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

[ShufromChina]

Actually, I'm sorry to break it to you that crappy screen has nothing to do with a laptop's ability to play HD videos. And just in case you feel like replying to me again, "playing HD videos" is not usually what people mean when they say they use their laptop for "email/Internet only".

Even an FHD TN screen chromebook is able to play HD videos smoothly. Or even a 1366 x 768 display laptop in a $400 range is able to play HD videos without a problem. The problem is what comes out of it and what you are able to see with your eyes.

I'm not arguing with you on the "email/internet" wording thing. Let's leave it like that.

 

[Playfoot]

I think personal preference is important, that is why Apple should make a 15" without the touchbar. Some people will definitely appreciate a 15" with a regular keyboard.

I would agree - our team finds the TB essentially useless. Combined with the issues of loss of simple always present Fn keys, dedicated volume, etc., read NOT always having to first depress a key to bring something up on the TB, AND the inability to control sensitivity, the TB is a frustrating experience.

And of course there are other issues we would have liked to see dealt with: keyboard is not as robust as we would like for touch typers from the typewriter and buckling spring days, keyboard is NOT silent, MagSafe for those of who travel, etc.

The jury is out on the battery: our teams needs to charge, typically, two to three times a day.

The ports and the speed is great. As is the SSD. Screen is very very good.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Apple not giving as much choice as you want is a slightly different topic, and not a new one.

YOU are the one that brought up the hard drive speed for god's sake.

If I am not mistaken, there are also options for 256 GB and 512 GB in between that 128 GB and that $3000+ option.

And that's still not enough space for 2017 as I already said.

I have 9TB of storage right now in my system with 2TB internal. 256GB and 512GB are STILL a joke as I already said. You can get a 4TB 2.5" drive for $130 or less. Not offering REAL STORAGE for a reasonable price is my point. You don't get it because you are either trying to be difficult or just can't see it. Either way, my point is valid and you whining about it serves no one.

And let's get your facts straight. The 128 GB option costs $1299, upgrading that to 1 TB brings the price up to $2099, slightly less than your $3000+ claim.

My $3000+ claim is based on the notebook I'd need to get to replace my 2008 Macbook Pro, which is the 15" model. True, it doesn't offer a 120GB drive (256 to start), but as I said, 256 is too little also. 120GB is an absolute joke, which is why I was agreeing with someone about it. I hadn't looked to see whether the 15" offered 120GB or not as I priced it with 1TB (base model +1TB = $2999 + tax and that doesn't include extra memory, the numeric keypad keyboard or an upgraded processor or graphics card). Either way, it changes nothing. 120 and even 256GB is too little space for 2017 for anyone that does ANYTHING more than Facebook and email and frankly, if they're storing loads of digital pictures to share on Facebook (or even videos), I'd say they'd run out of space pretty damn fast. The fact the drive is transferring the data internally at 3GB/sec or whatever doesn't help any of that ONE BIT (your point that the speed somehow matters in regards to having next to no storage at all).

 

[michafoto]

How does the battery runtime compare on a MacBook Pro 15" high spec 2016 vs 2017. I do get roughly 6hrs normal usage time out of my 2016 model. Please let me know, thanks!

 

[nawnp]

Then why have a non-touchbar option on the 13"?? Just force touchbar across the line for every computer.

I'm going to guess Apple realized far more people would buy the 13 inch w/o Touch bar then a 15 inch w/o Touch bar, with that noted a 15 inch $2000(or hopefully slightly less) with out the touch bar would be nice.
About the touch bar, it is its own thing, and I do think it is an experimental implementation, maybe it will be in an macbook upgrade as well(which I think it desperately needs), when they refresh more then just internals. I imagine Apple in a few years plans for a full touch screen keyboard, with force touch/3d touch, a haptic engine to simulate typing(and hopefully end this travel complaint), and possibly integrate the track pad.

 

[ShufromChina]

I'm going to guess Apple realized far more people would buy the 13 inch w/o Touch bar then a 15 inch w/o Touch bar, with that noted a 15 inch $2000(or hopefully slightly less) with out the touch bar would be nice.
About the touch bar, it is its own thing, and I do think it is an experimental implementation, maybe it will be in an macbook upgrade as well(which I think it desperately needs), when they refresh more then just internals. I imagine Apple in a few years plans for a full touch screen keyboard, with force touch/3d touch, a haptic engine to simulate typing(and hopefully end this travel complaint), and possibly integrate the track pad.

touch screen keyboard nooooo.... From typewriter 100 years ago to nowadays computers, the sound and travel of typing on a physical key is what get us going... taking this away will simply destroy a lot of people's work rhythm. Real life is very different from Sci-Fi, I think.

 

[macintoshmac]

Instead of buying dongles, just buy some new USB-C cables. There are plenty of varieties available now to connect your existing devices (iPhone, USB 3.0 Mobile drives, card readers, etc). Except for HDMI, projectors or Thunderbolt 2.0 devices.

http://www.belkin.com/us/Products/Cables/c/usb-c-cables/

I did the same. Not a single dongle for me. However, I realised, people are not very willing to replace cables.
[doublepost=1497073439][/doublepost]

And I'm 20% just as likely to not recommend this MacBook "Pro" to anyone. It's only managed to make my work-life miserable as long as I've had it.

How?
[doublepost=1497073878][/doublepost]

if you are referring to that mouse/keyboard that comes with the iMac Pro, well forget it as it won't be sold separately

Did Apple say so to you or are you just too happy killing someone's hope?

 

[Essaux]

Pro does not necessarily mean premium.

Do you work for Apple marketing team

 

[4nNtt]

Kaby Lake mobile still doesn't support the lower power DDR4, so unless Apple wants to reverse its stance on the battery hit for standard DDR4, 16 is it for now.

Although it is interesting that Apple overclocked the LPDDR3 memory to DDR4 speeds in the new MacBooks, so not much benefit to going to DDR4 except to go up to 32.

 

[d0nK]

Thanks for the reply. You were already able to test the 2017's battery?

I sold my spec'd out 6 month old 15" Pro to my cousin for $1,000 and now I'm waiting for my 2017 to arrive in the mail!
[doublepost=1496954646][/doublepost]
I just don't get it. Why is 128GB so bad?

You must be trolling.
My current system hard drive, containing my application folder, documents and operating system is currently using 420GB.
I have another 1TB drive that has 100GB of free space left. I am constantly having to offload movie files and audio projects to an external drive.

I cannot understand how anybody can get away with a 512GB HD, let alone 128GB!!!
If you are just surfing the web and doing social media stuff, then why pay so much for such a high-priced "pro" Apple laptop?? It makes ZERO sense. Just use an iPad!

Macbook "PRO". lol.

 

[Kcetech1]

You mention a very unique area of storage needs and truthfully no portable computer will fulfill that need without some sort of external storage. My niece is a wedding photographer/videographer in the Chicago area and learned rather quickly that storing her work on the portable device wouldn't work. The cloud/online storage, external drives and really good backup to prevent loss (and then lawsuits) is huge with her.

there is....., Just not in the Apple Eco system. I recently lent one of my video editing units to a photographer / videographer aquaintance for a family members wedding ( her 15" MBP bit it the day before with water damage ) and she found she did like the dual 3T drives in an mirrored RAID for data and the 2T 960 Pro screamed along for doing edits before the reception ( and yes backed up remote after the shoot), had to argue with her to get it back.

 

[bjet767]

Just not in the Apple Eco system.

That's my point, the internal storage of most laptops really isn't the end of the line for those with huge data needs and Apple iCloud isn't the end all storage solution.

I'm not much of a video editor, but in my minimal use of FCP my only major complaint is how the program limits storage options for projects. It seems moving a video project from one location to another is a real pain. Other than that I really like the product.

 

[macintoshmac]

....had to argue with her to get it back.

That made my morning.

 

[John.B]

The table is incorrect. The 2016 13" NTB MBP uses 1866 MHz RAM, not 2133 MHz.

Do we know if the 2017 13" non-Touchpad MBP has 2133MHz memory?

Same question about whether the Wi-Fi speeds for the 2017 13" non-Touchpad MBP are still 867Mbs or if they were bumped to 1.3Gbps like the other MBPs?

 

[dumastudetto]

These new MacBook Pros are truly incredible.

I have the 2016 model, but I am upgrading my machine for the huge performance boost.

 

[manu chao]

And that's still not enough space for 2017 as I already said.

I have 9TB of storage right now in my system with 2TB internal. 256GB and 512GB are STILL a joke as I already said. You can get a 4TB 2.5" drive for $130 or less. Not offering REAL STORAGE for a reasonable price is my point.

How many laptops offer 9 TB of storage? The vast majority (by sales) of higher-end laptops has gone SSD-only.

You don't get it because you are either trying to be difficult or just can't see it. Either way, my point is valid and you whining about it serves no one.

You cry out about Apple adding a 128 GB option and make the bogus claim that it's either 128 GB or $3000+.

My $3000+ claim is based on the notebook I'd need to get to replace my 2008 Macbook Pro, which is the 15" model.

But the 128 GB model was added only for the 13" MBP, why do you juxtapose these two options?

True, it doesn't offer a 120GB drive (256 to start), but as I said, 256 is too little also.

Your problem is that you couldn't leave well enough alone. You took two different product decisions, offering a 128 GB option in the 13" model, and the 15" model topping out at 2 TB, aggravated by that 2 TB only being available in very fast and very expensive SSD format and 'concluded' that Apple only offers very bad product configurations. You played fast and loose with the facts and logic because you were enraged.

But if you want to throw stones, you'd better get your facts and logic straight first, otherwise you'd look like fool.

your point that the speed somehow matters in regards to having next to no storage at all).

Nope, my point was merely that speed to some degree justifies price. You might think, I am supporting and considering justified, all of Apple's product and pricing decisions. But that is not what I am doing, I am only challenging criticism when somebody gets something wrong or omits mitigating factors.

 

[AppleScruff1]

These new MacBook Pros are truly incredible.

I have the 2016 model, but I am upgrading my machine for the huge performance boost.

Of course you are.

 

[dumastudetto]

Of course you are.

Well I don't always upgrade my Macs, but these new MacBook Pros are substantially more performant.

 

[michafoto]

It's only a very marginal improvement and absolutely not worth upgrading. That's all just Apple marketing crap... I wouldn't even call it a MacBook Pro

 

[whodean]

If you had the base $2799 2016 model and upgraded to the 2017 $2799 model it was a pretty substantial upgrade.

 

[JDW]

If you had the base $2799 2016 model and upgraded to the 2017 $2799 model it was a pretty substantial upgrade.

And if you have the 15" model from 2015 like I do, which has an SD card slot, legacy USB-A connectors, vastly superior keyboard in terms of key travel, and bigger battery too, both the 2016 and 2017 models are very noticeable DOWNGRADES.

Fact is that Apple considers the SD card slot important insofar as they put one even on the iMac Pro! "Yeah, but there's more space on the iMac," you say? Poppycock! The 15" MBP has space aplenty. And had they made the 2016 model slightly thicker, a bigger battery would have resulted in more impressive battery life. Instead, they ended up with complaints about sucky battery life due to software that wasn't fully optimized (which wasn't optimized on the 2015 MBP either, but the bigger battery of that model overcame that problem).

Apple has said that "constant negativity" has made them change their tune with regard to their Mac product line, so I think it's only fair to give them a hefty amount of such feedback regarding the MBP. Let the negativity roll, for the sake of putting "Pro" back in the MacBook:

https://www.apple.com/feedback/macbookpro.html

 

[whodean]

I don't use SD cards, don't mind the keyboard and get 10 hours with my new $2799 2017 15" MBP so yeah, I'm happy. I can understand others who aren't too.

 

[JDW]

I don't use SD cards, don't mind the keyboard and get 10 hours with my new $2799 2017 15" MBP so yeah, I'm happy. I can understand others who aren't too.

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").

 

[Allen_Wentz]

Come on, when are we going to see 32GB of RAM, hopefully this configuration will be an option by the 4th quarter.....

I was ready to pull the trigger to replace my current Late 2013 macbook pro, but no reason, this hardware is still going strong.

I too was hoping for 32 GB RAM to replace my 2011 17" MBP. Apparently Apple is waiting for LPDDR4, and Intel does not support LPDDR4 yet for MBP boxes and may not until 2018 perhaps.

Personally I would happily settle for power-sucking DDR4 detuned when used on battery-only, but it did not happen. Year after year Apple and Intel just keep driving me to keep my 2011 MBP and my $4k, go figure.

Sure would like to spend some money on 32 GB RAM. But if the 2011 box flakes I will buy a new 16 GB RAM MBP and no doubt love it.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

How many laptops offer 9 TB of storage? The vast majority (by sales) of higher-end laptops has gone SSD-only.

You don't seem to have any clue what computers Apple offers. My current 9TB system is a Mac Mini server and I already said that only 2TB was internal. The amount of storage is simply to illustrate that in 2017, 128GB is a drive size typically offered in 2001, not 2017. I'm sure you don't get that because you're too busy trying to win an argument instead of having an actual discussion. Sadly, hypocrisy is not a great way to do that.

You cry out about Apple adding a 128 GB option and make the bogus claim that it's either 128 GB or $3000+.

You're mixing up two different things and then blaming me for your mistake. Here's an exact quote of what I said to you:

Do you really need 3GB/sec? Is 1GB/sec not still a huge increase over 5400 RPM drives they're still selling in iMac models? Is that speed going to make up for 120GB being too little or 1TB costing over $3000?

Do you know what the comparative word OR means? Do you see the reference to iMacs there? Or do you choose to mux the two together for your own convenience?

Here's the quote of me before that:

What I complain about is they charge way too damn much for storage! A 1TB SSD drive costs around $350. Apple is essentially charging you ~$800 for one when you figure on the trade-in value for what it comes with.

to which you replied:

"Please show me a 1 TB SSD drive that hits speeds of 3 GB/s for $350."

I don't see any reference in either of those posts specifically to a 13" or 15" Macbook. What Apple charges for a given Mac model seems to be very similar if not the same across models since they're the same drives. What I'm looking for is a replacement for my Mac Mini and my 15" Macbook Pro. I've had the idea for some time now that a 15" Macbook Pro with Thunderbolt 3 that could take an external graphics card/hub would make a nice combination server with the capability of unplugging one wire and taking it with me if I needed to use a notebook. I've also been looking at iMacs since there has been no worthwhile updates to the Mac Mini since 2012.

The last time I looked this thread is about the Macbook Pro, not just the 13" model. My comment about a 128GB drive being too little is a reply to your comment to JJospeh about his comment regarding a 128GB drive. I said to that, "Meanwhile, 128GB isn't enough for anyone outside little old ladies looking at Facebook pages! On a "PRO" notebook!!! My $38 Windows phone has more storage than that with an $99 SD Card added (208GB!) for god's sake." That's in regards to your comments only. It was you talking about the 13" configuration. My original post was about the 15" configuration. This thread, however is about anything called a Macbook Pro.

I looked back. The truth is that I never once talked about a 128GB drive in this thread until you brought it up!!!

This is my first post in this thread:

If you have to ask, you probably don't need a notebook. 220GB wasn't enough for me in 2008. I upgraded it immediately to 500GB 7200 RPM drive at the time. I'd need at least 1TB these days internal. That pushes the 15" model to over $3000, which is just short of RIDICULOUS.

Gee, I specifically mention I'm looking at the 15" model, not the 13" model. I do not mention 128GB until you brought it up with JJoseph and my comment that it's too little space was in regards to your comment to him, not any model I'm personally looking at.

But the 128 GB model was added only for the 13" MBP, why do you juxtapose these two options?

I'm afraid it's YOU that have juxtaposed different posts by different people. Go back and look for yourself.

Your problem is that you couldn't leave well enough alone.

No, I don't have a problem. Your problem is you didn't read carefully.

You took two different product decisions, offering a 128 GB option in the 13" model, and the 15" model topping out at 2 TB, aggravated by that 2 TB only being available in very fast and very expensive SSD format and 'concluded' that Apple only offers very bad product configurations. You played fast and loose with the facts and logic because you were enraged.

The problem with your theory is that you're the one that claimed I said a 13" model cost over $3000 when I specifically said (as quoted above and in the thread for all to see) I was pricing the 15" model! You are just plain WRONG.

But if you want to throw stones, you'd better get your facts and logic straight first, otherwise you'd look like fool.

Mirror mirror on the wall....