If they followed the same process for all then yes. It represents a fair and reasonable test. If the same process yielded different results then the problem is more likely than not to be with the subject of the tests and not with the testing process CR has been transparent with both the process and their results.
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.
2016 MacBook Pro Denied Recommendation From Consumer Reports Due to Battery Life Inconsistencies
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If they followed the same process for all then yes. It represents a fair and reasonable test. If the same process yielded different results then the problem is more likely than not to be with the subject of the tests and not with the testing process CR has been transparent with both the process and their results.
Wow. Ok, so you can upgrade the hard drive. I guess that's why the previous model isn't an appliance and the new one is.
I mostly use my machine in clamshell mode with a wired aluminum Apple keyboard, but I actually prefer the feel of the butterfly mk 2 keys to anything else.
Last edited:
So you believe the 19.5, 18.5, 16, and 12 hour battery life test results?
Have any other laptops ever achieved that under rigorous test procedures?
Last edited:
I wonder if it's possible that optimisations for real world use are problematic in tests such as these. Maybe the unrealistic (not representing normal use) tests, perhaps even through the very consistency they try to implement, causes problems with the optimisations? Tests such as these may just show up how dangerous a little knowledge can be.
Battery life is hinkey, non-upgradable memory, non-upgradeable storage, a touch bar rather than a touch screen.
Apple, you can do better than that for your "pro" products.
Apple, you can do better than that for your "pro" products.
I respectfully disagree. Based on your posts, you're fixated on the high end of the results. You've made no mention of the low results, nor the variability in the results. It's like you've drawn a conclusion and are laser focused only on the data that supports it. I've looked at every post you've posted in this thread. You question the intellectual curiosity of CR's review staff, but you're exhibiting a lack of it yourself. Not once in any post have you even mentioned the possibility that the MBP might have an issue. If you can't acknowledge that you're not looking for the truth, you're looking for validation. That's not the same thing.
This is a hypothetical question. It's valid. It's equally valid converse is irrelevant as well. If that aspect of the overall test wasn't flawed, why shouldn't we have any confidence in their overall results? To date, there's no evidence, pro or con, regarding the question of the validity of their results. To pose a hypothetical as evidence if it has relevancy... you're better than that.
This is full of assumptions citysnaps. Chief among them, is the assumption they didn't check their equipment. I'm not going to assume they did, but I'm not going to assume they didn't either. There's no evidence to support it. They did check their results since they ran the tests multiple times, before and after updating the OS. I again reiterate your fixation on the high portion of the data set. You even bolded it this time.
It still ignores the larger question of the high variability of the results. The abnormally high numbers can also cast a ton of suspicion that the MBP could be flawed. With respect, you don't know this to be true. It fits with the conclusion you've already drawn so it seems you've convinced yourself it actually happened. I agree that intellectual curiosity is important, but no more important than intellectual honesty. A lot of assumption and hypothetical scenarios doesn't make your conclusion intellectually honest. Also offering up their data for review goes a long way towards expressing that intellectual curiosity you claim they didn't exhibit. Their willingness to retest does as well. CR could have easily said screw it, it is what is.
Btw, thanks for the discourse. When I joined MR, this is what I imagined it would be.
I wish we got more of this. Instead of, well you know...
I like it. It takes some getting used to because it IS different. It's got a bit more travel than the rMB which is nice. If you type hard, you need to soften up.
I never loved the previous keyboard on MacBooks (the one that's been in use since the original polycarbonate MacBooks) so I certainly don't feel like it's a step back.
Good question. IDK. But afaik no one, including Apple, uses real world scenarios to test battery life. All other previous macbooks passed their testing so it leads me to think it's a software issue. If so, that can be easily fixed.
With an OWC SSD? I really don't think those are an upgrade. Their controllers are lackluster. And Apple charges more than $1000 for a outright purchase of a 512GB SSD. So while you are technically correct it can be upgraded, it is not reasonable to do so. Hence the reason most everyone says non-upgradable.
As i said, i will wait ,they basically had my money already,too pricy,too silence from Apple,too many bad news.
Good point. For Apple to have produced better optimisations like I suggested, well, how would they test it to see if they were getting it right? An AI system for testing sounds like a fit, but I've no idea if that's plausible. Probably require long periods of widespread use in the wild. Unless the OS does (and has for a while) just that? Sounds fanciful.
I'm sure you're right about the software issue, if there is one. How could a hardware fault be inconsistent as CR found?
Personally, for what it's worth (sample of one!), mine lasts way better than my 15" 2013 model. Triple the time, perhaps?
No. That's not at all what I said.
I was pretty clear about the fact that if you need a lot of battery life, this is not a good machine. However, what I said was that I really liked it otherwise. (And I in no way needed this machine except that I was tired of hauling around a 15" MBP that I owned entirely because the deal was too good to pass up.)
And while it's "unstable" for a Mac, it's still a mostly trouble-free machine.
I think the "skip first gen Apple products" is a bit overstated. I've owned some first-gen machines, like the original unibody MBP. That machine is still operational. That product line was fine. Same goes for the first-gen Mac Mini.
I agree it seems to be software related. The very high numbers would make me think that, for whatever test they are using, there are hardware chips doing most of the work which is very battery efficient. Then maybe something is keeping the CPU or GPU powered on some tasks and drastically reducing battery life. Just some random thoughts I had.
Yep. I agree. I just got my wife a MacBook and to be perfectly honest, that's just about ideal in size and weight for what I want. The machine is just too weak for my own usage though. She specifically loved it because it slips in her purse so when she meets with clients she doesn't need to carry a separate carrying case.
So yeah, some people do care about thinner and lighter.
Not only does it not feel fragile, it is absolutely solid.
Erratic battery behaviour widely reported in reviews. Erratic battery behaviour widely reported on this forum. Erratic battery behaviour reported by Consumer Reports.
But certain members of this forum at angry at... Consumer Reports?
But certain members of this forum at angry at... Consumer Reports?
Your post history makes you seem like a true Apple fan whose opinion I respect. I appreciate your insights.
The innovation is the combination between thinner, faster, water proof, and a great user experience.
No other company did this before Apple. They might have made many products with one or two of these technologies but not a great combination of all these. If there's one, I'd like to see proof of that.
I have an Android tablet and the "user experience" is just as dialed. The features that made Apple's user experience superior is dwindling at a good clip, as their computer business is suffering, Airport is extinct, AppleTv is being schooled in 4k resolution and features by Amazon, Roku and Google, and Apple is lagging in adoption of useful home integration devices.
I get that you think Apple is all that. But they have lost their edge and are at present having a hard time just keeping up. Everybody except the most committed Apple evangelists are starting to buy superior products by other makers because the ecosystem is less rubust and their products are more expensive and less impressive than they used to be. They still make the best phone IMO, and that's about it. And I dont expect that advantage to last very long considering the issues the company is having getting basic functions right and understanding what customers actual want.
I get about three hours of light use on my 15" MacBook Pro. I can't really do anything of substance without plugging it in. Really pathetic. Is Apple going t fix or replace the batteries???