What do you guys expect from Apple now? Quality Products? Their quality went down with Tim Cook years ago. And besides, Apple doesn't care about its Mac products anyways. They did a half ass job.
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
It doesn't matter whether Consumer Report recommends the new Macbook Pros or not, people will still go out and buy them anyway.
I guess I don't understand some of your point. I have used OWC SSD's and they have worked great. Have I bench marked the controllers? No, but my butt dyno says they are more than fast enough.
Secondly, you say Apple wants over $1000 for a 512GB SSD? The OWC price is $350 for a 480GB SSD. Seems to be to be a very good reason to buy the OWC SSD for only 35% of the Apple cost for what I suspect is pretty close performance.
What am I missing??
What does Phil Schiller say about this now?
"Can't innovate anymore, my Ass!"?
"We don't design for price - we design for the experience"?
"SD Card slot and more than 16 GB RAM is cumbersome?"
"You're using it wrong?"
Haha. Apple please take your own medicine. It doesn't taste good for your customers.
"Can't innovate anymore, my Ass!"?
"We don't design for price - we design for the experience"?
"SD Card slot and more than 16 GB RAM is cumbersome?"
"You're using it wrong?"
Haha. Apple please take your own medicine. It doesn't taste good for your customers.
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.
"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. "
Respectfully, you are so wrong. I haven't mentioned the low end numbers because they are within the realm of possibility, especially for a device that has known battery life issues. I can think of all sorts of explanations for a computer having poor battery life; dGPU kicked in too often, firmware not programming ASICs properly, incomplete charge profile, poor or variable CPU/ASIC yields with high sidewall capacitance leakage under certain conditions, partially defective battery, battery charger not producing enough current during the charge cycle, display leakage abnormalities, and on and on.
For the life of me, though, I can't think of any hardware issues that would increase the manufacturer's maximum battery life by 85% while running real-life usage test scenarios. Can you?
"Not once in any post have you even mentioned the possibility that the MBP might have an issue."
Not true. In the past I speculated Apple would resolve the very real issue with a software/firmware update. This would not be the first time that has happened. And thus I'm not surprised.
"If that aspect of the overall test wasn't flawed, why shouldn't we have any confidence in their overall results? "
That's easy. It was likely flawed. Can you come up with an objective and meaningful real-life usage scenario (web browsing, watching videos, etc) that would result in 18 1/2 hours of usage? For any laptop, Apple or otherwise?
"This is full of assumptions citysnaps. Chief among them, is the assumption they didn't check their equipment. "
Sorry, wrong again. Those were not assumptions. I listed them as possibilities that could lead to absurdly high battery life numbers achieved in a real-life use test scenario. You may not be aware that during acceptance testing of products, when abnormal results are obtained without explanation, engineers will think about possible causes. Never assumptions, they are possibilities to investigate.
"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. "
Nope. I drew a conclusion based on the numbers reported being absurdly high, and not able to think of a real life usage battery test scenario that would generate such high numbers in one situation and low numbers in another. As I said, I have no problem believing the low numbers - all sorts or possibilities that could cause that.
At what point would you become suspicious, seeing as though 18 1/2 hours in a real-life usage test scenario apparently doesn't raise your eyebrows?
Would 25 hours do it? 35 hours? There must be some number that you would stand back and say, "Wait a minute, that can't possibly be true."
It would be like Consumer Reports testing, say, a Lexus 460 V8 off the lot. And over a closed loop test course, and rigorous test procedures, come up with, over multiple tests, MPGs of 5, 7, 12, 15, 18, 20, 24, and 44 MPG.
I'd expect numbers in the range of 15 to 24 MPG, even 12 in some situations. 5 and 7 MPG could be explained by (a combination of) bad timing, improper fuel/air mixture, a brake caliper piston or two stuck, very under inflated tires, etc.
But I know of no situation that could possibly yield 44 MPG over a closed loop course (i.e. not all down hill). Can you think of one? Would that number surprise you? If not, why not? If that number was reported by CR before investigation, would it cast doubt in your mind about their test procedures in general? It sure would with me.
-----------
EDIT:
I forgot that CR mentioned a 19 1/2 hours battery life number. That's +95% over Apple's stated maximum battery life.
Last edited:
Actually I was finding it too heavy and clunky and opted to take the 12" MacBook for working on location mostly. I'm really happy with the new form factor.
Some of your points are valid. I agree that the competition is stiff now. If Apple doesn't stay focus, they'll loose customers but that's just the nature of the business. You'll have to stay focus all the time.
Their computer business is not suffering. Mac computer is the only computer that has an upward sale trend while the entire pc industry is in a downward trend.
Apple TV is doing fine. It is selling more units than every other companies. Like I said, the user experience on Apple TV is far better then competitors. Hence, even withou 4k resolution, they're still not a deal breaker.
Discontinuing products is a normal things. It's not a sign of things going bad.
Home automation is still in its infancy. Everyone is not settling for anything yet. They're still testing out the market. That's why you see companies popping up with products all the time. We are still a long way to go from a true and affordable home automation standard.
The industries are changing at a rapid pace. It's Apple job to innovate and stay on top. Like I said, they're still on top but will need to continue to stay focus to keep it that way. Otherwise, they'll be another blackberry.
With regards to Battery Life, my 2016 15" MacBook Pro with the radeon 450 has been getting as much as 13.5 hours of battery life under light load, with an addition 7 to 12 hours of standby in addition to that usage. It of course it much lower when rendering large .tiff images in photoshop or batch editing through Lightroom.
Honestly consumer reports just wants to remain relevant. Go look at their site. Unless you want to buy a car it is utterly useless.
They relish the opportunity to take a shot deserved or not to get their name on the news.
Moving on.
They relish the opportunity to take a shot deserved or not to get their name on the news.
Moving on.
Can we finally stop with this insulting ******** directed at true professionals who use the new MacBook Pro, that - in fact - is, in shape and form, intended for them? Or are we still going to suffer this pretentious arrogance of the self-appointed, conceited "judges of what-is-trully-professional-and-what-is-not"?
Professionals that are really demanding power are working with dedicated Desktop machines or Workstations, where you can connect two Displays, external Keyboard, Mouse, etc. - Not a really thin MacBook that it's power gets throttling down when you really demand power for hours due to heat and cooling issues...
Can't really agree with your statements on computer development. For whatever reason their upgrade cycle is abysmal with regards to desktops and their new laptops are almost becoming an industry joke.
I also think the Apple of the past would have made home devices more relevant with big ideas.
I think their downward tread has begun and their position as another tech company rather than THE tech company is assured. I don't think they'll be another blackberry but I don't believe they'll be leading the charge in any arena going forward. Resting in their laurels isn't good enough, and that's the model under Tim Cook.
Let's just hope they don't downgrade their reputation to embarrassing.
Last edited:
Professionals that are really demanding power are not the only professionals in existence.
Professionals that are demanding Desktop machines or Workstations don't use laptops at all, not just MacBook Pros.
You can connect 2 5K displays on a MacBook Pro and 4 4K Displays, as well as external keyboards, mice, etc.
Every laptop throttles and the new MacBook Pros throttle less then previous, thicker models.
Basically, every sentence you wrote is wrong.
"apple TV ....selling more units than every other companies''
Not sure about that, I would guess 'Amazon Fire Stick' and or 'Chromecast' are the market leaders.
Unless 2016 was a bumper year for appleTV sales
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.te...ling-media-streaming-device.htm?client=safari
I've used both mac and pc for my work. The latest custom built pc I got is a joke , even compare with the old MacBook Pro. The user experience and productivity is still so bad that they can't be compared, horrible trackpad, terrible battery life, windows...well it's windows, too heavy to carry around all day, made of cheap plastic, etc. I'm talking about real world usage, not spec sheet comparison.
I do hope Apple will continue to innovate though. They're doing a lot of those quick enough lately.
You just wrote "While technically reviews themselves are facts" - they are not facts, technically or literally or metaphysically.
If I say, "I think these machines satisfy my needs" - that is not a fact. That is still an opinion. The only fact is an opinion was stated...the original poster 'had a "feeling"' - that's no different than a reviewer having a 'feeling' as you state.
I'm only confused why you keep thinking reviews or people's thoughts are facts.
Here is my review of the sun - "the sun does not exist" - I guess that's a fact.
A simple, elegant solution. One current Apple management would likely find distasteful. A shame.
I will allow that there is surely a sizable market wishing something more capable than a MacBook, but still fairly light and decent battery life. Or a market the 2016 MBP would more or less suite—IF better conceived.
Nevertheless, Apple would likely sell more than a few of an upgraded and modernized 2012 cMBP. Something with more than 'professional' pretensions, but the real deal. I'm still waiting.
While my work Lenovo laptop is absolutely wonderful in design, function and durability (also has ports!). And if the new iMacs aren't something stellar I will be jumping ship since all I need is a powerful machine to run Lightroom and PS.
He's SVP of Apple Marketing. Marketing people are liars as trustworthy as used car sales people. He simply creates the spin to counter negativity and does it very well.
I dont think Phil Schiller is a good salesman / marketer, quite the opposite actually.
I also think he should show some b#lls and issue a statement.