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

[A-Sign]

Anybody think Apple is working on battery life for next year's MacBook Pro update due this attention on this issue?

Have they fixed the battery issues on the iPhones 6s, iPhone 6? A lot of customers have complained that the phone switched completely off at 30 % remaining battery life. It seems Apple is dealing with multiple issues of battery life lately (regardless if iPhone or MacBook).

 

[bkends35]

Have they fixed the battery issues on the iPhones 6s, iPhone 6? A lot of customers have complained that the phone switched completely off at 30 % remaining battery life. It seems Apple is dealing with multiple issues of battery life lately (regardless if iPhone or MacBook).

Those are physical battery issues. New MBP issues are software related.

 

[TxExCxH]

Thankfully my 15" has been averaging 9-9 1/2 hours.

 

[Naraxus]

Right on cue....

https://twitter.com/pschiller/status/812461342728695808

 

[chfilm]

Yet mine is consistently running between 9 and 9 1/2 hours using Safari.

How is this even possible?

 

[anthorumor]

The iPhone and MacBook Pro are completely two different things, yet Apple seems to be applying iPhone design to the beloved MacBook line.
And everybody suffers.

 

[smoledman]

The iPhone and MacBook Pro are completely two different things, yet Apple seems to be applying iPhone design to the beloved MacBook line.
And everybody suffers.

Good. ARM-based design is superior to Intel chips.

 

[Burger Thing]

Good. ARM-based design is superior to Intel chips.

The experts are out from the woods...

 

[truthertech]

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.

Good, you are starting to get it. That you have another ill informed opinion, i.e., the sun does not exist, is a fact. Your opinion is wrong, but your opinion, however wrong, still exists. Similarly, it is a fact that there are many, many reviews by professionals who find your opinion that the Macbook Pros can't meet the needs of professional users to be utterly wrong. The only way a review wouldn't be a fact would be if it's existence was in dispute. If there was just a rumor that there were reviews by professionals who extolled the virtues of the new Macbook Pro, we wouldn't call those reviews facts, they would be rumors or speculation, etc.

Now, back to the main point that you have avoided for some reason--the multitude of professional reviews contain a mixture of facts and opinions. There are countless examples where the reviewers tested the capabilities of the Macbook pros by running professional software programs, etc., and the results of those tests were that the MBP's performed admirably and met their professional needs. Those are facts , both the positive reviews and the testing in those reviews, that contradict the poster's feeling who claimed that everyone could agree that the MBP's could in "no way shape or form meet the needs of pros.

Hopefully that clears things up and you'll feel better in buying a new MBP. I was at an Apple store today doing some Christmas shopping and there were several self-identified professional users (programmers) discussing the new MBP's. i asked for their feelings about whether it would meet the needs of a pro user. As a matter of fact (see how that works) they all felt it would meet their professional needs. I don't know whether those where just their feelings or if they had done any testing like the reviewers I cited.

Happy Holidays.

 

[31 Flavas]

Good. I don't have an issue with my 15" tMBP, but as the media presses Apple, they will have to either optimize the heck out of their software or stop the wafer thin obsession. Good for the future either way, although nothing will make some here happy, ever.

You know Apple is criticized for being "obsessed" with thin and light -- yet their competitors do just the same, at times, producing even thinner and lighter products then Apple's own. e.g. HP Spectre

If you ask me, critics need to stop obsessing themselves or, at least, equally critical when every year competing products annually become thinner and lighter themselves.

 

[A-Sign]

The iPhone and MacBook Pro are completely two different things, yet Apple seems to be applying iPhone design to the beloved MacBook line.
And everybody suffers.

You are absolutely right with this. That's why MacBooks become thinner (where is the line between Pro and Air?), getting a lot of Emoji iOS stuff and the touch bar which should be a replacement for a touch display or a touch-based MacOS. It's all halfhearted stuff which comes out of Apple lately.

 

[GoodWheaties]

"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.

I'm not sure the car analogy was the best idea considering hypermilers can get 150+mpg out of a Honda Civic. It's all about workload. Using dedicated chips to do specific things can yield much better battery life. We don't know the exact test parameters so it's all speculation.

 

[31 Flavas]

Regardless, people do read and take notes.

I beg to differ. Apple products are consistently poo-poo'd as terrible, horrible, rotten, no good products that suffer from all manner of design and manufacturing defects. Not to mention run software that is laggy, stutters, and in general just gets worse with every release and every patch -- because, remember, planned obsolescence and something about courage.

If "people do read and take notes" why do they keep buying iPhones? There is a disconnect between the rhetoric and reality.

 

[neteng101]

Can we stop calling this a "MBP Battery" issue?

Obviously some piece of sw is draining the battery.

Its obviously a battery issue - they put in a smaller battery and hoped the software can compensate for it... obviously using software tricks to compensate for inferior hardware is a FAILURE!

Trying to blame it on the software is beyond silly.

 

[lincolntran]

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.

Leveno is the only brand of laptop that I'd consider in the windows world ....but windows is a deal breaker for me. I guess I can run Linux on it but Linux is not as smooth of an os that I expect...
[doublepost=1482557891][/doublepost]

Um, I think I've said this to you before, but what on earth did you think the macbook air was for? People like YOU ... who value portability and thinness over power and expanability. Not sure why destroying the line of powerful laptops was necessary also. But whatever, enjoy your thermally throttled, battery limited laptop.

For those of us who wanted an apple laptop with something to offer other than 'thin and light', well, we're screwed now.

The air doesn't have enough power for what I do. So there's that.

Also, why so much anger? Can't take another person opinion when it's not like yours? Grow up and behave like the rest of us adults.

 

[A-Sign]

Its obviously a battery issue - they put in a smaller battery and hoped the software can compensate for it... obviously using software tricks to compensate for inferior hardware is a FAILURE!

Trying to blame it on the software is beyond silly.

These tricks are called App NAP which were introduced in Mac OS X Mavericks. App NAP buts the app into sleep mode when it is running in the background - and thus real multitasking is a joke on such a operating system. Here was an article facing about the probems:

http://www.zdnet.com/article/mac-mavericks-app-nap-power-nap-dont-always-play-well-with-others/

Beside that: Apple Laptops are known for the fact that they throttle speed of the CPU clock down when the cooling system can't keep up with the heat of their thin designed bodies. The first MacBook Air was switching one CPU core off if you gave it a task of a longer calculation. A novice user won't notice it (beside that the calculation needs much longer if you only have 2 cores) but you could see it in the Activity monitor.

 

[pat500000]

I beg to differ. Apple products are consistently poo-poo'd as terrible, horrible, rotten, no good products that suffer from all manner of design and manufacturing defects. Not to mention run software that is laggy, stutters, and in general just gets worse with every release and every patch -- because, remember, planned obsolescence and something about courage.

If "people do read and take notes" why do they keep buying iPhones? There is a disconnect between the rhetoric and reality.

Various reasons why they buy their products.

 

[robeddie]

Also, why so much anger? Can't take another person opinion when it's not like yours? Grow up and behave like the rest of us adults.

Must be nice to have what you want, and then lecture others about how to deal with not getting the tools they've previously gotten from Apple. But yea, I am frustrated, because as many have opined, pretty much ALL apple cares about anymore is thinness, even in their friggin' desktops!

http://www.macworld.com/article/3153256/macs/apples-desktop-macs-need-some-innovation-in-2017.html

So to hear you cheering them on? Yep, that's pretty irksome.

 

[deany]

Trying to blame it on the software is beyond silly.

I guess you dont have a 1st gen apple watch running watchOS 3.1
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/watchos-3-1-great-battery-life.2009440/

 

[Trixs]

Lucky for you? You already had the macbook air. That was apple's computer for people like you who value thinness and lightness over everything else. Now the rest of us who wanted a little more power, battery life, expandability in a mac laptops are left out in the cold.

So I don't really see how this is lucky for you, since you already had your mac, unless you define 'lucky' as no one else getting any options besides the thing you happen to like.

Lol, you guys are all so serious . Lucky me because I finally get the retina screen in a similar sized laptop as the air, and with a little more power. I'm a selfish mofo though..

Not sure how this does not have more power than the previous macbook pro anyway? I guess you have a point about battery life, so for you I wish they made the TB versions a bit ticker with more battery capacity, sorry Apple screwed you there.

Please, keep up the drama though, it's really cool.

 

[diddl14]

Its obviously a battery issue - they put in a smaller battery and hoped the software can compensate for it... obviously using software tricks to compensate for inferior hardware is a FAILURE!

Trying to blame it on the software is beyond silly.

A larger battery doesn't fix irratic power drain. It only hides it. People asking for a 20-30h battery charge to get 7-8h in real life are plain stupid. Why would I accept such huge power drain obviously caused by flawed software?

Power efficient design and coding takes a bit more though and time. It's obviously more complex than just throwing in bigger batteries. Any yes, you can also do both: big battery with power optimised sw. But these remain two different things. Eratic battery life is not fixed with a larger battery. Fixing erratic battery life doesn't extend the rated battery life.

 

[dannys1]

Now it doesn't really matter what Apple laptop you chose. They are essentially the same. Just don't forget the dongles.

By the time you won't require dongles, you will be throttled because of lack of RAM eventually. Too bad...

For Starbucks and light browsing it's perfectly fine, though.

I don't need dongles thanks, only people who can't afford one go on about dongles. I just upgraded all my cables to USB-C, simple.
[doublepost=1482580460][/doublepost]

and then lecture others about how to deal with not getting the tools they've previously gotten from Apple.

What tools you previously got? What are you bleating on about? Every laptop redesign Apple has released since the first has got smaller and thinner whilst also simultaneously getting more powerful. Nothing has changed. This is the most powerful, versatile and flexible MacBook Pro Apple has ever made.

 

[deany]

moved to battery thread mbp 2016

 

[Burger Thing]

I don't need dongles thanks, only people who can't afford one go on about dongles.
[doublepost=1482580460][/doublepost]

You really need to get away with that attitude. It makes you look like a smug.

I can assure you, for many users here it's not about affordability. It's about value for money. And I simply refuse to reward Apple and their increasingly lacklustres of products, like this thing, which I personally consider too limited in screen estate, inflexible in storage solutions and expandability and a god awful keyboard.

I would be happy to spend top dollars on a top notch product. This is not the case here.

 

[Alessiot]

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 bought the exact machine configuration as you and for the same reason lol
I haven't opened it yet giving it to myself for Christmas how is the battery life in your experience and was the i7 worth it?