Can We Put the 16GB "Pro" Myth to Rest?

[New_Mac_Smell]

Ohhh ohhhh, alarm, alarm, did you realize you just downplayed your wifes job?
By putting your engineer profession over her social tabs. I suggest you to hide your statement.

Anyway, sit down, be professional, put your apple devotion by side, and your ask yourself:
"Do I really need a MacBook Pro for my "daily Job"? Or would a e.g. HP workstation laptop with Windows and more RAM suit my needs, too?"

In case you badly need Apple Hardware to earn money(e.g. iOS dev), then you're in same boat as all other iOS devs. Accept the mobile 16GB RAM or go 32GB/64GB/128GB on a stationary device.

A professional user would simply buy whats suits the job best, without any devotional feelings. If you need 32GB, then simply move on to a device with more RAM. Problem solved!

Do the math if it worths being an iOS dev.
An professional investment should always pay off, else it's unprofessional.
An "...ios job here and there..." (in relation to iOS dev) sound not very professional to me.
If a 3k investment helps you to pay your life, go for it.
Sorry if it's sounds harsh, but it's the truth.

Exactly, and what has been said several times through the thread...

Next will come the response "But I NEED Apple for my work, and they don't offer X", followed my you don't need X arguments, and then some bickering about what constitutes a professional and criticisms of peoples needs, followed by someone nicely explaining how RAM works, and back to square one...

For the record I never saw any difference between 16GB and 32GB of RAM in my work, or the difference between an i7 or Xeon. Okay there's maybe a fair few minutes difference in rendering times, but these things take so long anyway and were usually done overnight so no effect. I just think that software is not optimised to take full advantage of it, or other factors such as advanced OSs or SSD speeds, cache and whatnot just make up. Basically, I reckon at least 50% of my computers power gets used 10% of the time.

 

[jjjoseph]

Its funny that people are arguing against someones choice. The fact that I need 32Gb of RAM for video, doesn't mean that a programmer needs 32GB of RAM, but because some people running VM's and other programmers don't need 32GB, then I don't 32GB, and if I do need 32GB of RAM, I don't need a laptop!

Why don't we let the consumer decide... A laptop with an i7 should be able to have 32GB of RAM. I think the point is that if people want 32GB of RAM let them have it!! If you don't need 32GB of RAM, don't get it and get 16GB, don't tell me I don't need it. No one can say that their is not a reason for them to have 32GB. If I want a laptop with 32GB of RAM, then I should be able to get one.

 

[Wildkraut]

Its funny that people are arguing against someones choice. The fact that I need 32Gb of RAM for video, doesn't mean that a programmer needs 32GB of RAM, but because some people running VM's and other programmers don't need 32GB, then I don't 32GB, and if I do need 32GB of RAM, I don't need a laptop!

Why don't we let the consumer decide... A laptop with an i7 should be able to have 32GB of RAM. I think the point is that if people want 32GB of RAM let them have it!! If you don't need 32GB of RAM, don't get it and get 16GB, don't tell me I don't need it. No one can say that their is not a reason for them to have 32GB. If I want a laptop with 32GB of RAM, then I should be able to get one.

Of course they can, and they should, if they need or want it.
But they should simply move on to another laptop, moaning around won't change the current situation.
They can decide between Apple MacBook Pro with 16GB or an other Laptop with 32GB+.
Easy done!

 

[spacebro]

Of course they can, and they should, if they need or want it.
But they should simply move on to another laptop, moaning around won't change the current situation.
They can decide between Apple MacBook Pro with 16GB or an other Laptop with 32GB+.
Easy done!

I hope apple stops making tools appropriate for what you want to do so you can just "easy done" switch to windows.

 

[jackoatmon]

I wish I had a better understanding of VMs.

I know I'm not in the minority that needs the RAM, but what do people that work with VMs do?

A good deal of VM usage is developers doing cross-platform browser testing with frequent updates. Like, altering a website a bunch of times in a row and making sure each iteration works on all the different browsers on different OSes without having to restart into a partitioned OS every time.

 

[jjjoseph]

Of course they can, and they should, if they need or want it.
But they should simply move on to another laptop, moaning around won't change the current situation.
They can decide between Apple MacBook Pro with 16GB or an other Laptop with 32GB+.
Easy done!

I wish it where that easy, our company has about 1 million in Apple hardware, 16GB Fibre network, with Proprietary storage. I'll save my fingers from typing the thousands off things we would have to deal with changing from OS X to Windows. Our MAIN IT guy is all about it, until we start figuring the cost of everything, its a financial hole we wouldn't be able to climb out of.

 

[zedsdeadbaby]

Excellent and true article.

https://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=6355

I am not a fanboy defending Apple, this is just how things are. I am a professional working in the game development industry for 10 years. I do everything from working in demanding 3D software, working on huge 8k textures (that's 8192x8129, almost 70 megapixel images) in Photoshop with lots of layers and sculpting in Zbrush and 3D Coat to running 3ds Max and Windows 10 in Parallels. I have 16Gb of RAM on my iMac, on my MacBook Pro, on my Windows 10 machine at work. I never ran out of memory.

I am not saying that no one needs more than 16. Some people do. Apple should give us the option to have 32Gb and hopefully - it will be available next year. What I am saying is that for a lot.... A LOT of "pros" - 16Gb is enough. And most people just think they need more, arbitrarily.

To quote the article:

"The MacBook Pro, as I’ve demonstrated, is more than capable of running a ridiculous number of “pro” apps without crossing the 16GB limit. It is, without a doubt, capable of adequately serving a vast majority of resource-hungry professionals such as myself, without breaking a sweat. The only thing, incidentally, breaking a sweat, are the people complaining about the number 16 on social media without actually understanding just how far that number gets you."

I rely on sampled instruments to compose music for a living. Each instrument needs to load a chunk of audio into RAM, each instrument often exceeding a gigabyte. (some as high as 5 or 6 gigs.) And to do so requires multiple instruments each running their respective orchestral or percussion sections.

I run out of RAM on a daily basis due to the limitation. (Hourly to be specific.) So although it isn't necessity for some "professionals" it is for others.

If it's not a physical limitation of the hardware then there's no reason this shouldn't be an option.

 

[aevan]

I run out of RAM on a daily basis due to the limitation. (Hourly to be specific.) So although it isn't necessity for some "professionals" it is for others.

Where did I - or the article I linked - mention that 16Gb is enough for ALL people? I clearly said, and that article clearly said - that it's more than enough for MOST professionals today. You're not "most".

You people keep mentioning your specific usage cases - but the fact is - for a LOT of people, this is the best compromise between mobility and power. I don't see how "but I need more than 16Gb" has anything to do with that statement.
[doublepost=1478822331][/doublepost]

If it's not a physical limitation of the hardware then there's no reason this shouldn't be an option.

It's been made apparently clear that it is a physical limitation of the hardware. More than 16Gb would require a larger battery because they couldn't use LPDDR4, and that would mean the laptop would be heavier, even more than the previous generation, and - as someone noticed on these forums - you wouldn't be able to take it on airplanes because of regulations. Unless they made the battery life significantly worse - and that's a compromise Apple is not ready to make. Others are, so you'll have to either wait, or get a Dell/HP/Whatever.

 

[jjjoseph]

Where did I - or the article I linked - mention that 16Gb is enough for ALL people? I clearly said, and that article clearly said - that it's more than enough for MOST professionals today. You're not "most".

Couldn't it be said by the same account if you don't need 32GB of RAM then you are NOT pro?
Apple Computers, when I started, was the choice for Video, Film Production, Photography and Motion Graphics. In my mind these are the Pro's that first adopted the MacBook Pro, and these are the ones complaining the most about the MacBook Pro's lower end specs. My Industry keeps moving, For VIDEO/FILM SD to HD to 2k to 4k to 8k and 16k. You can barely do 4k on a highly end MacBook Pro and I am getting some 8k Red Dragon files from Digital Film Photographers, DP's. I think for a lot of industries, their TECH needs have plateaud, and these new MacBook Pro's are fine enough for them. My industry has not, and doesn't seem to be... And my industry was the one that made Apple come out of the dark ages before the iPhone took it into the stratosphere..

 

[MattSeven]

I don't think he gets it.

I, me, my -- these are the words that are irrelevant to the discussion of what pro means.

 

[aevan]

Couldn't it be said by the same account if you don't need 32GB of RAM then you are NOT pro?

This is getting old. NO, it couldn't be said. Just as it couldn't be said that if you don't need a professinal Wacom stylus you are not pro. Or just as it couldn't be said that if you don't need P3 color gamut you're not pro. There are different kinds of pros.

Apple Computers, when I started, was the choice for Video, Film Production, Photography and Motion Graphics. In my mind these are the Pro's that first adopted the MacBook Pro, and these are the ones complaining the most about the MacBook Pro's lower end specs. My Industry keeps moving, For VIDEO/FILM SD to HD to 2k to 4k to 8k and 16k.

I love it how you video guys think you're the only pros in the world and that your requirements are only that are objective.

You can barely do 4k on a highly end MacBook Pro and I am getting some 8k Red Dragon files from Digital Film Photographers, DP's.

So? MacBook Pro is not for you. No one is claiming otherwise. What's your point?

I think for a lot of industries, their TECH needs have plateaud, and these new MacBook Pro's are fine enough for them. My industry has not, and doesn't seem to be... And my industry was the one that made Apple come out of the dark ages before the iPhone took it into the stratosphere..

I see, so you think Apple owes you something. They do not. Why do you all just flat out IGNORE the things that some other people need - like good battery life, great mobility, lower weight - and put your needs above?

Not everyone is a video professional. Oh, but even those that are, seem to be happy - after using it. Here is an early review of the 15" touchbar model from a video professional:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/thomas-grove-carter/one-professionals-look-at_b_12894856.html

"I’m an editor at Trim Editing in London, where we cut high end commercials, music videos and films....
....First off, It’s really fast. I’ve been using the MacBook Pro with the new version of FCP X and cutting 5k ProRes material all week, it’s buttery smooth. No matter what you think the specs say, the fact is the software and hardware are so well integrated it tears strips off “superior spec’d” Windows counterparts in the real world."


I know, I know, you're editing 100K uncompressed raw 3D hologram video from 10 Red Cameras in VR and this guy is not a pro like you. You don't even have to say it. You need more than 16Gb RAM. The fact is: most people don't. Apple made their decisions based on the needs of the many, not the few. Go buy something else, or wait. It's really that simple.

 

[brynsmith23]

if you're editing 4k and 8k, why are you doing it on a laptop.

I'd be looking at a more powerful suitable desktop for that work.

 

[jjjoseph]

I know, I know, you're editing 100K uncompressed raw 3D hologram video from 10 Red Cameras in VR and this guy is not a pro like you.

I would love a 100k RAW 3D hologram camera!!
And Yes Final Cut Pro X is NOT pro. Thats already been agreed upon.
[doublepost=1478825176][/doublepost]

if you're editing 4k and 8k, why are you doing it on a laptop.

I'd be looking at a more powerful suitable desktop for that work.

Everyone is always trying to make their DIT cart smaller. Laptops help with that.

 

[aevan]

I would love a 100k RAW 3D hologram camera!!
And Yes Final Cut Pro X is NOT pro. Thats already been agreed upon.

And yet that guy is using it professionally for his work that pays him money. Interesting.

Anyway, that doesn't change the fact that your needs - to be able to edit 8K video on a laptop - are not common, to say the least. I can understand that it would be great if you could do it on the new MBP, but you can't. Just like I can't take my Apple Pencil and use it with the MBP, no matter how much it would be great to me, personally. That doesn't mean that Apple made the wrong choice. In fact, I think they made one of their best computers yet - just not the one for you

 

[spacebro]

I rely on sampled instruments to compose music for a living. Each instrument needs to load a chunk of audio into RAM, each instrument often exceeding a gigabyte. (some as high as 5 or 6 gigs.) And to do so requires multiple instruments each running their respective orchestral or percussion sections.

I run out of RAM on a daily basis due to the limitation. (Hourly to be specific.) So although it isn't necessity for some "professionals" it is for others.

If it's not a physical limitation of the hardware then there's no reason this shouldn't be an option.

if you're editing 4k and 8k, why are you doing it on a laptop.

I'd be looking at a more powerful suitable desktop for that work.

Apple's roadmap claimed they were trying to push desktop users to laptops, laptop users to tablets. This implies they were going to come out with more powerful laptops AND more powerful desktops. We are upset because they have done neither.

 

[aevan]

Apple's roadmap claimed they were trying to push desktop users to laptops, laptop users to tablets. This implies they were going to come out with more powerful laptops AND more powerful desktops. We are upset because they have done neither.

Desktops - sure. Hopefully soon. But laptops? They are more powerful. Again, they may not be powerful enough for your needs. Perhaps nothing Apple makes is. But it doesn't mean they are not more powerful - the graphics performance has doubled, the disk speeds have tripled, the CPU is faster, the I/O is faster. Everything is more powerful. Once more - maybe not enough for you.

 

[jjjoseph]

And yet that guy is using it professionally for his work that pays him money. Interesting.

Anyway, that doesn't change the fact that your needs - to be able to edit 8K video on a laptop - are not common, to say the least. I can understand that it would be great if you could do it on the new MBP, but you can't. Just like I can't take my Apple Pencil and use it with the MBP, no matter how much it would be great to me, personally. That doesn't mean that Apple made the wrong choice. In fact, I think they made one of their best computers yet - just not the one for you

Anyone can get paid doing anything, our company that does Digital Broadcast uploads all day long, sometimes 300 a day, and not one of them can be done on Final Cut Pro X. You can do wedding videos and stuff like that, but not high end work. Final Cut Pro X is a Prosumer Product, not Professional.

And a few Apps we have to use are OS X only right now, because of ProRes 444, but ARRI and other companies are trying to get rid of all Apple products in their workflows are pushing MXF and trying to Purge Apple ProRes.

We can't get off of OS X until that happens.
Apple is like our Abusive Drug dealing and OS X is their crack.

 

[Antairez]

And who are you to say that "these people should be using desktops"? That is ridiculous, when the obstacle to bring 32GB of RAM to a notebook is not massive. It just requires that you don't shave 3 millimeters off of the already thin professional workstation notebook.

Maybe these people constantly travel the world and are expected to be ready to churn out deliverables no matter where they are, and the difference between having to carry a loaded, checked-luggage Pelican with a desktop and a monitor hundreds of thousands of miles yearly and carrying a notebook is 3 millimeters. These people are selecting notebooks because a desktop would not make sense in their workflow.

And a again, in what scenario are you looking at where a desktop doesn't make sense but a 32GB Ram workflow is required? You are talking about some cloud computing scenarios where multiple CPUs would be accessing the RAM at the same time, your laptop is just the commander in control in this scenario, and all it needs is just a web browser so that you could login to your AWS account.

I'm not saying having the limit capped at 16GB is a good thing, but in reality maybe only 0.001% of the prospective buyers would actually need it, while 100% of the consumers will benefit from the 3mms thinner unibody.

The choice is very obvious to me even I know nothing about user experience or industrial design.

 

[aevan]

We can't get off of OS X until that happens.
Apple is like our Abusive Drug dealing and OS X is their crack.

I can sympathise with you. But do you really expect Apple to make a product that is better for the small percentage of you guys and worse for everyone else? Because it would be worse for the rest of us.

If you think the answer is 'yes', we can stop discussing this because we'll never find common ground.
[doublepost=1478825893][/doublepost]

I'm not saying having the limit capped at 16GB is a good thing, but in reality maybe only 0.001% of the prospective buyers would actually need it, while 100% of the consumers will benefit from the 3mms thinner unibody.

As it's often the case, 0.001% are the most vocal.

 

[spacebro]

Desktops - sure. Hopefully soon. But laptops? They are more powerful. Again, they may not be powerful enough for your needs. Perhaps nothing Apple makes is. But it doesn't mean they are not more powerful - the graphics performance has doubled, the disk speeds have tripled, the CPU is faster, the I/O is faster. Everything is more powerful. Once more - maybe not enough for you.

Apple has given us a tablet-convertible class computer except it does not have touch screen or detachable screen. Tablet hybrids are not enough for A LOT of people.

 

[Antairez]

I can sympathise with you. But do you really expect Apple to make a product that is better for the small percentage of you guys and worse for everyone else? Because it would be worse for the rest of us.

If you think the answer is 'yes', we can stop discussing this because we'll never find common ground.
[doublepost=1478825893][/doublepost]

As it's often the case, 0.001% are the most vocal.

Quad core CPU in 13 inch, or dedicated GPU, or some how make more ports into the unibody. These are far more important than 32GB RAM. It's not like your machine is gonna fly with that extra RAM you know, that's not where the bottleneck is.

Not directing to you of course OP. I'm talking to the opposing side.

 

[aevan]

Apple has given us a tablet-convertible class computer except it does not have touch screen or detachable screen. Tablet hybrids are not enough for A LOT of people.

I seriously have no clue what you're talking about. You're calling a quad-core i7 computer with a 3Gbps SSD a "tablet-convertible" - That is just... I don't... I --

No.

I give up. You either didn't understand anything or chose to ignore everything I said. Whatever. They made a tablet class computer and true pros need 32Gb RAM and the rest of us are all casuals and prosumers. Ok, bye.

 

[nbritton]

These are far more important than 32GB RAM. It's not like your machine is gonna fly with that extra RAM you know, that's not where the bottleneck is.

Yeah that's kinda true, although oversimplified. If your SSD was fast enough you technically wouldn't need any RAM. The reason we have tiered memory (L1, L2, L3, L4 cache, RAM, Disk) is simply because large amounts of fast memory is very expensive. The bottleneck presently is most likely the disk and then the AES-NI encryption accelerator. NVMe SSD is so fast now a days that you could in theory dedicate a whole drive just for memory swap space and essentially increase your RAM to hundreds of gigabytes.

 

[spacebro]

I seriously have no clue what you're talking about. You're calling a quad-core i7 computer with a 3Gbps SSD a "tablet-convertible" - That is just... I don't... I --

No.

I give up. You either didn't understand anything or chose to ignore everything I said. Whatever. They made a tablet class computer and true pros need 32Gb RAM and the rest of us are all casuals and prosumers. Ok, bye.

I'm just comparing the macbook pro to the new microsoft surface thing that also has a 16gb limit because it uses the same ram.

 

[Karnicopia]

Maybe Apple should just put a handle on the mac pro. People could carry it around like a giant cup of coffee that can render video like a boss.