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.
New 13-Inch MacBook Pro Sans Touch Bar is Marginally Faster But More Efficient Than Last Year's Base Model
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There are good reasons to believe that it will have close to the same (12 h) battery life as the 13" MBA. It has a battery that is 11% larger than the Touch-Bar version that is also rated at 10 h, it is also lacking the T1 and the Touch bar display as well as having a 15-W TDP CPU compared to the 28-W TDP of the Touch-Bar version.
What you say makes sense, and gives good cause for optimism. It's also true that everyone's real-life usage varies, but Apple have limited themselves to a 10 hour claim, and I suspect they have their reasons. If they could claim 12 hours for the 'touch bar-less' model, I think they would.
I rather think they don't want the cheapest model to have a quoted battery life that is longer than on the more expensive model. Having 10 h on all models, including the 15" model makes for nice uniform marketing (note the iPads are also rated at 10 h).
Last edited:
That's my point: we're innovating in a different dimension - size and efficiency - rather than speed. It's just an interesting observation about the trend over the last 5-10 years vs the 20 years prior to that.
Yes, it's all a trick to exploit poor people because they're stupid. And they would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn't for you meddling kids!
Battery test have already been done by review sites, and it was a little over 12 hours.
And you would be wrong. The first MacBook Air was an incredibly compromised machine, 1.6GHz Core2Duo, 2GB RAM, only one (!) USB 2.0 port, 80GB HDD (64GB SSD optional), on the plus side a 13-inch screen, a full-sized backlit keyboard and a trackpad with new Multitouch gestures. The Airs big selling point was its thinness, not even the weight (compared to Subnotebooks with Windows). People didn't complain, not even about the $1.799 entry price. It was understood that a slower computer for a higher price wasn't meant for everybody, a business travelers laptop you'd use in an airplane seat.
Apple is known for doing very honest battery tests, external reviewers regularly get longer runtimes than what is advertised. For most other brands, you can safely subtract two hours from the claimed battery life, or more.
It's good and bad really! I've been building my own PC's since 1994 and I remember CPU speed/performance doubling each year forcing me to upgrade at least once maybe twice a year. I was really pissing my wife off during those times. That changed when I bought my i5-2500k and that rig lasted me for 4 years. The only reason why I upgraded to a i7-6700k last year was for Oculus Rift and I won't be upgrading the CPU and motherboard for at least 4 more years.
But that's the good thing about upgrading a custom built PC. You have total control over what components you buy. So while I bought a Samsung 850 Evo SSD last year I plan on buying a pair of M.2 Samsung 960 Evo drives for raid 0 configuration. My application load times will be incredible.
This is why I'm hesitant on getting a Mac desktop but I still want to experience MacOS. It's just that Apple is really making it hard to do so. In my eyes Apple is further killing the OS with their hardware and pricing decisions. Shouldn't Apple be concentrating on making sure that their platform does not die off?
The hardware isn't the problem - its that $1499 that's the problem.
This machine would be a great "upgrade" from the MacBook Air if it were in the $900-$1200 price range occupied by the Air and the entry 13" rMBP. It isn't - it costs as much as the old mid-range 13" MacBook pro from which it is a marginal upgrade. And its called the MacBook Pro. So, that's what its going to get compared with.
The Air was the choice for students, users with light computational needs, and people who wanted a second Mac. Unfortunately, it still is.
It seems like as massive blunder for Apple not to have an up-to-date offering for less than $1k - which is still a hefty premium over a perfectly serviceable plastic brick of a PC laptop. A handful of high-rollers willing to splurge $3000 on a laptop might look good in this quarter's sales figures, but its not going to keep the Mac platform viable - with third party support, expertise and software - in the longer term. A colleague's old MBP died today (it had lived a long and eventful life with the scars and dents to show for it) and will need replacing.... methinks they're gonna end up with a PC when the powers that be see the price of a new Pro.
It seems pointless to be upset about how a company markets a product. Did all those products with turbo in the name cause you to lose sleep?
[doublepost=1477937550][/doublepost]
I agree, and I'd buy one if I didn't already have a Broadwell Macbook.
Are we not also ignoring the fact that the new version comes with a much better screen with wide colour and twice as bright, better speakers, bigger track pad, better keyboard, 2x Thunderbolt 3 ports, which are also USB 3.1 which the previous model didn't have, and SSD that does 3100MB/s read and write, Bluetooth 4.2, as well as the lighter and smaller design and colour change of course.
I mean the CPU performance alone isn't the entire computer...
I mean the CPU performance alone isn't the entire computer...
Change only needs reasons if you don't like the changes. I'm fine with the decisions that Apple is making, and I don't need an explanation.
Courage was never an explanation or an attempt at one. It was management publicly showing support for their engineering team in the face of a whirlwind of hate. If you watch the Keynote and stop listening to the troll brigade, Schiller gave 3 detailed reasons, they've shown the internals of the device to show what that space is used by, and described how it helped waterproofing. None of that mattered to anyone. If you don't like that the port was removed, explanations don't help and are intentionally ignored in favor of straw man attacks. If you're ok with not having the port then the explanation isn't necessary.
When Jobs explained things, it was criticized as a "reality distortion field". When the modern Apple explains things, everyone rejects it and substitutes their own darker reasoning.
There's a lot of people, and only a few distinct product designs. The basic problem is that a lot of people don't understand engineering or design, but they think they deserve their own Mac that was custom designed to meet their precise specifications and price point and that any deviation from those requirements is a betrayal. Look at the thread on the 13" thunderbolt ports if you need any more proof-- there can't be a more clear explanation: the Intel chipset won't support full bandwidth on all 4 ports, yet people are setting themselves on fire in the public square over it.
Last edited:
Most People don't even know what the thunderbolt is there for. However, PRO's use it. I use it. It's an awesome port. I run an Apogee Ensemble soundcard, Apple Thunderbolt Display and a Lacie D2, all from the same port. When I get home, I plug in 1 cable and everything just runs.
Too bad these thunderbolt devices are still so expensive. I'd much rather have a 4 thunderbolt ports than 4 USB 3.0 ports. I rarely use USB, only for midi controllers. So I'm buying the 15 inch with touchbar.
Yeah just that, and the far better display with wide colour gamut thats twice as brought, speakers that are twice as loud and twice as dynamic, a better keyboard, two Thunderbolt 3 ports enabling 40GBps speeds which give you 2x USB3.1 gen 2 ports giving you 10GBps which weren't on last years model. A trackpad twice as big. An SSD that gives you and insane 3100MB/s read and write. Bluetooth 4.2. Runs cooler and quieter and available in Space Grey is quite sweet too.
But yeah apart from that, not much different really.
Not one bit surprised to see the improvements are only marginal. Why? The RAM speed on the model without touch bar is identical to the RAM speed on 2015 rMBP -- 1866 MHz.
To see a good amount of performance gain, you have to get the one with the touch bar. Touch bar models have higher RAM speed and better graphics. Some people think they are paying $300 for a touch bar, but actually you are getting much more.
Would be good to find out if SSD performance is different across the two. I be willing to wager (not more than $1, though) that it is.
I'm waiting to see performance numbers for the touch bar model.
To see a good amount of performance gain, you have to get the one with the touch bar. Touch bar models have higher RAM speed and better graphics. Some people think they are paying $300 for a touch bar, but actually you are getting much more.
Would be good to find out if SSD performance is different across the two. I be willing to wager (not more than $1, though) that it is.
I'm waiting to see performance numbers for the touch bar model.
I know, I'm so glad I bought that model only a couple months after its initial release.
Better screen and better sound, right? Doesn't that count for something? Also lighter in a laptop is fairly important.
Really the Air without the retina screen is a seriously compromised machine compared to what is available. Screen quality is very important.