You're getting upset and going all caps over your own misunderstanding....
> The general public isn’t asking for a hundred gigs, but I’d love to see the baseline rise up a bit. It doesn’t feel like we’ve budged meaningfully here for years. Or is that just me?
This was the comment that kicked off the thread. Some people felt 32 GBs was the new baseline, and then out of left field comes _256 GBs_
For any amount of RAM, someone somewhere will be able to use it. But that's the kind of deep observation I expect from a toddler.
If we're going past kiddie pool deep observations of plain fact, no, the baseline wouldn't be anywhere near 256 GBs of RAM based on how people use computers.
(And before you attack me for your own poor understanding of language again: People as in the human collective. "People don't need" is not the same as "no one needs".)
I didn't. At least, not to those of us who can deal with some flexibility in interpreting written communication, and use a little tool called context.
But then again, there are definitely people out there who need every. single. nuance. of the most basic statement spelled out for them, as if they're biological GPT-3 endpoint (and this site certainly does feel like it's drowning in those people these days) but I don't write comments for them.
Instead I write comments for people who are interested in actual conversation over browbeating everyone in site because they assumed the most useless interpretation of your statement was the correct one.
Your experiences are not the indicative of everyones experiences.