I use Electron apps (VSCode, Slack, etc). They are bloated compared to native apps, but that running a few of them somehow makes 8GB "not enough" is overblown. You get by just fine.

It's wanting to run big VMs that is the real pain point with 8GB.

Native apps aren't automatically less bloated, take Xcode vs VSCode for instance. Native apps might just have more optimization potential, but that doesn't mean that the potential is realized. The most efficient applications are 10 or 20 years old, running on modern hardware ;)

>Native apps aren't automatically less bloated, take Xcode vs VSCode for instance

What about them? XCode is quite efficient with memory, and it by definition doesn't pass everything through a interpret+JIT for a higher level language.

IME (and I work with both every day), Xcode is slower for almost every UI interaction than VSCode on the same machine. It already starts with Xcode's extremely slow startup, just now it took 15(!) seconds for Xcode to cold-start. And that's on a 32 GBytes M1 Pro.

It really depends on the size of the workspace your loading.

Try opening some heinously large project with 100+ dylibs (react-native) compared against a lean, statically linked single module workspace. You can have them open side by side and it’s like experiencing hell and heaven simultaneously.

Getting by today, doesn't mean one gets by tomorrow.

Why, are we waiting something drastic in the next 4-5 years before the users gets the new model?

Because that is forced obsolence and damaging for the environment, the computer from today should be perfectly usable in 4-5 years.

The upgrade treadmill from the 20 century computers is no longer relevant for most users, besides storage.

>Because that is forced obsolence and damaging for the environment, the computer from today should be perfectly usable in 4-5 years.

And for most users it will be. If we're talking "forced obsolence" Apple is probably the last to blame, given their stuff retains high ratio of original-vs-resale value (meaning they have long second hand careers).

That used to be true. It is not at all true for the recent Macs. The Intel Macs with soldered everything already old a worse value but the low-end Apple Silicon Macs seems to be even worse. It is unsurprising considering the limitation, the configuration is set in stone and any problem, especially on the storage means the end of the machine.

If you believe that will not make their second-hand value and their longevity much worse, I don't know what to tell you. It is already happening. Even relatively recent Intel macs are worthless if they were not top of the line with lots of storage and RAM. The only thing keeping somewhat of a value is what Apple does not want to sell anymore: big display iMacs (27"). But that's really not surprising since half the value comes from being a good display in the first place...

On top of all that, even low-end hardware is good enough for basic task, so second-hand inventory is piling up, especially at the low end. Macs are nice but old Macs not that much nicer than cheap Huawei's and the likes...