M1 MacBooks limits to 16Gb for now?

I think that this may be an unpopular thing for me to say here, but I also think that you’ve hit on the main difference between a “pro” user and a “non-pro”. A professional has defined requirements and a business case for making a purchase. They will buy the machine that fulfills their requirements and falls within their business case. It’s a very clear cut process. Had I the need and could I justify it on the basis of my business, I would simply purchase a Mac Pro now, because that’s what I would need right now. Upcoming features may not be completely unimportant to hardcore professionals, but they almost never factor in to a purchase decision.

For consumers (and maybe especially for enthusiasts and “power users”), it’s the more murky scenario that you outline, because business requirements don’t drive purchases.

I think that Apple has done exactly the right thing here. They’ve updated their most popular, highest volume, most consumer oriented machines with the (presumably) least performant and easiest to produce new CPUs. The people buying these machines are the least likely to be adversely affected by the quirks that are almost certain to come with a major architecture change, something that professionals will be very intolerant of.

Also, Apple has been able to make “low end” computers that both punch above their weight in terms of performance and have (hopefully real world) battery life that’s beyond the realm of anything that anyone else can produce, for years. That would/will be a coup and produce a benefit that’s far more tangible for far more people than higher performance in the Pro lines.

Those are my rambling thoughts anyway :slight_smile:

9 Likes

That may be true at the pricepoint of a laptop. Even for the largest of businesses, a $20K to $50K Mac Pro is a major capital purchase; the time to obsolescence of such a capital purchase is surely a factor.

It absolutely is a factor. But, in an environment in which a Mac Pro purchase decision was made based on (professional) need to do a task in support of a business case, it doesn’t become obsolete because another computer is produced that does other things. It becomes obsolete when the cost to keep using it is greater than the cost of replacing it.

1 Like

I think Jason Snell hits the nail on the head: Enter the M1 – Notes on Tuesday’s big event – Six Colors

Especially

Apple said it themselves in their video event Tuesday: The M1 is a “first step” into a “family of chips” that will power future Mac models. This really is the performance floor of the Apple silicon on Mac story. […] The future is promised to nobody, but it seems premature to assume that just because the M1 doesn’t support your favorite higher-end Mac feature, it’s been canned.

(emphasis mine)

5 Likes

Were exactly my thoughts… Apple announces the FIRST models and the world already is doomed because of max. 16GB. :smiley:

I am seriously considering an M1, mainly because of the promised battery life. I would go for a 32GB model, so I now have to consider if I wait more new models or a content with 16GB for a while…

2 Likes

I’ve ordered a MacBook Pro M1. My current one is making strange noises and could die any day!

Why the Pro and not the Air? I run a business from my laptop, so I often have hundreds of things running at the same time - having the fan means it’ll do more of this heavy lifting without having to clock down. That is big for me. I don’t want my flow interrupted just because Chrome is being a pain etc…

Why not wait for M2? I have an early 2015 MBP 13 I am typing this on now. I use it 10+ hours every day. It has an SSD. And the SSD is making grinding noises like a spinning disc did when it was in its death throws. I need a computer now. Plus, if I wait for the 16 inch M2 to come out, I’ll end up blowing 4k rather than the 2k this costs. Yes, I would prefer 32gb RAM, but I guess that universal memory will mean that 16 acts more like 24 - sort of Fusion Drive for RAM…!

Why not go Intel? I want this for another 5 years, and so as an investment in the future, Apple silicon is a must - it may only be iOS apps running on it this year, but for the next 5 I’ll be using this, there will be more and more OS feature which only work on Apple silicon.

That is today’s logic anyway. I may

4 Likes

Well, I don’t think the world is doomed, but if what I’m hearing is correct - that the 16 GB limit is actually a hard hardware limitation and not just a design decision, that would mean that the first model to go over 16 GB is also effectively a “real world beta” sort of product as well. That’s useful to consider when buying.

That all said, that info could be wrong. From what I’m reading, it looks like the RAM is actually part of the SOC - which could quite possibly make the 8/16 choices an issue of trying to manage workload at the fabs. Limiting the memory options effectively gives two SOC packages (M1/8 and M1/16), with binning giving the MacBook Air the lower-GPU option.

That’s the boat I’m in. I’ve been thinking about getting a laptop, and I probably don’t need more than 16 GB. Being able to run iOS apps would be a neat thing. :slight_smile:

Where have you been hearing this? Because I follow a lot of Apple rumor websites and not once have I seen this anywhere…

I’m mostly a podcast person, and I know I’ve heard it mentioned a few times. I forget which podcast it was that specifically had the longer discussion, but a couple of hosts were talking about it as a hard limitation and as a limitation likely carried over from the memory management controller on the iPad.

Well, not one of the big news website has taken that rumor up (at least not 9to5, Macrumors, iGen, Six Colors, Daring Fireball, MacStories, TidBITS and the like). Not saying it’s not true, but I have a hard time believing this one where all rumors point to the exact contrary (much more powerful machines coming including a Mac Pro) and some of those websites would take anything up to fill their pages. :slight_smile:

I am pretty sure there will be updates to the current product line with 32Gb options. And if we gat a SIlicon MBP16, no way the memory will be capped at 16GB. Never. That would be dumb.

So, there will be a M1+, M1s; M2…whatever for the next round of products.

Yesterday’s launch was just the entry into Silicon. I am expecting:

  • more than 16GB
  • eGPu support
  • dedicated GPUs: I am waiting for benchmarks comparing the performance of M1 vs. Radeon Pro 5600M. If they are integrating everything into an SoC, there HAS to be enough space for a top-notch GPU (nVidia, please!!!).
  • different versions of M1/m2/m1+/whatever.
  • Benchmarks!!! I want to see (proper!) benchmarks!!!
1 Like

It actually wouldn’t shock me if Apple did all their GPU stuff in-house except maybe for the Pro. With control over the silicon, you’d think they could make a pretty beefy GPU option that would (theoretically?) be more efficient than anything that has to be added on.

Definitely agree about benchmarks - we need benchmarks that are compiled natively for the architecture. :slight_smile:

And only 2 Thunderbolt lanes?

No Ethernet?

This is really a joke.

Sure it’s early into Apple Silicon. My complaint is all the hype from Apple. If they billed this as a Preview of what is to come - great. If these were “Beta” versions of M1 hardware - great. But billed as the latest/greatest in all of Apple’s marketing materials? Foul.

And this criticism comes from a very longstanding completely addicted Mac fanatic.

The last laptop Apple with built-in Ethernet was the 2012 non-Retina MacBook Pro. If you were expecting Ethernet you really need to recalibrate your expectations.

3 Likes

Lack of an Ethernet port is not a problem - lack of Ethernet support on the M1 chip is a problem.

The M1 powered Mac mini has an Ethernet port. The USB-C to Gigabit Ethernet Adapter is listed under Accessories on the Tech Specs page for for both the MacBook Air and the M113" MacBook Pro.

2 Likes

I think what it’s lacking is 10 Gig Ethernet.

Agreed

Nonetheless - this is being promoted as the technology of the future and something far superior to Intel. I do not see it.

In software, a “reversion” where a feature is lost during a product upgrade is severely frowned upon and almost embarrassing. Yet that is exactly what the M1 chip has done but Apple is boasting of its great advance?

In hardware, by contrast, they’re pretty unremarkable.

Just the biggest jump in CPU and GPU power from one generation to the next in the history of the Mac, along with the biggest jump in battery life.

3 Likes

Well, battery life and performance that shatters everything else on the market, maybe, along with huge headroom for innovation? But yeah, after all, there’s certainly nothing to be gained from this. Apple, with all its billions, experience and engineers, has definitely made a major blunder with a major product line that we, without knowing anything from the roadmap, nor any kind of insider information, can foresee with certainty.

I submit something: let’s talk about this again a year from now.

4 Likes