Is This Reaction Normal?

[Ethosik]

Absolutely.

What I'm trying to say is that >16GB RAM in 2016 is not as inane a requirement as some posters are trying to make it sound.
Even a college senior in certain fields can easily benefit from a 32GB machine.

"in certain fields". Yeah, you can't make a computer for everyone. Certain fields might even benefit from having a $5,000 NVIDIA Quadro (if you are studying 3D modeling or something like that). If you need 32GB right now on a laptop, get a Windows PC. Laptops are not supposed to be desktop replacements (unless you are looking for a system with 1 hour battery life and thick/heavy). Laptops are meant to do light work on the go. I can do A LOT with 16GB of RAM with Photoshop and Final Cut Pro.
[doublepost=1483461127][/doublepost]

Not really.

Not in 2017, with huge datasets everywhere and everybody and their dog taking classes in Data Science (tm).

There is a reason why 64GB options are commonplace on workstation-class laptops like Thinkpad P or HP Z series, and desktop workstations with up to 512GB are not unusual.



Probably.
Then again, it's for this very reason that when people complain about the MBP being "pro" only in name, they are probably onto something.

I feel the MBP is still a very, very good solid high end consumer effort, but no, it's no mobile workstation or proper "enterprise" machine.

Which I'm completely okay with, mind you, it's just that half this thread boils down to "Apple doesn't care about the pro market anymore" and/or "16 is not enough/is more than enough", so I wanted to offer a perspective

Im sorry, so there is NO possible way that ANY professional work can EVER be done on a 2016 Macbook Pro?

Why are you complaining about that but you are not complaining about the Surface "Pro"? Where is the 64GB of RAM Surface Pro? Why does that get a free pass then?

 

[villicodelirant]

"in certain fields". Yeah, you can't make a computer for everyone.

You can't.
But, using several gigabytes of RAM is, in 2017, commonplace enough that 16 or 32GB machines aren't niche anymore, with 8 being the absolute minimum.
You don't need to set out to make a computer for everyone to offer a 32GB option.
I wanted to point out this.

Certain fields might even benefit from having a $5,000 NVIDIA Quadro (if you are studying 3D modeling or something like that).

They might.

If you need 32GB right now on a laptop, get a Windows PC.

Obviously.

Laptops are not supposed to be desktop replacements (unless you are looking for a system with 1 hour battery life and thick/heavy).

Not true.
Since at least the late '90s laptops have further divided into:

• "true" or "business" laptops/notebooks
• ultraportables/ultrabooks/subnotebooks
• desktop replacement/ "consumer" laptops

with the more recent addition of

• mobile workstations
• gaming laptops

In fact, I think the MBP fits the description of a desktop replacement laptop quite well, with its relatively beefy specs (you can have an i5 or i7) and lack of advanced mobile features (e.g.: somewhat bulkier than an subnotebook, no integrated 3G modem, no pointing stick, etc.).

I don't think it's trying to be a mobile workstation, though - not even a low end one (which is fine, you can't fill all niches).

Laptops are meant to do light work on the go.

In theory, I agree.
Machines such as the Powerbook 100 or the Thinkpad 700C embody exactly that function.

In practice, consumers have long decided to use laptops as their main machine, and manufacturers have been churning out desktop replacements, mobile workstations and - ugh! - gaming laptops for years now.

Im sorry, so there is NO possible way that ANY professional work can EVER be done on a 2016 Macbook Pro?

Yes, I think yes, you can?

Why are you complaining about that

Complaining? Moi?
I'm just saying that when other forum members complain that Apple does not cater to the "Pro" market, which I imagine to be the market for business laptops and mobile workstations, they have a point, as Apple simply does not make those.
The last Apple laptop with a docking station was the Powerbook Duo, the last Apple laptop with ECC memory... is yet to be released.

Where is the 64GB of RAM Surface Pro? Why does that get a free pass then?

I... don't... think... I have ever mentioned the Surface?
No, I don't think the Surface makes for a great workstation either (duh), but there are plenty of Windows 10 workstations should one have a few grands burning a hole in their pockets - the IBM Thinkcentre, Dell Precision, HP Z lines.

 

[ihatetoregister]

The trick with Kaby Lake is native TB3 support.
Apple just decided to go with a custom TB3 chip and NOT expose any other ports.
Every additional port would have limited the PCIe lanes available for the TB3 controller.

This enabled Apple to say "Look! 4 TB3 ports are the future" and "We don't care about the quality of adapters!"
Both statements are a total joke.

As I mentioned earlier, with builtin Ethernet, HDMI and SD Card and also an USB Controller, Apple at least supported the hardware they built into the system.

Now, you have to cross your fingers and hope all adapters play nice and do not disturb PCIe bus timings.
That is the main issue I have with this new approach. Shifting responsibilities to third parties.

FINALLY, an explanation for this terrible, idiotic decision !
Thank you pmau I was wondering for a while what was the real reason behind the 4 USB-C . I was wondering if it was a question of royalties - Apple being a cheap bastard - like it has been before that, but not this time it seems.

Perhaps, but it may be fairly niche as well (I don't know). I'm guessing that apple is leveraging the computer for the masses, but even so. Schiller has stated that they couldn't provide >16GB without significantly impacting battery performance.

Developer here. 16GB is literally the minimum if you want to get things done, running a few containers, some Node monstrosity etc
In 2016, it should have been the default on a supposedly "Pro" machine, with an option for 32GB for the ones who need it or want to future-proof their machines.

As said before, one of my issues with this machine is it doesn't feel Pro at all for a machine released end of 2016.

As for alternatives in the Mac world, you're pretty much screwed if a laptop is what you need.
Everything in this MBP iteration should have been for the macBook, and the MBP should have had more muscles and ports.

As for the power draw, frankly Schiller is full of **** .
DDR3-1600 averages at 2W per stick in normal use and close to 3 watts under heavy load. So that's the increase we're talking about here : 2 to 3W. Peanuts.
And even if Apple was being cheap ( and God knows they are when it comes to this stuff ) and used 4 sticks (4x8), we're still talking 4 to 6 watts increase.

And hey, if they actually had done something right in this iteration, they could have used the same Kaby Lake as the one in the Razer Stealth Blade, get slightly better performances than the maxed-out Core i7 in the 13", and since it's TDP is way lower (15W vs 28W), we could have had 32GB and still save between 7 to 10 watts in heavy load !
[doublepost=1483474841][/doublepost]

You can't.
But, using several gigabytes of RAM is, in 2017, commonplace enough that 16 or 32GB machines aren't niche anymore, with 8 being the absolute minimum. [...]

Goodluck on this one vilicodelirant, I gave it a try it's a lost cause.

Speaking of...
xWhiplash, I wonder why you are so angry / at war with people disliking this iteration or not finding it good enough ?
It's not like we dislike / go at war with the people who love it ?
Plus, you might actually spoil your enjoyment of the product you bought
Just be happy with it if it fits your needs, and if you're curious as to why some don't find it good enough / dislike it, ask away.
But maybe don't tell us we're wrong just because we believe the choices could have been better/ smarter / more adapted to Pro users. After all, we know what we need(ed) !
Enjoy your machine !

 

[jerryk]

Some of us in engineering and the sciences don't consider that professional work either

Just kidding, but in a lot of medical or scientific fields you can easily exhaust the provided 16GB, for example, I'm not sure people get that.

Step 1: load R or SAS
Step 2: load dataset larger than 16GB
Step 3: there is no step 3

I used to work at one of the largest BioPharms and saw people with these types of issues all the time. Because of the size of the data and package architecture decisions it really does not matter how much memory you have.

Often it was misuse on the users part by trying to treat data from experiments as a big chunk of monolithic data, as if it was a big spreadsheet. These could be solved by using database oriented operation. Loading the data in a database and providing views accessible with something like R's ODBC can do wonders for performance, and dramatically reduce the size of data that must be ingested by R or another tool.

 

[villicodelirant]

Often it was misuse on the users part by trying to treat data from experiments as a big chunk of monolithic data, as if it was a big spreadsheet.

And sometimes it's not misuse and you actually need the whole dataset in memory or face disk thrashing

The latter situation is less and less unusual with the growth of datasets.

 

[Ethosik]

You can't.
But, using several gigabytes of RAM is, in 2017, commonplace enough that 16 or 32GB machines aren't niche anymore, with 8 being the absolute minimum.
You don't need to set out to make a computer for everyone to offer a 32GB option.
I wanted to point out this.



They might.



Obviously.



Not true.
Since at least the late '90s laptops have further divided into:

• "true" or "business" laptops/notebooks
• ultraportables/ultrabooks/subnotebooks
• desktop replacement/ "consumer" laptops

with the more recent addition of

• mobile workstations
• gaming laptops

In fact, I think the MBP fits the description of a desktop replacement laptop quite well, with its relatively beefy specs (you can have an i5 or i7) and lack of advanced mobile features (e.g.: somewhat bulkier than an subnotebook, no integrated 3G modem, no pointing stick, etc.).

I don't think it's trying to be a mobile workstation, though - not even a low end one (which is fine, you can't fill all niches).



In theory, I agree.
Machines such as the Powerbook 100 or the Thinkpad 700C embody exactly that function.

In practice, consumers have long decided to use laptops as their main machine, and manufacturers have been churning out desktop replacements, mobile workstations and - ugh! - gaming laptops for years now.



Yes, I think yes, you can?



Complaining? Moi?
I'm just saying that when other forum members complain that Apple does not cater to the "Pro" market, which I imagine to be the market for business laptops and mobile workstations, they have a point, as Apple simply does not make those.
The last Apple laptop with a docking station was the Powerbook Duo, the last Apple laptop with ECC memory... is yet to be released.



I... don't... think... I have ever mentioned the Surface?
No, I don't think the Surface makes for a great workstation either (duh), but there are plenty of Windows 10 workstations should one have a few grands burning a hole in their pockets - the IBM Thinkcentre, Dell Precision, HP Z lines.

So it is 100% impossible to even write one line of code on the 2016 Macbook Pros? But it is somehow possible to do on the 2015 Macbook Pros? I can't even create a one minute 720p/1080p movie with the new laptop? Or even write a 1 second audio file with it? Or I cannot write a book?

The entire "Pro" argument is just silly. One person's "Pro" never matches another. You might meet a "Pro" that needs a $20,000 computer. Not wants one, but NEEDS one. Studios like Pixar need expensive equipment. Are they the only "Pros"?

You are only a "Pro" if you require 64GB of RAM?

You said that Pro does not belong in the name, why aren't people calling for Microsoft's head like they are for Apple? Their computers are less pro since they are using ultra portable processors.

Compare this to....lets say the PS4 Pro. Your argument would be valid then, as I cannot do any professional work on that (well unless you make your living from Twitch, but Twitch doesn't have 4K streaming).
[doublepost=1483477859][/doublepost]

FINALLY, an explanation for this terrible, idiotic decision !
Thank you pmau I was wondering for a while what was the real reason behind the 4 USB-C . I was wondering if it was a question of royalties - Apple being a cheap bastard - like it has been before that, but not this time it seems.



Developer here. 16GB is literally the minimum if you want to get things done, running a few containers, some Node monstrosity etc
In 2016, it should have been the default on a supposedly "Pro" machine, with an option for 32GB for the ones who need it or want to future-proof their machines.

As said before, one of my issues with this machine is it doesn't feel Pro at all for a machine released end of 2016.

As for alternatives in the Mac world, you're pretty much screwed if a laptop is what you need.
Everything in this MBP iteration should have been for the macBook, and the MBP should have had more muscles and ports.

As for the power draw, frankly Schiller is full of **** .
DDR3-1600 averages at 2W per stick in normal use and close to 3 watts under heavy load. So that's the increase we're talking about here : 2 to 3W. Peanuts.
And even if Apple was being cheap ( and God knows they are when it comes to this stuff ) and used 4 sticks (4x8), we're still talking 4 to 6 watts increase.

And hey, if they actually had done something right in this iteration, they could have used the same Kaby Lake as the one in the Razer Stealth Blade, get slightly better performances than the maxed-out Core i7 in the 13", and since it's TDP is way lower (15W vs 28W), we could have had 32GB and still save between 7 to 10 watts in heavy load !
[doublepost=1483474841][/doublepost]

Goodluck on this one vilicodelirant, I gave it a try it's a lost cause.

Speaking of...
xWhiplash, I wonder why you are so angry / at war with people disliking this iteration or not finding it good enough ?
It's not like we dislike / go at war with the people who love it ?
Plus, you might actually spoil your enjoyment of the product you bought
Just be happy with it if it fits your needs, and if you're curious as to why some don't find it good enough / dislike it, ask away.
But maybe don't tell us we're wrong just because we believe the choices could have been better/ smarter / more adapted to Pro users. After all, we know what we need(ed) !
Enjoy your machine !

I am angry at people stating things like "These aren't Pro". How? Even writing a small game to make a living off of is a Professional. Each professional has different needs. Do you expect the big blockbuster movies to be done completely on laptops? There are some professionals that need a $5,000 NVIDIA Quadro video card.

I can play this game too. Do you need a $5,000 video card? No? Then you are not a professional user.

Here is that $5,000 video card. So if laptops are meant to replace desktops for professional use, where can I find a laptop that has 24GB of VRAM?

http://www.pny.com/nvidia-quadro-m6000-24gb?sku=VCQM6000-24GB-PB

 

[jerryk]

And sometimes it's not misuse and you actually need the whole dataset in memory or face disk thrashing

The latter situation is less and less unusual with the growth of datasets.

Disk access is really a consequence of how the database is accessed, indexed, and DB Server architecture. Most of our Oracle databases servers were set up that we could do very fast access from the SAN and then gigabit dark fiber to the users. And the database made sure that users never needed to traverse all of the data to get statistics or identify structures with certain defects/features. We also built query tools to let the users do "what if", "is there a relationship" directly against the database.

But, I understand the growth of datasets. I do machine learning and spend a lot of time dealing with datasets in hundreds of Gigabytes. I only run a smallish subset at a time on my Mac and put together the results models to form the completed model. Or better yet, farm it off using TensorFlow!

 

[niploteksi]

Since at least the late '90s laptops have further divided into:

• "true" or "business" laptops/notebooks
• ultraportables/ultrabooks/subnotebooks
• desktop replacement/ "consumer" laptops

with the more recent addition of

• mobile workstations
• gaming laptops

In fact, I think the MBP fits the description of a desktop replacement laptop quite well, with its relatively beefy specs (you can have an i5 or i7) and lack of advanced mobile features (e.g.: somewhat bulkier than an subnotebook, no integrated 3G modem, no pointing stick, etc.).

I don't think it's trying to be a mobile workstation, though - not even a low end one (which is fine, you can't fill all niches).

Wouldn't it be really nice if Apple could just produce three different kinds of laptops? One entry really light weight super portable one for people who cared about looks and weight more than specs. A middle version with great battery but just slightly heavier and with a decent screen catering to the professional writers. Then a high end laptop that was a mobile workstation or a desktop replacement for people with cpu and ram need, it probably wouldn't even need to be 5 inches thick these days. Just something that could hold maybe 32 or 64 gb ram and some ass-kicking processors, maybe even two drives!

Just imagine... then they wouldn't have to produce a laptop that was pleasing every costumer.... It's kind of mind boggling to think about.

 

[ihatetoregister]

So it is 100% impossible to even write one line of code on the 2016 Macbook Pros? But it is somehow possible to do on the 2015 Macbook Pros? I can't even create a one minute 720p/1080p movie with the new laptop? Or even write a 1 second audio file with it? Or I cannot write a book?

The entire "Pro" argument is just silly. One person's "Pro" never matches another. You might meet a "Pro" that needs a $20,000 computer. Not wants one, but NEEDS one. Studios like Pixar need expensive equipment. Are they the only "Pros"?

You are only a "Pro" if you require 64GB of RAM?

You said that Pro does not belong in the name, why aren't people calling for Microsoft's head like they are for Apple? Their computers are less pro since they are using ultra portable processors.

Compare this to....lets say the PS4 Pro. Your argument would be valid then, as I cannot do any professional work on that (well unless you make your living from Twitch, but Twitch doesn't have 4K streaming).
[doublepost=1483477859][/doublepost]

I am angry at people stating things like "These aren't Pro". How? Even writing a small game to make a living off of is a Professional. Each professional has different needs. Do you expect the big blockbuster movies to be done completely on laptops? There are some professionals that need a $5,000 NVIDIA Quadro video card.

I can play this game too. Do you need a $5,000 video card? No? Then you are not a professional user.

Again with the angry, disproportionate answer :-/
Peace, it's a new year!

So, we are pros and we either find this machine is not enough or even we dislike it.
You can apply your own definition of "pros", it won't change the fact that WE think it's a weak machine and a faux-pas from Apple and our expectation or worse, requirements, were not met.

Every time I see you in a thread you're like "enough with the CPU argument", "enough with the RAM argument", "enough with the dongle argument" "enough with the battery argument" etc and now "enough with the PRO argument".
And sometimes quite wrong, if I may .
We (the partially or totally discontent) are pro users. And also "simple" users. We know what we need, we know what can be done nowadays, and we aren't happy with this iteration, with some or most of the problems we mention.

I really don't see the point or the purpose behind telling us that we don't need the things we want, because you don't need them yourself ?!?
I see people being annoyed by the specs of the PS4 Pro. I understand why they think that. I also don't care and enjoy my console because it's completely fine for my use. I'm not going to berate them for wanting more, or read why it sucks for them !

If the machine is fit for you, just be happy and enjoy it !

 

[villicodelirant]

So it is 100% impossible to even write one line of code on the 2016 Macbook Pros?

No, I think it is possible.

But it is somehow possible to do on the 2015 Macbook Pros?

I think it's possible.

Or even write a 1 second audio file with it?

That can probably be arranged.

Or I cannot write a book?

I think you can, yes.

One person's "Pro" never matches another.

Yes, that's true.
That's, in fact, why you have such a variety of hardware on the market.

You said that Pro does not belong in the name

Did I? If I inadvertently did, I take it back.
"Pro" belongs to the MBP brand name just as much as "Air" belongs to the MBA name: it's just a marketing name.

, why aren't people calling for Microsoft's head like they are for Apple?

Probably because Windows 10 users who want a16+ core Xeon machine with ECC memory can just buy one.
Those who want to run OS X (legally) on such a machine can only complain on MacRumors

I can play this game too. Do you need a $5,000 video card? No? Then you are not a professional user.

I don't think anybody claimed that.
In fact, it works the other way around: if you need a $5000 video card you are a professional of some sort.
If you need 64GB you are a professional of some sort.

Sure enough you can be a professional and not need any particular hardware.
I don't know, a professional chef, for example.

How is any of this not entirely obvious?

What is being said here is that Apple's current strategy is not focused on the "professional" market as much as it is focused on the "consumer" or "lifestyle" market.
Why?
Because while it offers devices that can be used by professionals, it does not cover certain segments that are only bought by professionals.

For comparison, Boxx focus entirely on the pro market because no sane person would buy one of those for home.

This has not always been the case: again, think of the Powerbook Duo or of the early-00s Power Macs, which competed with SGI boxes.

I hope I am making myself clear this time.

Here is that $5,000 video card. So if laptops are meant to replace desktops for professional use, where can I find a laptop that has 24GB of VRAM?

In a few years. Probably not from Apple.

 

[ihatetoregister]

Just imagine... then they wouldn't have to produce a laptop that was pleasing every costumer.... It's kind of mind boggling to think about.

Haha yeah that`s about what I said on a similar topic, about the choice of CPUs:
"Imagine...imagine the MADNESS of releasing Skylake equipped laptops when the CPUs were released ! And then Kaby Lake ones for this release. Pure insanity!"

 

[niploteksi]

I really don't see the point or the purpose behind telling us that we don't need the things we want, because you don't need them yourself ?!?

Maybe some people feel dissatisfied that they would no longer buy the high end computer if the mid end one suited their needs better? Like if the one they wanted was light as air but didn't have a "pro" in the description (this is in no way intended explicitly for xWiplash, no flame baiting here). Otherwise I can't really see why some people have to spew "Hate" over people wanting more out of a company they used to "love".

 

[Ethosik]

Again with the angry, disproportionate answer :-/
Peace, it's a new year!

So, we are pros and we either find this machine is not enough or even we dislike it.
You can apply your own definition of "pros", it won't change the fact that WE think it's a weak machine and a faux-pas from Apple and our expectation or worse, requirements, were not met.

Every time I see you in a thread you're like "enough with the CPU argument", "enough with the RAM argument", "enough with the dongle argument" "enough with the battery argument" etc and now "enough with the PRO argument".
And sometimes quite wrong, if I may .
We (the partially or totally discontent) are pro users. And also "simple" users. We know what we need, we know what can be done nowadays, and we aren't happy with this iteration, with some or most of the problems we mention.

I really don't see the point or the purpose behind telling us that we don't need the things we want, because you don't need them yourself ?!?
I see people being annoyed by the specs of the PS4 Pro. I understand why they think that. I also don't care and enjoy my console because it's completely fine for my use. I'm not going to berate them for wanting more, or read why it sucks for them !

If the machine is fit for you, just be happy and enjoy it !

I agree with you. But when people say these are in no way a Pro machine is flat out wrong. Your pro needs are different. That is fine. But I can still get professional work done on these computers.

Like I said, every pro user needs is different. Do you need that $5,000 Quadro video card? Well there are pros that do. And they do NEED it. Do you need 32 GB of RAM? Okay, well there are some pro users that do not.

This is like me complaining in every post on the Dell forums (or a site like this for Dells or something) that the Dell XPS 15 does not have 128 GB of RAM. What would you tell me then? "Enough with the RAM argument". But what if I NEED 128 GB of RAM (like you guys NEED 32 GB of RAM)?

 

[niploteksi]

But what if I NEED 128 GB of RAM (like you guys NEED 32 GB of RAM)?

I wouldn't be very upset that you needed that much ram in a laptop... maybe a bit curious though.

 

[ihatetoregister]

I agree with you. But when people say these are in no way a Pro machine is flat out wrong. Your pro needs are different. That is fine. But I can still get professional work done on these computers.

Like I said, every pro user needs is different. Do you need that $5,000 Quadro video card? Well there are pros that do. And they do NEED it. Do you need 32 GB of RAM? Okay, well there are some pro users that do not.

This is like me complaining in every post on the Dell forums (or a site like this for Dells or something) that the Dell XPS 15 does not have 128 GB of RAM. What would you tell me then? "Enough with the RAM argument". But what if I NEED 128 GB of RAM (like you guys NEED 32 GB of RAM)?

But the examples you're quoting are extremes (and physically wouldn't work anyway), not to mention literally no one ever asked for those here.

We're not asking to build the impossible.

It's a high-end machine at a high-end price. It's in the domain of plausible - and feasible, as the competitors have shown- to provide a better battery, a newer and better CPU, an option for 32GB RAM, a better screen, to not have to look dumb with our dongles, to not have to spend THAT much money etc.

No one talks about impossible feats here, economically or physically. Physically & economically the competitors did it, and I guarantee you that Apple will, again, have the highest margin on laptops in the industry. And there's a reason for that.

 

[villicodelirant]

But the examples you're quoting are extremes (and physically wouldn't work anyway), not to mention literally no one ever asked for those here.

We're not asking to build the impossible.

I'm not asking to build anything, actually.

I am matter of fact-ly stating that Apple doesn't really do workstation and servers anymore (hey, remember the XServe?), its current model is much more focused on the "lifestyle" sector and on (very good) consumer computers

In fact, I'm sort of defending Apple on this: they are very consistent in their product range; it's just that their current brand is akin to that of Sony in the late '90s, not of SGI.
Which is not necessarily insane, since SGI went bankrupt and Sony is still with us.

Of course, there's bound to be some disgruntled fans of late '90s Apple, but... after mailing in a few bomb threats printed with their LaserWriter II they'll hopefully get used to Windows 10 and stop complaining soon enough

 

[Ethosik]

But the examples you're quoting are extremes (and physically wouldn't work anyway), not to mention literally no one ever asked for those here.

We're not asking to build the impossible.

It's a high-end machine at a high-end price. It's in the domain of plausible - and feasible, as the competitors have shown- to provide a better battery, a newer and better CPU, an option for 32GB RAM, a better screen, to not have to look dumb with our dongles, to not have to spend THAT much money etc.

No one talks about impossible feats here, economically or physically. Physically & economically the competitors did it, and I guarantee you that Apple will, again, have the highest margin on laptops in the industry. And there's a reason for that.

As of right now though, these are the best processors available for these systems.

They took a gamble with 16 vs 32 GB of RAM. We will see if it was a mistake or not. But the Surface Pro 4 only has 16 GB of RAM too. It is not cheap either.

 

[villicodelirant]

They took a gamble with 16 vs 32 GB of RAM. We will see if it was a mistake or not.

My guess is: it wasn't.
The 32GB+ crowd was never among the tbMBP's potential buyers anyway.
Those guys had probably ordered a few dozen Dell Precision or Xeon P-70s from Lenovo already

This is like me complaining in every post on the Dell forums (or a site like this for Dells or something) that the Dell XPS 15 does not have 128 GB of RAM. What would you tell me then?

"Dude, the XPS is a high-end consumer machine, you want the Precision line - but I'm afraid 128G is not yet available as an option"

Which is precisely what I'm doing here: those that are complaining about the lack of 32GB option are simply looking at the wrong laptop.

The MBP is not a portable workstation, it, in fact, competes directly against the XPS 15, not the Latitude or the Precision machines.

 

[niploteksi]

Of course, there's bound to be some disgruntled fans of late '90s Apple, but... after mailing in a few bomb threats printed with their LaserWriter II they'll hopefully get used to Windows 10 and stop complaining soon enough

*grumble grumble* I migrated my stuff to Windows and I keep my Mac Pro for nostalgic reasons... in a closet along with my G5 and G4... only to be hooked up to format drives for PS3s and such... haha.. and I have a mac laptop that I use to support my retired parents, no way I'm pulling the safety blanket away from them.

I dont' now.. maybe it's silly, but I still fondly remember the first installment of Os X and the discovery of the Terminal

(No bomb threats posted though and I jumped the government program for ejecting from the 90' fan club)

 

[ihatetoregister]

I'm not asking to build anything, actually.

It was xWhiplash I was addressing & quoting - about a 5000$ video card and 128GB of memory, which is far from from the requirements of the people who are not satisfied with this iteration

As of right now though, these are the best processors available for these systems.

Not that again :-(
A few pages ago I went to great lengths providing you with bench and TDPs link.
The CPU in the Razer Stealth Blade, Kaby Lake, both has (slightly) better performance and MUCH lower power consumption than the BEST, maxed out CPU offered in the MBP 13".
Not to mention other advantages.
It would have been, BY FAR, a much better choice.

And yes, they could have had this for the 13" line and Skylake for the 15" (like they did with Haswell and Broadwell).
Or you know, release earlier with Skylake CPUs, and then again when Kaby Lake had the ones suitable for the 15" . Which were released ... today if I'm not wrong ?!?

They took a gamble with 16 vs 32 GB of RAM. We will see if it was a mistake or not. But the Surface Pro 4 only has 16 GB of RAM too. It is not cheap either.

It's not a gamble. This is just a bad iteration, with bad choices all over ( in my and some other`s opinions ;-) ).
Surface Pro has one major issue though : it has Windows on it !

 

[niploteksi]

Which is precisely what I'm doing here: those that are complaining about the lack of 32GB option are simply looking at the wrong laptop.

Also, just because we're whining about Apple's choices doesn't mean we haven't bought computers from other manufacturers.

 

[Ethosik]

It was xWhiplash I was addressing & quoting - about a 5000$ video card and 128GB of memory, which is far from from the requirements of the people who are not satisfied with this iteration



Not that again :-(
A few pages ago I went to great lengths providing you with bench and TDPs link.
The CPU in the Razer Stealth Blade, Kaby Lake, both has (slightly) better performance and MUCH lower power consumption than the BEST, maxed out CPU offered in the MBP 13".
Not to mention other advantages.
It would have been, BY FAR, a much better choice.

And yes, they could have had this for the 13" line and Skylake for the 15" (like they did with Haswell and Broadwell).
Or you know, release earlier with Skylake CPUs, and then again when Kaby Lake had the ones suitable for the 15" . Which were released ... today if I'm not wrong ?!?



It's not a gamble. This is just a bad iteration, with bad choices all over ( in my and some other`s opinions ;-) ).
Surface Pro has one major issue though : it has Windows on it !

Um I was referring to the 15". Like I was in the other post. Show me where the 15w Kaby Lake beats the 45w Skylake in the 15" system. THAT WAS MY ARGUMENT.

So you expect Apple to have a Kaby Lake designed laptop for 13" and a Skylake designed laptop for the 15"? That would be a nightmare.

 

[ihatetoregister]

... I abandon. I'm sure you're doing this for trolling.
Happy new year anyway, I hope you'll find everything you desire for.

 

[Ethosik]

... I abandon. I'm sure you're doing this for trolling.
Happy new year anyway, I hope you'll find everything you desire for.

Please, show me I am wrong that the current Kaby Lake at 15w beats the hell out of the 45w Skylake from the 15" Macbook Pro. I showed you evidence that it did not. It doesn't even have the same number of cores! So why not you show me evidence that it does?

You said so yourself that TDP is pointless. So that 15w Kaby Lake is even better than my desktop Skylake i7 at 4Ghz? Even with fewer cores? Even with lower clock speed?

Oh and BTW, the Intel 7500U, from what I read, was released August 30, 2016. The new Macbook Pros were released October 27, 2016. Unless you wanted the apple laptops to be delayed (to test to see if there were any Kaby Lake issues like the Surface Pro 4 ran into with Skylake).

For the record, I am not trolling. I have yet to see evidence of Kaby Lake beating all Skylakes across the board. If there is, please point me in the right direction so I can KNOW about it.

EDIT: Wrong Month.

 

[BarracksSi]

Saw this point being made --

If the new MBPs aren't Pro enough, what did pros use instead of the 2015-and-earlier models?