2016 MacBook Pro Denied Recommendation From Consumer Reports Due to Battery Life Inconsistencies

[macrem]

The irony is that not a single person on this planet complained the 2015 was too thick. I haven't met anybody online or offline who said they wished it was thinner. Yet they trimmed it down along with the battery.

Me. I'm the guy. Sorry! My dream machine is the form factor of the latest MacBook with MBP power under the hood. The 2016 MBP is close enough. I'm getting ~10 hours battery life and for the most part am using MacOS apps (Safari, Mail, Messages, etc.). I never was a fan of Chrome on Mac. Safari on MacOS is much better IMHO.

 

[Scott_Martin_]

They were testing it wrong!

That's worth a closer look than I think you intended. Just because their results were wacky doesn't mean the MBP is wacky - they could learn from this and improve their methodology. How about doing a variety of things while testing battery life (not just web browsing)? I feel like CP's methodology for testing all kinds of things has gone downhill in recent years. The way they test and rate cameras, for example, is maddening.

 

[citysnaps]

This is my hope. Though it looks like old school battery memory. I know it is not for sure I know that. That is just the way it looks. I hope apple can sort out the discharge bug and kill it.
[doublepost=1482503862][/doublepost]

I find it odd hence I said lets assume they are sound in the testing method. That is assumption 1.

Then the wildly different results is a flaw in the testing or a flaw in the machine. I would love to ready the methods in great detail and you know what is great CR does provide that.

So I suspect we are looking at some sort of glitch if and only if the CR results can be verified by like 9to5 Mac or hell even editors here.

If we can not produce the same large delta in data which your right normally points to a flaw in a testing method then it is bunk.

If we can produce the same delta or similar delta. I then have to assume that it is a firmware bug with discharge rates.

So I have 2 assumptions 1) CR did there job and it was sound 2) it can be reproduced by some one other than CR.

I am not a fan of CR nor lover.

I am looking at this as a giant science experiment. I know we can improve the controlled for variables with say a automator script clicking every 5 seconds or so. The point is this data is mixed bag till we can get more than I got this you got that data points. I need to see 2 machines loop this test 5 to 10 times. The delta should be sub 10%.

I assume that when we do that if we get similar results there is a firmware flaw. If not then it was poor testing.

So lets all simmer down and science this and not play slap fight.

I'm not trying to engage in a "slap fight."

I'm just wondering why so many people do not question some of CR's too-good-to-be-true results getting 19.5, 18.5, and 12 hours of battery life under their test conditions.

I attribute that to many having a serious lack of intellectual curiosity. Yet those same people will believe CR's conclusion lock, stock, and barrel.

Sadly, I am not shocked.

 

[Martyimac]

What I'd like to see them improve is device continuity. Every Apple device should use the same power cords and standardize on USB 3.0 so you really only need one set of adapters for all your Apple devices. Also, most of all, they should sort out a way to resurrect the Mag Safe connector... IMHO one of the best features of the MacBook line for years. Saved my butt more than once.

Although I can see why Apple is taking the route they are with minimal ports, wireless is the way to go, but working through the transition period is painful and having different cords for iDevices vs Mac devices is getting out of control.

Things I don't care about... touch screen on my laptop or a detachable screen. Both seem like gimmicks to me. I do think different devices have different uses and would rather have devices that are great at what they're intended for than a single device that is mediocre at either.

If I was in charge of Apple product line vision... I'd be pushing for more continuity and making them as easy as possible to use together. Seems Apple has all the right components, but they need to make it stupid-simple to set-up and understand. Besides that... battery life on devices... that should be a huge focus to ensure Apple devices last longer than any comparable device out there.

While I'm on my little idea soapbox, I'd also add an iOS option to make your iPhone as simple as possible and great at making phone calls. I know a number of people (mostly in the 55+ age range) that use smart phones, but are getting overwhelmed with all the features and all they want is something way more simple (make calls, text, map directions, search internet now and then)... but this group could care less about features like ApplePay, iCloud, file sharing and would want the OS to be smart enough to automatically optimize settings for best battery life and internet usage.

I agree totally with your post. ESPECIALLY the part about the iPhone simplification being over 55 and all. While there are many users in our MUG that use a lot of the iOS features, the majority of us could care less about emojis, or texts that have moving graphics. Problem is, the way Apple is moving, not sure I would trust them to make a decent simplified iPhone.

 

[ItsNotaTumor]

Tim Cook is getting coal in his stocking.

 

[aevan]

They've been recommending Apple products left and right and no one considered them trustworthy, but now that they didn't recommend it - suddenly they are a paragon of objectivity.

If you read what they said, they actually say that the computers are good, but have the issue with battery life. So, if you believe them so much, then that means you admit all the billion posts on Macrumors that claimed the new MBPs are underpowered are wrong?
[doublepost=1482504912][/doublepost]

And you wonder why Macs are declining? It's a wonder they're not declining at a faster rate.

Macs are among the best selling PCs on the market. The entire industry is declining.

 

[iRobertM]

Weird. No major problems here on ours, it seems on par with my previous MacBook Pro's.

Anything to get people talking about Consumer Reports though I guess.

I knew Consumer Reports was wrong, I told myself while reading it "I am going to wait on the authoritative source Anzio before making my purchasing discussion." I am pretty sure Consumer Reports holds more clout than someone biased forum post.

 

[Pike R. Alpha]

This is my hope. Though it looks like old school battery memory. I know it is not for sure I know that. That is just the way it looks. I hope apple can sort out the discharge bug and kill it.
[doublepost=1482503862][/doublepost]

I find it odd hence I said lets assume they are sound in the testing method. That is assumption 1.

Then the wildly different results is a flaw in the testing or a flaw in the machine. I would love to ready the methods in great detail and you know what is great CR does provide that.

So I suspect we are looking at some sort of glitch if and only if the CR results can be verified by like 9to5 Mac or hell even editors here.

If we can not produce the same large delta in data which your right normally points to a flaw in a testing method then it is bunk.

If we can produce the same delta or similar delta. I then have to assume that it is a firmware bug with discharge rates.

So I have 2 assumptions 1) CR did there job and it was sound 2) it can be reproduced by some one other than CR.

I am not a fan of CR nor lover.

I am looking at this as a giant science experiment. I know we can improve the controlled for variables with say a automator script clicking every 5 seconds or so. The point is this data is mixed bag till we can get more than I got this you got that data points. I need to see 2 machines loop this test 5 to 10 times. The delta should be sub 10%.

I assume that when we do that if we get similar results there is a firmware flaw. If not then it was poor testing....

Actually. That is not true. It may not be reproducible, by anyone here, and still be a valid bug. Remember. Not all hardware is the same; for example. There are at least two different brands of display panels.

It also does not have to be the firmware. Other software, like drivers, can also be the culprit. Even the CR test scripts. But that is another assumption.

What's not an assumption is that if there is a bug, then Apple will find it and fix it.

I do however support your sentiment. People here should relax. This forum is not, or should not become, another kindergarten where 'kids' can have fun over the backs of hard working engineers at Apple. We're all humans. We all make mistakes, but what counts is how you react to a problem. That is what matters. Nothing else.

 

[Red Fummoxed]

The thing is that time and again people make excuses for Apple (the fault of the market for computers vs mobile, intel's fault, software's fault, your own fault). I've seen numerous examples in the forums of features Apple could have optionized, but didn't. People aren't clammoring for groundshaking innovation...most of the complaints stem from Apples disinterest with real performance (GPU, RAM, CPU), emphasis on thinness and the resulting implications, and price point which is getting outrageous even for groups that have long been accustomed to and cool with the Apple tax. I think it's a real problem when decades long Apple fans are looking at PC options...Razer, and even (gag) Microsoft. I don't buy it that Apple doesn't have the resources to put together a talented discrete team that can give the laptops the dedication they need. Telling people don't let the door hit your butt on the way out doesn't confront a real trend that seems to be going on among a small but previously dedicated group of consumers. Apple is capable of more AND better in the domain of desktops and laptops and doing so would in no way break the bank. Their computers are good for light to moderate computing, sometimes use older hardware (while championing the future of USB-C), and are overly expensive, even for Apple. In terms of the apologists, even if you love the new MBP, why wouldn't you want Apple to do better? Even if you think Apple is doing great, why wouldn't you want them to do better?

It isn't too late to ask Santa for a return key for Christmas. (drum fill)

Okay, salient points, but it seems you may be conflating apologists with "satisfied customers". Yeah, I looked at PC options and actually used a Surface 4 at work and let me tell you, that has nothing on a 2015 MacBook Pro. Its battery life wasn't anything to crow about, and while the tablet mode was nice at times, its application was limited and its biggest strength of being light and portable was a weakness because of battery life. Now, where have we heard that complaint? Outside of work, yeah, no way I am using that.

I spent 15 years working in television, and I saw Apple make tons of cash in laptops, desktops, XServ, Xsan and do you know where all that is today? Gone. It has been replaced with cheap boxes for render clusters, with human interface being a MacBook sitting on a stand driving a monitor. In news gathering, Apple lost that years ago as laptops, like many other video production equipment, are seen almost as consumables. Yeah, Apple left some of its customers behind, partly because the customer moved on as well.

You and I share concerns about Apple's direction, but I think they understand change. Innovation has slowed in both mobile and traditional computing because really, what else is there? Touch screens? Even that is pretty incremental. The competition has taken the hint they need to make marginally better designs and hardware, and in doing so have caught up to Apple in some respects. Oh, and they all have at one time or another, made their logos light up on the lid.

The innovation for MacBooks is going to be getting away from Intel. And I believe Apple isn't the only manufacturer thinking that way.

 

[truthertech]

Reviews aren't facts....

You are getting confused. Go back and read the posts again. The original poster felt, i.e., he had a "feeling" that the everyone could now agree that the new Macbook Pros were in "no way shape or form suitable for professional users." I provided reviews that contained "facts" that countered his "feeling," including the testing by multiple professionals of the Macbook Pro's performance on various professional software programs that showed that it met their performance standards and needs. Ergo, his feeling that the MBP's couldn't meet in "any way shape or form" met the needs of professional users was refuted by the fact that it has been demonstrated over and over to meet the needs of many, though not all, professional users. Those reviews contain those facts. While technically reviews themselves are facts, because they are something that actually exists, more typically we would say that reviews contain a mixture of opinion and fact. Hopefully, that clears up your confusion.

 

[Markusxl]

I think @fermat-au was pointing out the absurdity of individual anecdotes used as empirical evidence of... well, of anything. You and the poster he addressed seemed to miss the point about anecdotes and focused on the Note example. Forest and tree.

Except in the case of batteries, it's all anecdotal evidence. Wow, MacRumors posters are daft.

 

[dfelix]

I've been in UK Apple Stores a few times since the launch and people are ignoring these machines. They are so crazy expensive, especially if you do any BTO options, they are just not anything most people consider. I'm used to paying '£1299-1599' for my Pro Mac laptop and I'm struggling on with my 2011 as I just can't stomach the lack of upgradability on newer models. I'd need to spend over £3k to get a 1TB 15" machine - Dell can give me more than I need for £1500 but without MacOS.

Here's how Apple can save face:

In 2017 introduce the 'FatBook' without fanfare. Just needs to be the thickness of the last 2012 non-retina machine when you still had an easily upgradable drive and memory. Include magsafe, normal usb port and TB3. Make the base model really vanilla and a fair price but use BTO so people can make a 32TB 2TB, decent graphics card, road warrior/desktop replacement machine if they wish. Make the battery life killer.

Allow these flop machines to quietly go away like the Cube, merge their better elements with the next MacBook.

I like this thinking.



Just an actual, upgradeable nvme 2-bay would suffice. 32GB ram standard, soldered in if needed. a battery module for quick swaps. That's all it takes. I would be a happy mac owner once again.

I want a computer, not an appliance. Heck, a Vitamix 700 machine is more upgradeable than a ****ing macbook "pro".

The Vitamix does have Pro in the name as well. This just makes no sense.

Obviously, for someone in a mac bubble like Jony Ive's worshippers, the computer screws up and you just take it to an apple store, wait a month and get it back. Or, apparently, that's what apple wants you to do is carry a spare macbook in case the one you use all the time goes poopoo. Buy and carry a spare macbook. But not everyone lives in a place where there are Apple stores. Which means you can't depend on one for actual work, well, that is unless you buy a whole machine as spare.

That's the only way their obsession with thinness makes sense. Buy a second one, and a third one! Multiple computers weigh as much as a normal one! If you have to go to work in a faraway country , have the other ones with you as well! You don't ever have to repair your own or replace anything on it, evarrr! As a "feature" to keep you from prying into the machine, we'll solder everything in for you!

This is Planned Obsolescence at its finest, and this can not continue. If Windows would serve my needs as an OS better than MacOS I'd switch in a heartbeat, but it doesn't. And I absolutely hate drive letter assignment, with a passion. So I have to keep calling out Apple on their ******** or keep using the damn MacMini 2012, the last great Mini, as I have been.

But I want newer tech. I wanted a new Mac Pro since 2015, and was patiently waiting for a new release, but that never happened. Did not want to buy 2013 tech for ever increasing 2015 and beyond prices. The iMac got thinner, well, just because. What the actual hell, it's a desktop, not gonna get moved around that much, but now a strong wind can ... Plus, I live in a hot climate. Any proper workload on that thing and its starts its other signature feature, which is that damn fan noise. So it's not a good fit for me.
Sorry for getting sidetracked, but now back on point.


Not everyone needs or wants Macbook Airs. Renaming the Air line into Pro and then actually discontinuing proper Pro products is not the way to go. This has to stop. Period.

 

[Trigosl]

Except in the case of batteries, it's all anecdotal evidence. Wow, MacRumors posters are daft.

It's highly likely and clear that this is just a case of them not having the money to purchase the product, don't waste your time.

 

[MaSx]

Mac fanboy be like, you lie Consumer Reports you lie!

 

[cdmoore74]

Imagine if this was the iPhone. Apple better fix this inconsistency soon.

 

[69Mustang]

Wow, MacRumors posters are daft.

That may be the case. It still doesn't change the fact that you completely whiffed on the context and intention of that post. So no matter how daft I may be, at least my level of reading comprehension is sufficient enough understand what the poster meant.

 

[Paco II]

Pretty much sums up 2016.

Mac fanboy be like, you lie Consumer Reports you lie!

 

[Mac32]

Don't worry, the new MBP models are quite inexpensive, so a few issues should be accepted. Oh wait...

 

[polee]

ehem, except this guy...

...Thinner isn't always better...After waiting so long, i ended up getting the macbook 15" 2015. Sigh...

 

[swajames]

Looks to me to be a classic case of shooting the messenger. Assuming CR applies the same methodology to all laptops they test, and it's reasonable to assume that they do, the results are what they are and are simply what they found.

 

[AppleScruff1]

I'm not trying to engage in a "slap fight."

I'm just wondering why so many people do not question some of CR's too-good-to-be-true results getting 19.5, 18.5, and 12 hours of battery life under their test conditions.

I attribute that to many having a serious lack of intellectual curiosity. Yet those same people will believe CR's conclusion lock, stock, and barrel.

Sadly, I am not shocked.

It's simple math.

Consumer Reports says battery life is 19.5 hrs= Consumer Reports is a reliable source.

Consumer Reports says battery life is poor= Consumer Reports sucks and is biased against Apple.

 

[citysnaps]

Looks to me to be a classic case of shooting the messenger. Assuming CR applies the same methodology to all laptops they test, and it's reasonable to assume that they do, the results are what they are and are simply what they found.

So I should be OK with some of the test results yielding 19.5 hours, 18.5 hours, 16 hours, and 12 hours? And then feel confident that their testing methodology and conclusions are sound?

 

[jdiamond]

The irony is that not a single person on this planet complained the 2015 was too thick. I haven't met anybody online or offline who said they wished it was thinner. Yet they trimmed it down along with the battery.

I know - every time I go onto an airplane, they think my 2015 MBP is a tablet and let me stow it in the seat pocket or hold it during takeoff and landing. Weight is clearly more important than thickness, and even there, it's relative: To me, the 4.5 pound 15" 2015 MBP is light as a feather because I was used to an 8 pound 17" MBP for so long. And I'd never notice a half pound difference.

Always reminds me of college projects, where the teacher would say "you get ZERO points for bells and whistles until you complete all the BASIC functionality correctly."

 

[Marconelly]

If it was software, they wouldn't have killed the remaning indicator but acknowledged it was software and announcing a fix for that. So it's probably Hardware. And it seems random as they told CR that (affected) customers should contact AppleCare.

If it wasn't the software (safari in particular I would guess), you'd think the issue would manifest in Chrome as well though.

 

[bernuli]

The irony is that not a single person on this planet complained the 2015 was too thick. I haven't met anybody online or offline who said they wished it was thinner. Yet they trimmed it down along with the battery.

My boss recently picked up a 2016 13" MBP after I told him not to. He had a perfectly fine 2014 model but wanted "the latest and greatest" The day after he got it he asked me "what happened to the SD card reader, what do I do now". I said "well, you could get a dongle, but really I think you should return the computer."

Leaving me are the days where I could justify and recommend the more expensive hardware because of it's flexibility and longevity.