MacBook Air M2 $800, lowest price ever

[SimchaCC]

All colors https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0B3C7MJX3/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

[mevinyavin]

Get the DDMS M1 version instead; it will be faster.

The M1 model comes with an SSD using all four PCIe lanes, showing little to no slowdown when 8GB of RAM is saturated and SSD space is used as RAM. However, both M2 and M3 models come with an SSD limited to two lanes. Reviewers all noted horrible performance throttling when the RAM was saturated (one called it "Celeron performance"). As such, for a basic user, the M1 is a no-brainer to recommend over the M2. Anyone who needs the extra processing power provided by the M2 will also need more than 8GB of RAM, and by extension, will be unable to take advantage of the M2.
You can solve this problem by going up to 16GB RAM or by going up to 512GB storage (as that drive uses four lanes).

[AsherO]

Get the DDMS M1 version instead; it will be faster.

The cynic in me feels like Apple did this by design

[mevinyavin]

The cynic in me feels like Apple did this by design

TBH I think that the existence of any 8GB non-upgradeable luxury model (be it in Zenbooks, Grams, Macbooks, Surfaces and the like) is there to make the 16GB model look like better value than it is. In Apple's case, imagine if they only sold a 16GB model but prices started at $1300...

[SimchaCC]

Get the DDMS M1 version instead; it will be faster.

I had the M1 and now have the M2, and the M2 is noticeably faster. I don't know about all the technical stuff, but when it comes to the eye test, the M2 is better. And that's besides the other hardware upgrades.

[mevinyavin]

I had the M1 and now have the M2, and the M2 is noticeably faster. I don't know about all the technical stuff, but when it comes to the eye test, the M2 is better. And that's besides the other hardware upgrades.

Do you have 16GB of RAM? Do you have a 512GB SSD or larger? If so, it would make a lot of sense for the M2 to be faster.

[myi]

I was contemplating about buyinv the m2. But that's odd that you say it's 2 steps backward instead of it being a model up.
  Yes I'll save a few $ on the m1. But I'm willing to spend to get something that will last and run flawlessly.   I waited till the m2/m3 to come out so I can get the m2 at a decent price. Hmm. Let's see what the 16GB ram and or 512GB cost is.

[mevinyavin]

Let's see what the 16GB ram and or 512GB cost is.

From what I've seen, a bit too much.

[skbayare]

Stay away from 256gb M2s.  They use a single nand which takes the load time significantly longer than M1 256gb / M3 256gb.

[SimchaCC]

Do you have 16GB of RAM? Do you have a 512GB SSD or larger? If so, it would make a lot of sense for the M2 to be faster.

Nope, I have the base 256/8, and it's great.

[mevinyavin]

Nope, I have the base 256/8, and it's great.

Bizarre. The reviewers have been consistent about this complaint, everywhere, with no dissenting opinions.

[skbayare]

Well the typical browse/shop/email/zoomer would think it's a nice smooth computer.

It's only if you do intense work that requires a lot of loading up from storage to memory is when you notice the difference.

For developers that compile several times a day... it'll be noticeable.

[mevinyavin]

Well the typical browse/shop/email/zoomer would think it's a nice smooth computer.

It's only if you do intense work that requires a lot of loading up from storage to memory is when you notice the difference.

For developers that compile several times a day... it'll be noticeable.

I used to think this was true, but it has been two years since I thought that about an 8GB model. And although that was re: Windows, the various reviewers said the same thing quite emphatically about M2 (and M3) models with 256GB, about regular usage, nothing fancy.
It isn't loading from storage to memory that matters (I suspect an SSD at half-speed is plenty fast for reading) - it is saturating 8GB of RAM and then using the SSD as RAM that matters.

[AsherO]

I used to think this was true, but it has been two years since I thought that about an 8GB model. And although that was re: Windows, the various reviewers said the same thing quite emphatically about M2 (and M3) models with 256GB, about regular usage, nothing fancy.
It isn't loading from storage to memory that matters (I suspect an SSD at half-speed is plenty fast for reading) - it is saturating 8GB of RAM and then using the SSD as RAM that matters.

If you’re not exceeding 8GB of RAM why would it matter?

[mevinyavin]

If you’re not exceeding 8GB of RAM why would it matter?

That's exactly the point. I no longer believe that people would not exceed 8GB of RAM - not for two years, as my own eyes have shown me. Instead, those who opt for 8GB models are choosing to buy slower computers to save money, in the same way that people who buy Celerons are choosing the same tradeoff. I suppose it is technically possible, but from a recommendations standpoint, I only recommend 8GB on upgradeable models, and if not, I warn them they MAY be in for slowdowns. That whole cheshbon lasts until $400, at which point, 16GB becomes affordable and there is no excuse. $800? You have got to be kidding me.

[Chuchum Ainer]

I second the above.
I don't remember the specs of my first desktop, but my first upgrade had 502 mb ram (yes, that's the way I remember it, not 512). I'm pretty young.
At some point computer software and operating systems progress past the capabilites of hardware from a few years ago.

There's still a thousand and one uses for 8gb ram or even 4gb ram machines, but you don't drop $800 on a new model with that little ram, and throttled ssd to boot. If you need a media consumption device or a chidushei torah word processor, find something cheaper.

I don't have much apple experience, so maybe I'm wrong and there's use for a MacBook with 8gb. Even so, go buy the m1 model for $150 cheaper.

[mevinyavin]

I don't have much apple experience, so maybe I'm wrong and there's use for a MacBook with 8gb. Even so, go buy the m1 model for $150 cheaper.

As you may recall, this was my argument above? 

But here's what I've been saying since forever, excuse the technical lingo:

8GB of non-upgradeable RAM is a deal-breaker for anyone who can actually use the i7's advantage over the i5.

Or better: you want more processing power, make sure you got enough RAM to match it, or you are wasting your money.