Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by JoachimS 3472 days ago
No. Apple decided between adding more, but more power hungry memories and battery life. 16 GByte memory was deemed ok for most of all users and battery life became more important.

Design within the limitations and handling market requirements in short.
2 comments
toyg 3472 days ago
No, they chose between performance and thinness. Battery life would have been fine with a battery the size they used before.
link
lethargic_meat 3472 days ago
Please, read this before commenting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_DDR

XPS 15 uses DDR4, is even thinner if possible than the MBP and has less than 4 hours of battery.

IMO MBP should be performance focused, being battery life a secondary concern, while keeping MBA as an ultrabook.

link
pvdebbe 3472 days ago
In any event, it possibly cannot be Intel's fault if Apple makes the hardware decision.
link
JoachimS 3471 days ago
No, it can't be. Intel provides their best products as given by their constraints, goals and customer demands (and Apple is a big customer). Apple releases the best products based on their goals, constraints and customer demands (as much as Apple now listens to them).

Each one to their own devices, so to speak.

link