I've not too much of a problem with them going all USB-C except for them not developing a magsafe replacement, others are doing it so that's just lazy (and agree they should have thrown in a couple of A to C adapters, costs them pennies). But I do have a problem with them getting rid of the SD card slot, you're lumbered with a dongle forever. Also having to use a dongle for the ethernet dongle is a joke.
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 Users Express Concerns About Limited Battery Life
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've not too much of a problem with them going all USB-C except for them not developing a magsafe replacement, others are doing it so that's just lazy (and agree they should have thrown in a couple of A to C adapters, costs them pennies). But I do have a problem with them getting rid of the SD card slot, you're lumbered with a dongle forever. Also having to use a dongle for the ethernet dongle is a joke.
Don't use Chrome. It's terribly inefficient, partially because it has Adobe Flash enabled which is not designed for energy efficiency. Whenever I need to run a video in Flash, my fans spin up and it's a terrible experience.
Solution: use Safari and I guarantee you'll experience the battery life advertised.
10 hours is rated with a specific use case such as watching video or light web browsing. It DOES NOT including gaming or using software that is not optimized for battery performance (aka Chrome and Flash)
Solution: use Safari and I guarantee you'll experience the battery life advertised.
10 hours is rated with a specific use case such as watching video or light web browsing. It DOES NOT including gaming or using software that is not optimized for battery performance (aka Chrome and Flash)
I wouldn't be surprised if digital cameras ship with USB-C ports in the near future. And as I mentioned before, there are lots of 3rd party USB-C to Ethernet adapters, some of them include USB-A ports.
I just don't understand why we still insist on using SD cards for data transfer. Seems dumb. This problem should have been solved by now with wireless technologies. Why do I need to take my camera off the tripod, flip it over and pop out an antiquated piece of plastic to push into a laptop and then import. Why are my photos and videos not just appearing on the dang computer right after they're taken?
I just think there's a better way and manufacturers are not bothering to solve that problem.
Watch the video dude. This one has major thermal throttling due to it's thiness and fan design.
They may well have but sd cards are removable media and you usually have multiple cards so that won't solve it. Of course there's 3rd party products but how hard would it have been for Apple to add a USB-C ethernet dongle rather than the mess it is now? I'd say not very.
Simply dropping magsafe was lazy when you see the kickstarter doing fairly neat version, Apple could have made a very neat one.
By the way, KPOM ... what happened to you're other four buddies who endlessly defend apple like you do? Seems they got tired, or perhaps, realized that they were wrong about this one?
I know it's far fetched, but some people do have the capability of changing their mind based on clear and obvious facts.
At the same time, I know it's human nature to keep defending a position you've held for so long.
I feel for you. It's a tough position to be in: Deep down knowing you're wrong, but emotionally not ready to deal with it.
So one lot of storage is better than unlimited storage? You can get wifi enabled sdcards if that's what you want but transfer isn't as fast as plugging it in.
I have MBP 15" 2016 for two weeks now. 2.7 512 Radeon 460. Battery life is pretty much what Apple said. Never got 10 hours, but 8-9 all the time. I did set it up as new laptop i.e. did not move all my crap from 2015 MBP.
Hey, Folks! I solved my Macbook Pro problem!
Just bought a Gigabyte Notebook for half the price with double the processing power.
Hmm. Damn it. My SSD with 512gigs is a bit small tho. Wait....!!! I CAN EXPAND THE STORAGE MYSELF!!!!
And it runs 8-9 hours when using casually as well. =)
Just bought a Gigabyte Notebook for half the price with double the processing power.
Hmm. Damn it. My SSD with 512gigs is a bit small tho. Wait....!!! I CAN EXPAND THE STORAGE MYSELF!!!!
And it runs 8-9 hours when using casually as well. =)
Hmm, in this case, he's stating FACTS. You're actually much more like the Trump supporter: Denying all sorts of flaws, rejecting obvious problems, and blindly supporting something that doesn't deserve your support.
What facts? What he wrote was simply "it's a $3,000 piece of junk". That's called OPINION. Not fact. You must have problems differentiating those two. It's common these days.
I know it sounds mean, but I can't wait to hear what you say after you experience one, or many of the issues detailed in this video (like I said earlier, this vid deserves to be on every page of this thread - so here you go).
Wrong.
I own a 13" TB and used only Safari, Messages, Calendar, and a few other lightweight apps initially to see if it lived up to Apple's claims. I got 6-6.5 hours. After reinstalling Sierra, that jumped up to 8-8.5 hours—but only temporarily. I'm now back to 6-6.5 hours, even at 35-45% brightness.
Also, I've compared power usage with Safari and Chrome using Battery Health 2 (shows usage in both watts and mAH), as well as in the energy and CPU tabs of Activity Monitor. I do not see a significant difference in usage in mAH, or in the energy/CPU tab between Safari and Chrome.
Stop telling me I can't use Chrome. I've been using Chrome for many years on different laptops and have never been a problem. If these MacBooks can't handle Chrome, they should put a red warning sticker the box. and I am definitely not buying it.
I guess my concern is more with transferring data from cameras and peripherals to a laptop, not in the storage on those devices. It would be nice even to trickle-download over WiFi to the device than have to remove a card and plug in to transfer. It would be nice to just browse the media on the device and choose what to download, etc.
I have an SD card in my current MBP for extra storage so I do use that for added space. But it's pretty limited (separate volume) and it's really SLOW. Even with a fast SD card, it's not nearly as fast as SSD even on my 13" MBPr.
[doublepost=1480900596][/doublepost]
The issue is really with Adobe Flash and video in my tests. While Chrome uses large amounts of RAM in my tests, it seems it really digs into the CPU when Adobe Flash is running, which is used in advertising in a lot of web sites as well as video on YouTube, CNN, Facebook, etc.
Man, the apologist mentality really needs to go. It's like you think Apple can do no wrong. Please STOP dismissing peoples REAL issues with Apple, it's insulting DISHONEST.
It's more an issue with Google not coding for performance on the Mac platform. I don't think anyone is telling you not to use Chrome, but I get poor battery life on any Mac laptop when running Chrome with Flash enabled.
Most new cameras do come with wireless transfers. However that's just the issue. New cameras. Most photographers buy cameras that last for years and years at a time; they still have older models that don't have new features like wireless transfer.
In saying that, wireless transfers from cameras is still a pretty terrible experience!
Wrong wrong wrong
The 3lb laptop is the MacBook and the pro machine is a whole half pound heavier. Users who want the lightest buy the MacBook and those wanting power sacrifice a whole 8 ounces in weight.
No way would we see this type of posting of a pro machine with true power use be decried as we see here when use is diminished for the sake of thinness. Apple could have had both as they had before but chose not to go that route and this is the reaction they got.
This is what happens when 1 man rules over design without oversight.
Apple has made mistakes before, let's hope they are not too stubborn/proud to fix it moving forward.
I didn't say I think Apple can do no wrong. Stop setting up logical fallacies. You can have all the issues you want. Go for it. It's a free country (or probably is wherever you are). But I think they are unfounded. I think people are placing expectations higher than reality permits. Go ahead and beat the company up with a stick or boycott their products or whatever you want. It doesn't bother me. Maybe I'll get my 2016 MBP a little faster if everyone isn't buying right now.
I'm not sure I understand your last statement. What does "insulting dishonest" even mean? Do you mean "insultingly dishonest"? Am I somehow lying to you? I'm not known for being a dishonest person. I'm just stating that if you're expecting a battery to do something when running a test that stresses the performance of a system, you're not going to get the "up to 10 hours" of battery life. I'm not expecting to get that when I'm running Xcode while using a web browser, Photoshop and editing videos. I am willing to bet I'll get 5 hours (and will be happy if I do). So I do stand by my statement that it takes an exceptional person to think otherwise or to think that 10 hours would be the norm. It would be the exception of very frugal use.
If you're not getting that performance, schedule a Genius Bar appointment. Maybe there's something wrong. But everywhere I've ready from reviews shows that it is getting about the expected battery life when the tests are replicated.
And that's where you're wrong and why nobody should read your comments. You're basically a liar.
I mean, really. I keep seeing this pop up, probably from people justifying not spending money they don't have (but they still want the MBP). It's not like just because it's thinner, it's Apple's first foray into laptop design and construction.
Sure, the touchbar is a new addition, but doesn't instantly suggest this is some sort of concept product that's gone to production.
Apple knows better than anyone how to engineer and build a laptop. Let's stop this "lolz gen 1 bugs u sukkas!" line. It's silly.
Understood and agree. I just wish they could have solved the issue by now. I didn't say they have
I'm not a videographer or photographer as a profession but I have some experience in that arena.It seems that normal SD may top out at about 100 MB/sec. There's a faster version that requires more pins that tops out around 312 MB/s - https://www.sdcard.org/developers/overview/bus_speed/
Apple's SSD in the MBP 2016 comes in around 1,400 MB/s or (4.5x) - http://www.computerworld.com/articl...e-new-macbook-literally-is-twice-as-fast.html
USB 3.1 gen 2 manages 1.25 GB/s (10 Gb/s) which is 4x the maximum possible speed of the SD interface. Thunderbolt 3 manages about 5GB/s (or 40 Gbps) which is 4x faster than that. Why not switch the tech over to USB-C instead of the SD interface? It's more compact and has more headroom for future speed enhancements assuming that storage technology can keep up in a smaller form factor.