Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This comment reminds me of the "Turbo" switches on older x86 PC desktops/towers from the mid to late 90's. As if anyone ever ran their PC in non-turbo mode, but hey if anything goes wrong we can blame it on user error. "You're running it too fast!" LOL

I ran in non turbo mode because a lot of software didn't work right in turbo mode. Games ran too fast, some software crashed, etc because it didn't use timers but instead counted run loops. Copy protected software, in particular, had problems.

And I keep my tmbp brightness at 66%, which is brighter than my rmbp 2014 at 80%.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StyxMaker
I'm using 10.12.3 beta 4 on my 2014 13" MBP, and with the screen on 100% it still doesn't tell me the display is using significant energy...
 
Has the median IQ of Apple customers dropped so significantly that it needs to be pointed out that maximum brightness is going to use more energy?

I think you don't spend enough time reading the forums. If this is representative then uh oh...
 
Now, Apple has gone one step further and expanded the feature to include display brightness. On the latest macOS Sierra beta, when a Mac's display is set above 75% brightness--or at least 13 out of 16 notches--a new item called "Display Brightness" is listed under the battery menu.


I have a MBP and am on the latest beta yet it won't show on mine, might be that mine is a 2012 13" model.
If this is only visible on the new TbMBP then something smells here.
 
Apple should rename 100% as 130% and scale accordingly. It sends the message that, though your screen can go that bright, you shouldn't set it that bright unless you really need to.
This is not a crazy idea at all.
These kind of adjusted measurements have been used since the first days of cell phones. All 5 bars of cell coverage is not always 100% coverage, 100% battery charge is not always a complete full battery.
 
Has the median IQ of Apple customers dropped so significantly that it needs to be pointed out that maximum brightness is going to use more energy?

Or is Apple so desperate to validate their battery duration claims that they need to itemize every element that is using energy as an excuse?

Up next the "energy-usage-per-keypress" note.
You should see the people who close all their apps in iOS.
 
Interesting... Now if Apple could bring back the time remaining section back to the battery menu, that would be great. Yes, I know it can be seen in the activity monitor, but it's much more convenient to have it right in the menu bar.

I agree. The update did indeed fix the battery life for my 15". As mentioned in a different thread, the battery life seemed to have stemmed from Software not being optimised properly for the latest CPU-GPU.
 
Apps using significant energy:

Safari
Slack
Typing


I returned my 13/touch bar bc batter life was 5 hours or less. Too little for too much. When they fix it, I'll replace my Air.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cole Slaw and Altis
Apps using significant energy:

Safari
Slack
Typing


I returned my 13/touch bar bc batter life was 5 hours or less. Too little for too much. When they fix it, I'll replace my Air.

I was thinking the same thing. Slack is hardly a power-intensive task, and a lot of people leave it running all the time.

I'm afraid BetterSnapTool, Flux, dock, mouse pointer, etc will all eventually show up there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DudeDad
THIS IS SO RETROGRADE. Embarrassing. Blaming developer apps, Apple? Fix your engineering software/hardware issues. This is completely a confusing user experience. What is the user meant to do with this information??? This ain't simplicity. Actual simplicity would have the OS determine energy intensive apps and manage the heck out of them silently in the background! The user needs to know nothing about what apps are doing at the chip level.
Completely ridiculous and disappointing if this makes its way to public release.
 
I don't like setting my display to less than 100% bright most of the time. I think most people feel the same way. Using 100% just seems good.

Apple should rename 100% as 130% and scale accordingly. It sends the message that, though your screen can go that bright, you shouldn't set it that bright unless you really need to.

I agree!! I mean whats the point of a super sharp, color accurate display if you can't see it lol
 
Why do we always get faster, more pixels, more memory, more features, but never more battery? Everything has increased 100 fold, but we're still stuck with ****** battery life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GSDLVR123 and Altis
In 2017, macbook need not ever require a charger waiting nearby. Should be able to get 12 hours battery at least. Total failbook in regards to battery performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Altis
I don't like setting my display to less than 100% bright most of the time. I think most people feel the same way. Using 100% just seems good.

Apple should rename 100% as 130% and scale accordingly. It sends the message that, though your screen can go that bright, you shouldn't set it that bright unless you really need to.
Do you have OCD or something? I have no problem using 70% brightness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: celaurie
In other words, Apple points to everyone else for their poor design choices. Typical Apple, always blame everyone else.

I wish there was a way to see if whomever writes these comments actually has the machine in question or they are simply talking from their ass...one may disagree with many things, but one should never criticise products they do not own. I do apologise if you do own a new MacBook pro.
[doublepost=1484600210][/doublepost]
I used to watch TWiT podcasts where they once in a while mentioned "four hours battery? can we believe that? .. yeah, I agree, usually Apple at least is pretty good at giving proper usage numbers" .. I guess those days are over..

The best battery from any device ever has been the iPad. You have 4% and can still finish a movie on Netflix before it hits 1% Even after a couple of years of daily use. Everything else usually after 1,5 years shows wear/tear of the battery "didn't I just walk out of the house with 60% battery left, why is it already down to 40% now.. few months ago I could easily assume it wouldn't be below 55%'

laptops i've had or used from Apple that had 1 hr left, usually means 20 minutes .. because you USE it.. Premiere , Skype , Facetime, Chrome .. etc. They only say 1 hr left and are like 40 minutes, for the first handful of months.

But with the way Apple has been running Apple in 2016, it isn't really a surprise that 10 hours simply means 5 hours.. And that consumer reports for once did their tests as usual, and came to the same conclusion. Only to 'update' their stuff 'based on new numbers', yeah, .. provided by apple "how about you use these power saving features, dont actually use the device, store it in a fridge, and keep the charger connected.. look: 10 hours! .."

Don't advertise a screen saying it's extra bright, extra this, extra that .. and then say "but if you want to use it, you get 12 minutes of battery power, soooo" .. I can make products like that too.

Buy my car, it will get you around the world on one charge!
If, you put it on the back of a truck.


I am sorry but your car comparison is just dumb. Car manufacturers DO advertise their cars to go X miles per gallon of gas...under controlled tests, indoors and at the perfect cruising speed. Step on the pedal and you will get nowhere of the advertised milage....
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.