[dangus]

Didn’t Steve Jobs basically say Apple didn’t know how to make a good computer for $500 and used that as a justification to not sell any products to the lowest priced area of the market?

Found it, it was from an earnings call: https://appleinsider.com/articles/08/10/22/steve_jobs_on_app...

There’s no irony here. The plain fact exists that 8GB of RAM has been considered not an especially exotic amount lot even on cheap on laptops and desktops for about a decade if not longer.

$450 in 2015 would have bought you a Dell laptop with 6GB of upgradable memory:

https://www.laptopmag.com/reviews/laptops/dell-inspiron-15-5...

The PS4 launched in 2013 and had 8GB of RAM with an operating system that barely multi-tasks.

[raw_anon_1111]

Steve Jobs died in 2011. Did you check the specs of cheap laptops when SJ said that?

[dangus]

Why does that matter?

The point was that Apple has completely been uninterested in the bottom of the laptop market from 1976 to 2026, and there is therefore no irony in my statement that many businesses including Apple will purposefully ignore customers who do not have enough money to buy their stuff.

From the first comment I responded to:

> “Anyone who can’t afford 8GB isn’t worthy of being my customer,” is literally the opposite of what Steve Jobs always said.

This commenter is wrong. This idea that the bottom of the market is below Apple is almost exactly what the quote from the earnings call said. Jobs effectively said “we only make mid to high end computers, someone else can take the serve the budget customers.”

This is why I pointed out that most people employed making commercial software don’t have to concern themselves with the needs and desires of users on desperately outdated hardware, since those users can’t afford your product anyway.

Of course, at the time Jobs was alive that number for RAM was below 8GB, but that specific number is not specifically relevant other than the fact that I brought it up as a general example of the standard of the day from around 10 years ago.

I brought up a bunch of computing examples from the mid-2010s after Jobs’ death because they are about the oldest reasonable hardware you’d find around today, proof that even buyers of low-end hardware 10+ years ago were regularly getting more than 4GB of RAM.

Apple’s base model MacBook Air in 2017 had 8GB of RAM. The 2015 model started with 4GB configurable to 8GB. The 12” MacBook from 2016 had 8GB RAM.

So you literally have to go back a decade to find anything sold by Apple where getting less than 8GB was an option on the lowest possible configuration, never mind PC manufacturers who generally gave better specs per dollar and included socketed memory.

But hey, Apple shills will shout from the rooftops that a 2026 laptop with 8GB of RAM is a good deal just because it’s $500 if you lie about your status as a student and pinky promise with Apple that you’ll never use the computer for commercial usage.

[raw_anon_1111]

No Steve Jobs said exactly what he said. The technology wasn’t to the point where they could offer products that aren’t junk. An unsubsidized $120 Android phone is “junk”. A $99 iPod Shuffle or a $300 low end iPad isn’t.

The Netbooks available in 2010 were junk even by that days standards.

The MacBook Neo which is fast enough, a better display than low end PCs and a good trackpad is not junk. It can do what most low end consumers care about well.

At least in the US, even during the SJ era you could get a “free” iPhone with a contract that anyone could afford - it was the last years phone

[dangus]

Well, here’s the thing…and, I apologize, this is a bit of a shift from what we were talking about.

The MacBook Neo is getting so much hype for being better than a low end PC, before it’s been put through its paces over the long term.

I had the same initial reaction. Wow, a Mac for $500, how incredible, how disruptive.

But then this morning I decided to look at the actual street pricing of laptops at my local Best Buy.

And here’s the thing: now that Apple has this machine with no haptic trackpad, no backlit keyboard, the worst screen available on any Apple product, very small keyboard, and very basic non-upgradable specs including a generations-old efficiency processor, I think the actual story here is that Apple has changed their mind and is willing to make a product that they would have previously called “junk.”

I’ll list off a couple of systems that I would absolutely buy as better machines over the MacBook Neo:

HP OmniBook X Flip, 16” 2K touch screen, Intel Core Ultra 5 226V, 16GB memory, 512GB storage, $699.

For the same price as the top model Neo you get double the RAM, a bigger and probably better screen, which is convertible and touch enabled. It is not some kind of bargain basement SKU, either, a legitimately well-reviewed laptop.

Lenovo IdeaLad Slim 3x, 15.3” 2K touchscreen, Snapdragon X1, 16GB memory, 256GB storage. $549

Right there in the pricing sweet spot you get more memory and basically all the benefits of an ARM architecture in another laptop that is well-regarded. You also get a number pad on the keyboard.

All these laptops have been getting well over 4.5 star reviews, like this one:

> This little guy has been amazing this semester plenty of power while being light and getting good battery life the quick charging feature is particularly impressive from almost dead to full in around half an hour all and all this laptop has met or exceeded all of my school life needs

Finally, this is probably my choice if I was in this segment:

Lenovo Yoga 7 2-in-1 14” 2k touch screen Ryzen AI 340, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD, $679.99.

Another great example of a laptop that is costing you less than the Neo’s top model before education discount, has better specs, and is again a legitimately good model of laptop solidly in the mid-range of the lineup, not a bargain basement SKU. I would actually be surprised if the Neo kept up with this particular model in terms of build quality, keyboard, etc.

The Neo’s main advantage is that it’s got a chassis made of aluminum, and that’s really its only differentiator. And I’d say that’s an overrated differentiator (e.g., plastic is lighter and isn’t automatically weaker/worse for long-term ownership).

[raw_anon_1111]

Just looking at the first one - the screen is worse, it’s heavier and the processor is slower. Of course PC mags always grade crappy intel based PCs on a curve. Actually all of the screens are worse.

[dangus]

They are bigger screens, which many people may prefer. They also have touchscreens, which many people may prefer.

The Lenovo Yoga has an OLED screen, I am somewhat doubtful the average person would find it worse than the screen on the Neo.

https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-apple_a18_pro-vs-a...

The Ryzen AI 340 isn't a bad match against the A18 Pro. It's actually ahead of the A18 Pro on multicore performance, and only 20% behind on single core benchmarks, not enough for anyone to notice. Yeah, it's true you're losing a lot of integrated GPU performance. Integrated GPUs do need more RAM, though, and I doubt the Neo is going to be handle a lot in the realm of "high school kids who want to game on the side" between that and the software compatibility situation.