they already did with their dongle rebate, that's all we'll get from them I think.
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.
Phil Schiller: Apple Working With Consumer Reports to Understand MacBook Pro Battery Test
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Every company actually has a obligation to sell products that are worth the money and not to rip the public off and use false advertising.
It is very clear the computer does not provide the battery life Apple is advertising it to provide. I'm pretty sure if the iPhone had a battery life several hours short of what Apple advertises it as being, the main stream media would be covering it and Apple would have to provide damage control again. You have to realise that if Apple is false advertising it's battery life it can be taken to court with class lawsuits, and it has had a lot of those recently. It seems to have a habit of ignoring its product problems now until a class action lawsuit is raised for the issue, then it suddenly sets up a 'repair programme'.
I am not angry, just stating a fact how this is damage control from Apple to save its skin and public image, nothing to do with shareholders.
I am kind of glad the new mbp 2016 is getting a lot of hate and criticism and causing Apple a lot of embarrassment.
IF anything, this will make Apple double check and be sure they are releasing a high quality product worthy of the Apple name in the future. I would like to think that every single criticism will be fixed in the next iteration and then some more because of this.
IF anything, this will make Apple double check and be sure they are releasing a high quality product worthy of the Apple name in the future. I would like to think that every single criticism will be fixed in the next iteration and then some more because of this.
iPod wouldn't be possible without Mac too, but iPod was very big part of Apple revolution no doubt about that.
Yep, they have really downgraded the MacBook Pro and removed some beloved and delightful features over the last 2 generations e.g. magsafe, sleep indicator light, battery indicator light, upgradeable SSD, RAM and so on.
Apple does'nt know or care for the professionals and creatives lately. Should've kept the same weight as previous laptop for bigger longer lasting battery, given free dongle for USB C transition, kept MagSafe power cable and turn that trackpad into a Wacom pad for apple pencil.
Also bs reason not to be at 32gb of ram
Missing light on Apple symbol means darkness
Also bs reason not to be at 32gb of ram
Missing light on Apple symbol means darkness
Last edited:
This is what I mean, Apple doesn't do anything these days until something that gets wide spread coverage reports the issue! Or a class action lawsuit is raised.
I have to also say their Christmas advert with flipping Frankenstein is incredibly pointless and confusing and, well, really rubbish and not very Christmasy?
Last edited:
As I said.
The difference is that another company *could* have done the iPod, though obviously no other company did.
Without the iPod, Apple would be just another failed computer company. Luckily for Apple, Jobs and his team really were THAT good.
It was obvious to me that Safari 10.0 is a problem.
Safari (not responding) … 300.0 CPU - hung, hard shut-down earlier this month. Nothing would function.
Perhaps Safari 10.0.2 will be better.
Safari (not responding) … 300.0 CPU - hung, hard shut-down earlier this month. Nothing would function.
Perhaps Safari 10.0.2 will be better.
This is the bed that Apple made. Time for them to lie in it. They made a conscious decision to slowly kill off their professional line of hardware and software, and placed the majority of their focus on the i-Toys.
The new MacBook 'Pro' is an expensive dud. Schiller can try to market-spin the machine all he wants, but I don't think many people are listening.
The new MacBook 'Pro' is an expensive dud. Schiller can try to market-spin the machine all he wants, but I don't think many people are listening.
No. Not until Apple, or someone else, finds a flaw in their test method(s).
But you can only assume that nobody actually thought about it. Also. Their numbers are real, but they might be obtained in the wrong way. Yet they do depict a problem. Whatever that problem may be, to be determined at a later time, and that is why we need independent reviews to verify, and either confirm the 'problem' or debunk it. No speculations, assumptions and personal opinions. Facts and facts only. Nothing else counts.
Note: If it was an obvious flaw in CR's testing methods, then Phil Schiller would have been keen to push out a new tweet, and before you can blink with your eyes, yet that did not happen, so it may actually be a complex problem. More so than what most people here seem to think that it is.
Want a 15" MBP went to the store and between the clicking keyboard and the "reported poor battery life" leaves me thinking the previous version maybe the better way to go. They have had people return the new one and or exchange them. Maybe it's time to move from the Apple platform as far as computers go................
Merry Christmas to all
Merry Christmas to all
Phil to CR: "Your using it wrong. When browsing the web for hours, you need to stay on the Apple website since we haven't optimized the other billion websites yet. Also, on a side note, Darth Timmy is being controlled by Emperor Investor and forces Darth Timmy to stop listening to customers. Emperor Investor demands a 70% profit margin, and next year will be demanding an 80% profit margin."
Battery science is no mystery, not like, say, dark matter or women.
Engineers know exactly how much maximum energy a packet of chemicals can produce over a given time frame based on the draw from the machine.
So, the problem is either the battery firmware or CR's testing tools. Given that hundreds of thousands of units are on the market and nobody else has reported such insane variability (3-19 hrs??), it's unlikely a battery firmware issue and most likely CR's fault.
Schiller's battery engineers working with CR is SOP for a big company that gets such an insanely disproportionate review from a big name site/magazine.
Battery life the #1 issue at all computer companies (right behind WiFi connectivity) for their notebook and tablet platforms. You can be sure they tested the heck out of the MBP batteries before shipping. Battery life is also the #1 issue most misunderstood by consumers (right behind WiFi connectivity).
Not being an apologist (frankly the MBPs are not competitive), just saying is all.
Engineers know exactly how much maximum energy a packet of chemicals can produce over a given time frame based on the draw from the machine.
So, the problem is either the battery firmware or CR's testing tools. Given that hundreds of thousands of units are on the market and nobody else has reported such insane variability (3-19 hrs??), it's unlikely a battery firmware issue and most likely CR's fault.
Schiller's battery engineers working with CR is SOP for a big company that gets such an insanely disproportionate review from a big name site/magazine.
Battery life the #1 issue at all computer companies (right behind WiFi connectivity) for their notebook and tablet platforms. You can be sure they tested the heck out of the MBP batteries before shipping. Battery life is also the #1 issue most misunderstood by consumers (right behind WiFi connectivity).
Not being an apologist (frankly the MBPs are not competitive), just saying is all.
Wait, I thought Apple already issued a software update to fix things?! You know, the Sierra update that removed the battery time remaining feature! Didn't taking that away suddenly convince people they were getting longer battery life? ROFL
Read the Bloomberg article. According to that article, Apple had a new battery design they created specifically for the 2016 MBP. But, after decisions on MBP case dimensions were already set in stone, Apple abandoned the new battery design and went with the older battery design. According to Bloomberg, Apple shipped 2016 MBPs without the battery design Apple wanted to use. Without the battery design the 2016 MBP was DESIGNED to use.
And now users are complaining of inconsistent and unreliable battery life. Consumer Reports is seeing exactly the same thing.
Put two and two together people, where there is smoke there is fire.
Mark
Read the Bloomberg article. According to that article, Apple had a new battery design they created specifically for the 2016 MBP. But, after decisions on MBP case dimensions were already set in stone, Apple abandoned the new battery design and went with the older battery design. According to Bloomberg, Apple shipped 2016 MBPs without the battery design Apple wanted to use. Without the battery design the 2016 MBP was DESIGNED to use.
And now users are complaining of inconsistent and unreliable battery life. Consumer Reports is seeing exactly the same thing.
Put two and two together people, where there is smoke there is fire.
Mark
"I think if you're looking at a PC, why would you buy a PC anymore? No really, why would you buy one?"
– Tim Cook
– Tim Cook
OK, they thought about it and after management and editorial review they decided to release those number believing they were accurate.
"Their numbers are real, but they might be obtained in the wrong way."
And that's why I said: I have no doubt their testers came up with battery life numbers such as 12 hours, 16 hours, 18 1/2 hours, and 19 1/2 hours during their MBP real-life usage battery tests.
If you want to believe those numbers (12 hours, 16 hours, 18 1/2 hours, and 19 1/2 hours) are accurate and representative, be my guest.
Last edited:
There's no voodoo between the battery and the notebook hardware. At best, the battery Apple "designed" for the new MBP was a marginal chemical improvement over the previous generation of battery (i.e. the consumer would see a +2% increase in battery life, which would give marketing orgasms because they could put 10.5 hr usage time instead of 10.2 on the brochures).
They likely didn't ship with it because it wasn't qualified for use in time for FCS (or rather, CF then RTM, then FCS).
The question then comes as to who Apple views as their "actual consumers".
This article comes to mind.
https://sixcolors.com/post/2016/12/cars-and-trucks-and-mac-suvs/
A few days ago Timmy said Apple wasn't about profit... give me a break:
- Almost everything coming out of Apple is having excessive issues unlike past years were minor issues were easy to ignore. Timmy must have gotten rid of the QA group since that cuts into profit.
- A $17,000 watch that's just the $250 sports watch with a partial gold body. Gold cost $1300/ounce, so it would need 13 ounces of gold to be worth it. No one in history would wear a 1 pound. Don't care about profit, yeah right.
- Magsafe was a true innovation, and should be used for anything with a wire. Timmy got rid of it cause it cut into profit.
- New MBP removed the most computer common port in history (USB) and didn't provide a free dongle, plus it reduced battery volume, and uses cheap graphics, and significantly increased price. Timmy, we are not stupid.
- Base Apple products have very little memory, and to increase memory, cost many times more than market value of RAM and SDD costs. Stop pissing in our ear and telling us it's raining.
There are many more reasons Timmy is proving without any doubt that he is only focused on profit.
MacRumor's members, please let me know if I'm even slightly wrong.
Apple needs to hear the roar of genuinely frustrated people. I stopped buying from Apple since the the iPhone 6, and I'm patiently limping my older Apple products along until Apple cleans up their act or I need to jump ship.
I support companies that innovate first and put greed second, not visa versa. Apple under SJ put innovation first.
- Almost everything coming out of Apple is having excessive issues unlike past years were minor issues were easy to ignore. Timmy must have gotten rid of the QA group since that cuts into profit.
- A $17,000 watch that's just the $250 sports watch with a partial gold body. Gold cost $1300/ounce, so it would need 13 ounces of gold to be worth it. No one in history would wear a 1 pound. Don't care about profit, yeah right.
- Magsafe was a true innovation, and should be used for anything with a wire. Timmy got rid of it cause it cut into profit.
- New MBP removed the most computer common port in history (USB) and didn't provide a free dongle, plus it reduced battery volume, and uses cheap graphics, and significantly increased price. Timmy, we are not stupid.
- Base Apple products have very little memory, and to increase memory, cost many times more than market value of RAM and SDD costs. Stop pissing in our ear and telling us it's raining.
There are many more reasons Timmy is proving without any doubt that he is only focused on profit.
MacRumor's members, please let me know if I'm even slightly wrong.
Apple needs to hear the roar of genuinely frustrated people. I stopped buying from Apple since the the iPhone 6, and I'm patiently limping my older Apple products along until Apple cleans up their act or I need to jump ship.
I support companies that innovate first and put greed second, not visa versa. Apple under SJ put innovation first.
From the Bloomberg article:
"Take the company's attempt to create a longer-lasting battery for the MacBook Pro. Apple engineers wanted to use higher capacity battery packs shaped to the insides of the laptop versus the standard square cells found in most machines. The design would have boosted battery life.
In the run-up to the MacBook Pro's planned debut this year, the new battery failed a key test, according to a person familiar with the situation. Rather than delay the launch and risk missing the crucial holiday shopping season, Apple decided to revert to an older design. The change required roping in engineers from other teams to finish the job, meaning work on other Macs languished, the person said. The new laptop didn't represent a game-changing leap in battery performance, and a software bug misrepresented hours of power remaining. Apple has since removed the meter from the top right-hand corner of the screen."
The new battery design would have boosted capacity. The case dimensions of the 2016 MBP were set based on using that newer battery design. Oops!
Mark
Boy if these kind of bad reports keep coming, MR should consider removing this model from it's buyers guide and replace it with "Don't buy" 
Do you prefer some religious zealots destroying an entire Star and millions of people along with it just because of some religious view? Not to mention the economical disaster this brought along...
on the Apple side...they did seem to forget that the professionals are the backbone of Apple's business. And no mac sales means no iPhone sales...not the other way around...