MacBook Pro Users Express Concerns About Limited Battery Life

[MH01]

For you the solution is simple. Just buy a 2015 MBP. And then buy dongles when the next peripheral you buy has USB-C.

Last three peripherals I bought had USB-C on the device itself, but the cable that came with it had USB 3 on one end and USB-C on the other. we will see a second generation of this laptop or even a third before people need to worry about dongle hell working the other way.

Apple while spearheading this transition is also looking at making big money via dongles on the way ..... and the profit margin in those is huge
[doublepost=1480923612][/doublepost]

3 users from the article:

1. "Currently I'm powering a 1080p external monitor and casually browsing with Chrome. At full charge, I'm getting an estimate of 3 hours battery life. With gaming it's even less."

2. "MacRumors forum member Scott claimed he experienced a 5 percentage point drop in battery life, from 10% to 5%, in just 12 minutes. Google Chrome, a known battery hog, was listed as the only app drawing significant power."

3. "I've been working non-stop for the past 1.5 hours, back and forth between emails, Safari, Calendar, Messages, organizing files, editing some PDFs in Adobe Acrobat DC, and building a financial model in Excel. I started at 100% and am now at 92% battery, with an estimated 10 hours 35 minutes remaining. If you're not getting this kind of battery life on your MBP you should definitely get it checked out."

Maybe you should take your own advice and read the article.

Feel free to read the rest of the thread, not just the first post, plenty of users using safari with poor battery life. I find brightness of the screen the main contributing factor. So at 80% brightness i loose 15% in 30 minutes in safari. I can now go away and drop the brightness down to say 30% and comeback and say I have great battery.....

i might just do that....see what the battery life is with such reduced brightness .

 

[Abazigal]

Is there anything Apple can actually do to solve this or are we all just SOL?

Apple could just issue errata to reduce the number of hours of battery life claimed on the packaging, and everything would be in order.

 

[FifaFrancesco]

View attachment 676261

Can one of you guys tell me how to get the estimated time remaining? Doesn't show up for me..?!

 

[gijoeinla]

I'm 62 and have been using Apple products since the early 90's. You can praise them all you want but I'm pissed off at the direction this is going in.

We get it. Your pissed. Are you intimately aware of their business plans?

 

[dof250]

Can one of you guys tell me how to get the estimated time remaining? Doesn't show up for me..?!

It's a bug in the latest Sierra beta. If you are running beta, then thats the problem.

 

[RMD68]

You've never seen someone "giving a PowerPoint" (or "KeyNote")?
You lucky, lucky person.
Sometimes people even use data projectors for useful things, like demoing software/websites.

Maybe there will be a power outlet for the laptop too you snot.

 

[borntrouble]

Apple's not learning from repeated mistakes in deciding to enter the thin wars, and I agree that it's a sign of trouble. Maybe the tech equivalent of the canary in the coal mine.

Apple used to rise above the spec wars, a domain of the PC crowd. "But ours has more megahertz and more RPMs," they'd say, to which Apple would rightly respond, "Who cares? Ours feels more responsive and offers a better user experience because of our integrated software/hardware and the beautifully functional ergonomics. Everyone from classroom kids to creative pros couldn't care less about geekbench and megahertz as they're having the best user experience there is."

Fast forward. "Magazine reviewers want thin? We'll give them thin!!" says Jony Ive, no longer with Job's insight into the user to rein him in. So we now have phones that are so thin (at the expense of milliwatt-hours) that the camera absurdly protrudes out the back. We have laptops so thin the battery life curve is actually decreasing as battery demands are rising. We also have new laptops that you can't plug into new iPhones, new Apple TVs you can't plug into laptops if a software update bricks it, and not-yet-legacy peripherals you can't plug into new laptops without an array of dongles (which you must now buy à-la-carte).

Everyone's got a theory about what's happened in Cupertino, but something certainly has. Who knows if it would've happened had Jobs not died, but my gut says it wouldn't have, at least not this way. I'll still stick with Apple because, frankly, macOS is still better that the alternatives in my opinion, and everything flows from that. But I'm no longer as proud of my choice as I used to be.

This.

 

[RMD68]

Sure, Chrome is just the most widely used browser, but ofc Apple can't be bothered. People are simply using their systems wrong, they should use that train wreck that is Safari (to web developers)

Just like all the R&D Google spends on optimizing for Safari, right?

 

[lexR]

We get it. Your pissed. Are you intimately aware of their business plans?

I think we all understand your a 'Pro' apple user, with many years in the industry, but what he's saying is based on his opinion he is not happy with the direction of Apple, TBH neither an I, I am not a pro user, but thats what once drew me to Apple, my Art teacher had one back in the 90's and for me they were the stuff of legends... from my own opinion it feels like Apple is becoming far more weighted towards 'consumer' type products like the iPhone, iPad (in previous years) apple watch and the iMac. Where is the 7.1 Mac Pro? its been years since the MBP was updated and on the surface it looked good... slimmer, lighter, faster and all that but its no good 'looking' good if it doesn't perform. It feels like Apple is now saying more 'yes' (due to profits) than 'no' (due to not quite being good enough).

 

[Fishcake21]

Its not rocket science the older models have much higher battery wattage and the CPU generation is still reliable on battery life.

Also, some of these tests are whacked, try using officially what apple does like safari and fcp, and compare with new and older models.

 

[MH01]

Right guys.

I have been on both sides of the argument now, **** battery and awesome battery. Ive had the 5hours estimate and the 10.5 hours estimate.

So my initial test was between the 2016 2.7 460 and 2015 2.8, browsing Macrumors for 30 minutes, with brightness set to 80%....yup it looked dman good .

After 30 min.

2015 : 92% battery
2016 : 85% Battery

so going at that rate, I can deplete the battery at the rate some on here are complaining. And anyone coming from the 2015 model will see a decreased battery life....

So I decided to achieve the opposites based on my theory that the new model kicks butt battery wise when its being used in its efficiency sweet spot.

Redid the test browsing MR on 30% brightness, for 30 min. Once you get used to 30% brightness it not that bad...lol

2016 : 97% battery - Estimation 10.5 hours battery life.

Have not done the 2015 test, though assume the 2016 beats it here...

Quick Summary.

All our batteries are the same......its the settings we run that determine what battery we get. If you run the new machine with low brightness and just do day to day tasks that are not CPU/GPU intensive it will give you the advertised battery life.

Throw intensive GPU and CPU tasks and the battery goes down fast.

Ive done intensive CPU/GPU tests between the 2015 an 2016 machines, and the 2015 comes out about 25-30% better battery wise.

The Short of it, your cannot reduce the battery by that much and expect the same results, this gets shown up with intensive tasks where the efficiency gains are removed.


For the the people debating this still.....the people getting awful battery, reduce your brightness to 30% and surf the web for 15-30 minutes...you have just got yourself a machine that the people who get 10 hours have...

People who are getting 10 hours, turn your brightness unto 80% and do the same.....you now have a machine with crap battery....

You all have the same machines....if just what you are running them at different settings.

In none of my scenarios where the machine is pushed, can the 2016 match the 2015 in battery life....when it comes to using the 2016 in its efficiency sweet spot, its better than the 2015....but Pro machines are not really made to be used this way in my opinion......

So depending on your usage patterns you will see between 3 hour to 11 hours. The 2016 suffers from a smaller battery once it's pushed and outside it's efficency sweet zone, here the battery in my testing is up to 30% worse than the 2015 model....some are experiencing this

 

[MrGimper]

Apple's not learning from repeated mistakes in deciding to enter the thin wars, and I agree that it's a sign of trouble. Maybe the tech equivalent of the canary in the coal mine.

Apple used to rise above the spec wars, a domain of the PC crowd. "But ours has more megahertz and more RPMs," they'd say, to which Apple would rightly respond, "Who cares? Ours feels more responsive and offers a better user experience because of our integrated software/hardware and the beautifully functional ergonomics. Everyone from classroom kids to creative pros couldn't care less about geekbench and megahertz as they're having the best user experience there is."

Fast forward. "Magazine reviewers want thin? We'll give them thin!!" says Jony Ive, no longer with Job's insight into the user to rein him in. So we now have phones that are so thin (at the expense of milliwatt-hours) that the camera absurdly protrudes out the back. We have laptops so thin the battery life curve is actually decreasing as battery demands are rising. We also have new laptops that you can't plug into new iPhones, new Apple TVs you can't plug into laptops if a software update bricks it, and not-yet-legacy peripherals you can't plug into new laptops without an array of dongles (which you must now buy à-la-carte).

Everyone's got a theory about what's happened in Cupertino, but something certainly has. Who knows if it would've happened had Jobs not died, but my gut says it wouldn't have, at least not this way. I'll still stick with Apple because, frankly, macOS is still better that the alternatives in my opinion, and everything flows from that. But I'm no longer as proud of my choice as I used to be.

Amen.

 

[KerryXEX]

After changing from my old MBP 13” i5 (late 2013) to the new MBP 13” i5 with Touchbar, it’s very obvious that battery life is quite less on the new machine.

The old MBP had approx. 85% capacity left according to Battery Health app. I’m using the MBP as normal office machine with mostly 2 accounts logged in and Safari, Mail, Outlook, Excel, Powerpoint, Chrome open and on Wifi. No specific heavy load apps for Video/Photo/Compiler apps used.

The old MBP would still last 5-6 hours with the above usage pattern. The new one which claims 104% battery capacity, it’s rather 4-5 hours.
It also re-charges faster, but nevertheless it’s worse than with the old MBP.

 

[simonmet]

Right guys.

I have been on both sides of the argument now, **** battery and awesome battery. Ive had the 5hours estimate and the 10.5 hours estimate.

So my initial test was between the 2016 2.7 460 and 2015 2.8, browsing Macrumors for 30 minutes, with brightness set to 80%....yup it looked dman good .

After 30 min.

2015 : 92% battery
2016 : 85% Battery

so going at that rate, I can deplete the battery at the rate some on here are complaining. And anyone coming from the 2015 model will see a decreased battery life....

So I decided to achieve the opposites based on my theory that the new model kicks butt battery wise when its being used in its efficiency sweet spot.

Redid the test browsing MR on 30% brightness, for 30 min. Once you get used to 30% brightness it not that bad...lol

2016 : 97% battery - Estimation 10.5 hours battery life.

Have not done the 2015 test, though assume the 2016 beats it here...

Thanks for this. How much better/brighter did the new MacBook look at 30% brightness? I rarely run brightness above 40-50% because I prefer dim lighting at home so maybe the new one will fair ok at comparable brightness levels. Under load though the new processors will use as much power as the previous generation so the smaller battery comes in to play. But again I try to save my battery as much as possible and plug in when under load when at all possible. It's why after a year I've used less than 100 cycles on my 15" rMBP!

I know that for pros battery life under load also matters however.

 

[MH01]

Thanks for this. How much better/brighter did the new MacBook look at 30% brightness? I rarely run brightness above 40-50% because I prefer dim lighting at home so maybe the new one will fair ok at comparable brightness levels. Under load though the new processors will use as much power as the previous generation so the smaller battery comes in to play. But again I try to save my battery as much as possible and plug in when under load when at all possible. It's why after a year I've used less than 100 cycles on my 15" rMBP!

I know that for pros battery life under load also matters however.

It's a better display so at 30% it's not too bad, I did not have time to compare to the 2015 at the same brightness his morning. Will do tonight. I'm confident 30% will match your 40-50% really is a nice bright display.

And you nailed it right there , underload the new processors use the same power. So for many users like for like performance especially if it's cpu intensive will take a nice hit due to the smaller battery.

At least I now know how many users are getting 10 hours....or there abouts

Nothing wrong with my laptop, it's just got a smaller battery that shows when pushed

 

[robeddie]

The MacBook is 2lbs. There's a big enough difference between 2 and 3. 3.5 would be even more of a stretch. Apple is using the exact same classes of processor in the MacBook Pro 13 and 15 as they did in the last generation. The newer chips are a bit more efficient, so Apple made the decision to increase portability by making the battery smaller. So have most of their competitors. 3.5lbs is considered heavy for a 13" notebook in 2016.
[doublepost=1480905188][/doublepost]
Because that's you. Apple got the MacBook Pro right. People like you complained about the MacBook Air, declaring that "5lbs is the right size" for a 13" notebook.

You ALREADY had the macbook air for thin, light. I just dont get you. Why wouldnt you just buy that and allow people without toothpick arms to 'suffer' the horror of carrying around a 4.5 pound powerhouse?

Did you not see the review where the MBP is so thin, and apple wanted the fans so quiet, that the cpu temps go well past 100c and it forces the processors to throttle while encoding video?

You can brag all you want about the 'modern''components insode the machine, but doesnt do much good for you when they reside inside a computer that cooks them to death

 

[MarsViolet]

Chrome is terrible on laptops. Non story.
[doublepost=1480890850][/doublepost]
As opposed to Chrome which eats batteries?

Doesn’t matter. People are going to use what works for them. If Apple’s battery benchmarks only stand up under certain conditions using very specific apps Apple knows to be unpopular, their benchmarks are null in the real world. If they want people to use Safari they have to stop neglecting its development.

 

[dixido]

At this point it should be clear to everyone that Apple took form over function too far with this MacBook Pro design. They shouldn't have sacrificed that much battery capacity for that extra thinness.

The sad thing is that this design decision is pretty much irreversible. I have a very, very hard time seeing Apple releasing a MacBook Pro that would be thicker than the previous gen.

 

[GadgetBen]

Thats because it has a touch bar that no one needs.

 

[rickyipcw]

how can this be a serious article when the complaints include a person running an external display on battery (why just why?!) and a bunch of folks using Chrome which is a known power gluten.

Seriously MR what has happened to you? Apple never said 10 hours of battery life "doing whatever you want hooking up all kinds of whatever to the device".

Apple indeed didn't say you can do whatever you want on the MBP while keeping 10hrs or battery life, but running an external monitor is not a big deal, since the monitor has dedicated power supply that the MBP is only giving out video signal. If you ONLY use the external monitor with the internal monitor off, you will in fact have better battery life, since the battery doesn't have to power up any monitor at all.

 

[MacMyDay]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vauayyykugn49yc/Screenshot 2016-12-05 10.05.22.png?dl=0#

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1azpq1fgeg327mb/Screenshot 2016-12-05 10.06.06.png?dl=0

This is on a brand new, MacBook Pro 13" that is 2 days old. I have the following apps open:

• Mail
• Safari
• Skype
• Preview
• Calculator

Activity Monitor shows only Mail using an "Avg Energy Impact" of 5.07

 

[Keniutek]

Thank God they didn't put 32 gigs of ram on those babies. Like they said, 16 is for our own good and great battery life...

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

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.

So you think camera manufacturers should increase there costs to suit a small percentage of computer users without removable media slots?

 

[Fzang]

So you think camera manufacturers should increase there costs to suit a small percentage of computer users without removable media slots?

They won't increase their cost, because that would prevent them from staying in the game. The camera market is struggling at the moment.

 

[Gilligan's last elephant]

They won't increase their cost, because that would prevent them from staying in the game. The camera market is struggling at the moment.

The vast majority of camera users will be happy to use removable memory. I wouldn't entertain a camera without it. And Cloud storage is impractical or useless in most outdoor locations. Would not pay the extra cost for it.