Here's How Apple's New MacBook Pro Compares to Last Year's Model

[Allen_Wentz]

Or add one goddam millemeter of thickness and make the battery as robust as it was on the 2015 macbook pro. But I know, nobody would buy a laptop that ridiculously thick.

I am one of those folks holding out on buying because of lack of 32 GB RAM. But I bet there are very few of us versus lots of folks buying for thin.

Plus the DDR4 adds a lot more heat and that is a very big design consideration.
[doublepost=1497233133][/doublepost]

You can get 512 GB in an iPad now! Also, 512 GB thumb drives and SD cards are available and for a pretty reasonable price in $/GB. 128 GB of non-upgradable storage on a laptop marketed as "Pro" in 2017 is a joke.

Apple knows few people in their right mind will order this cripplingly low amount of storage. They only did it to get the "starting from" price down.

Apple are kidding themselves if they think people can't see through their tactics.

So why the animosity? Just let buyers choose what they want.

 

[AdonisSMU]

Do you work for Apple marketing team

Hahaha... I guess since your argument didn't hold up to additional scrutiny attack the individual.

 

[mrmiketheripper]

hey guys you know the 13-inch non touchbar model has swappable storage right. so it wouldn't be that big of a deal to buy 128gb and upgrade when you need more. i think it's meant more as a direct macbook air replacement more than anything, it's just named badly imo

 

[Allen_Wentz]

A true fanboy will tell you Apple knows better than you, 128GB is enough. ;-)

128 GB is a CHOICE. Dissing Apple for providing a less expensive choice is flat nonsense.

Note that ever since 2011 Thunderbolt MBPs have had excellent i/o, allowing them to be used as desktop replacement boxes. There are plenty of usages where the MBP moves from workstation setup to workstation setup. The cloud, NAS, etc. provide the mass storage.

 

[544263]

128 GB is a CHOICE. Dissing Apple for providing a less expensive choice is flat nonsense.

Note that ever since 2011 Thunderbolt MBPs have had excellent i/o, allowing them to be used as desktop replacement boxes. There are plenty of usages where the MBP moves from workstation setup to workstation setup. The cloud, NAS, etc. provide the mass storage.

Hello Allen, that's indeed a good re-use! While it looked ridiculous to me (and others) at first, there have been people in here (journalists,writers etc.) telling they barely use 20 GB on their laptop, so i can understand now it's an option for them.

 

[Essaux]

Hahaha... I guess since your argument didn't hold up to additional scrutiny attack the individual.

Attack? Just asking a question.

And my argument does hold up, it's yours that is flakey.

How you can say Pro doesn't necessarily constitute premium is just ludicrous.

Pro means by default something better than the ordinary. More and better features and thus a higher - premium - price tag.

So, again I ask you: do you work for Apple marketing?

 

[michafoto]

Nope, I've got a high spec model of the 2016 version and spending that much money for the 2017 upgrade seems pathetic as it is really only a very marginal update... nothing worth spending that amount for that tiny bit of extra performance there for me...

 

[Abazigal]

On the 15" model they had plenty of space to put ONE legacy USB-A port (USB 3.1 revision 2) but they didn't. That was a stupid move on a "Pro" Mac. Everyone could use that and will continue to use that for the foreseeable future, even after USB-C gains wider acceptance. That's why even the iMac Pro has so many of those USB-A ports!

So I still think there is an advantage in that "constant negativity" I mentioned (i.e., "constructive criticism").

Too bad the price to be paid for that "constructive criticism" is a much more toxic and acerbic discussion climate here at Macrumours.

I am aware that many "pros" have had their workflows disrupted by Apple's recent change in direction of their hardware. I have no doubt it suck, but the extremely entitled attitude I am seeing here makes it very hard to empathise with them, however justified their gripes may be.

 

[JDW]

Too bad the price to be paid for that "constructive criticism" is a much more toxic and acerbic discussion climate here at Macrumours.

Be that as it may...

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/06/mac-pro-may-not-ship-until-2019/

If "constant negativity" works (and it does), I for one am more than happy to Let Freedom Reign in the forums, even if that means "a more toxic and acerbic discussion." Steve Jobs didn't always coddle people or use pretty words when he spoke, but the fact is he got things done. Think about how many thought Jobs was "toxic," yet he got the job done. Where would Apple have gone without him? So in light of this logic dictates we ought to dispense with the touchy-feely pleasantries and strive to encourage our beloved computer maker to bring the "PRO" back to the MacBook. Apple has admitted they do listen, even to "constant negativity."

 

[cerbin]

Attack? Just asking a question.

And my argument does hold up, it's yours that is flakey.

How you can say Pro doesn't necessarily constitute premium is just ludicrous.

Pro means by default something better than the ordinary. More and better features and thus a higher - premium - price tag.

So, again I ask you: do you work for Apple marketing?

Your argument does not hold up. Pro stands for professional, not premium. Professional means it is used for business, which does not mean it is better, but that it is fit for the job.

 

[Abazigal]

Be that as it may...

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/06/mac-pro-may-not-ship-until-2019/

If "constant negativity" works (and it does), I for one am more than happy to Let Freedom Reign in the forums, even if that means "a more toxic and acerbic discussion."

I personally am of the opinion that as Apple continues to push forward into new markets such as health and self-driving cars and AR, the Mac will consequently matter less and less.

All the more when you consider that these new products will likely run some modified version of iOS, not macOS.

If anything, an argument could be made that it is the Mac which is holding Apple back, because resources still need to be sunk into a product category which simply isn't selling in sufficient quantities. And for all their size and wealth, Apple is still extremely taxed when it comes to engineering resources.

He who shouts the loudest isn't always right.

Steve Jobs didn't always coddle people or use pretty words when he spoke, but the fact is he got things done. Think about how many thought Jobs was "toxic," yet he got the job done. Where would Apple have gone without him?

And all that was done behind closed doors, well away from the consumers. I never had to deal with any of his BS, all I saw was the final end product.

So in light of this logic dictates we ought to dispense with the touchy-feely pleasantries and strive to encourage our beloved computer maker to bring the "PRO" back to the MacBook. Apple has admitted they do listen, even to "constant negativity."

It's no surprise why Apple wants to drop the Mac Pro, because sales don't even cover the cost of R&D.

Apple's goal seems to be to migrate so many of its Mac users to iOS that the Mac business, like the iPod, becomes too small to make a fuss over. The Grand Unified Theory of Apple Products hints at this: convince 90% of Mac Pro users they can make do with an iMac; convince 90% of iMac users they can make do with a MacBook; convince 90% of MacBook users they can make do on iOS; rinse and repeat.

Apple's main misstep appears to be misjudging the laggards: their extreme intransigence; their lack of faith in Apple to do the right thing; and their ability to influence the Apple's narrative in the tech press.

Truth be told, I am more than a little surprised that Apple ultimately capitulated and announced that they would be updating the Mac Pro. The iMac Pro was clearly intended to replace the Mac Pro and up to recently, Apple probably had no intention to refresh the Mac Pro ever.

For whatever it's worth, may you get the Mac you deserve.

 

[JDW]

Professional means it is used for business, which does not mean it is better, but that it is fit for the job.

I would argue that the term "Pro," as Apple uses it, means whatever meaning we the user wish to assign to it, simply because "Pro" Macs are not exclusive to business. I have a MacBook Pro 15" 2015 model at home, used exclusively at home. Why? Because I want the performance it offers in a compact Mac form and because I saved the money to buy it. But this has long been true of Macs. People with enough cash buy them regardless of the name when they are interested in performance and/or expandability. The IIfx sold for $10k back in the day, but still some "individuals" purchased it.

Why does this matter? It matters because not just "one category" of buyer purchases Apple's "pro" machines. That is also why the absence of key features in the 2016 MBP series was met with an outcry. Both pros in business and prosumer individuals voiced a strong opinion.

It doesn't matter much if Apple prices their "pro" equipment in the stratosphere (which they do), since many people still buy them. What does matter is when those "pro" machines priced accordingly start missing key functionality that upsets both true business pros and prosumers alike.
[doublepost=1497261811][/doublepost]

I personally am of the opinion that as Apple continues to push forward into new markets such as health and self-driving cars and AR, the Mac will consequently matter less and less.

I dare say I don't share that pessimism. And as to my shouting, I don't see it as "right and wrong" but as "getting results." Again, that's what Steve Jobs did. Some despised the man for it. But who can argue Apple was better off without his shouting?

I am passionate about the Mac and have been since my 128k in 1984. I have used Windoze but never defected. And while I may be rather loyal to the Mac platform, that doesn't mean I am blind to reality in that there are problems that Apple needs to address. That's why I often send Apple feedback when I have constructive criticism to offer. It matters little to me if some feel the Mac will matter less and less. For truly, the Mac will matter as long as people with money continue to buy Macs and continue to pound on Apple to improve them. If Macs meant little to Apple, they would not have admitted that "constant negativity" prompted them to totally rethink the Mac Pro, and we certainly would not have an iMac Pro. For now, Apple is still committed to the Mac, and AR/VR is now making its start on the Mac too. If indeed self-driving cars do come on the scene (100% automated) and if Apple really is involved, I doubt it will be anytime soon and if it does happen I doubt it would automatically dictate the demise of the Mac.

Long live the Mac and the people who seek to keep it alive and kicking!

 

[AdonisSMU]

Attack? Just asking a question.

And my argument does hold up, it's yours that is flakey.

How you can say Pro doesn't necessarily constitute premium is just ludicrous.

Pro means by default something better than the ordinary. More and better features and thus a higher - premium - price tag.

So, again I ask you: do you work for Apple marketing?

You can claim that all you want but what you said is a personal attack. Why else would you assume that a rando on MacRumors is part of Apple marketing simply because they disagree with you and you had nothing to come back with? You assigned the premium label to Apple MacBook Pros based on what you believe to be premium. Apple did no such thing. You are simply shifting the conversation towards me and you need to focus on the topic of discussion and keep the separate and completely unrelated topic of me out of your post...because you don't know anything about me. There is no reason to assume that I'm Apple marketing simply because I posted a competing opinion.

Technically, I agree with you that 128GB is way too low a spec for a MacBook Pro. However, some people don't need the additional storage but they do need more power. TBQH I haven't even used 128GB on my 15" MBP with 512GB storage and I'm a developer. So in theory that MBP is plenty of computer even for my uses.

 

[Ds6778]

I don't get the frustration here.... If you don't think 128gb is enough, then opt for more storage. No one is putting a gun to your head to buy the 128gb.

 

[mrex]

Cant you just use that for anything? "Dont complain, you dont have to buy it."

It is not the frustration but more like "hey, we discounted the price!" ... and abit later you realize that they "discounted" something else than just the price aswell.

hey guys you know the 13-inch non touchbar model has swappable storage right. so it wouldn't be that big of a deal to buy 128gb and upgrade when you need more.

Where are you going to find a suitable ssd for ntb mbp (2017)? That may be abit tricky...

 

[dernhelm]

Got a 13" without the touch bar for my son heading off to college. That was a no-brainer. But I'd like to update my 4+ yr. old MacBook Pro I use for work this year. It's making me batty that I can't get a 32GB option yet (and yes I understand why, but I would trade battery life for the extra headroom for another VM running when I need it). Not sure how much longer I'll wait, but it looks like 2018 before LPDDR4 support.

 

[Law44]

Coffee Lake was never scheduled to be release in August... The roadmap has always been Q1 2018. It was only a stupid rumour from a unknown source that got picked up by WCCFTech that told us August might be a thing.

And at the time Apple released the new MacBook Pro, there was no SKU's currently available for Apple to use. So they did in-fact use the latest and greatest. Unless you wanted Apple to go one set lower on all their SKU's and start offering the ships that offers the lowest end iGPU's? The only machine that could have gotten Kaby Lake at the time was the MacBook 12-inch. Quad-Core SKU's for the 15-inch didn't exist at all and Dual-Core SKU's for the 13-inch existed in very limited quantities and was not currently being offered in the line-ups that Apple uses which are the ones with better cache and iGPU's.


And you keep making a fool out of yourself when you talk about RAM. Apple uses LPDDR3, low-power DDR3 which are more expensive than regular DDR3 and DDR4. They are far from milking it, they just don't want to go for the slightly faster, but higher voltage DDR4 which will result in additional heat and battery strain while only provide a very slight performance increase.

As neither Skylake or Kaby Lake offers support for LPDDR4 Apple has to choose to whether they want to go for low-power DDR3, or higher power DDR4 with a tiny increase in frequencies. This has nothing to do with "milking" anything. Why post about stuff you obviously have no clue about?

I know that dell has kabylake and DDR4 and this was before apples laptop release. But look man I don't want to get you all flustered bro so let's just leave it at that thanks for the reply

 

[macintoshmac]

I know that dell has kabylake and DDR4 and this was before apples laptop release. But look man I don't want to get you all flustered bro so let's just leave it at that thanks for the reply

The poster was talking about LPDDR4. You are talking about DDR4.

DDR4 != LPDDR4.

 

[Jamalogo10]

hey guys you know the 13-inch non touchbar model has swappable storage right. so it wouldn't be that big of a deal to buy 128gb and upgrade when you need more. i think it's meant more as a direct macbook air replacement more than anything, it's just named badly imo

Are you sure the 128gb is swappable? None of the other computers have swappable SSD. Link your source.
Thinking about purchasing a MBP 13in i7 16 ram 512 ssd but may opt for 128 just to save some cash.

 

[Essaux]

You can claim that all you want but what you said is a personal attack. Why else would you assume that a rando on MacRumors is part of Apple marketing simply because they disagree with you and you had nothing to come back with? You assigned the premium label to Apple MacBook Pros based on what you believe to be premium. Apple did no such thing. You are simply shifting the conversation towards me and you need to focus on the topic of discussion and keep the separate and completely unrelated topic of me out of your post...because you don't know anything about me. There is no reason to assume that I'm Apple marketing simply because I posted a competing opinion.

Technically, I agree with you that 128GB is way too low a spec for a MacBook Pro. However, some people don't need the additional storage but they do need more power. TBQH I haven't even used 128GB on my 15" MBP with 512GB storage and I'm a developer. So in theory that MBP is plenty of computer even for my uses.

We disagree on what constitutes premium. To me any "Pro" model is a premium model, because you pay a premium price for a premium product. That's the way I see it and many with me and there are many who will see it the way you see it.

128GB SSD in a "Pro" model is just really lacklustre for the price one pays. 256GB should be the minimum on a "Pro" model in my opinion. In this case, they should simply scrap the "Pro" moniker from that 128GB version.

Your argument to me holds as little water as mine does to you.

My dig at you about if you work for Apple Marketing is just to tease. Don't get your knickers twisted about it.

 

[Quicksilver867]

Still rocking my late 2011 i7 w/512GB SSD and 8GB RAM. Runs fine...I don't see the need to drop $1K plus yet.

 

[lec0rsaire]

I know that dell has kabylake and DDR4 and this was before apples laptop release. But look man I don't want to get you all flustered bro so let's just leave it at that thanks for the reply

Apple doesn't just use any Intel chips. The ones they select for their notebooks are quad core i7s that have extra features like vPro, etc. that aren't present on the whole line. These HQ chips for the 15" were not ready when they launched the new gen in October. They started coming on the market about 2-3 months later. Look at the intel spec sheets and compare the exact CPUs that different companies use. For example on 13" inch models they need to wait for CPUs containing specific Iris/Iris Plus iGPUs. PC manufacturers use the newest stuff available to them without much concern for this. Apple can't do much about Intel delays. They've been behind schedule for a couple of years. It took a long time for Skylake to even come out.

 

[lec0rsaire]

The poster was talking about LPDDR4. You are talking about DDR4.

DDR4 != LPDDR4.

Exactly correct. Part of the "secret" to Apple's above average and in some cases industry leading battery life is the use of Low Power DDR ram. This is what they use on all of their modern notebooks, phones, tablets and even for the ATV 4. Besides the LPDDR3 is on the 15" mbps is operating at 2133 MHz, while standard desktop DDR4 is running at 2400 MHz. Of course there is extra bandwidth but given the miniscule clock speed difference it's not a big deal. Not offering 32GB is valid criticism but Apple will eventually get around to offering it when the appropriate Intel gen supports LPDDR4 and they have new memory controllers. It is unreasonable to expect Apple to redesign such an integral part of the system architecture when they just released a completely new MacBook Pro design that must've been several years in the making. They probably started work on this gen back in '13-14 right after the first Retina MBPs became widely adopted.

Personally I think they did a formidable job with the design and tech. People overlook the amount go power in such an elegant and refined chassis with exceptional I/O. The ability to run two 5K displays and two RAID systems is impressive and not available on most notebooks on the market. I don't think a non nVidia GPU and lack of 32GB Ram disqualifies this machine from being a professional product. While the Radeon Pro series doesn't have the TFLOPS of the best GPUs, they are workstation class cards that offer stability that these other GPUs made for gaming aren't built for. This is not meant to be a gaming machine. It's meant to be used for professional work whether one is a journalist, video editor, photographer, programmer, businessman, et cetera. Some people think that only professional 3D modeling, 4-8K video production and this sort of work is the definition of "pro." While professionals in these industries do need lots of raw power, they're not the only professionals out there.

At the same time I'm pleased that Apple is introducing full eGPU support to silence critics that intensive work requiring lots of GPU horsepower can't be done on a Mac. With TB3's bandwidth eGPU enclosures will be a game changer when they start becoming mainstream for the Mac next year. One will be able to use a powerful Radeon desktop card for those applications where AMD excels and nVidia for any application that greatly benefits from CUDA. It will be interesting if SLI or Crossfire support will be possible down the road. This would be greatly welcomed by the gaming community.

 

[whodean]

Folks should also remember how fast these SSDs are... Even if you go into the swap you don't suffer a huge performance degradation.

 

[docfuz]

It's no surprise why Apple wants to drop the Mac Pro, because sales don't even cover the cost of R&D.

It's no surprise if we accept Apple choice that every machine it produces should have a rightful place in modern art museums. Sometimes pro machines are simply computers to have work done. Better, maybe. Faster after each upgrade, hopefully. Not necessarily in a stunning beauty envelope, though.

The Mac Pro tower was a beauty in itself, when compared to other towers. XServe, too. But I bet R&D costs were lower than the can's ones. Do we really need a piece of art? People seems to imply they need faster, upgradable boxes.

The problem, here, is becoming Mac OS usability. Apple won't license it. Even with limited approved hardware lists. I am one of those in need of running multiple VMs on a notebook. Yes, notebook. Not necessarily a laptop. 16G is low. In many of my clients' environments I have no access to the Internet. I cannot use the cloud. Sometimes I'm underground or afoot in data centers. Dongles and external drives are going to be a problem. And maybe I have to record gigs of traffic/data. My case is a very specific one, I concede, but the point is there's no pro laptop, for me, to upgrade to. Point. My early 2011 13-inch is 16G/1TB already. Now I hope it can survive longer...

Apple's goal seems to be to migrate so many of its Mac users to iOS that the Mac business, like the iPod, becomes too small to make a fuss over. The Grand Unified Theory of Apple Products hints at this: convince 90% of Mac Pro users they can make do with an iMac; convince 90% of iMac users they can make do with a MacBook; convince 90% of MacBook users they can make do on iOS; rinse and repeat.

Fine with that. Really. What about the 10%? Should they(we) move to Linux or Windows? Apple, simply state so. My clients expect a litlle bit, at least, of a business map. I expect it from my providers. Here, Apple is failing in the notebook field. They are not clearly saying, but are implying, the the MBP is a power-horse. It's not and it wasn't, but it was workable with ports. Even when they left out RJ45 I was disappointed. Today it's iMac (pro) or nothing.

Please note: I do not dislike the current MBP. I think we're missing an UglyBookPro. Something not to brag about esthetics and design, but powerful enough for Mac OS on mobility.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I bet it wouldn't be difficult to make business machines which are technically excellent without being reviewed in fashion magazines. Especially for the kind of Apple financial situations. Keep on with IOS and design, let the money flow. Simply extend the hardware listing by a little bit.