So... because the CPU that Apple chose doesn't support >16GB RAM in a way that's convenient for Apple to meet an Apple-imposed specification, it's Intel's problem?
It was a design trade off Apple made. They could sacrifice power efficiency for additional memory (LPDDR4 on the CPU is limited to 16 GB, DDR4 can go up to 32 GB).
I'm pretty confident if Intel's CPU supported more RAM they would of made it a configurable option. Apple still has configurable graphics cards, hard disk sizes and CPU speeds. RAM could of easily been another configuration they could of offered.
Like I said previously, the MacBook Pro is a mobile device so making a trade off for power efficiency makes perfect sense to me.
Sure, so am I. My Air has 4GB RAM and it's mostly fine - I was hoping to see an upgrade in October, but 8GB would suffice.
My only point was that this really isn't something that Intel does or even should care about, it's the result of Apple's decisions; isn't even necessarily their "problem".
Well, it kinda is, because low-power/long battery life is a reasonable requirement for a laptop, and it is a limitation of the Intel chipset that doesn't allow more than 16GB of low-power memory. Or in other words, how could Apple solve the requirement of low-power/long battery life together with 32GB RAM without Intel?
Also, if low-power, long battery life and low weight are not your requirements, maybe you're not in the market for a laptop?
I'm pretty confident if Intel's CPU supported more RAM they would of made it a configurable option. Apple still has configurable graphics cards, hard disk sizes and CPU speeds. RAM could of easily been another configuration they could of offered.
Like I said previously, the MacBook Pro is a mobile device so making a trade off for power efficiency makes perfect sense to me.