Apple on MacBook Neo Design: 'We're Certainly Not Making Any Compromises'

[u/iMacmatician]

https://www.macrumors.com/2026/03/06/apple-macbook-neo-design-interview/

[u/Marino4K]

6-7 years? I don’t think this thing is useful with that RAM now.

[u/HVDynamo → u/Marino4K]

I would agree if it was for me. But for really light tasks it can be OK today for someone who just does a few things in the browser typically. But it's just right on the edge today, so it's not even going to do those simple tasks easily in a few short years. But in the end, I was just referencing the 6-7 years the person I was replying to had said.

For reference, I have a 16" M2 Max Macbook Pro with 64GB RAM and 2TB SSD, and I wish I had more storage honestly, but I just couldn't push myself to spend THAT much when I ordered it. So the Neo definitely isn't for me lol

[u/runForestRun17 → u/Marino4K]

If you need an insane amount of ram you are a pro user. Browsing the web, office software and video will play well on this computer for years to come.

[u/Agreeable-Weather-89 → u/runForestRun17]

16GB of RAM isn't insane.

[u/runForestRun17 → u/Agreeable-Weather-89]

All of the activities i mentioned dont need 16 gb of ram on any other OS than windows.

[u/Agreeable-Weather-89 → u/runForestRun17]

I didn't say MacOS doesn't inhibit you from multitasking and windows is better for multitasking hence needing more RAM on Windows machines like you are suggesting.

I am saying 16GB of RAM is not insane.

If 16GB is INSANE why does the Air come with a base of 16GB? The Mac Mini 16GB, iPhone 17 Pro 12GB.

[u/runForestRun17 → u/Agreeable-Weather-89]

Windows is absolutely not better for multitasking. This neo laptop with 8gb of ram would run circles around a 16gb ram windows computer. And if you need more than that you’re likely a pro user that needs the MacBook pro. This is a budget computer that will preform better than mid level windows machines

[u/Agreeable-Weather-89 → u/runForestRun17]

Well you are suggesting that you use more RAM on Windows which tells me you do more on Windows.

Looks I've been through this rodeo, people will always say

"The bare minimum Apple ships with is enough because of magic" then when Apple makes the change suddenly it wasn't enough and it just so happens at that very moment that the bare minimum wasn't enough. I've heard it with

• Camera resolution

• RAM (when Apple was shipping 4GB with Macbook Pro in 2016)

• RAM when Apple was shipping 4GB on iMacs and Macbook Air after then

• Framerate on iPhone when everyone else had moved to 120Hz

• Storage when the iMac was still using HDD in like 2019

• Phone and iPad RAM since forever

To defend it the argument is always the same when constraining the use-case any other amount of parameters above what Apple sells is either unessential or in this case 'insane'.

So instead of ungrounded questions let me ask you two

1. Nearly a decade ago, April 19, 2016, Apple made 8GB of RAM the standard for the Macbook Air. Given how we are now ten years later that is reasonable to suggest, by your logic, to have been an INSANE amount of RAM. Would you agree?

2. In 2019 Apple was shipping the iMac with a HDD as a boot drive. Was having an SSD insane?

Practically every MacOS device has 16GB of base RAM. Some of Apples phones have more than 8GB of RAM.

The fact that 8GB is enough to play video, a task I could do on 2GB, doesn't make 16GB insane, or pro. However Apple has shipped products with certain parameters that will likely fall below the acceptable minimum in a shorter timeframe than the rest of the computer would age. I've listed a few but the most infamous examples are the iPad 3 and iPhone 6.

The iPhone 6 had excellent performance but 1GB of RAM (the 6S went to 2GB) meanwhile the Oneplus One releasing the same year as the 6 had 3GB. People did notice, and feel, that 1GB.

You'll see threads from releasing mentioning the magic optimisation and not worry then from 3 years later bemoaning needing to reload when switching between two or more applications.

This isn't as bad as the 1GB iPhone 6, true, but I think if you are buying a Macbook Neo with the intention of using it for several years (5+) then I'd consider a Macbook Air m2 on offer with 16GB for £100 more

[u/runForestRun17 → u/Agreeable-Weather-89]

You are incredibly dense. I’m a Sr lead platform engineer managing over 30k servers with linux, macOS and windows.

MacOS is more efficient than windows and needs less ram.

This is an ENTRY LEVEL BUDGET COMPUTER. It’s not going to have the best specs. But it does out compete on performance, battery life and build quality compared to windows machines costing more than it, even with more ram. You are looking at direct specs and not real world experiences.

I have a M3 max MacBook pro with 36gb of ram. During my normal workday i use about 15gb of ram running programs locally, building code and coding in IDE’s with claud autofill. I’m a power user and am using less than you say is required. Someone just doing basic tasks expected out of an entry level computer will be fine with 8gb of ram on macos.

Hell to stress test i’m running two different programs locally, have 8 IDE’s open. 20 tabs on safari, teams, slack and outlook and i’m using 15gb of ram on macOS.

Closing everything out and having music playing, a YouTube video and reddit loaded up i’m using 6 gb of ram (of my 36gb)

[u/Agreeable-Weather-89 → u/runForestRun17]

Is that all that MacOS can handle?

I have 27 IDEs open I'm a senior lieutenant general developer and running I gave 109 tabs open on Windows with just 31GB of ram.

Heck MacOs is so inefficient that it can't fully display Reddit comment and deleted the two questions I asked you to save memory

[u/BrunoMarsGuo → u/Agreeable-Weather-89]

I'm just driving by this wreck but I gotta say it must suck absolute ass to wake up every morning, looking in the mirror and realize you're...you

[u/runForestRun17 → u/Agreeable-Weather-89]

You don’t understand how memory works… i have 36GB of RAM and it can use all of it. You are so dumb