Oh god... Apple front page has MBP 17" tag line "The worlds thinnest and lightest 17" notebook". Did they actually do some sort of research with MBP 17" users? I have hard time believing 17" pro users top wishes were lighter and thinner note book. I would've been impressed with something like "The fastest notebook in the world" tag line. There needs to be re-focusing here. Get the best components in the world and make it more expandable then any other laptop. Then design chases around it and slap MBP text on it and you have real pro laptop. There is no way of making truly small and light 17" laptop so why even try. If you want small and light then design a tiny netbook but leave adjectives like thin and light out when you want to advertise your fastest work horse laptop in a lineup.
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.
MacBook Pro 17" Battery Replacement $179 and Other Notes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Bah .... -1
I'd say that YES, making a 17" notebook that's still as thin and light as possible is a very worthy objective.
That's exactly why I bought my first 17" Powerbook G4, years ago. Plenty of companies offered a 17" laptop, and many with better performance than the dated and overpriced G4. But by contrast, they were selling bricks! The HP 17" I looked at was enormous! I've owned lighter-weight DESKTOP systems, seriously!
I think most "pro" type users can get their work done just fine on a machine with a 15" display. It's no big deal to attach a large external LCD display when you're actually at a desk you sit at often, if you need more screen space some of the time. Going larger, to a 17" screen, is done mainly for the convenience. It's a "nice thing to have", basically - NOT a requirement. If it means you're stuck with a thick and heavy brick of a computer to get it, it's hardly worth it.
I'd say that YES, making a 17" notebook that's still as thin and light as possible is a very worthy objective.
That's exactly why I bought my first 17" Powerbook G4, years ago. Plenty of companies offered a 17" laptop, and many with better performance than the dated and overpriced G4. But by contrast, they were selling bricks! The HP 17" I looked at was enormous! I've owned lighter-weight DESKTOP systems, seriously!
I think most "pro" type users can get their work done just fine on a machine with a 15" display. It's no big deal to attach a large external LCD display when you're actually at a desk you sit at often, if you need more screen space some of the time. Going larger, to a 17" screen, is done mainly for the convenience. It's a "nice thing to have", basically - NOT a requirement. If it means you're stuck with a thick and heavy brick of a computer to get it, it's hardly worth it.
I think the refocusing is already underway. Apple is now targeting individuals with expendable income who want to purchase a computer primarily based upon style. Pro users aren't really getting much out of the Apple lineup these days and I'd argue that they are not even the target market. This is especially true since a pro user will still begrudgingly purchase a new Mac even if it doesn't directly meet their needs.
And I really don't think this will change any time soon. The majority of Apple's products are now closed or hobbled in some way. At this rate, within 3-5 years you won't be able to replace any components on your Mac (desktop or mobile) except ram. I think that's why Apple is dragging their feet with the Mac Pro line. It's their least ideal product since it allows the consumer to upgrade components instead of upgrading machines. If they could remove this product from their matrix without significant backlash, I really think they would.
Apple is quickly becoming a consumer company (and a profitable one at that), we're just refusing to accept it.
Snow Leopard will eat the battery faster than 10.5 !
Note that much of the improvements in power management are in the area of reducing power draw in unused components - especially at the functional unit level in the CPUs and GPUs. Idle processor cores use much less power than busy ones.
These boards offer ample proof of this - the posts about how hot laptops get running some programs, or how watching a DVD kicks the fans into high gear. Any look at the cooling needed for a graphics chip shows the same problem.
I don't think that GrandCentral and OpenCL will have much effect on battery life. While they'll get some jobs done faster, by keeping more units busy they'll draw more watts from the battery (and spin the fans more).
There may be some minor savings due to briefer run times (so LCD power loss will be smaller), but by and large I expect that in the end a given task will use about the same number of watt-hours in 10.5 and 10.6. Getting it done faster won't necessarily mean improved battery life.
Note that much of the improvements in power management are in the area of reducing power draw in unused components - especially at the functional unit level in the CPUs and GPUs. Idle processor cores use much less power than busy ones.
These boards offer ample proof of this - the posts about how hot laptops get running some programs, or how watching a DVD kicks the fans into high gear. Any look at the cooling needed for a graphics chip shows the same problem.
I don't think that GrandCentral and OpenCL will have much effect on battery life. While they'll get some jobs done faster, by keeping more units busy they'll draw more watts from the battery (and spin the fans more).
There may be some minor savings due to briefer run times (so LCD power loss will be smaller), but by and large I expect that in the end a given task will use about the same number of watt-hours in 10.5 and 10.6. Getting it done faster won't necessarily mean improved battery life.
In NLE's its huge difference and Shake actually needs higher res then 15" provides. With NLE's you almost always have bunch of other gear so it means nothing if laptop is fraction smaller or lighter. Only power and expansion options matter.
Ps. On desktop I'm not using a laptop. Its MacPro with three screens (20", 30" and 40") or some turnkey system. Honestly, some users require stuff like that in order to get their job done. Its not convenience but necessity. If I could get my job done on $1000 MacBook I would be in heaven.
According to Apple, the life span of these batteries is about three times as long as the previous one. From 300-400 charges to 1000, and each charge lasts 40% longer. And you conclude that instead of changing them after 2.5 to 3 years, they will be changed after 3 to 3.5 years.
My maths doesn't work the same as your maths.
I think if Apple wants to put all of this bickering to rest, they just need to step up and say they will warranty the battery for 3 years with a standard warranty or 5 years with the purchase of Apple Care. I think that would put an end to it pretty quick. Make Apple put their money where their mouth is.
What's the problem?
I doubt this is a problem for very many people. A 17" notebook is a portable - it is hardly ultraportable. The battery almost seems like a quaint optional feature. My 17" has been run on batteries for much less than 1% of its 3 year life. Most people using a 17 are using it as a portable desktop replacement.
For people who really do need to swap an 8 hour battery in the field where no wall outlets are available, there are plenty of external batteries that are just as portable as carrying an extra battery - and they have the benefit of not forcing a shutdown on a swap.
The useful life of the battery is beyond the point these computers become eBay bargains.
I'm trying to picture the customer this doesn't work for. An archaeologist doing work 16 hours a day out in the field, who is such a foppish dandy he can't imagine attaching it to a battery dongle lest he be humiliated by his colleagues.
Apple has shown non-removable batteries trade very small losses for very big gains.
I doubt this is a problem for very many people. A 17" notebook is a portable - it is hardly ultraportable. The battery almost seems like a quaint optional feature. My 17" has been run on batteries for much less than 1% of its 3 year life. Most people using a 17 are using it as a portable desktop replacement.
For people who really do need to swap an 8 hour battery in the field where no wall outlets are available, there are plenty of external batteries that are just as portable as carrying an extra battery - and they have the benefit of not forcing a shutdown on a swap.
The useful life of the battery is beyond the point these computers become eBay bargains.
I'm trying to picture the customer this doesn't work for. An archaeologist doing work 16 hours a day out in the field, who is such a foppish dandy he can't imagine attaching it to a battery dongle lest he be humiliated by his colleagues.
Apple has shown non-removable batteries trade very small losses for very big gains.
Magsafe isn't licensed to anyone so I wouldn't call it plenty if you find few hacks that allow you to attach external battery... and the ones I've seen are far from being portable (adapters some boxes and then some cables...)
EDIT: The ones I've seen are actually car adapters but they are definitely hacks.
EDIT: I actually found one (QuickerTek) that looks nice and not hack like and gives you 8 to 12 hours extra on old MB and MBP but costs $449.95
Touche
You're right about that. I didn't realize the third party magsafe adapters you can buy are actually hybrids made from Apple's own parts (which explains the price tag).
But it is still a viable solution for the tiny population of exceptional users.
I guess my biggest complaint with these complaints is that they rely mainly on hypothetical or outlandish scenarios to get any traction. Like all the iPhone complaints - they eventually seem to boil down to the absurd - a person who needs to cross Death Valley on foot twice daily - but still demands to do it in style with a dongle-free iPhone - when an HF handheld radio and some extra water would be far more practical.
You're right about that. I didn't realize the third party magsafe adapters you can buy are actually hybrids made from Apple's own parts (which explains the price tag).
But it is still a viable solution for the tiny population of exceptional users.
I guess my biggest complaint with these complaints is that they rely mainly on hypothetical or outlandish scenarios to get any traction. Like all the iPhone complaints - they eventually seem to boil down to the absurd - a person who needs to cross Death Valley on foot twice daily - but still demands to do it in style with a dongle-free iPhone - when an HF handheld radio and some extra water would be far more practical.
OMG, a battery does not snap in and out and it is the end of the free market or free will? Dude you are being a little melodramatic. It is not like there is only one 17" computer on the market, or that Apple does not make a laptop with a snap-in battery or easy to change RAM and hard drive. Or that the previous version of the 17", that is now being discounted for hundreds off is obsolete. Get a grip you do have a choice and you do have free will, you are not being held hostage and you have control over your money.
I am going to throw the BS flag here, I've been buying Apple's pro laptops for nearly a decade, and other than the old Wallstreet/Pismo the laptops have had varying degrees of simplicity/difficulty in replacing RAM and drives. (RAM on the the PISMO was no simple matter.) And I can tell you from personal experience, a pro user is not going to be intimidated by 8 frick'n screws on the underside of their laptop when they decide to replace an internal drive or increase the RAM, or swap in a Blueray drive. And if this battery is not soldered in place, it is going to be a breeze to replace. Because the case is now only two pieces, and the internals placed so elegantly the 17 it is actually going to be a great deal easier to work on than anything but the most recent 15" Pro and MacBook, and when you close it back up it will remain just as rigid and quiet as new. Your premise that this is no longer a serviceable laptop or Apple does not care about professional users just does not ring true.
I think you pick up on a good point regarding the battery.
Apple assumes their products are flawless, and the battery will last for the predicted lifetime. The reality is that this is never the case, and your story of an internal battery damaging the internal components is actually quite likely.
Isn't this what defines 'design flaw'?
I hate the direction that Apple seems to be taking computing- hiding all the technology away, removing any ability to repair or upgrade. It's as though Apple thinks the consumer is some kind of dumb-ass that has no idea about technology.
This notebook is an insult to the human intellect. No self removable battery in a 17" notebook, no RGB LED lit display and a graphics card from a 15" notebook. Wow, that's really a machine for pros.
I rather buy a M6400 notebook with a WUXGA RGB LED edge-to-edge lit display, a Quadro FX 3700M and 16GB RAM.
I rather buy a M6400 notebook with a WUXGA RGB LED edge-to-edge lit display, a Quadro FX 3700M and 16GB RAM.
Errr, most Apple customers have no idea about technology.
Wow, everybody is quick to question the new battery without any benchmarks. Like with every other supplier these are based on very light action. That's why they say "up to". But nonetheless, they're going to be accurate in comparison to their other battery life claims, since they're gonna be using the same weird benchmarks...
So compared to the 15'', we're likely gonna see 60% improvements. Everybody can calculate what that means on their own.
Additionally, 1000 cycles get the same boost. Because each cycle is actually longer, you go through fewer cycles.
So compared to the 15'' and its replacable battery, you get 1600 equivalent cycles instead of 300... If that's even remotely true, it makes the build-in battery a non-issue for 99% of people, as far as aging is concerned.
New, battery life is another issue. But here, at least 90% of people don't carry a spare battery today, even though they could. They are only gonna benefit.
It sucks for those who need very long battery life, and those whose batteries die prematurely, but for the majority of people this should actually be a benefit.
It sucks more if you don't live close to an Apple Store. If you have the chance to bring it in, they can probably replace it in a few minutes. Sending it in isn't nearly as comfortable.
So compared to the 15'', we're likely gonna see 60% improvements. Everybody can calculate what that means on their own.
Additionally, 1000 cycles get the same boost. Because each cycle is actually longer, you go through fewer cycles.
So compared to the 15'' and its replacable battery, you get 1600 equivalent cycles instead of 300... If that's even remotely true, it makes the build-in battery a non-issue for 99% of people, as far as aging is concerned.
New, battery life is another issue. But here, at least 90% of people don't carry a spare battery today, even though they could. They are only gonna benefit.
It sucks for those who need very long battery life, and those whose batteries die prematurely, but for the majority of people this should actually be a benefit.
It sucks more if you don't live close to an Apple Store. If you have the chance to bring it in, they can probably replace it in a few minutes. Sending it in isn't nearly as comfortable.
Huh?
Honestly, I sometimes wonder where some of you people come from? You're supposedly long-time Apple users, yet you don't seem to remember a single thing of Apple's history?
The ORIGINAL Macintosh, for example, was a PAIN to take apart! You needed a special, super-long torx wrench, just to access the torx bolts they sunk DEEP into the plastic case. (Not like torx bolts don't discourage people enough from taking something apart - since torx drivers still aren't anywhere NEAR as common as normal screwdrivers. But they had to go and make sure no normal torx driver on the market would ever REACH those bolts!)
Apple has a LONG history, ever since that first Mac, of building machines that discourage people from disassembling them or doing their own upgrades to them. At the same time though, they interspersed that with very easy-to-open machines. (Anyone remember the old Apple LC series? System looked like a plastic pizza box, and the whole top of the case just snapped off by pulling on two tabs in the back of it!)
In that respect, it seems like nothing's really changed a bit, over at Apple. They're still cranking out the random machine that's easy to work on, followed by one that's not. And above all, you can bet they'll make almost every one of them a new "learning experience" to work on. (Look at the insides of the iMac G5 machines for example, vs. the first (same white case) iMacs with Intel CPUs. The insides look all clean and neat in the G5, but a hodge-podge packed in the Intel version.)
More examples? How about the G4 cube, with the cool way the whole insides slid out of the top shell, just by pulling on the big release handle on the bottom? Compare that to a Mac Mini, where you need a PUTTY KNIFE to wedge in there and pop the sides loose!
It's almost like their designers have split-personalities and you never know which way they'll swing when they do a given system revision!
Honestly, I sometimes wonder where some of you people come from? You're supposedly long-time Apple users, yet you don't seem to remember a single thing of Apple's history?
The ORIGINAL Macintosh, for example, was a PAIN to take apart! You needed a special, super-long torx wrench, just to access the torx bolts they sunk DEEP into the plastic case. (Not like torx bolts don't discourage people enough from taking something apart - since torx drivers still aren't anywhere NEAR as common as normal screwdrivers. But they had to go and make sure no normal torx driver on the market would ever REACH those bolts!)
Apple has a LONG history, ever since that first Mac, of building machines that discourage people from disassembling them or doing their own upgrades to them. At the same time though, they interspersed that with very easy-to-open machines. (Anyone remember the old Apple LC series? System looked like a plastic pizza box, and the whole top of the case just snapped off by pulling on two tabs in the back of it!)
In that respect, it seems like nothing's really changed a bit, over at Apple. They're still cranking out the random machine that's easy to work on, followed by one that's not. And above all, you can bet they'll make almost every one of them a new "learning experience" to work on. (Look at the insides of the iMac G5 machines for example, vs. the first (same white case) iMacs with Intel CPUs. The insides look all clean and neat in the G5, but a hodge-podge packed in the Intel version.)
More examples? How about the G4 cube, with the cool way the whole insides slid out of the top shell, just by pulling on the big release handle on the bottom? Compare that to a Mac Mini, where you need a PUTTY KNIFE to wedge in there and pop the sides loose!
It's almost like their designers have split-personalities and you never know which way they'll swing when they do a given system revision!
This notebook is an insult to the human intellect. No self removable battery in a 17" notebook, no RGB LED lit display and a graphics card from a 15" notebook. Wow, that's really a machine for pros.
I rather buy a M6400 notebook with a WUXGA RGB LED edge-to-edge lit display, a Quadro FX 3700M and 16GB RAM.
Errr, most Apple customers have no idea about technology.
Which is closer to a desktop than to the thinnest 17'' notebook...
Except you could actually put 16GB into a desktop.
It's a monster with 2 hours of battery life. When I say monster, I don't mean it in a negative way. At least not in the "insult to human intellect" negative way. But you might as well compare a Mac mini to a midi tower machine. These are very, very, very different machines, and they will please very different people.
Exactly! So much selective memory in order to rationalize pointless frustration and false arguments.
I'm not liking the new built-in battery concept. I like having a battery that I can easily remove and replace when I want to, not one that I have to send my entire laptop into Apple to replace, and I'm also very hesistant on buying a laptop (especially one at that price) when I can't upgrade its RAM or hard drive easily in the future...
Why would you travel with a 17 inch laptop? hahahah May as well bring my desktop with me, it has a smaller screen
5 years before it needs replacing. If your battery only lasts 20 minutes, it definitely needs replacing.
This is no good. Battery must be removable. Imagine your work Mac pro's battery (that you take between home and work) goes dead. With built in battery you have to send your WHOLE laptop away. You can loose a day or two of worth of work. At least with removable battery, you can just plug in your Mac pro and keep working while you wait for battery. Not a good move.