this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
326 points (95.3% liked)

Technology

59392 readers
2538 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

About time. This also applies to their older models such as M2 and M3 laptops.

In the U.S., the MacBook Air lineup continues to start at $999, so there is no price increase associated with the boost in RAM.

The M2 macbook air now starts at $1000 for 16GB RAM and 256GB storage. Limited storage aside, that's surprisingly competitive with most modern Windows laptops.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 33 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Finally the RAM on that thousand dollar machine is on par with my decade old T420!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The localllama people are feeling quite mixed about this, as they're still charging through the nose for more RAM. Like, orders of magnitude more than the bigger ICs actually cost.

It's kinda poetic. Apple wants to go all in on self-hosted AI now, yet their incredible RAM stinginess over the years is derailing that.

[–] rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago

I do have a 64gb m1 MacBook Pro and man that thing screams at doing LLM AI. I use it to serve models locally throughout my house, while it otherwise still works as a fantastic computer (usually using about half the ram for llm usage). I still prefer a 4080 for image generation though.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 23 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

insultingly tiny, unupgradeable storage aside, that's surprisingly competitive with most modern Windows laptops

[–] simple@lemm.ee 24 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

It's not ideal, but you're getting probably the best hardware in the market in return. The M series still dominates Windows CPUs, and the build quality on most $1000 laptops leaves a lot to be desired.

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 33 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

build quality on most $1000 laptops

You're not kidding.

I have a couple of laptops from various vendors, and they're all built like shit.

ASUS is especially eyerolly: the case is literally crumbling into pieces. Like seriously? You couldn't have picked a material that's not literally going to disintegrate in two years on a $1200 laptop?

[–] simple@lemm.ee 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Yeah, a lot of manufacturers are just bad. I knew people who had Dell and MSI laptops and those things feel like toys. Cheap plastic and very wobbly hinges. The only manufacturer I genuinely trust is Lenovo. My Legion is a bit thick but I can at least rest easy that it's built well.

Lenovo is, outside of their really cheap consumer options - like, the $500-and-under options - are pretty solid.

But yeah build quality is one reason when I roll my eyes at the 'haha stupid buying apple! apple tax! lol ripped off!' crowd: I mean maybe, but as soon as you pick up a Macbook whatever it's immediately obvious that you're getting something for what you're paying, and not some bendy flexy piece of plastic crap that will maybe physically survive the warranty period, but not much more.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

I saw someone’s Samsung laptop last year and the screen was wobbling all over the fucking place. I couldn’t believe what I was seeing. I commented on it, and the owner just gave me a blank look.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Just in time for 32gb to become the necessary standard, so they can still sell you egregiously overpriced ram upgrades.

[–] thatsnothowyoudoit@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

I can’t imagine that being the case for most users. I’m absolutely a power user and I keep being surprised at how consistently high the performance is of my base model M1 Air w/16GB even when compared to another Mac workstation of mine with 64GB.

I can run two VMs, a ton of live loading development tooling, several JVM programs and so much more on that little Air and it won’t even sweat.

I’m not an Apple apologist - lots of poor decisions these days and software quality has taken a real hit. While 16GB means everyone’s getting a machine that should last much longer, I can’t see a normal user needing more any time soon, especially when Apple is optimizing their local machine learning models for their 8GB iOS platforms first and foremost.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 17 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

The M2 macbook air now starts at $1000 for 16GB RAM and 256GB storage. Limited storage aside, that's surprisingly competitive with most modern Windows laptops.

What do you mean limited storage aside?

If we disregard the fact that it's terrible value for money, it's a good deal. No laptop sold in 2025 and costing over a grand, should have anything less than a terabyte.

[–] BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee 10 points 2 weeks ago

But it has a apple logo and it browses facebook just fine.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

“640k is enough for anyone.”

[–] JDPoZ@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Completely laughable. Literally had 16 GB of DDR3-1600 for my 2600K from 2011 that I handed down to a kid nephew for their first PC to tinker with. Hell, my local NAS has more than that...

[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 24 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

We use windows PCs at work as software engineers now, but when I was training I used a MacBook Pro M1 with 16GB of RAM and that thing was incredibly performant.

I know it in vogue to shit in Apple, but they build the hardware and the software and they’re incredibly efficient at what they do and I don’t think I ever saw the beachball loading icon thing.

Now the prices they charge to upgrade the RAM is something I can get behind shitting on.

[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I used Windows, Mac and Linux in the past year.

It's not Mac that's fast, it's Windows that sucks hard.

[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 weeks ago (10 children)

Same.

  • Mac - Fast, user friendly, and UNIX based.
  • Windows - Fast (I have a beast), bloated, stupid command prompt (“Add-Migration”, capital letters really.), wants to spy on me.
  • Linux - Fast, a lot of work to get everything working as you would on Windows or Mac and I’m past those days, I just want to turn the thing on and play Factorio or Minecraft, not figure out if my 4080 will run on it etc.

it’s almost like people make choices to suit their needs and there isn’t a single solution for everybody.

I wonder what the industry standard is for developers? Genuinely. I’ve heard it’s Max, but my company is all in on Microsoft, not really heard of companies developing on Linux. Which isn’t to say Linux doesn’t have its place, but I’m aware this place is insanely biased towards Linux.

[–] OhYeah@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Every place I've been at had developers using windows machines and then ssh into a linux environment

[–] dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

Makes sense for sysadmin or something but little sense for developers and engineers writing code to build enterprise software.

[–] Strykker@programming.dev 2 points 2 weeks ago

Well enterprise software is either going to run on windows or Linux servers, so sounds like windows and Linux make good dev workstations.

My current work gives devs macs but we build everything for Linux so it's a bit of a nuisance. And Apple moving to arm made running vms basically impossible for a while, it's a bit better now.

Still a giant pain in the butt to have your dev environment not match the build environment architecture.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kalleboo@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I wonder what the industry standard is for developers?

The Stack Overflow developer survey (which has it's bias towards people who use Stack Overflow)... says 47% use Windows, 32% use Mac, and uh, Linux is split up by distro so it's hard to make sense of the numbers but Ubuntu alone is at 27%. (each developer can use multiple platforms so they don't add up to 100%)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I just want to turn the thing on and play Factorio or Minecraft, not figure out if my 4080 will run on it etc.

Funny that you chose two games that run natively on Linux.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] independantiste@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

The chip and OS won't do shit when your ram is saturated by electron apps taking 800MB each. Maybe MacOS behaves better under very high memory pressure than windows does, but it doesn't mean it's okay to rip off consumers. That whole 8GB on mac = 16GB on windows has been bullshit all along, and is mostly based on people looking at the task manager and seeing high ram usage on windows (which is a good thing)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

You can use Linux with RAM compression to have the same kind of economy that MacOS does.

Just nobody bothers.

[–] JDPoZ@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I know it’s in vogue to shit on Apple…

Apple does have a lot of vertical integration which allows first party stuff to function well and they work closely with a lot of their premium 3rd party software partners, but you try running an actual RAM hungry process like a local LLM model, for example, and all but the highest end latest edition MacBook Pro WILL shit the bed.

[–] Mercuri@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

Fucking PHONES had more RAM. It was so fucking stupid. And despite their arguments, it was proven time and time again 8GB was not enough.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 weeks ago

Perfect, just when I've decided 16GB is the bare minimum these days too. My day to day I max out 16 on my laptops without even trying. 32 is my new minimum.

[–] ColdWater@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 weeks ago

Apple finally caught up with 2018 technology

[–] Player2@lemm.ee 7 points 2 weeks ago

And here I thought that 8GB on Mac was at least as good as 16GB on plebian PCs.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

watch how (corporate) operating systems will now be heavier accordingly.

[–] FrostyCaveman@lemm.ee 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes it’s described as being for “Apple intelligence” which I’m sure won’t be bloated nor hard to disable at all.. sigh

[–] histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago

It’s literally a toggle in the settings under apple intelligence

[–] Poem_for_your_sprog@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Now that 64GB is the standard

[–] WereCat@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Where? Workstations at best.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] synapse1278@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Cool cool cool cool. Can I buy 16GB now and upgrade my Mac later ?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›