Mac Mini for the kids and it’s pretty good for their needs, but they tend to prefer the old i3 win 10 PC connected to the same monitor. The M1 Mini could run Intel Civ 6 faster than my 32GB i7 MacBook Pro could, which surprised me.

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          7 months ago

          faster than my $2000+ PC

          tell me you run windows without telling me you run windows

      • scorpious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        To be fair

        NO! No fair.

        I delivered a season of 4k animations for a network show using Motion, AE, C4D, Ps, AI…all using a base model M1 Mini (8/256), with zero problems.

        Of course more would be better, but unless you’ve actually used one, it’s hard to imagine how well it works. I tried mentioning this in another post, but it’s all Apple hate all the way down here

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        People are, just not PC spec heads that like to compare numbers. Practical use is the only real comparison.

        • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Actually the opposite is true for a basic spec. like RAM. People may not understand CPU/GPU naming conventions. BUT they understand something simple like 16>8.

          They also understand their “old slow” PC probably had 8gb and they want to UPGRADE so when they see this “new” mac with same amount of ram they immediately think slow whether it is or not…

        • olympicyes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Some of the YouTubers comparing the new MacBook found that the 16GB Air smoked the 8GB version for creative tasks and rendering, but they found no difference between 16 GB and 24GB. Seems like Apple could up the RAM to 12 GB and see a big improvement.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      30
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      UM on an SoC is not the same thing as RAM on a PC with a CPU and GPU. It’s purely a storage liaison, since data is passed directly from core to core.

      It’s not that it’s more efficient, it’s simply used less than in conventional PC architecture.

      MacOS is also designed specifically to leverage the hardware, so practical use is the only legitimate comparison to a PC.

      Maybe PC Gamer isn’t the most informed reviewer of technology outside of PCs.

      • Shadywack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s not that it’s more efficient, it’s simply used less than in conventional PC architecture.

        It’s not that you’re wrong from a philosophical perspective with that, it’s that you’re factually incorrect. Memory addresses don’t suddenly shrink or expand depending on where they exist on the bus or the CPU. Being on the SoC doesn’t magically make RAM used less by the OS and applications, as the mach kernel, Darwin, and various MacOS layers still address the same amount of memory as they would on traditional PC architecture.

        Memory is memory, just like glass is glass, and glass will still scratch at a level 7 just like 8GB of RAM holds the same amount of information as…8GB of RAM.

        The article actually quantitatively tests this too by pointing out their memory usage with Chrome and different numbers of tabs open.

        Looks like you didn’t read the article.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          26
          ·
          7 months ago

          You should familiarize yourself with the architecture before commenting. The GPU is broken into several cores of the SoC, along with the roles of the CPU. The UM is not part of the SoC. However, data is passed from what could be referred to as the CPU to what could be referred to as the GPU without interacting with UM.

          • Shadywack@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            I’m actually deeply familiar with the architecture, and how caches, memory, and UM’s work. I understand all of that. None of that changes the storage available. Having high memory bandwidth to load/unload memory addresses doesn’t fix the issue of the environment easily exceeding 8GB. I also understand the caching principles and how you actually want RAM utilization to be higher for faster responsiveness. 8GB is still 8GB, and a joke.

              • Shadywack@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                A weeklong battery life, efficient cores, rapid response time, and great software environment make it a great choice…at 16GB for my needs. I will not recommend 8GB to any user at all going forward. It’s marketing malarkey with no future proofing, degrading the viable longevity of the machine.

                There’s no conversation to continue. Glass is glass, and 8GB is 8GB, as well as being a joke.

                • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  16
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  If it’s great for your needs, the base model isn’t for you. You can stream video with have 30 tabs open in Safari and only use 4.6GB of UM on an M1 Mac. I just verified for you.

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        What a load of nonsense. You’ve got no idea how a computer works. RAM isn’t just used for passing data between cores. If anything that’s more the role of cache although even that isn’t strictly accurate.

        Whether a system has a discrete GPU or not doesn’t really factor into the discussion one way or another, although even if it did having more RAM would be even more important without a discrete GPU because a portion of the system RAM gets utilized as VRAM.

      • magiccupcake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        This is a truly terrible article.

        Like why not test these things? This just sounds like ai generated garbage.

        That being said, 8gb is an abysmally low amount of ram in 2024. I had a mid range surface in 2014 that had that much ram. And the upcharge for more is quite ridiculous too.

        I know it’s pc ram but I bought 64gb of ddr4 3600mhz for like $130. How on earth is apple charging $200 for 8!!!

        • Shadywack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          7 months ago

          Looks like you didn’t read the article either.

          Overall, I’m using 12.5GB of memory and the only application I have open is Chrome. Oh, and did I mention I’m typing this on a 16GB MacBook Air? I used to have an 8GB Apple silicon Air and to be frank it was a nightmare, constantly running out of memory just browsing the web.

          Earlier it’s mentioned that they have 15 tabs open. I don’t like a lot of things they do in “gaming journalism” but on this article they’re spot on. Apple is full of shit in saying 8GB is enough by today’s standards. 8GB is a fuckin joke, and you can’t add any RAM later.

          • ABCDE@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            That doesn’t make sense. I have the 8GB M2 and don’t have any issues with 20+ tabs, video calling, torrents, Luminar, Little Snitch, etc open right now.

            • Shadywack@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              7 months ago

              15 tabs of Safari, which is demonstrably a better browser by some opinions due to its efficiency and available privacy configuration options. What if you prefer Chrome or Firefox?

              I will argue in Apple’s defense that their stack includes very effective libraries that intrinsically made applications on Mac OS better in many regards, but 8GB is still 8GB, and an SoC isn’t upgradeable. Competition has far cheaper 16GB options, and Apple is back to looking like complete assholes again.

            • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              7 months ago

              That’s because PC people try to equate specs in dissimilar architecture with an OS that is not written explicitly to utilize that architecture. They haven’t read enough about it or experienced it in practice to have an informed opinion. We can get downvoted together on our “sub standard hardware” that works wonderfully. lol

              • pivot_root@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                7 months ago

                The only memory-utilization-related advantage gained by sharing memory between the CPU and GPU is zero-copy operations between the CPU and GPU. The occasional texture upload and framebuffer access is nowhere near enough to make 8 GiB the functional equivalent of 16 GiB.

                If you want to see something “written explicitly to utilize [a unified memory] architecture,” look no further than the Nintendo Switch. The operating system and applications are designed specifically for the hardware, and even first-party titles are choked by the hardware’s memory capacity and bandwidth.

                • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  The Tegra is similar being an SoC, however it does not possess nearly as many dedicated independent processing cores designed around specialized processes.

                  The M1 has 10-core CPU with 8 performance cores and 2 efficiency cores, a 16-core GPU, a 16-core Neural Engine, and all with 200GB/s memory bandwidth.

          • magiccupcake@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Oh no I read the article, I just don’t consider that testing.

            It’s not really apt to compare using ram on a browser on one computer and extract that to another, there’s a lot of complicated ram and cache management that happens in the background.

            Testing would involve getting a 8gb ram Mac computer and running common tasks to see if you can measure poorer performance, be it lag, stutters or frame drops.

            • Shadywack@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              7 months ago

              You do have a point, but I think the intent of the article is to convey the common understanding that Apple is leaning on sales tactics to convince people of a thing that anyone with technical acumen sees through immediately. Regardless of how efficient Mach/Darwin is, it’s still apples to apples (pun intended) to understand how quickly 8GB fills up in 2024. For those who need a fully quantitative performance measurement between 8 and 16GB, with enough applications loaded to display the thrashing that starts happening, they’re not really the audience. THAT audience is busy reading about gardening tips, lifestyle, and celebrity gossip.

        • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Your 64 gigs of ram probably uses 10x the power and takes up significantly more space than the single memory chip that’s on the M1-M3s die. And yet it still has less bandwidth than the M1, and on top of that the M1 utilizes it more efficiently than a “normal” desktop or laptop can since there’s one pool of memory for RAM RAM and VRAM.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_M1#:~:text=While the M1 SoC has 66.67GB/s memory bandwidth

          Chat GPT guestimates 57GB/s for dual channel DDR4 at 3600mhz

          $1000 for 8 gigs of RAM in the Air is whatever. $1200 for 8 gigs of ram in the Pro was not great. But 1600 for 8 gigs of ram in the new M3 MBP is really awful.

          • pivot_root@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            the M1 utilizes it more efficiently than a “normal” desktop or laptop can since there’s one pool of memory for RAM RAM and VRAM.

            That’s not how it works, unfortunately.

            A UMA (unified memory architecture) enables zero-copy texture uploads and frame buffer access, but that’s not likely to constitute notable memory savings outside games or GPU-accelerated photo editing. Most of the memory is going to be consumed by applications running on the CPU anyway, and that’s not something that can be improved by sharing memory between the CPU and GPU.

            And yet [your 64 gigs of ram] still has less bandwidth than the M1

            It’s by necessity that the M1 has higher memory bandwidth. UMA comes with the drawback of the GPU and CPU having to share that memory, and there’s only so much bandwidth to go around. GPU cores are bandwidth hungry, which is mitigated by either using a pile of L2 cache or by giving the system better memory bandwidth.

  • dinckel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    7 months ago

    They’ll continue selling these, purely because of two reasons:

    • On an Air, 8gb is the bare minimum that is realistically viable, for people who don’t do anything than browse the web, who they can later upsell, when they get a new machine.
    • They can immediately upsell you for every extra memory tier you would need. This makes them a colossal amount of money.

    Practically all of us know that the difference between these memory modules is pocket change, when mass produced like this, but for those extra couple cents, they get an extra 100$ from you

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      On an Air, 8gb is the bare minimum that is realistically viable, for people who don’t do anything than browse the web

      Thanks to the modern web, web browsing of one of the most RAM intensive tasks. Add a few Electron based apps and you’re in hell.

      • Matriks404@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        For browsing the web 4 GB is enough, unless you do some multitasking. Still I wouldn’t buy a computer with less than 8 GB of RAM nowadays.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          For browsing the web 4 GB is enough, unless you do some multitasking.

          Multitasking = more than one tab and the background tabs not immediately put to sleep.

    • COASTER1921@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      When they charge many $100s for an extra 8gb the value of the bare minimum 8gb doesn’t look so terrible (if only comparing to Apple). Especially considering the performance of swap on a fast SSD.

    • whereisk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s also a nice way to tax their poorest customers more. A lot of people are keeping their machines way past what apple provides updates for, if the ssd that can’t be changed dies (because of constant swapping) faster than what they intended or could keep the machine for, I guess it’s too bad for them.

  • Panda (he/him)@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    > most powerful chip available in a laptop and arguably one of the greatest overall laptops ever

    > 8 gb ram

    my phone has 12 GB of ram what the fuck is apple on

    • extremeboredom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s a strategy to push customers toward the more expensive models. Their markup is massive, it’s a blatant profit move.

      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        And, since the ram is soldered to the fucking mobo, you can’t upgrade it yourself. It’s a ridiculous and craven strategy for a company already nickel and diming their customers.

        but the cultists still love them.

    • nomadjoanne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Their silicon is really good. I’d argue it is mostly because they have a node advantage but it is what it is.

      But especially in the MacBook Air it can only really show off its stuff in the short-bursty workloads of casual users (and Geekbench). My four-year-old PC would pull ahead quite quickly on any task when you actually have to run it at load for a while.

  • mohammed_alibi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Such a weird hill to die on for Apple. How much does it really cost to just add 8GB more RAM? $5?

    • TCB13@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      This is just like the iPhone (lack of) storage and the (lack of) SD cards. Apple is trying to maximize profits by using less RAM and by forcing people into buying more hardware in a few years. Apple does a lot of stuff very well but then they also pull this crap.

    • EarMaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Acknowledging that 8GB only delivers mediocre performance at best would upset anyone who already bought a device with only 8GB. And as later upgrades are not supported by Apple it would abandon these users like buyers of a 1st gen Apple device…

    • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      My guess is they’re going to sell like hotcakes to clueless parents whose kids insist their first laptop needs to be apple

  • InfiniteGlitch@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    I like Apple. Got Apple Watch, AirPods Pro and iPhone. I love the design of MacBooks however I refuse to ever buy MacBooks.

    Overpriced like crazy. For half of the price you can get a really great laptop.

    I’m honestly even thinking to buy a €200 android device to get used to the system.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m honestly even thinking to buy a €200 android device to get used to the system.

      Don’t. Unless it’s a slightly older Pixel A-series 2nd hand phone. Manufacturers of cheap Android phones skimp on everything and add bullshit crapware. Shit like that is the cause of many “Android sucks” comments.

        • __ghost__@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          They’re acceptable for basic productivity but very sluggish if you’re coming from a flagship device. Get an S10 series if you’re looking for something cheap and Samsung

        • lemmytellyousomething@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          The A series is great to be honest.

          It’s the same as the S series, but for people who don’t play high end games or live stream or render videos or don’t need to record videos in a high quality that I can’t even replay on my other devices.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Samsungs come with excellent Windows support right out of the box, so if Windows is you jam it’s a good choice. Not familiar with the A14, though. Would advise against cheap Chinese brands.

    • Andromxda 🇺🇦🇵🇸🇹🇼@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m honestly even thinking to buy a €200 android device to get used to the system.

      Don’t do that, I can tell you from experience: Most of them suck, especially cheap Chinese ones.

      The Google Pixel 7a is currently $350 and it will get cheaper when the 8a comes out. The 7a will get security updates until May 2028. If you want to get into mobile device privacy/security, a Pixel is an excellent choice. You can install an alternative operating system called GrapheneOS, it’s a much more private and secure, improved version of Android. It doesn’t include Google spyware and thus also improves battery life. It also extends your feature updates, by default the 7a would only get feature updates until 2026, but GrapheneOS provides Android feature updates as long as the device gets security updates. That would mean 2 additional years of Android feature updates. I highly recommend it!

      • UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        I agree with this. Pixel A series are pretty much the smoothest android experience for cheap. Plus they have a pretty good camera as a bonus. The low end Chinese phones and even the Samsung A series just don’t quite do it for me. I think OneUI was made for faster hardware.

    • kameecoding@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      The best way to have a MacBook is your employer giving you one, but trust me you kinda wont want to work on regular notebooks after experiencing macbook.

      • ripcord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I don’t have one of the ARM ones, and after using Macs for like 20+ years, I barely use the ones I have. But that 16 hour battery life and performance is really nice.

        Mac OS X used to wow me in the 2000s and even 2010s; it was definitely why I used Macs. But nothing about it is all that interesting to me anymore, and in some ways it’s gotten worse.

    • deranger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      I dunno, I’ve got a base model M1 and it feels like one of the best laptops I’ve owned. Overpriced is exactly what I feel it isn’t. $1000 for a decent laptop is not bad. Nothing below that price has a good trackpad.

      • pr06lefs@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        There’s the thinkpad x13s. But its pretty slow. Should be snapdragon elite laptops coming out this year tho.

  • _sideffect@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Let’s put 100hp in this new apple truck that weighs 9000lbs!

    What? Our competitors have 350hp? It doesn’t matter! Our 100hp is very efficient and performs just as well!*

    *only when compared to light usage and not towing or driving on inclined roads

    • deranger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      A more apt analogy would be to use the truck bed size. Horsepower is more akin to the CPU speed.

      Most people don’t fill their truck bed just like most people don’t fill their RAM. I’ve had no issues with my family users who just do typical light laptop tasks on 8GB RAM. I think the memory upgrades need to be much, much cheaper, but 8GB works absolutely fine IME. I would like 16GB but it’d be a waste for the other users in my household.

      • _sideffect@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        You’re in the minority actually.

        Why buy an overpriced Mac and not use it to its full potential?

        Just for the logo on the back?

        • deranger@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          How do you know I’m in the minority when I didn’t say how I use my laptop? I don’t get it. I do use it to its potential, and there’s no logo on the back. It’s in a case.

          Also not overpriced with the base model, which is what I have.

          • _sideffect@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            You just said you never utilize all of your ram, so it’s apparent that you don’t heavily utilize your machine

            • deranger@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              I did not say that. I said I’d actually like 16GB. It’s my family users (normal, non nerds) who have no issue with 8GB RAM and having 30+ tabs and two dozen apps running. Memory management handles multitasking very smoothly, and I’ve not found many apps that are limited by 8GB. I’d like 16 for the few times I edit on laptop, typically I use my desktop.

              • _sideffect@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                Fine, so why buy them an overpriced Mac if they don’t fully utilize it?

                My original question is still valid

                • deranger@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  I disagree it’s overpriced. The base model Air at $850 is great, meets their needs, and decreases the amount of family sysadmin tasks I’d have to do for them if they had Windows or Linux laptops.

  • accidentalloris@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    I daily drove a laptop with 8gb of RAM less than a year ago. Works just fine for most tasks. Granted, at Apples typical price point, I’d want more than that, but it is far from unusable. Running VMs wasn’t fun though.

    • uranibaba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      How did you do that? My laptop is at 14gb now and I am not using it (typing on phone)

  • Hux@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    I don’t disagree that 8GB is generally less than I would accept for normal usage, but the way this article is written you can tell the author really doesn’t have any reasonable grasp of memory management.

  • GreenBottles@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Apple has their niche, but you’ll never find me owning a Mac. They are not useful for me. And fuck the proprietary nature of Apple in general.

    That being said, I run 64GB of RAM and it’s glorious!