They’ll also have to account for the additional running cost of increased memory in the computers they deploy. That cost might seem negligible to a lone user, but at a scale of thousands of seats, the cumulative consumption could challenge company sustainability targets, as well as raising energy bills. Those costs scale. 

Apple’s answer to this is to continue to show that its systems deliver more performance per watt than its competitors. In context, you can also arguably point out that any additional memory it might pack into its products is still relatively parsimonious in comparison to competitors. That’s because its systems are inherently capable of doing more with less, which means you need less to do more. That’s a tautology, but an important one to anyone controlling a budget.

Does this matter? 

It looks as if it does. Samsung has signalled a 60% price increase for some kinds of memory, while the prices of high-bandwidth memory modules, such as the DDR used in most decent computers, including Macs, is also moving higher.