Apple Says New Macbook Pro Has Only 16Gb Of Ram To Save Bat

Fool. It's common knowledge Harambe does not have the power of resurrection.

They also like progress *as they see it*.

I bet he has because in older macbooks you were still able to upgrade RAM(very easily before, impossible now) and HDD (easily before, more difficult now).

That....feels too evil even for metal

Bulimia because they keep purging out ports.

I was wrong, I am using ddr3L as in low voltage. Just not lpddr3

If you're using DIMMs or SO-DIMMs, you're not using LPDDR3. That's always soldered to the board.

Now you're just making up acronyms.

[deleted]

I think it's really cool how they put all those technical features straight into the marketing material (interleave without table lookup, etc.). Back then you could still expect the primary target audience to actually understand how their systems worked. Today, the most they'd put on there would be something like "includes patented XCOMP SpeedFast™ technology to give you the fastest speeds and the speediest fasts!"

DOS with EXTENDED MEMORY!!!!Also if *memory* serves, DOS also allowed you to do virtual ram AND ram disks as well.

I was thinking of Doom. You needed 4mb of RAM minimum to run it. Adding some memory to the old 386SX allowed me to at least play it, but you still couldn't play it full screen in the higher resolution setting unless you had at least a 486. That was the family computer, and when we got a new one, I claimed the old 386 for myself; I later upgraded it to a Cyrix 6x86, 16 mb of memory, and put a 1GB hard drive in it.Now my phone absolutely demolishes it by every possible metric.(My first computer was a Commodore 64, which is almost as powerful as a TI graphing calculator)

They're all pornhub.

Not totally. Chrome creates a separate process for each tab. And a process always has a RAM overhead, so in Chrome there's an unavoidable base-usage of RAM per tab, no matter what you load up in it.

I always remind myself of that. At work I went from a core 2 duo, 512MB RAM system to an i7 VPro (8 core) 10GB system and I can still bring it to a halt, but when you compare what it takes to get it to that point. I will have multiple instances of Visual Studio open, one probably running an application in debug mode. Outlook, Chrome with tons of tabs open. Oracle browsers. Word, Excel, RDP's etc. It really is a lot going on.

Algorithms to do certain common tasks have already become almost as efficient as they possibly can too. Theres not a new sorting algorithm being released every year or something for example. And sorting is a very common thing in almost every application.

In some sense, yes, programmers have gotten lazier.In the past we used to use very low level languages like Assembly Language or C for everything. These languages can do everything that modern languages can, but they require a lot more work from the programmer to get anything done.In exchange for the programmer doing extra work, an application written in C generally runs faster than the same application written in a higher level language, say C# or Java.So if C is faster than Java why do we still write apps in Java?The first big reason is portability.A language like C requires you to be aware of the low level details of the hardware and operating system you're coding for. Being aware of these details allows you to make your code more efficient, but it also means that your code probably won't run on any other system.Modern languages put an abstraction layer between the programmer and the hardware. Now your code will run on anything, but it will be a little bit slower because it can do the same thing 10 slightly different ways depending on what system type it's running on.The other big reason is that modern languages have faster development times. I can create a somewhat useful app in Java or C# in a day. Writing the same app in C will take me twice as long, will be more prone to bugs, and will support less hardware.Fortunately it's not black and white in reality and most large applications will mix high and low level code to find the right balance of application and development speed.

> but it also makes them much harder to understand, fix and extend.I've never thought about this point. It's interesting that I've always tried to write code that's highly optimized but because I've never worked with other people on code, I've never gotten a sense of how difficult what I've written is to read

It's not all one thing. But yes laziness factors in. A task that you'd machine code two decades ago for its speed and efficiency advantages, people now code with faster processors and more memory. Call that laziness maybe.There's a lot of fudged, crude, sloppy programming out there.

In the bygone era of text mode software, user affecting bugs were virtually unheard-of. Crashing or "blue screening" was not part of the typical experience of a WordPerfect 5.1 user.

Even for tech people, it can get annoying. I work for a major tech company and we were all handed fully-supported Red Hat Thinkpads when we started. A lot of people (myself included) bought our own BYOD Macs after a few months of trying to keep the machine working properly. The only stipulation is we're not allowed to use Windows as our base OS, anything else is fair game.We needed a Windows VM to run Office, and we needed Office for basically everything (don't try to write client-facing documentation in LibreOffice...). If we wanted to present on a projector, we had to reboot, turn on the video card in the BIOS, finish our presentation, then reboot and turn the video card off. If we didn't turn it off, it couldn't go to sleep. We needed to be connected to our work VPN to download updates, if we updated from other sources everything broke and we needed a full rebuild. Not to mention the thing weighed 500lbs and we're all traveling consultants who spend all day with our laptops in our backpacks.I have several Linux certifications hanging on the wall right behind me and I won't use it as a desktop OS. It's my bread and butter, I work on million-dollar Linux servers all day, and I'll connect to those servers from anything *but* Linux.**edit - I'm not going to respond to any more "just use PDF" comments.

Scientists, as well. If you're in data science in any industry, chances are good you have a top-end MBP. You can, of course, use it as a dumb terminal, but in that case, any computer will work. The idea behind the Pro, being named the Pro, is that professionals can use it to do their work on it.

I have to disagree with design professionals being the Mac's primary market. That was certainly the case awhile ago, but look at the emphasis on iOS devices and Apple's positioning of itself into more of a lifestyle brand across the board. This has been happening for a few years now since Tim Cook took over and has led us to the point where the Macbook "Pro" is limited to 16GB of RAM to emphasize battery life.A lot of design professionals will still choose Apple products and I don't think that Apple has completely written off that segment at all. Of course they are still trying to satisfy that niche on some level. It's just that the target market has shifted and therefore it isn't really fair to say it is a poor decision.In fact, I would argue it is exactly the same kind of decision that they have been executing for years now that led them to becoming the world's most valuable company. Make hardware that is never cutting edge/always a few years behind, and thus force people into a continual upgrade cycle because after 1-2 years their hardware is really closer to 4 years old compared to the rest of the market. But you have to make sure to invent and throw in a new gimmick that is "must have" (like a Touch Bar) OR make the hardware increase slightly better without a gimmick (like an "S" model). Either way, then charge them 2-3x as much as comparable hardware from competitors for the privilege of using Apple.Of course, I think the lack of innovation and not keeping their standards as high as when they were led by Jobs is slowly eroding confidence and fanaticism for Apple, and these kinds of decisions exacerbate that for professionals who truly use tech, but that is a different topic.

Ehh based on the type of people I see using MBPs most frequently I'd guess their primary demographic is wealthy college kids that don't need much more than a word processor and Internet access.

[removed]

And here I just upgraded my desktop from 8 to 16, even though I didn't *really* need it.My work laptop, on the other hand, has 8 and really needs to be upgraded to 16. Stupid web-based apps.

Yep, thats me. I am a designer and i work all over the place. I havent had a desktop for over 6 years and have oly had Toshibas and ASUS laptops. It's just not practical. I was thinking about moving to a MBP but no chance now. I have 32mb ram now and i still have issues.

That's why it weighs twice as much.

Electrical engineering courses were the perfect use case for the surface pro for me. Typing alongside drawing circuits and writing equations on top of PowerPoint slides all in one cloud-connected application in OneNote is absolute heaven for someone who hates putting pen to paper. Not to mention flipping the keyboard behind and reading textbooks in portrait mode while lying on a couch.

Lol. The macbook pro PRO. I see it happening.The all new macbook synergy line.