Guest Commentary: What Would You Want in a New Mac?

Over the past year, I’ve had frequent doctor appointments. However, one thing that has made them more bearable has been the discussions I’ve had in the waiting room about new tech – often Apple in particular. Many of the talks revolve around Macs and how they have become more like the iPad as far as repairs and upgrades are concerned (see the upgrades available for your Mac here). Some of us complain about this, but haven’t been able to do anything constructive about it.

Of the regulars that I’ve spoken to, I’ve noticed three types of people/opinions: 

Type A

  • Is satisfied with Apple’s products in general for their needs/usage.
  • Often replaces products within 2-3 years.
  • Isn’t necessarily interested in user upgrades.

Type B

  • Longtime Mac user, but has almost given up hope.
  • Realizes Apple is now primarily a services/mobile device company.
  • Feels Apple no longer targets them or their opinions don’t matter.

Type C

  • Simply gave up and moved on from Apple products.

Whichever category the person falls under (I tend to fall somewhere between the B and C types), the subject of Apple’s “closed” Macs comes up often. It brings about the question – is there any amount of user feedback to Apple that would change their course on any of their models? (The image of tiny rowboats trying to change the Titanic’s course comes to mind.)

Related article: Commentary: Apple Should Renew Focus on Mac Users, Pros

Users like me could have reached out after the 2013 Mac Pro was released, for example, but we have no idea whether Apple would listen. However, what do we have to lose by taking the time to send our feedback to Apple?

Another sticking point that comes up often is the cost of these “closed” Macs. Once you compare the performance you can get from a DIY machine – especially to the aging current Mac Pro design – it’s hard to imagine going back. If Apple were to design for an open “workhorse” vs. a closed “work of art”, they should at least be able to offer something more competitive that’s not limited to essentially the same performance forever.

I’m not saying all Macs need to be open. But Apple should consider offering one that isn’t a closed design. I know there’s a market for models such as the iMac, but is the percentage of us who want something upgradeable so small that it’s hopeless?

Apple could (finally) announce an amazing 2017 Mac Pro tomorrow that changes everything, but I’m not holding my breath about a change in design philosophy. I suspect the next Mac Pro basic design has been finalized, unless the 2013 cylindrical design is here for the long haul.

(Thin form factor have become a priority for Apple with its MacBook line.)

Thin Is In
When I watched the keynote for the new MacBook Pro, my first thought was that “thin” is the primary design goal. Was there ever any consideration to keeping the same size with more performance, better GPU, a larger battery, etc.? My gut feeling is the non-negotiable primary goal was make it as thin and light as possible – the things that elicit applause in keynotes.

For their “Pro” Macs at least, are there any design engineers there now that would even suggest a design focused on what users value long term, and function over form and “cool” factor? Have they ever asked how satisfied 2013 Mac Pro users are years after the initial “wow” factor has worn off?

Mac Feedback
One way Apple could incorporate feedback, if it chose to do so, would be to get input from Pro users and produce two Mac designs – one a closed “work of art” and the other an open, standard components (PCIe, M.2 slots, etc.) form factor design. The latter might even cost less and perform better at the sacrifice of aesthetics, especially in the long term. Using standard form-factor components (motherboard, graphics card, power supply, etc.) provides an easier upgrade (and repair) path in the future. Custom designs such as Apple’s 2013 Mac Pro have internal space limits and used non-standard graphics cards that were trailing edge shortly after they were sold (as of early 2017, there’s still no upgrade option for them).

Avoiding proprietary designs allows an easier/faster way to incorporate future changes vs. custom designs with higher costs/lower production. And an open design doesn’t have to be “ugly”, as many case manufacturers have proven in the past. (But personally I’d take an internally upgradeable “Plain Jane” under my desk vs. a small pretty “vase” on top with cables to external devices for expansion.)

Related article: Did You Know You Can Make Your Mac Pro Better Than New?

And here’s an idea – if they do continue using non-standard form factors, how about a commitment to offer at minimum a graphics card upgrade the following year for buyers of Mac Pros? (Graphics cards are one of the fastest changing components and can have a big effect on performance.) I don’t own a 2013 Mac Pro, but couldn’t they have offered at least a graphics card upgrade for its most powerful line by now? What lesson is that to 2013 Mac Pro owners, or anyone considering a Mac Pro in the future?

What would you want in a new Mac?
All of this begs the question: If Apple considered an open design, what would you want in your Mac? What about standard components, user-replaceable storage, CPU or graphics cards? And a system bootrom that supports basic boot video without Mac EFI in the graphics card?

None of these suggestions on their own are “world changing”, but they might be the change direction that users want – for at least one Mac model.

I would expect – and understand – that most replies and reactions to the above changes are “it’s too late”, “they don’t care what I want” or refer to the famous Steve Jobs quote “people don’t know what they want until you show it to them.”

Admittedly, Apple has been very successful with its current path and has little reason to change that for what has been a shrinking PC market for years. And I have no idea what (if any) level of feedback to Apple would matter. But one thing is for sure – doing nothing will not change anything.

Further Reading:


LEAVE A COMMENT


  • The PC ‘enthusiast’ (segment of the PC) market stands alone with growth and high margins.

    As Apple are – effectively – out of the pro/enthusiast market… Why not…

    Sell the macOS for $500 – restricted to 6 core+ (ie X99) motherboards, only from (a few) vetted vendors.

    This is NOT suggesting a resurgence in ‘clones’.

    Its a way for Pro’s to Roll Their Own – yeah, its *similar* (to clones) but not quite the same.

    Upsides:
    No manufacturing costs.

    Pure profit once initial outlay of programming is covered.

    This is a very different time to when Apple ONLY made (good, high end margin) money on their desktop lines: ie the Scully/Spindler/Amelio years.




    • Why restrict the motherboards? A user might prefer higher clocks over more cores.




    • I agree with your suggestion, but not $500, more like $100 with perhaps yearly upgrades for say $25. Make it also so individuals only can purchase – as through App Store.

      I don’t see this hampering iMac sales. I don’t want an iMac. I have always used MacPros and really liked the flexibility of the original design.

      Remembering when Apple was struggling, I am glad they have survived. I can understand that the desktop market is not a big part of their business. But if we are still using Mac OS X, we are still tied into their world, regardless of hardware. So let people have it both ways as it were – iMac for those who just want to use it and “legal” hackers who know they will be close if not on the bleeding edge sometimes.




  • Thanks to OWC my older Macs can be made to perform as good as well or nearly so than new closed lead weights.

    Apple probably spends more time emptying their round file of Feedback, than they do thin king about what users want.




  • I have a PPC 2.7 GHz liquid-cooled G5 sitting on the floor, with its 650-watt power supply built-in. It’s kind of a monster, but with the addition of an ATI Radeon graphics card, it runs the games I play very well.

    I chose my Hackintosh components with an eye to performance paired with power efficiency, and in a small size. i7-6700 CPU, TDP 65 W; nVidia GTX 750 Ti, 64 W, a Gigabyte H170N Mini-ITX motherboard with 16 GB DDR4 RAM, and Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB SSDs. This thing plays “Obduction” in “Epic” (highest) quality pretty well. The power supply is only 180 watts, but that’s plenty.

    For a new Mac to sell me, it would have to have at least the performance of this system, preferably higher, and cost less than $2000. That means better than 50 fps on “Heaven” and “Valley,” and over 100 on the OpenGL section of Cinebench R15. It should also come with at least two SSDs for storage. For me, no need for a monitor or keyboard, but then a complete system would need them, I guess. Would this be a SuperMac Mini?

    I don’t see Apple doing that, though.




    • Apple should make 3 desktop sizes. Large (Corsair Carbide Series® Air 540), Medium (Lian Li PC-Q28), Small (DAN Cases A4-SFX). The Large and maybe Medium should have space for a 5.25″ drive. The Large, maybe two. The Medium and Small should have room for one discrete graphics card (up to nVidia Titan X). The mini can remain as the one with no discrete graphics card, but maybe a mobile discrete graphics chip. The large should have 4 or more PCIe slots. Maybe it should have a Thunderbolt 3 add-in card so that the Thunderbolt can accept DisplayPort from the discrete graphics.

      Standard parts should be used. mini ITX or ATX motherboard, ATX or SFX power supply, standard NVMe slot(s), etc.

      BIOS for overclocking (4.6+ GHz) and disabling or reconfiguring devices. XMP memory (3200+ MHz) for even more performance.

      5.1 sound analog built in. With optical.

      With a Hackintosh, you can get all those features. Not only do you have the option of spending less to get more, buy you can spend more to get much more.




  • I’m still in “camp B”, but slowly moving away from Apple, here and there.

    I actually purchased a 2013 Mac Pro system when it first came out, and upgraded it to 64GB of RAM via a 3rd. party memory upgrade. Eventually, I upgraded the 256GB SSD in it to a 512GB that I was able to buy on the used market. It serves as my primary home desktop computer, but it pains me to see Apple’s lack of interest in offering any upgrade options for it. I mean, the LEAST they could have done was to offer an external Thunderbolt enclosure to add extra drives to it. I went with a 3rd. party “eBox” solution that houses 5 SATA drives and does hardware RAID — but the thing looks like it belongs on a Windows PC, not a Mac. I could see Apple offering a slick rectangular “base” with a circular indent in the top of it to sit the Mac Pro in, or something like that. But nope!

    I also use a Retina Macbook Pro 15″ as my primary laptop. (That one was paid for by my job, since I work in I.T. and support a mixed Windows and Mac environment.) It’s a great portable, but the newest model with the touch-bar doesn’t feel like an upgrade from it, at all. It was too early to take away all the useful ports and leave you dealing only with USB-C connectors, and the “next generation video chipset” I was so anxious to see in action? Completely hobbled by thermal management issues.

    I also evaluated the “new Macbook” in the high-spec configuration, hoping it might be a good machine to issue to some of our highly mobile employees. Nope! Another losing proposition from Apple. Way underpowered with that Intel Atom CPU in it. And way overpriced too, when you factor in the expensive “dongles” needed just to do basic essentials like connecting an external display to it, or adding a standard USB port.

    Microsoft’s Surface Pro 4 made a far better solution for our mobile workforce, especially with the fact you can use it as a tablet OR a notebook computer. (If you need to use it while standing up, doing some kind of presentation? No problem.)

    I’ve always been the kind of customer who only wants the higher-end gear from Apple. I never thought they were selling sufficiently “cutting edge” video chipsets in anything they sold (or optimizing the video drivers well). But I tolerated it because of all the other good things about Mac OS X. Now? The performance gap vs. Windows PCs has just gotten too big. I don’t have much faith I’ll be buying a Mac next time I upgrade.




    • Any power user will find the current MBP’s “enhancements” (size, thickness, and battery-life) completely offset by all the dongles and connectors needed. My present later 2013 rMBP connects directly to everything I use on the road: two Thunderbolt ports, two USB 3 ports, an HDMI (never used) and an SD card slot (used every day).

      Honestly, we need this kind of connectivity, not less—not as an option, but simply to function. The present MBPs are a triumph of form over function, and I never thought I would see myself saying this.

      No to upgrading for me, for at least the next two years, because we have decided that shooting in 1080p and mastering in the same will future-proof the kind of work we do (Vimeo pay downloads) for years. There is zero advantage and many disadvantages in going 4K. We do not need this capacity, at all, so it’s not a factor in our decisions.




  • I’m in the C group with one leg left in the B group as my primary office machine for routine tasks remains a 2014 MBP, arguably until it dies.
    Bought a HP Omen 090nz for less than 1700$. It’s not pretty, but it’s quiet, cool, ridiculously fast and upgradeable for the foreseeable future. I’m sure I’ll get five years out of this system with ease, maybe more. 4.2GHz i7, 32GB RAM, 512 SSD, 2TB HDD, 8GB GTX 1080 GPU, DVD burner, plenty of ports. It’s really simple. If Apple offered something similar even for 2500$, I’m sure people would be buying that by the dozen.




  • Like many of the readers making comments, I dont want a computer that cannot be upgraded to improve its usefulness. My current Mac Pro is a 2011 model with an Nvidia 680gtx video card and 32gb of ram, and a samsung ssd 1tb boot drive, another 3tb of storage and a 4tb backup drive. And a usb 3 card. Its a compromise between speed and compatibility that does everything I need. As a consultant I see alot of new macs and they dont really offer much more. Apple needs to introduce a more conventional desktop design and laptops with ram upgradability to keep high end users…




  • My early 2011 MacBook Pro is starting to fall apart. The batter swelled, making the trackpad pop up slightly and rendering it useless. The thing won’t power down or restart without a hard power down. It’s never left my studio, never been abused. For the price, this thing should last longer than this.




  • As a mid 2010 MacPro owner I’m dismayed at the current offerings in the space my Mac occupied. Apple is completely deaf to the requests of those wanting a reasonably powerful headless Mac that offers upgradability. And Apple’s been this way for a long, long time.

    The MacPro in its day was actually overkill for many, and consequently overly expensive. The now ostracised (and let’s face it – embarrassing) 2013 MacPro was the worst of all options – expensive, almost no upgradability and no internal bays; wholly inappropriate for the Pro market. They ought to return to something more akin to the original PowerMac G5/MacPro form factor to reclaim the respect of power users. As for those of us not quite in the ‘Pro’ range, a headless iMac or a scaled down MacPro would serve our needs well. But Apple has lost interest in anything outside of the broader consumer market (no server hardware, macOS Server is horrible and no appropriate high-end hardware).

    This is a huge disappointment, as it’s the pro users who have championed Apple for decades. Not exactly the thanks we were hoping for. For the first time in 25 years I’m considering a PC, and it almost sickens me. I’m an Apple shareholder for goodness sake! There’s no loyalty in Apple’s business model apparently.




  • I agree with about as much of this as I disagree with. I like the idea of a user up-gradable path. The design for the G3 and G4 was I feel the pinical. The G5 and early MacPro was not bad but unduly heavy. However The closed environment is one of the things that keeps the platform stable. My Mac Works and it is easy to maintain. I work in IT and the last thing I want is for Apple to make their hardware more like a PC, but I do think there is a middle ground. Just not sure how profitable that will be for Apple.




    • Believe it or not, my hackintosh (Fortress Haximus) is more stable than my “real” Mac Pro 1,1 ever was. OWC kept my Mac Pro going for years, and I’m quite sure they could adapt to an “open and more PC-like” model. They can already do SFF style storage such as the Aura series.

      Now imagine them finding a sweet spot with a good NVMe drive for say, a Z100 or Z200 series motherboard such as those from Gigabyte (in case nobody noticed, Apple’s own motherboard design features are exceptionally similar to Gigabyte, which is why that company’s motherboards are so compatible and are just “plug and play” and can be used without a DSDT in a hackintosh, although using a good DSDT gets you perfect HDMI audio and options above and beyond what Apple’s “legit” hardware can do).

      You see, here’s the thing: Apple designs “chic”, but I and most power users care far less about looks than performance and in the case of portables, the ability to shift from sipping power while on battery power to going straight to Ludicrous Speed while plugged in and doing so without cooking the machine to death in the process.

      None of this glued in battery, soldered everything so the user can’t upgrade past the BTO page when ordering. Apple makes throwaway machines, and though it does give OWC an easy way out when it comes to shining regarding good products to enhance what little Apple leaves open to the user these days, it still ends up being too limited and too rigid for most power users.

      I’m one of those users that enjoys the freedom of having multiple drives without a bunch of ungodly power bricks snaking their way around my room or wherever I go. If it weren’t for the rather absurd price and the curved screen, I’d love an ASUS Predator X21. Multiple drives, dual GPUs (good ones too, not these crappy Polaris power hogs from AMD), tons of RAM, a *mechanical keyboard with customizable backlight*, and enough ports so I don’t need to dongle myself to death.

      Even MSI’s dual GPU laptops at the “low end” range for dual GPU put Apple’s highest tier laptop to shame and even give the iMac 5k w/ maxed out CPU and GPU a run for their money.

      Of course, the irony here that I’m sure OWC isn’t missing one bit is that those of us on hackintoshes have more money left over to spend on goodies for upgrades: NVMe drives, a better DESKTOP GPU, good cooling, etc. Nearly all of their offerings work with PCs too so long as they use the same connections, etc., so there’s zero reason an open system from Apple should hamper their ability to put out quite desireable products. And I’d rather spend my money at a place I know has been around for Apple’s users than someplace that doesn’t even care and just wants the cash. I’m sure OWC would have kept my Mac Pro 1,1 going even today had Apple not saddled its 64-bit hardware with a 32-bit EFI preventing legitimate modern OS installs (Sierra notwithstanding, since that OS requires SSE4 instruction sets within the CPU to boot).




  • Would like to leave feedback, but Apple would probably not like to hear that I run a “Hackintosh.”




  • I should have added that in pursuit of the kind of performance HD video editing requires, OWC have been my lifesavers. And I am keeping an eye out for the 2.8GHz version of the rMBP, too, in the refurbished section. And when the battery in my present rMBP loses performance, I am hopeful a better one (bigger capacity) will be available from OWC.




    • I hate to say it, but Architosh has apparently been sipping back one too many while wearing those rose tinted glasses.

      The G3/G4 “trap door” design as they so lovingly call it was absolutely *horrible* for airflow. Sure, you could cram a lot in there for that point in time, but if the drives didn’t burn out, the CPU would sooner or later. Even the Quadnostril G4 and MDD G4 had issues with heat being trapped (I own an MDD G4 whose CPU I had to replace with one from OWC ironically because of the original frying itself – it’s my “UT99 machine” now).

      And Apple “didn’t try liquid cooling”? Uh, the G5 says hello. And it failed. Miserably. But in Apple’s defense here, those cooling systems were in their infancy and didn’t have the innovations today’s systems do, so I didn’t really dock them points for the failures there except for the part where they refused to even acknowledge the problem until their hand was forced by very unhappy users whose systems turned into rusted paperweights overnight). Apple could easily choose a solution like Corsair’s H100i for CPU cooling if they wanted to now, and probably save enough money from using a good readily available option to make it quite profitable.

      The cMPs aren’t the “Ric Flairs” of PC cases by any means, but their functionality and quiet operation coupled with power and ports made for one hell of a setup at home.

      Oh, and it should be noted that if Apple went the more traditional “PC” route, and didn’t screw us over with custom UEFI, boot camp would be a thing of the past outside of the assistant to create a Windows partition. No need for Apple specific drivers inside Windows. Just honest to goodness dual boot UEFI with great stability.

      As for aesthetics, I hate to say this, but looks don’t win games, power and configurability do. And Apple thus far in the last eight years has refused to deliver on that model and as of the trash can pro, has gone entirely proprietary, which is what nearly led to their demise in the 1990s until Jobs came back and actually started using PC components in the Macs and innovating from there.

      There isn’t a single Mac today with a desktop class GPU outside of the trash can pro’s proprietary and NON-UPGRADEABLE pair of GPUs that ironically only serve as compute units for the most part in OS X (there is no CrossFireX or SLI in OS X even today). And those GPUs even maxed out are barely on par with a Radeon 7950 for gaming purposes and are thermally throttled to boot.

      My Cosmos II encased hack pro runs circles around Apple’s entire lineup while simultaneously machine gunning them down, and if any component dies, I replace it and move on. No glue. No near zero repairability score. Just total and complete control over my system.

      Apple has the ability to make even bulky look chic. But as far as I’m concerned, chic has to come last – power and control over my system that *I PAID FOR and thus OWN* must come first. And right now Apple doesn’t even begin to deliver. If it weren’t for companies like OWC, the Mac would likely be a distant memory by now with its inherent limitations.




      • Now that you’ve vented your outrage, can you now take a close look at the actual design presented? The waterblock places the hose connections away from the motherboard. The coolant is then routed to a large radiator at the top of the system. Two 240 mm fans drive ample vertical airflow through the case.




  • Great topic. And let’s not stop at the hardware: I am happily using 10.10.5 (Yosemite)—I know this means I can’t upgrade to the latest Final Cut Pro/Compressor, but my two current systems are 100% reliable, are fast enough, and do what I need to be able to do, production-wise.

    I run a rMBP, late 2013, 16GB RAM, and the quad-core 2.3GHz processor. I have an OWC SSD, and use external SSDs for editing on the road.

    In the office, a specced to the max iMac (late 2014, 27″) and use an SSD-equipped Elite Pro Dual as a very fast external drive for source footage. I can edit four streams of 1080p video and second system sound with zero delay or bottlenecks.

    What would I like? Well, the iMac as described is fast enough; I do not see the need to upgrade, even if an obvious one was available. Re. the rMBP: I do not need thinner/lighter; I need CPU power and battery life—so none of the current MPPs interest me. I would be interested in a significantly faster quad-core MBP, and a user-replaceable graphics card, SSD, and RAM is essential. So, in the current Apple era of going more and more iOS, and lighter/more gadgets but same power as the machine I currently use, I will not be updating any time soon. Oh, and I need a stable, reliable OS, too. On the FCP forums, I have read way too many horror stories about editors who have upgraded their OS only to find performance took a hit, or their previously stable machines no longer were. If you earn your living from your machines, as most reading here will do, we seem to be running out of options. I fall in between Type B and C too. Sad, really.




  • Has anyone here been so annoyed by closed systems, that they’ve gone the Hackintosh route?




    • Yep. I’ve gone the Hackintosh route. I have the CPU just under the top tier iMac, 32 GB RAM, a BLU-RAY DRIVE (yes Mr. Cook, I actually use my system as a HOME THEATER machine), SSDs for Windows, OS X, Blizzard games, and the rest of my games. And a HD for OS backup and data backup (separate partitions). Oh, and an nVidia GTX 780, which I’ll be replacing with a GTX 1080 once Pascal support gets put into nVidia’s web drivers (because Apple refuses to update its god awful limited hardware code in their in-house drivers).

      And just so the system doesn’t cook itself to death like the last two revisions of the iMac which won’t even turn the fans up until the machine hits 100°C, I have multiple fans arranged in a push-pull configurations rigged for quiet operation, and a Noctua NH-D14 CPU cooler.

      My case? Thankfully I can choose that, so I went with the Cosmos II and slapped a Thermaltake 1200W ToughGrand PSU in there as well.

      And thanks to using a real motherboard, I have enough USB ports (8x 3.0 and 4x 2.0) for all of my devices, plus Gigabit ethernet so I don’t have to rely on wi-fi when I game.

      And I have my nice Samsung H7150 46″ TV for a display, all nice and calibrated for computer work and awesome video viewing.

      Show me any Mac around that has all of that. I dare you. ^_^

      And it all cost less than an iMac or top tier MBP. And when that 1080 support comes in, I’ll have HDCP 2.2 and be 4k ready (5k if I really want it since the 1080 can handle it much better than any of Apple’s laptop GPUs can).

      So long as Apple continues closed designs with zero upgradeability, they won’t get another dime from me when it comes to hardware. Apple is still relevant to me because of OS X. It certainly isn’t their anemic set of paperweights.




      • I’m right there with you, in regard to the Hackintosh route. BTW I might need your help getting a 7970 Radeon acknowledged in my setup, I’ll send you a PM on Xlr8yourmac’s Home Away From Home.




      • Apple has shown that they can’t keep up in the PC hardware space so they should give up and just license macOS for Hackintosh’s.

        They’ll probably need to open source more of their kernel (CPU, Graphics, USB, FireWire, Thunderbolt, NVMe, Bluetooth, etc.) so that the community can create drivers for new devices or devices that don’t have macOS drivers yet since there are so many choices on the PC side.




  • My approach has been to tweet @tim_cook that I’m not interested in closed systems that cannot be upgraded. No response, of course. That’s why I’m using a 6 year old iMac. The high price and closed design of the new MBPro is annoying.




  • I think MBPros are getting “anorexic” – thinness is not an end in itself, and the compromises to continue making them thin are less and less helpful. (The space & weight you save on the laptop is replaced by all those dongles :-( ) I think not having at least one USB 3 port on the latest MBP was a very big mistake.

    It would be very nice to be able to upgrade “disk” in the laptop, although it’s not as essential with flash memory than it was with rotating drives (and their higher failure rate.) Same thing with RAM.

    But most importantly, Apple needs to place major attention on Mac OS X and Apple application reliability. That includes firmware/low level things (like the problems I’ve seen waking from sleep) and making major applications (Mail, Calendar) much more reliable. (Everyone knows iTunes is a huge mess.) My friend who works for Apple as a SW guy says they know they have Software QA problems, but he can’t comment on whether they have any new emphasis on fixing them.




    • I am not a pro user,but I am getting very tired of the “Form Over Function” mantra that has seemingly engulfed Apple. I see no excuse for soldered memory and locked in storage in, for instance, in the Mac mini.

      I can also envision the day when Apple designed chips move to the Mac and convert it into a closed system ala IOS.

      I have looked at a few Windows computers and It seems that they offer an awful lot of computer For prices that are shockingly low compared to Macs. Right now,my youngest Mac is 5years old and will not be rep;aced by any Mac with soldered memory. As long as OWC sells refurbished Macs, I’ll be in good shape.