"We couldn't because the Skylake CPU memory controller we're using doesn't support more than 16GB of LPDDR3..." - he left off the part after that that goes "... and while we could have easily added a a slightly bigger battery to counter the effects of using DDR4, we thought it was more important for our professional line of notebooks to be super super thin than for them to have the hardware specs that power users demand"
Apple could have easily offered a "professional" laptop with support for 32GB of RAM. They just didn't think it was as important to their users as size and weight.
Edit: And if the sales numbers are anything to go by, they were evidently 100% correct. But I don't have to agree with it.
So, bottom line - could we have done a better job of this video? Yes. We outright missed the detail that Skylake's memory controller is limited to 16GB if you're using LPDDR3, and Phil Schiller's statement hadn't come out yet at the time we wrote/shot this video.
Furthermore, I'm not aware of any swappable LPDDR3 modules, so YES we were stuck with a non-ideal apples to oranges comparison.
But it DOESN'T change the reason we were upset, or the fundamental disagreement we have with Apple's obsession with thin at the cost of better usability and performance. Our conclusion - they did it for space savings - is still correct even if we arrived there without a key piece of the puzzle.
And this is a super solid argument for YouTube giving some creators the ability to make edits to videos instead of taking away the tools we have at our disposal to make corrections after the fact (annotations don't appear on mobile, which is a HUGE chunk of viewers now).
Unfortunately for us, the repercussions of pulling/re-posting a video are usually MUCH greater than leaving it and putting in (which understandably feels half-assed, but is all we really have to work with) a correction link.
cpatlynch reacted to LinusTech in Macbook Pro 16GB RAM Limit Exploration
