I'd be happy with a 15" with a real Escape key and the rest of the row being touchbar. Apple won't do it, because it'd be less pretty, but I need an escape key I can hit reliability 100% of the time, without looking.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
15-Inch MacBook Pro Delivery Estimates Slip Ahead of New Models Expected Next Week
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
oh yeah, your right, sorry my mistake, I thought for a moment that you could get the 2.7 with the base model but it's an upgrade. Did they change the look of the website or is it me? It looks different, font?
Intel Xeon E3-1535MV6 and E3-1505MV6. Both support 64GB of DDR4 ECC RAM. Are Kaby Lake variants and are 45W TDP / 35W cTDP mobile chips. Perfect for a real Pro laptop. These babies were released few months ago.
If the new MBP uses the latest AMD chips then how long will it be before they start to fail? AMD graphics chips have a history of issues, I believe.
I think both makers have had a fair share of problems... but recently Apple has been AMD only, so... Mac Pro has had a lot of GPU problems. Haven't heard much of other as critical.. my client had a lot of problems with MB 12" HD515 GPU. They were driver issues, but it took a lot of time to get fixed. Last summer was bad with El Crapitan and MB 12" 2016 model.
DDR4 RAM is not what the MacBook Pro is using. It uses LPDDR3 which is limited to 16Gb. So they would have to wait for Intel to support LPDDR4 to get above that limitation.
Like hans1972 says, that's still the wrong RAM though. Too high energy consumption.
I think Apple's working on paper thin margins for power delivery - the 'old-style batteries' may be part of the reason. This is why they don't offer 32Gb because even that is a larger power drain. That's not to say that a terraced battery will result in a 32Gb RAM option because apparently LPDDDR3 RAM doesn't come in that size for the shape of the enclosure that the current Macbook Pros have.
If Apple were going to seriously offer a 32Gb option one easy way to do it would be within a 'mythical' 17" larger model which would offer more battery size, probably fix keyboard issues, and allow 32Gb via DDR4 due to bigger chassis.
I don't see any reason for Apple to do that though, especially as 6 core Coffee Lake CPUs could surely be the logical CPU to put into such a device - along with a better (Vega?) AMD GPU - and a big selling point for future desktop Macs and a Rev C Macbook Pro range.
They could also be pre-cannibalising their 'mythical' Modular Mac Pro too if people weren't scared off by the probably massive price of a 17" model.
I think it's been mentioned that appropriate LPDDR3 RAM chips are not available in the density required due to the thin chassis (not enough room). I'm not really expecting 32Gb in either 13" or 15" incarnations. But a supersize 17" model now makes sense again especially if Apple are thinking to boost it to 6 cores in time for the Coffee Lake CPUs next year.
The 2011 17" models are about to be obsoleted so it's perhaps a good time to introduce a replacement model. I'll be shuddering at the price if they did though.
Give me a break! For things like the laptops you already know what Intel can supply and will likely supply to Apple.
It's an interesting situation with the SD slot. Currently there is no new retina laptop with an SD slot in Apple's lineup. TBH it doesn't affect me that much as I use CF anyway, but it really affects average consumers (not pros). I now have nothing to recommend to my parents when their MacBook Pro dies and I'm for sure not going to make my mom remember a card reader or try to figure out wifi or something because that is complicating things for absolutely no reason. I have a hard enough time getting her to keep her pictures backed up on the computer as it is, then to add more hassle? Nope.
[doublepost=1496102702][/doublepost]
It sure seems like they could have done something like that. Escape on the left, power/TouchID on the right. Make them look about the same and then the touchbar in the middle. Could have made everyone happy.
Last edited:
Actually this is incredibly easy to answer. There are a few very real issues that causes people to completely reject the Mac Book:
1. The CPU is crap in the machine, anybody doing demanding work will suffer through very sluggish behavior.
2. The Single USB-C port is just a bad idea for a MBA replacement. It might make sense on a netbook (pretty much what a Mac Book is) but it sucks for a general purpose machine. By the way I fully support the move to USB-C, it it set single port that I have trouble with.
3. That current USB-C port doesn't support TB3. This means docking stations suffer performance wise as you aren't getting any high speed goodness out of that port. An upgrade here makes for a more interesting Mac Book for some users.
4. That CPU thermally throttles pretty badly at times.
5. While nice the screen is small. I'd rather see the MBA's upgraded to retina screens. For my usage even a 13" screen is crowded.
That covers many of the issues but don't take this as knocking the Mac Book, for some users it is a good machine. However a lot of users out there simply need more from their machines. MBA is actually a pretty good value (if it is possible for Apple to have value in its products). On the flip side Mac Book is a poor value, it costs a lot and performs poorly. Like others though I think Apple can recover value in Mac Book with some solid upgrades which frankly wait on Intel to deliver.
I'm pretty sure these guys already have a windows machine and don't have any interest in Apple except to visit this forum and complain.
Really, if someone dislikes Apple and its products so much, why even bother checking them.
They still sell the "old style" MacBook Pro - the one with lots of different ports (but no USB-C/Thunderbolt 3) - even though it's kind of shoved into the corner. I'd love it if they updated the processor options for that machine. Even with no port upgrades, I'd buy one.
My wife would like a new computer of her own, but she uses several different external hardware that's all USB 2/3. We're not going to pay a premium for a computer that we'll have to use dongles with. She's making noises about switching back to Windows, and that may be what we do for her in the end.
My wife would like a new computer of her own, but she uses several different external hardware that's all USB 2/3. We're not going to pay a premium for a computer that we'll have to use dongles with. She's making noises about switching back to Windows, and that may be what we do for her in the end.
I totally disagree. I work in IT and production in advertising and use the BTO version of the current MacBook as my only computer.
It's a great little Mac, the best in the lineup currently. Handles light to middling work in Adobe apps, all my general admin stuff, and even some small scale 3D work quite capably. The lack of TB3 is in reality a blessing, because it means that the one USB-C port really is "USB-C", and works consistently for that reason.
We have 12 of the new MBPs here (a mix of 13 and 15 inch) and my little MacBook. The MacBook is the most trouble free of the lot. And it gets pushed harder too. I think that many users have a grandiose idea of what their "needs" really are, and snobbery about the MacBook is evidence of that. It's a great little laptop, and for those who are into ultimate portability, it's a brilliant, highly usable and capable computer - despite it's humble specs.
Last edited:
Would not be the first company which arrogance is its downfall.
Baby (since macOS prefers that spelling, ill leave it) Lake, redesigned battery to deal with that mess up, maybe a newer GPU?, different batches of keyboards?
You knew an update was coming in the coming months or could have done the research.
My guess is that the 13" model is selling well. This could be the special model for the "ultra-pro" users. Also, Apple updated the MacBook Air and 13" Pro in July 2011 with significantly faster processors just after both were completely redesigned in October 2010. Sound familiar?
[doublepost=1496105327][/doublepost]
Except as you recall the 2008 model was branded a MacBook, not a Pro.2009. 13" MacBook Pro and the return of FireWire.
I upgraded from a 2012 11 inch MBA with a 2gHZ i7 and 8GB of RAM to the new MB - 1.3gHZ BTO version. It's noticeably faster. Everyone gets stuck on the specs of the processor alone, but the new, more evolved SSD and other components add up to a machine that definitely feels faster. Knockout battery life too.
USB-3 is available though $9 adapters on Amazon. No need to use the Apple version. As for TB2 Apple's adapter is one of the more reasonably priced. TB2 never really took off, but TB3 is popular on the Windows side, so I understand why Apple dropped direct support for TB2.
[doublepost=1496105651][/doublepost]
That analysis is a bit simplistic. The GPU in the 2016 is faster than the 2011 MacBook Air, and the CPU uses a lot less power. That's why it doesn't need a fan and can support the Retina Display with ease.
Also, Intel hasn't focused on CPU speed enhancements as much lately. Even a 15W Kaby Lake processor isn't that much faster than the chip in your 2011 Air (except the GPU is much better). There is actually no jump clock speed for clock speed between Kaby Lake and Skylake, and the jump in CPU performance from the Sandy Bridge in your 2011 is only about 50% overall.
Something to keep in mind.
Then don't spend so much on a computer. "Top of the line" is just nonsense. You pay for features that matter. Otherwise it's a waste of money and you would be better off with the base model. Apple priced this generation quite high. I suspect at some point you'll see a bit of a price correction, as they can't keep the 2015 model as the base option forever.