• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Why does Apple still use tiny SSDs?

falter

falter

Veteran Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2011
Messages
6,580
Location
Vancouver, BC
I don't understand how Apple gets away with charging almost $2k for a base iMac with a paltry 256gb of storage. It would cost what, like $30 to bump to 512gb? And they solder it in so you can't upgrade it...

Apple isn't the only one guilty of this, even Lenovo still sends out $1300 ThinkPads with 256gb. Like.. what?
 
Maybe to push cloud services?

Also the price, when you initially buy, to upgrade to a larger size is crazy expensive, so maybe it’s a little bait and switch. Show a low price on the model no one wants, but the larger storage is actually a lot more profit.
 

Apple's been like that for years, my dude. Sleek looks, questionable engineering and a target audience who may at most only use the device for three years before upgrading to the next model, which is funny because they don't normally provide a trade-in discount. Just make sure to not de-allocate your device from your Apple account and it locks out the second hand market. It feels like a Gucci brand.
 
How good is the flash? I am willing to pay a bit more for flash that can survive an excessively unlikely number of writes.

Dell's pricing concerns me. The 512 GB SSD is $100 more than the 1 TB SSD. It is possible that a price reduction has happened but it might be a switch much lower quality flash.
 
I mean I get that lots of people use cloud services, but lots don't. And applications still take up space. Just one OSX upgrade can consume 60-80gb during install. I've known a few people whose upgrade went sideways because they didn't realize it would eat up everything they had left on their tiny SSD. There can't possibly be a significant cost difference between 256 and 512. Even my cellphone has 512.
 
Storage, and RAM have always been profit centers for computer manufacturers. If it's upgradeable, it often makes sense to buy a system with the minimum, and upgrade it yourself. This has been true for years.
 
andy said:
Storage, and RAM have always been profit centers for computer manufacturers. If it's upgradeable, it often makes sense to buy a system with the minimum, and upgrade it yourself. This has been true for years.
Click to expand...
After establishing the habit as a sysadmin of keeping my /home on its on drive or partition, it's not too hard for me to deal with this.

I have had the same gripe though. How are companies selling systems with that little storage in 2023? I hate to admit that for my newest iMac I got the 27" so I could upgrade the RAM (you could not do it yourself in the smaller one), and instead of shelling out for more internal SSD space, I got a 4TB external USB-C ssd. It's plenty fast to store the bulk of my stuff.
 
The lowest spec version of any device is almost always a tease to get folks in so that they will buy something more expensive. See car sales, for a very clear example.

- Alex
 
Nope. All the M1 and M2 Macs have soldered down SSDs, in the case of the portables and iMacs, and "storage blades" which are indeed modular, in the Mac Mini, Mac Studio and Mac Pro. Even replacing those isn't straightforward, as Apple encrypts the SSDs to the machine at install time. Replacement is possible on the Mac Pro, but it requires a second machine to pair the SSD blades to the machine. As far as I know, the blades aren't user replaceable on the Mac Studio and Mac Mini.

- Alex
 
Apple has been using that to mainly clamp down on the used market. Ten years ago I could still sell a first gen or second gen macbook with a drive and ram upgrade. By soldering it down it locks the hardware into obsolescence so that you can't easily and quickly refurb it and put it back up for $300 to people who don't need the latest model. Encrypting and whitelisting it also prevents more hands-on upgrades.
Likewise like I mentioned with products remaining tied to an Apple account. It's a downside to the complaints that Apple products were so easy to steal because there was no way to remotely disable them and there was no product activation needed to do a fresh install. Even if it's not stolen, you drop it off at a second hand store it's E-waste. Apple doesn't actively promote the fact that when you are done using an Apple product you MUST de-allocate it from your account. Even if you wipe it the first thing the next user does is get prompted to login to your account and boom, it's a dead-end because they have no way to reach out to the previous owner, if said previous owner is even aware their wiped phone is trying to be reused.
By providing the minimum amount of disk storage and providing a free iCloud account with space limitations it keeps customers on the edge constantly. Either they can pay for a full iCloud subscription or wait for the next model.....or buy an external drive.

iCloud will not shut up about the fact I've long since exceeded the free space I'm allowed and wants me to upgrade to a paid plan. SanDisk on the other hand sells a USB stick with Lightning on one side and USB on the other, so my phone has an alternate backup.
 
Last edited:
The version of the Sandisk backup tool I have informs me that I have less than 50% free space left on my phone. Rather annoying since I can't clear out anything. Some is stuff I would be happy to delete but the phone won't let me; other stuff I need on the phone to have a useful phone.
 
falter said:
I mean I get that lots of people use cloud services, but lots don't. And applications still take up space. Just one OSX upgrade can consume 60-80gb during install. I've known a few people whose upgrade went sideways because they didn't realize it would eat up everything they had left on their tiny SSD. There can't possibly be a significant cost difference between 256 and 512. Even my cellphone has 512.
Click to expand...
More than likely the 256GB included is super fast. Not all NVME drives are the same speed.
 
Apple (like on the Mac Mini) SSDs, the larger sizes are faster, because they have more chips, and read/write in parallel through the controller.
 
Chuck(G) said:
All sounds really user-friendly. /s No wonder I don't buy Apple stuff.
Click to expand...
I dont understand why anyone does.. You have have a nice Linux computer for far less. Lets face it, its because its a status symbol/jewelry. I dont even like wearing clothes with logos or brand names showing... Why would I flaunt something from Apple?
 
VERAULT said:
You have have a nice Linux computer for far less. Lets face it, its because its a status symbol/jewelry.
Click to expand...
Not at all for me, maybe some would consider it a status symbol that I prefer to use one over a linux machine but I don't view it that way. Ever tried to do a corporate job from a linux machine? Webcam and mic drivers alone will end your patience. Though before the zoom era I did mainly work from linux machines, but that was in a datacenter with 20k linux servers to admin. Using another OS there was somewhat difficult, MacOS was doable, windows was an exercise in losing your mind completely.

I own macs now because they work. That's pretty much it. I don't love everything Apple does, and I quite literally hate using iOS, but MacOS and I get along just fine. I can use the CLI in the vast majority of cases that I want/need to, time machine backups are awesome, I can have SSH/SFTP listening, and every video conferencing app under the sun (whether I like it or not...) will work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smp
skate323k137 said:
Ever tried to do a corporate job from a linux machine? Webcam and mic drivers alone will end your patience.
Click to expand...
Yes. But I am sure it helps if you have Adminitstrative domain access and and full access to active directory.

I got around alot by using a virtual session of windows in Virtual Box. Or remoting into my Windows Desktop. But I get what your saying.

Cant you load MacOS on any standard computer or is that not a thing anymore?
 
Chuck(G) said:
I regularly zoom, etc. with a webcam and use a gaming headset with mike on Ubuntu x64. What's the issue?
Click to expand...
I can typically make it work, but it's generally more work.

I do not miss recompiling my video card drivers, or really anything about Linux as a daily OS when it comes down to it. I rank it as acceptable. Ask me about servers and my tune will change all but immediately to "use Linux unless you have good reason not to."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top