There were a number of exciting announcements from Apple at WWDC 2024, from macOS Sequoia to Apple Intelligence. However, a subtle addition to Xcode 16 — the development environment for Apple platforms, like iOS and macOS — is a feature called Predictive Code Completion. Unfortunately, if you bought into Apple’s claim that 8GB of unified memory was enough for base-model Apple silicon Macs, you won’t be able to use it. There’s a memory requirement for Predictive Code Completion in Xcode 16, and it’s the closest thing we’ll get from Apple to an admission that 8GB of memory isn’t really enough for a new Mac in 2024.

  • m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    And why they solder the RAM, or even worse make it part of the SoC.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      There are real world performance benefits to ram being as close as possible to the CPU, so it’s not entirely without merit. But that’s what CAMM modules are for.

      • akilou@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        But do those benefits outweigh doubling or tripling the amount of RAM by simply inserting another stick that you can buy for dozens of dollars?

        • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          That’s extremely dependent on the use case, but in my opinion, generally no. However CAMM has been released as an official JEDEC interface and does a good job at being a middle ground between repairability and speed.

          • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            It’s an officially recognized spec, so Apple will ignore it as long as they can. Until they can find a way to make money from it or spin marketing as if it’s some miraculous new invention of theirs, for something that should just be how it’s done.

        • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’s highly dependent on the application.

          For instance, I could absolutely see having certain models with LPCAMM expandability as a great move for Apple, particularly in the pro segment, so they’re not capped by whatever they can cram into their monolithic SoCs. But for most consumer (that is, non-engineer/non-developer users) applications, I don’t see them making it expandable.

          Or more succinctly: they should absolutely put LPCAMM in the next generation of MBPs, in my opinion.

        • FarraigePlaisteach@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          And even if the out-of-the-box RAM is soldered to the machine, it should still be possible to add supplementary RAM that isn’t soldered for when the system demands it. Other computers have worked like this in the past with chip RAM but a socket to add more.

      • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Apple’s SoC long predates CAMM.

        Dell first showed off CAMM in 2022, and it only became JEDEC standardised in December 2023.

        That said, if Dell can create a really good memory standard and get JEDEC to make it an industry standard, so can Apple. They just chose not to.

    • Balder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      In this particular case the RAM is part of the chip as an attempt to squeeze more performance. Nowadays, processors have become too fast but it’s useless if the rest of the components don’t catch up. The traditional memory architecture has become a bottleneck the same way HDDs were before the introduction of SSDs.

      You’ll see this same trend extend to Windows laptops as they shift to Snapdragon processors too.

      • umami_wasabi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Well. The claim they made still holds true, despit how I dislike this design choice. It is faster, and more secure (though attacks on NAND chips are hard and require high skill levels that most attacker won’t posses).

        And add one more: it saves power when using LPDDR5 rather DDR5. To a laptop that battery life matters a lot, I agree that’s important. However, I have no idea how much standby or active time it gain by using LPDDR5.