16-Inch MacBook Pro May Ship With 96W USB-C Power Adapter

[Emanuel Rodriguez]

There simply might not be enough bandwidth left after accounting for the 6K video stream to justify anything faster than USB-C. TB3 has a number of extra capabilities over USB-C, among them are more bandwidth and daisy-chaining. The former might be moot after subtracting the 6k video stream and the latter is at least partly compensated by there being three USB-C ports.

USB-C is a port. Thunderbolt is a protocol.

Yes, marketing material gets this wrong too, but whatever. The USB Type-C port is the third type of USB port after USB Type-A and USB Type-B (in its various forms). USB Type-C is the first type to support more than just the USB protocol (versions including 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 4), including DisplayPort, HDMI, MHL, VirtualLink, and also Thunderbolt (although USB Type-C is guaranteed to support the USB protocol, the other protocols are optional. Power-only USB Type-C cables are defined in the standard, but I've never actually seen one, and I doubt anyone would bother manufacturing one).

Sorry, this is a pet peeve of mine. Understand that USB Type-C has no speed. It is not a protocol.

 

[Kinotto]

The keyboard was a design failure but it is not that Apple set out to create a less reliable keyboard. It's more like **** happens and Apple was too slow to clean up the mess (though, so far the last iteration seems to be noticeably better than earlier versions). And the not-user-serviceable components has been a continuous trend that you just have to live with.

And it is not that the keyboards of most Surface products have that great of a typing experience either. And products like the Surface Book have their downsides as well (thick, top-heavy) that would be castigated as well if they were Apple products.

I don’t believe Apple didn’t test the keyboard before release: they knew for sure it was what it proved to be, they just thought the tradebacks were acceptable for the greater good of extreme thinnes.

Surface book falls in a completely different category than the MacBooks: the direct competitor is the Surface laptop and it’s known to everyone their keyboards are best in class. Besides that, Microsoft just made their laptops easily serviceable and made the SSD user-upgreadable across all the lineup.

I’m not saying they’re perfect but there’s a clear intention to empower the user, rather than put stupid limitations

 

[cocoua]

Wifi 6 please!
[automerge]1570350929[/automerge]

With the pure chaos that Apple's laptop lineup has been the past years ("Air doesn't mean it weighs less, it means it's cheap"), I am totally expecting them to keep selling the 15" alongside the 16" as "the cheap one". It makes no sense, but Apple's laptop line has also made no sense for very long. They also kept selling the 2015 for quite long, and the ancient Air for years and years, etc. They're trying to hit very many price points/use cases without any cohesive story.

Personally what I would love them to do is introduce a 15" MacBook (non-Pro) that can be the super thin and light machine with no ports, and then have the 16" Pro be allowed to be a little bit thicker with better cooling, more battery, thicker keyboard, a (gasp!) USB-A port and SD card slot, etc. No way in hell that is going to happen though.

Not to mention iPad line... my father has 3 cases fir different iPad until he could buy th one fits his. Naming either is easy for someone doesn't studies "ipad,s naming career" pro , air , new, new air, air 2, pro 11, pro 10,2... man!

 

[manu chao]

I don’t believe Apple didn’t test the keyboard before release: they knew for sure it was what it proved to be, they just thought the tradebacks were acceptable for the greater good of extreme thinness.

Testing keyboards as to their sturdiness during 'normal' use is one thing, testing them in regard to ingress of debris is more difficult as it is hard to define what typical debris would be. They revised the keyboard at least three times. Do you really think they knew exactly how it would fare in real life in advance when they had to correct course three times?

Besides that, Microsoft just made their laptops easily serviceable and made the SSD user-upgreadable across all the lineup.

I’m not saying they’re perfect but there’s a clear intention to empower the user, rather than put stupid limitations

Apart from the SSD, what else is more serviceable in the Surface laptops?

 

[manu chao]

USB-C is a port. Thunderbolt is a protocol.

Though I think the phrase 'TB3 port' is a reasonable short form for 'USB-C port with TB3 support' in conversations where all parties are aware of what it means. In the image provided by Apple of the back of the display that prompted this sub-discussion Apple labels the two types of ports as:

• USB-C port(s)
• Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C) port

I really don't think shortening something by leaving out stuff in parentheses is such a no-no (it is not that there would multiple types of Thunderbolt 3 ports and that the 'USB-C' label would be necessary to differentiate between them).

USB Type-C is the first type to support more than just the USB protocol (versions including 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 4), including DisplayPort, HDMI, MHL, VirtualLink, and also Thunderbolt (although USB Type-C is guaranteed to support the USB protocol, the other protocols are optional. Power-only USB Type-C cables are defined in the standard, but I've never actually seen one, and I doubt anyone would bother manufacturing one).

Yes and no. There are USB-C cables that support only power + USB 2. For most purposes a lot of people would consider those to be mainly 'power-only' cables.

Sorry, this is a pet peeve of mine. Understand that USB Type-C has no speed. It is not a protocol.

Though, at least with Macs (with one exception), USB-A has meant 5 Gbit/s (since 2012) and USB-C 10 Gbit/s, in regard to the speed when using the USB 3.x protocol. And coming back to the image of the back of the display, when Apple labels a port 'USB-C', it means 10 Gbit/s (at the moment), when it labels it 'Thunderbolt 3', it means 40 Gbit/s.
[automerge]1570362518[/automerge]

Get the feeling you're going to be bitterly disappointed with this machine if you're expecting the former of my two examples, 96W is tight for a truly high end machine. Assuming the CPU remains 45W, the rest of the system draws the same as the 15", this is what, 9W extra for the GPU? A laptop RTX 2060 can draw up to 90W alone. That's a reasonable but not exactly monster graphics card. Even a low end gaming laptop comes with a 120W charger, the Razer Blade with the best Nvidia graphics comes with a 230W power supply. Looks like it's going to be closer to the current 15" than what you're looking for.

Given that USB-C tops out at 100 W, I'd say Apple has quite an incentive to not design laptops that have a power supply with more power. They wouldn't want to break the neatness of only USB-C ports simply to push 10 or 20% more power to the laptop.

It has always been the case that laptops could consume more power temporarily than their power supply could provide. They simply would tap into the battery for short moments. I see in this some wiggle room for Apple.

 

[SactoGuy18]

I wonder why would the new 16" MacBook Pro come with a 96 watt USB-C charging adapter. Don't you think given how more power efficient modern laptop motherboards are nowadays, they could get by with at 65 watt charger?

 

[Emanuel Rodriguez]

Though I think the phrase 'TB3 port' is a reasonable short form for 'USB-C port with TB3 support' in conversations where all parties are aware of what it means. In the image provided by Apple of the back of the display that prompted this sub-discussion Apple labels the two types of ports as:

• USB-C port(s)
• Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C) port

I really don't think shortening something by leaving out stuff in parentheses is such a no-no (it is not that there would multiple types of Thunderbolt 3 ports and that the 'USB-C' label would be necessary to differentiate between them).

It's a reasonable shortening for sure, the issue is that many people believe that USB Type-C ports have, by definition, USB 3.1 Gen 2 speeds. There is no such guarantee. In theory one could implement USB 1.0 on USB Type-C interfaces, although that may be standards-breaking. I believe USB 2.0 is the minimum allowed by standards-compliant implementations, from what I remember from the docs.

Yes and no. There are USB-C cables that support only power + USB 2. For most purposes a lot of people would consider those to be mainly 'power-only' cables.

They may consider those power-only cables, but they are not. My point was that the USB standard (you can read the docs yourself if you're curious) defines power-only cables. Those don't exist in production as far as I can tell, and are in production, as you pointed out, power + USB 2, since the cost of including USB 2 is so little.

 

[0989382]

You guys know that it’ll be priced exactly the same as the existing MacBook Pro, right? Quote me on it. Apple know what they‘re doing. MacRumors haters will always jump on sensationalist bandwagons to no end.

 

[Val-kyrie]

have you tried a 2019 model?

Yes. I like the feel of the 2019 model better than 2016-18 MBPs, but after analyzing the design and reading about the problems, I believe it to be a structural flaw. I won’t rehash the details which I have posted elsewhere but this is the reason I have not purchased a new Mac laptop.

 

[Steve121178]

You guys know that it’ll be priced exactly the same as the existing MacBook Pro, right? Quote me on it. Apple know what they‘re doing. MacRumors haters will always jump on sensationalist bandwagons to no end.

No chance. What about the $ to £ adjustment for starters?

 

[Kinotto]

Testing keyboards as to their sturdiness during 'normal' use is one thing, testing them in regard to ingress in regard to debris is more difficult as it is hard to define what typical debris would be. They revised the keyboard at least three times. Do you really think they knew exactly how it fare in real life in advance when they had to correct course three times?


Apart from the SSD, what else is more serviceable in the Surface laptops?

The keyboard and the whole part of the case around it can be lifted up to access internals.

Just to be clear, my point is not that MacBooks are ****, they’re not, just they could be much better and implement features that benefit the user, instead of stupid trade-offs

 

[Falhófnir]

You guys know that it’ll be priced exactly the same as the existing MacBook Pro, right? Quote me on it. Apple know what they‘re doing. MacRumors haters will always jump on sensationalist bandwagons to no end.

Highly doubtful. Apple are more than ever phasing in new designs from the top end, if pricing is in line with the existing 15" range, it's very likely to still start at a much higher spec, and accordingly higher price. Cashing in on people who will pay through the nose for the new design is very lucrative, I'm sure. I could see something like the following:

$2,399 - 15" i7/16GB/256GB/555X
$2,799 - 15" i9/16GB/512GB/560X
$3,299 - 16" i9/16GB/1TB/Vega 16 ($50 more than the 15" with the same spec).

But not this new machine debuting from $2,399.

 

[manu chao]

The keyboard and the whole part of the case around it can be lifted up to access internals.

Just to be clear, my point is not that MacBooks are ****, they’re not, just they could be much better and implement features that benefit the user, instead of stupid trade-offs

According to iFixit, the Surface Laptop 1 and 2 scored a 0 out of 10 on their repairability score. The 2015 MBP scored a 1 out of 10. The 2019 13" MBP (2 TB ports) scored a 2 out of 10. [The 2018 MBA scores 3 out of 10]. They don't seem to have anything on the Surface Laptop 3 yet.

For the Surface Laptop 2 their conclusion is:

• Opening the device is still destructive, inhibiting any repairs
• Modular components like the headphone jack are not easily accessible
• The CPU, RAM, and onboard storage are still soldered to the motherboard
• The battery is difficult to access and is severely glued in place

Maybe that all changed with the Surface Laptop 3 but up until the Surface Laptop 2, they aren't really better than Apple.

 

[0989382]

No chance. What about the $ to £ adjustment for starters?

It'll have the same affect it's always had, and Apple will deal with it the way they always have.
[automerge]1570447760[/automerge]

Highly doubtful. Apple are more than ever phasing in new designs from the top end, if pricing is in line with the existing 15" range, it's very likely to still start at a much higher spec, and accordingly higher price. Cashing in on people who will pay through the nose for the new design is very lucrative, I'm sure. I could see something like the following:

$2,399 - 15" i7/16GB/256GB/555X
$2,799 - 15" i9/16GB/512GB/560X
$3,299 - 16" i9/16GB/1TB/Vega 16 ($50 more than the 15" with the same spec).

But not this new machine debuting from $2,399.

Well, time will tell. Wait and see.

 

[Steve121178]

It'll have the same affect it's always had, and Apple will deal with it the way they always have.
[automerge]1570447760[/automerge]

By putting the prices up if the recent iPhone 11 Pro launch prices against the Xs launch prices were anything to go by.

 

[0989382]

By putting the prices up if the recent iPhone 11 Pro launch prices against the Xs launch prices were anything to go by.

It's a very small increase. Not going from £1,249 to £3,000 + as some people on here suggest ...

 

[Steve121178]

It's a very small increase. Not going from £1,249 to £3,000 + as some people on here suggest ...

For me it's not really the MacBook prices that are the problem. It's the CTO options, especially storage & RAM.

 

[Falhófnir]

For me it's not really the MacBook prices that are the problem. It's the CTO options, especially storage & RAM.

Or to put it another way, the extremely stingy base spec (particularly as storage tiers go). Seems incredible a £2,400 computer comes with a paltry 256GB SSD, and that there is no off-the-shelf 1TB option at all.

 

[0989382]

For me it's not really the MacBook prices that are the problem. It's the CTO options, especially storage & RAM.

Yeah RAM has been a rip as of lately. I remember in 2013 ordering 16GB for around £80 for my MacBook Pro at the time (mid 2012 model). Then, two years later, looking for the same kit and it was £160. Even for non Apple, upgradeable PCs today like a ThinkPad with removable RAM, upgrade kits are a rip off.

Apple's higher spec configurations have often led me lately to go for the highest model. I had a 2018 MBP 13" with TouchBar last December and opted for the 512GB option for SSD due to it not being upgradeable. I couldn't afford the RAM upgrade at the time and deemed the storage more useful, it's definitely not cheap. But then, I found the same to be true on the Windows ends of competing laptops - expensive build to order options and aftermarket upgrade kits

 

[Falhófnir]

According to iFixit, the Surface Laptop 1 and 2 scored a 0 out of 10 on their repairability score. The 2015 MBP scored a 1 out of 10. The 2019 13" MBP (2 TB ports) scored a 2 out of 10. They don't seem to have anything on the Surface Laptop 3 yet.

For the Surface Laptop 2 their conclusion is:

• Opening the device is still destructive, inhibiting any repairs
• Modular components like the headphone jack are not easily accessible
• The CPU, RAM, and onboard storage are still soldered to the motherboard
• The battery is difficult to access and is severely glued in place

Maybe that all changed with the Surface Laptop 3 but up until the Surface Laptop 2, they aren't really better than Apple.

The SL 1 and 2 got a 0 because you literally had to break them (rip the alcantara keyboard surface off) to get inside them, therefore there was literally no way to even get into it without breaking it. Panay detailed how the new machines can be opened up via screws, and that inside at least the Drives are removable (with the usual ass-covering spiel that they 'aren't meant to be opened by the user/ microsoft aren't responsible if you break something' even though the implication very much is that you can DIY, or at least a third-party repair shop can.

To their credit, the new MacBook Air design is also a small step back in the right direction from the MacBook Pro, with modular boards to allow for the ports and headphone jack and a few other components to be replaced separately, unlike the Pros where it's all on one board.

 

[manu chao]

The SL 1 and 2 got a 0 because you literally had to break them (rip the alcantara keyboard surface off) to get inside them, therefore there was literally no way to even get into it without breaking it. Panay detailed how the new machines can be opened up via screws, and that inside at least the Drives are removable (with the usual ass-covering spiel that they 'aren't meant to be opened by the user/ microsoft aren't responsible if you break something' even though the implication very much is that you can DIY, or at least a third-party repair shop can.

To their credit, the new MacBook Air design is also a small step back in the right direction from the MacBook Pro, with modular boards to allow for the ports and headphone jack and a few other components to be replaced separately, unlike the Pros where it's all on one board.

In other words, both Microsoft and Apple are or have been rather bad but both have made some improvements recently?

 

[Falhófnir]

In other words, both Microsoft and Apple are or have been rather bad but both have made some improvements recently?

Kind of? Apple's move really just means if you snap your USB cable off in the port it will be cheaper for them to replace just that small board, rather than the whole logic board (probably still charging you the same flat repair fee) while with Microsoft you can (can't) now open the machine up, and potentially replace the drive (though it looks proprietary in the video anyway?). It remains to be seen how the rest of their motherboard is set up, but they've been just as guilty of soldering everything down as Apple til now, and didn't say anything about RAM SO-DIMMs, wireless cards etc. That I've yet seen, neither of them have even caught up to what Dell, Razer etc already offer in terms of modularity with a lot of their machines.

 

[wolfedude88]

By putting the prices up if the recent iPhone 11 Pro launch prices against the Xs launch prices were anything to go by.

The prices here in the US were the same for the launch prices of iphone 11 pro and Xs. Heck the iphone 11 was even cheaper than the launch price of the XR.

 

[Zdigital2015]

I wonder why would the new 16" MacBook Pro come with a 96 watt USB-C charging adapter. Don't you think given how more power efficient modern laptop motherboards are nowadays, they could get by with at 65 watt charger?

Because 65w is not enough to supply sufficient power a 15”/16” MBP during times when both the CPU and the GPU are hitting peak power draw, much less simply charge a MBP with a 45w TDP CPU and a 35w TDP GPU and Thunderbolt 3 ports providing power AND an 83.5w/hr battery - https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs/

 

[Kinotto]

According to iFixit, the Surface Laptop 1 and 2 scored a 0 out of 10 on their repairability score. The 2015 MBP scored a 1 out of 10. The 2019 13" MBP (2 TB ports) scored a 2 out of 10. [The 2018 MBA scores 3 out of 10]. They don't seem to have anything on the Surface Laptop 3 yet.

For the Surface Laptop 2 their conclusion is:

• Opening the device is still destructive, inhibiting any repairs
• Modular components like the headphone jack are not easily accessible
• The CPU, RAM, and onboard storage are still soldered to the motherboard
• The battery is difficult to access and is severely glued in place

Maybe that all changed with the Surface Laptop 3 but up until the Surface Laptop 2, they aren't really better than Apple.

Yes they apparently changed with the Surface Laptop 3, hence my comment: Microsoft listened and worked towards fixing the issue