"...Golden Gate needed a whopping 17GB more space on the M1 MacBook Air, thanks to a mandatory multi-gigabyte language model download that kicks in automatically the first time you connect a freshly restored Golden Gate Mac to the Internet."
This is the main thing stopping me from updating iOS/macOS. It's completely unacceptable to park a bunch of space on my devices right when that storage is at its most expensive it's ever been.
My phone is on iOS 26, and even with Apple Intelligence turned off, there's ~13GB made unusable. My phone ran out of space while recording a bike trip, and yet the model I have no use for remained.
Yes, the disrespect Apple/Google/MS has for their users (on equipment they have purchased!) is palpable. They seem to have a real sense of entitlement these days.
It used to be universally accepted that losing or corrupting user data was a (if not THE) cardinal sin in development.
In many ways we get what we tolerate, but the lack of viable alternatives in some spaces (esp cellphones and TVs) makes it very hard to hold the big players to any kind of account economically. At least no one is holding a gun to our heads to use MacOS or other proprietary systems on our desktops/laptops/servers for the most part.
If there is no way to remove this 17 GB model, then the OS is simply not for me anymore. I'll stick with Sequoia for another year and use it until it stops receiving security updates and then I'm back to being a full-time Linux user.
Phones should have separate storage for their OS so that when you buy a specific phone with specific storage it actually is that much storage available to the user
Android used to work kinda like that. You got the system partition that's a fixed size, and that's it. You also had the data partition for apps and their data on the same internal flash. For everything else, you inserted a micro SD card. You could move some apps to the SD card as well.
Maybe macOS 26 was lot bigger... but I went straight from Sequoia to Golden Gate and freed up like 30 GBs. I didn't have enough disk space to download the update prior, so the extra 30 GB wasn't that... but could've been caches I guess. I assumed it was dropping Intel?
Unfortunately I don't know yet because I updated for Xcode 27 + iPhone dev, so having an iPhone plugged in 24/7 is heavily spewing the results towards "much worse".
If I can still reply mid-to-late next week I'll let you know.
It doesn't seem much worse to me if at all. Not a noticeable difference. That said, the laptop is only a year and a half old, with the battery cycle count at 314.
I also wonder if I'll have a "oh, the battery life _is_ much worse" moment soon, but not yet!
The real problem with iOS is that there’s no way to clear an app’s cache without uninstalling it. Every non-indie internet-connected app on my phone has a massive and unneeded cache that consumes gigabytes of space.
Yeah, and a pound of sugar cost 8oz of gold a few thousand years ago, so inflation isn't real and food insecurity is a myth.
If you want a fair comparison you should look at the price of storage at the capacity required for typical contemporaneous workloads. Don't quote numbers in the billions when that amount of storage didn't exist on the entire planet at the time.
this is pointless pedantry. there's an implicit "functionally equivalent, for modern (apple) devices" bit.
> It would really help perspective sometimes
It objectively and absolutely doesn't help this discussion at all. Even if taken as hyperbole, the frustration with Apple charging $200 for 256 added gigs, and filling up ~20gigs of it without consent or requirement, is unaffected by floppy prices in the 80s.
Ok, let’s talk apples to apples. I’ll talk about RAM instead of disk, and I have a workload example for you.
As a graduate student in AI in 1995, I bought (with granting body’s money) a workstation for running my PhD experiments. It was a Sun Sparcstation 5, and it had 192MB of RAM. That was a lot of RAM in those days, and we spent the money so we could do experiments at what was then then a high end personal workstation (not big iron or server rack gear).
The 192MB of RAM DIMMs cost $27K in 1995 dollars, or $58K in 2026 dollars. Just the RAM.
The maxed out Mac Studio today, with 256GB of RAM is $10,800, including an upgrade to max RAM of $4K. This machine smokes the Sparc 5 so hard it’s not even funny (as does my phone, of course). The RAM on this frontier workstation is 1/10 the price of my student workstation’s RAM, and more than a thousand times larger.
It is simply not true, however you cast it, that storage (static or dynamic) has never been more expensive.
We can talk about bloated installs without saying stuff that is not at all true. It’s good to know our history. You can call it pedantry, I just prefer true things.
RAM is ~10,000 times cheaper for today’s workstation purchasers per byte, or ~ten times cheaper for max-out-that-bastard, which normalizes for technical progress.
ProfessorLayton · · focus · HN ↗
This is the main thing stopping me from updating iOS/macOS. It's completely unacceptable to park a bunch of space on my devices right when that storage is at its most expensive it's ever been.
My phone is on iOS 26, and even with Apple Intelligence turned off, there's ~13GB made unusable. My phone ran out of space while recording a bike trip, and yet the model I have no use for remained.
rylando · · focus · HN ↗
drop_star · · focus · HN ↗
NetOpWibby · · focus · HN ↗
DrPhish · · focus · HN ↗
wronglebowski · · focus · HN ↗
[deleted] · · focus · HN ↗
[deleted]
tap-snap-or-nap · · focus · HN ↗
drooopy · · focus · HN ↗
teaearlgraycold · · focus · HN ↗
How easily we forget the exponential improvements of decades past...
sharts · · focus · HN ↗
grishka · · focus · HN ↗
samtheprogram · · focus · HN ↗
als0 · · focus · HN ↗
nexus6 · · focus · HN ↗
samtheprogram · · focus · HN ↗
If I can still reply mid-to-late next week I'll let you know.
samtheprogram · · focus · HN ↗
I also wonder if I'll have a "oh, the battery life _is_ much worse" moment soon, but not yet!
quantumwannabe · · focus · HN ↗
dawnerd · · focus · HN ↗
Toslink · · focus · HN ↗
[dead]
robotresearcher · · focus · HN ↗
Most expensive it's been for a handful of years.
1TB of spinny disk cost a million dollars as recently as 1994, and half a billion dollars in 1980.
<a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/historical-cost-of-computer-memory-and-storage" rel="nofollow">https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/historical-cost-of-comput...
nvme0n1p1 · · focus · HN ↗
If you want a fair comparison you should look at the price of storage at the capacity required for typical contemporaneous workloads. Don't quote numbers in the billions when that amount of storage didn't exist on the entire planet at the time.
robotresearcher · · focus · HN ↗
A Macintosh 128K with a FLOPPY DRIVE cost $7,500 in inflation adjusted dollars.
Can we please take a view of today that’s in a context of more than a few years? It would really help perspective sometimes.
nirava · · focus · HN ↗
> It would really help perspective sometimes
It objectively and absolutely doesn't help this discussion at all. Even if taken as hyperbole, the frustration with Apple charging $200 for 256 added gigs, and filling up ~20gigs of it without consent or requirement, is unaffected by floppy prices in the 80s.
[deleted] · · focus · HN ↗
[deleted]
robotresearcher · · focus · HN ↗
As a graduate student in AI in 1995, I bought (with granting body’s money) a workstation for running my PhD experiments. It was a Sun Sparcstation 5, and it had 192MB of RAM. That was a lot of RAM in those days, and we spent the money so we could do experiments at what was then then a high end personal workstation (not big iron or server rack gear).
The 192MB of RAM DIMMs cost $27K in 1995 dollars, or $58K in 2026 dollars. Just the RAM.
The maxed out Mac Studio today, with 256GB of RAM is $10,800, including an upgrade to max RAM of $4K. This machine smokes the Sparc 5 so hard it’s not even funny (as does my phone, of course). The RAM on this frontier workstation is 1/10 the price of my student workstation’s RAM, and more than a thousand times larger.
It is simply not true, however you cast it, that storage (static or dynamic) has never been more expensive.
We can talk about bloated installs without saying stuff that is not at all true. It’s good to know our history. You can call it pedantry, I just prefer true things.
RAM is ~10,000 times cheaper for today’s workstation purchasers per byte, or ~ten times cheaper for max-out-that-bastard, which normalizes for technical progress.
GeekyBear · · focus · HN ↗
mahboi · · focus · HN ↗