Apple, when asked about the Random Access Memory (RAM) of the newly unveiled Apple Macbook Pro stated that any laptop carrying more RAM (32 GB or above) of the same size of the Macbook will surely be affected by the battery life problem. Apple greatly focuses on making its devices last longer.
After the announcement of the new Macbook Pro, much was being said about the device’s trade-offs, innovation and the most probably the price it was carrying. Apple has unveiled three variants of the Macbook Pro in the Fall Event yesterday and those who are ready to pay that much amount ( It costs around 1 Lakhs for just the enterer) have complained about the RAM of the device which is just 16GB which sounds pretty less than the specs offered. According to the buyers, relating to the specs sheet the same device would’ve came with a 32GB RAM to work properly even after a few future updates but with 16GB, the firm itself blocks the users from updating their devices.
When Apple was asked about the same then it told that “any laptop carrying more RAM (32 GB or above) of the same size of the Macbook will surely be affected by the battery life problem.”
I’ll just present you with a MacRumor reader’s email to the firm about the same 32GB RAM option, what response he got.
He got a response from marketing chief of the firm, Phil Schiller himself.
Here’s the whole mail exchange:
Q: The lack of a 32GB BTO option for the new MBPs raised some eyebrows and caused some concerns (me included). Does ~3GBps bandwidth to the SSD make this a moot issue? I.e. memory paging on a 16GB system is so fast that 32GB is not a significant improvement?
Schiller: Thank you for the email. It is a good question. To put more than 16GB of fast RAM into a notebook design at this time would require a memory system that consumes much more power and wouldn’t be efficient enough for a notebook. I hope you check out this new generation Macbook Pro, it really is an incredible system.
The weird part of the conversation is that Schiller just ignored the “performance” part of the question and focused only on the RAM part. So is this could be a yes to the concerns of the users that yes more of RAM could’ve saved you a couple of bucks in the coming future or is just Apple’s policy to go with more of battery life, killing all other things up?
I guess Apple does.