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.
Consumer Reports Reverses Course, Recommends MacBook Pro Following New Testing After Apple Bug Fix
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Then why phrase your statement in a way that critiques Apple for Chrome's issues?
Well, I got my 13" MacBook Pro without touchbar and I was planning to returned as soon as I receive it but I decided to give it a try. So far using it for regular activities (browsing internet with chrome, listening to music, working with MS Office) I am getting average of about 10hr (not using safari) so not bad....
Again, I never said that and if you read what I said, along with my other comments about people that thought this, you would see that I don't think this.
"Apples software really isn't up to scratch anymore."
Meaning.... Apples software isn't up to scratch anymore (in terms of reliability)
"At least this is fixed now but it doesn't tell the story for Chrome users."
Meaning, at least the issue is fixed but the tests don't tell the story for Chrome users.
Of course it's not Apples fault, why would you think anyone on this forum, or anywhere else for that matter, thinks Apple is in control of Google Chrome or has direct influence over it?
[doublepost=1484261715][/doublepost]
It really doesn't. It critiques Apple for their own software, and then goes on to say that the tests don't show what battery life is like with Chrome.
The original CR report had Safari performing inconsistently, but Chrome not only performed consistently, it performed well. It was the single poor Safari run and the inconsistency that led to the non-recommend rating.
The fact that Chrome ran better than Safari was probably the first indication something was fishy with the results...
In Apple review, MacBookPro recommends you.
"Apple's software isn't up to scratch... at least not for chrome users."
You clearly blame Apple and never mention any blame of google.
just the fact Apple hid the battery indicator tells you everything on how Apple is being managed
It is easy to blame CR here but I think the bigger question is why can the Safari Browser be affected in such a way to have such a negative impact on the battery life. A simple cookie used by CR should not have killed the battery that easily that this speaks more to the holes in the Apple software vs the holes in the CR testing process. CR does a good job testing but they cannot be aware of every odd memory leak or security hole apple may have left in their software.
CR will also not be the first person to accidentally use whatever cookie or setting so grossly affected the MBP. Apple needs to make it so such a simple thing will not have such a negative impact on battery life.
CR will also not be the first person to accidentally use whatever cookie or setting so grossly affected the MBP. Apple needs to make it so such a simple thing will not have such a negative impact on battery life.
I'm a happy 2016 MacBook Pro owner who has had pretty good battery life, but certainly not 15 hours of battery!
What the hell is going on here? They went from underperforming to way overachieving. Seems just as unreliable as the initial results to me.
What the hell is going on here? They went from underperforming to way overachieving. Seems just as unreliable as the initial results to me.
Smells like an emissions test scandal. Either they paid Consumer Reports a hella bunch to lie, or they wrote software that cheats battery tests. 
I do not believe this looks good for Apple. The better option would have been to accept the initial results. This sudden U turn looks very, very suspicious.
I do not believe this looks good for Apple. The better option would have been to accept the initial results. This sudden U turn looks very, very suspicious.
Something is really wrong here. Who's getting over 15 hours?
Dude, give it up. We all now know you didn't mean your original post to sound that way, but it did come off sounding like you were blaming Apple. To multiple people, including me. Just be clearer next time.
That is impressive battery life but I think they should test at 200 nits not 100 nits. For reference, Apple says they test at 75% IIRC which should be about 375 nits.
Me. Light home & work usage (internet, email, youtube).
Smells like an emissions test scandal. Either they paid Consumer Reports a hella bunch to lie, or they wrote software that cheats battery tests.
I do not believe this looks good for Apple. The better option would have been to accept the initial results. This sudden U turn looks very, very suspicious.
Consumer Reports doesn't accept advertising dollars or donations from companies whose products they review. CR did their tests using the same beta build that is available to consumers.
You're right. I think it has to be software related. I did a test of the physical battery like someone in another thread described the apple hotline did with him, with some terminal wizardry and have it run for over 15 hours.. it worked.
But as soon as I start using it in real life, it drains like NOTHING! It's really absurd after my 13 hours macbook air.
It's a standard benchmark so they can compare one machine to another with a standardized workload. It's not some all encompassing test to reflect what you'll get with your usage.
What does the "battery indicator" has anything to do with this article?
And what's "wrong", etc? It's the best laptop by far and away.
"at least" is a linker between your previous thought and the upcoming thought. The way that you phrased it made it come across as you accusing Apple for Chrome's problems - something that multiple people have commented on when describing your wording.