this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2026
84 points (85.0% liked)
Technology
84731 readers
4288 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I suspect it'll come with 8GB RAM to ensure the price can't justify it's usefulness...
E: looking up the leaks confirms it's supposed to be 8GB RAM. Imagine selling a PC with 8GB RAM for $700+ in 2026. So insane. I can get a better PC than that for $300.
Are you sure? Because at this moment with $400 you only get the RAM.
There’s more to a computer than RAM (or even ither specs), comparing what’s shown in the article to the low-cost option you linked the two systems are leagues apart in terms of build quality.
Wouldn’t be surprised if the battery life was miles apart too.
That cheap plastic HP laptop is destined to have its hinge mounts snap away from the upper palmrest through normal day-to-day use.
Apple heard you and released it for $599-699!
I'm not planning on touching them, but in this economy + the Apple tax, I'm almost impressed
The 17e or whatever new phone is supposedly available for 599 with 256GB of internal storage.
Honestly: If the phone i know little android competition in that price range witg comparable specs and polish.
But I'd still get one at a higher price because I don't like Mr.WalledGarden
what does storage have to do with ram?
Same base material
not even close
I got a 16GB RAM M4 MacBook Air for 600USD so it better be cheaper than that if it comes with 8GB…
but is it pretty pink with an iconic apple on it? I think not.
Spray paint
Way back in 2007, my one college buddy had an elderly Thinkpad that he'd spraypainted red and stuck an Apple sticker on. People constantly came up to him and asked him where he got the red Macbook, since they didn't think Apple made them.
One of the chief things that make macbooks commendable over PCs is the build quality. While I don't doubt there are very many PCs with better hardware at that price point, often macs are superior by robustness, display resolution, and the quality of their keyboards and trackpads.
I hope this cheaper model doesn't cheap out on that front. And if it also gets good Asahi Linux support, then it would get me to recommend it above anything else.
We will see soon enough.
I also used to prefer macOS over Windows, but now macOS is also utter shit, especially with Liquid Ass update.
So now Linux is the only good operating system.
Unified memory, so more efficient with that. Also MacOS has RAM compression.
I suppose more is better, and 8GB seems like bare minimum for something useful. But one should always mind that now (unlike before 2020) Apple's hardware has caught up with their advertising in the fact that it's really specifically optimized for the job.
It's fine for an "Apple Chromebook" I think, especially if bulk orders for institutions will get different deals.
LMAO you actually bought into that 8GB = 16GB marketing nonsense
RAMDoubler!
No, that's you happily laughing at the nonsense you yourself said attributing that to me.
I said that RAM compression in MacOS is an OS feature, well-tested and always on. You can play with something similar under Linux and find out it really makes things better. Which means you can fit more there. Like 10%-20% more is notable enough.
And I said that unified memory is a feature of their hardware, which is correct. Which is the reason Intel and AMD were playing with that X86-S idea (a new architecture with much of legacy removed, and also, yes, unified memory), until they dropped it because Intel is going to shit.
I don't see any marketing nonsense in technical facts. Your GPU can use all the same RAM with less expense for doing that. And RAM allocated to applications does get compressed, which is more CPU-intensive obviously, but happens.
These are obviously correct.
Not who replied to you originally but,
You aren't wrong (you even stated that more is probably better) , just not necessarily presenting the whole picture.
Ram compression isn't a benefit only scenario, there is a cost in processing power to make that happen.
So it's a trade off of memory utilisation vs processing requirements.
Whether or not it's worth it is down to circumstance, though i agree that generally i think it's worth the tradeoff.
Unified memory is useful in specific circumstances, most notably LLM/ML scenarios where high vram utilisation is part of the process.
It's not an apples to apples comparison by any means.