Phil Schiller: Apple Working With Consumer Reports to Understand MacBook Pro Battery Test

[Rookbird]

So Phil Schiller says Consumer Reports testing does not match Apples testing. Well just ask the consumers than. Lots of people are having battery issues. Apple is starting to make a lot of excuses for their issues. Instead they need to spend that energy into making a good product that consumers would want.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

I think the MBP is going in the wrong direction. I purchased the entry level 13", sans touch bar, and I'm satisfied with it but man is it way overpriced. I got it through B&H in NY so there was no sales tax which took a bit of the sting out, but still. I was coming from a mid 2009 MBP so it was a significant upgrade for me. If I had last year's MBP, I wouldn't have upgraded. I am glad I passed on the touch bar model. It's useless and gimmicky. After seeing it in person, the colors look really cloudy/ faded too - I'm guessing because of that matte finish they put over it. OLED colors are supposed to pop, but not the touch bar's colors. Fail.

I would bet they tried it both ways, but a slick Touch Bar not only smeared and streaked badly, but a finger didn't slide as smoothly over the slick surface as on a matte one.

 

[Red Fummoxed]

So does Windows. So by that logic, Windows doesn't suck.

Lets not be hasty with our judgement.

I have had my 2016 MBP for just under a week, and I have no battery issues doing the light stuff, even when using Chrome. My experience is quite enjoyable, and not sure how CR's tests would produce such different results.

However, last night while updating sparsebundles that get sync'd to Dropbox, I burned through 40% of the battery life in an hour and a half. The encryption was the load, but no where near 100% utilization of the CPU. I suspect there is a fine demarcation between light loading with very efficient power use, and everything else where battery drain begins in earnest.

Empirically, that would probably put intensive CPU tasks exhausting the battery somewhere between 3 and 4 hours, and likely much closer to 3. This is shorter than the 2015 MBP issued to me by my employer. So yeah, smaller battery less work, there ya go Mr. Schiller.

I have until Jan 8 to return it, so plenty of time to figure out use patterns. My previous personal machine is a mid-2009 (non-glossy screen too) that crawls compared to this, and gets maybe 3 or 4 hours on battery doing the light things. It is what it is. If it makes any difference, the Surface assigned to me at work never came close to its advertised 16 hours, so Apple isn't the only outfit being optimistic.

The reports that Apple failed to put an updated battery into this machine before their sales deadline is a compelling story. I also think that it is plausible that Apple feels that USB-C will offer better field charging options into the future and maybe they see smaller batteries being the norm. There is after all, only so much energy you can pack into a small space before it gets called a bomb.

I do now see how disappointing the energy consumption can be on this machine.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

How about listening to your actual consumers and making a machine with proper ports and RAM.

Perhaps they did, but they just didn't ask you.
[doublepost=1482721532][/doublepost]

Most likely they were working on something similar to the sculpted batteries used in the rMB. Of course Apple engineers (and I would even argue industrial designers) wouldn't make the decision to ship an older design. That's clearly coming from the top and my guess is Schiller made the call that they had to ship something for the holiday season. But maybe they would have been better off waiting for Kaby Lake and the engineers to solve the battery issue.

You forget the drubbing they were getting in the press and on the intarwebs about it being SOOOO long since Apple updated the MBP (when the main reason was that Intel blew their projected timeline for the Quad Core Kaby Lakes by half a year), and so yes, Apple was feeling a bit of pressure to prove they werent "Abandoning the Mac", and frankly, to make sure that MS' Surface line didn't start getting real momentum.

But the 2016 MBP still has lots of bragging rights, not only when compared with the 2015 MBPs, but also over most other 2016 Windows laptops, too. Maybe battery life isn't one of them. But the evidence seems quite equivocal.

 

[bernuli]

But the 2016 MBP still has lots of bragging rights, not only when compared with the 2015 MBPs, but also over most other 2016 Windows laptops, too. Maybe battery life isn't one of them. But the evidence seems quite equivocal.

The 2016 barely has anything to brag about when compared when compared to the 2014. Compared to the 2015 it is absolutely not worth the money to downgrade.

No one asked for a touch bar or thinner batteries.

 

[Glockworkorange]

Game laptops are thick because that's what Gamers expect. And because they have big heatsinks and fans. Nothing more.
[doublepost=1482710731][/doublepost]
That is the most perfectly-worded response I have read on here.

Bravo!

There was a thing Gruber said, something to the effect of "MacBook Pros mean 'nicer' laptops," and I think that is accurate.

Most people who buy these machines are not gaming and they are not performing intensive video-editing. That might have been true 10 years ago, but Macs are more mainstream now.

MacBook Pros=nicer, more expensive general use laptops.

 

[hardflaco]

I think i am just going to return mt 13inch MacBook Pro as soon as it arrives this week and look for something else..... Maybe the Air.....

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

So why no USB A ports so they can jack in to their laptop? Why no SD card reader for professional photographers? Why no minidisplay port for all the high end displays currently in use?

No USB-A Ports because USB-C covers that easily. If you can't be bothered with a $2.50 passive USB-C to USB-A adapter (<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Adapter-Hi-speed-Devices-MacBook-ChromeBook/dp/B01LHBFCEO/">here's a 3-pack for $7</a>), that sounds like seriously first-world problem. And if you spend $10 for a little hub-dock thing, you can break out that single USB-C Port into <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Axxbiz-CableBiz-C013W-USB-Type-Port/dp/B01BGZGUOM/">FOUR, FULL-SPEED USB 3.0 Ports</a>, ALL of them going full-tilt SIMULTANEOUSLY at 10 Gbps (IOW, not a "Hub", where everyone shares the same USB 3.0 bandwidth, but a "breakout", where EVERY Port gets FULL 3.0 bandwidth). Try that with your precious USB-A Port.

No SD Card Reader because PROFESSIONALS don't use SD because it is TOO SLOW for RAW Format. SD is a CONSUMER-level storage medium. And if you REALLY need one, you can get a nice USB-C version for around $10-15, that <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Reader-Adapter-CHOETECH-Support-MacBook/dp/B01MRM5WJL/">like this one</a>, that also supports MicroSD and CF (which (CF) some Pro gear actually DOES use). And there are many other variants available, depending on your needs. Apple's SD slot was just that: an SD slot. Period. Full Stop.

The 2016 MBP has FOUR MiniDisplayPorts, neatly disguised as USB-C/TB3 Ports. Oh, and you can Drive FOUR External 4k Displays. Try that with ANY other laptop.
[doublepost=1482724687][/doublepost]

You expect Consumer Reports to figure out what was causing the issue? They test products and publish the results.

Yes I do, actually, when they are getting that level of completely-spasmodic results.

At least pop open Activity Monitor to see if some Process was eating 400% of the CPU. And if a Reboot didn't solve it, at least report that fact.

But they figured they'd just rather have the clicks...

 

[Naimfan]

The 2016 barely has anything to brag about when compared when compared to the 2014. Compared to the 2015 it is absolutely not worth the money to downgrade.

No one asked for a touch bar or thinner batteries.

Agreed.

I prefer the non-haptic feedback of the 2014's trackpad.

And before someone mentions how much faster the SSD is, be aware that most people would never notice the difference in day to day use. As for the screen being nicer, eh. Side by side with either my 2014 or 2015 they're indistinguishable (though note that I do not use it for photography or video, in which case the 2016 might well be an advantage).

Ultimately, Glowckworkorange put it well:

MacBook Pros=nicer, more expensive general use laptops.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

luckily I didn't pick one of these lemon up !

my 2015 macbook air is still going strong !!!

thank you Steve Jobs, you were the only one who cared

That's an unwarranted slap in the face to all on the Mac team.
[doublepost=1482724945][/doublepost]

Never did I think I'd live to see the day when Dell and Microsoft products are more elegant and user friendly than Macs.

And you still haven't.
[doublepost=1482725419][/doublepost]

I found the solution to all our MBP woes: just chuck this in your dongle satchel. Problem solved, lol.

For $80, you get a whopping 30 W/h (in reality, about 1/2 that is usable).

Better buy two, if you're going to make more than about an extra hour (maybe).

 

[Deuce on the Clock]

"Have a great Christmas, we will disagree as it sounds like Apple can do no wrong in your eyes and everyone who says anything slightly critical is completely wrong. Or youre Apple super secret social media police defending Apple and looking for employees."

Absolutely not true and a cheap shot. That's the refuge of being out of gas and not being able (or willing) to address the issues I've brought up.

So once more, hopefully without obfuscation or put-downs this time... With Apple's laptops under CR's standardized suite of rigorous real-life battery tests (web browsing, video playback, etc), since 18 1/2 and 19 1/2 hour battery life numbers don't raise your eyebrows and seem plausible to you, what greater number of hours would you say, "Hold on, there's something wrong here, maybe it would be good to look at the tests, test procedures, and test monitoring.

Would 50 hours cause you to take notice? Maybe 100 hours? Surely there must be a number that you would find surprising, triggering even a tiny bit of curiosity? It really is a sincere, simple, and very meaningful question.

Or, perhaps you wouldn't find those numbers unusual when browsing the web with any laptop?

It doesnt matter if it had 18 or 19 or 1000, the fact they also had 3 or 4 or 5 during the same tests is the issue. Inconsistent is the key factor here indicating a more serious underlying issue.Its up to Apple to identify and fix the inconsistencies not Consumer Reports. All CR did was report inconsistent results that raised a red flag. Apple knows people use other browsers other than Safari. That shouldve been a basic test. They only tested pre-installed Apple apps.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

Unless I am reading it wrong the article says that when they ran the tests in Safari they experienced poor battery life -- conversely when they re-ran the tests in Chrome they experienced consistently high battery life. So I don't think your point stands.

You're right. It points almost assuredly to an issue with Safari, or some underlying Framework that Chrome either doesn't use, or uses in a way that doesn't trigger the the power-eating bug.

I'd be interested to know if the CR Reviewer noticed the papers and stuff blowing around on his desk/workbench when Safari was running... (Seriously).

 

[mkldev]

No SD Card Reader because PROFESSIONALS don't use SD because it is TOO SLOW for RAW Format. SD is a CONSUMER-level storage medium.

What the heck are you talking about? I've been shooting RAW exclusively on my 6D for four years using SD cards. And my 5D Mark IV also has an SD card slot. I shoot everything on both slots, but the CF card never leaves the camera, because the built-in SD card reader makes it so much easier to import the content into my laptop. The extra three minutes of importing caused by Apple's ancient UHS-I reader is still less time than it would take to dig a standalone UHS-II or CF reader out of my bag.

The SD standard is more than fast enough. In fact, with UHS-II, it's about twice as fast as CompactFlash. The SD standard might have started out as a consumer medium, but going forward, all signs point to SD being the primary medium for external cameras, both at the consumer level and at the pro level.

Even the CFast and XQD standards aren't very much faster than SD (less than a factor of two), which means that those standards will likely die a horrible death shortly after UHS-III gets released.

Also, the SD standard is much more mechanically robust than the CF standard, which should have been dumped twenty years ago over those fragile pins, but I digress.

And if you REALLY need one, you can get a nice USB-C version for around $10-15, that <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Reader-Adapter-CHOETECH-Support-MacBook/dp/B01MRM5WJL/">like this one</a>, that also supports MicroSD and CF (which (CF) some Pro gear actually DOES use). And there are many other variants available, depending on your needs. Apple's SD slot was just that: an SD slot.

Not quite. Apple's SD slot was an SD slot that you always had with you and that didn't require you to dig it out from the bottom of your camera bag. Built-in readers are a major improvement over the dark days of having to dig for a reader and plug it into the side of your laptop, carefully finding a solid surface to put your laptop on so that you won't accidentally knock loose the USB connector.

And now, Apple's laptops don't have one. Lame.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

I think apple wants to dump down the laptops by removing ports so that they can make money off accessories. They also want to increase how frequently people upgrade their laptops. This will all bring in more revenue from a market segment (laptops) that has been stagnant for the last 10 years.
[doublepost=1482599662][/doublepost]As sales continue to drop Apple will realize that people don't consider their products to be premium.

This already a very tired meme.
[doublepost=1482727414][/doublepost]

I charged my MacBook fully, and yesterday it lasted only 2 hours and 34 minutes. I was watching Netflix on Safari. That's it. So... is there a software fix, or how do I return it?

Try it in Chrome. There may be a (hopefully temporary) issue with Safari causing the new MacBook Pros to draw a lot of power for seemingly no good reason.

It is actually great news that the issue seems to center around Software (Safari, or something in the OS it relies on), rather than Hardware (which might involve a "recall" , blah, blah).

So, I'd say this is just a little software issue with the new Touch Bar Version of Safari, and Apple will address this with a Software Update in short order. So, KEEP THAT MACKBOOK!!!

BTW, I'd love to know if you notice the fans on your MacBook kicking up significantly during your Netflix sessions.

Also, in the Finder, in the Folder "Utilities" under "Applications", launch "Activity Monitor". Take a look at this web page, paying attention to the part about the "Energy" Pane.

https://www.macrumors.com/how-to/troubleshoot-energy-heavy-apps-os-x/

That should prove VERY illuminating. Because I GUARANTEE something will OBVIOUSLY be suckin' down the juice!

Let us know what that is, ok???


I say this as an Apple user since 1976, and a Mac user since 1984.

 

[mkldev]

I don't want to sound pedantic, but how many of you pro users of the new MacBook actually need to be able to have your MBP unplugged or independent from a power source to do the pro work? It's not a question intended to distort the fact that somewhere along the line mistakes have been made by Apple - maybe. I'm just curious of how effective your workflows are when in an unplugged environment.

Not very effective at all, mainly because battery life is insufficient even with older MBPs (and that's before they cut the battery capacity by 25%).

On any given Sunday, I head to church approximately an hour from home. After singing and/or playing brass at two Masses, I go and grab food. Afterwards, I spend time composing music using Finale, usually from a location that has no power outlets. This particular app burns battery like there's no tomorrow, so I can easily run down my 2014 MBP in two or three hours of use.

Periodically, I find myself editing photographs in Lightroom while out and about, which eats battery quickly. And I sometimes need to take my laptop and drive down early for evening rehearsals to avoid the horrible Bay Area traffic. When I do this, my work laptop either runs Xcode or uses VNC over Wi-Fi to a computer running Xcode. Either approach is brutal in terms of battery life.

There have been many, many times over the past couple of years when, even with the supposed 10-hour battery life of my 2014/2015-era MBPs, I've been forced to go out to my car and plug in a power inverter and start my engine just to charge my laptop back up because the battery didn't make it through the entire three or four hours. And the new laptops will likely provide only about three-quarters as much battery life under load, which IMO crosses the line into completely unusable territory. I haven't had such poor battery life in a laptop since I got the second battery for my Wallstreet almost two decades ago.

For me, an ideal laptop would need to get at least 32 hours of battery life for typical web browsing, because that's the point where I'd consistently be able to get 5+ hours of battery life when doing real work using the power pigs that I use regularly. Unfortunately, Apple is optimizing based on ivory-tower-ideal applications, whereas real-world pro apps are ill-behaved power pigs. And the result is that each subsequent generation of Mac laptop gets less usable than the one before it, at least from my perspective.
[doublepost=1482728709][/doublepost]

Does the only laptop that can drive TWO external 4k displays sound like "neglect"?

I'm pretty sure you can do that using external docking stations on most recent laptops. For sure, Dell has a docking station that supports up to three 4K monitors. The number of times I've cared about being able to drive multiple monitors without a docking station, I can count on zero fingers. However, the number of times I've used the HDMI port on my MacBook Pro today requires one finger. So yeah, supporting ridiculous numbers of ultra-high-def monitors while eschewing direct support for the sorts of monitor connections that people typically use while traveling definitely qualifies as neglect in my book.

Does 4 identical, future-proof USB-C/TB3 Ports with 80 Gbps I/O Bandwidth (more than ANY other laptop) that you can use in a wide variety of ways sound like "neglect"?

In a manner of speaking, it does. We've had traditional USB ports on the Mac platform for almost twenty years at this point. Having three identical USB-C ports and one traditional USB-3 port would have been a much better design for the vast majority of users.

Does an industry-leading SSD design with nearly THREE TIMES the performance of ANY other SSDs sound like "neglect"?

An SSD that is soldered on, non-expandable, can't easily be moved to a new motherboard when your GPU inevitably fries itself, etc... yeah, neglect again. A poorly thought out change is often worse than no change at all.

Does a Unique-in-the-Industry multifunction OLED Touch interface sound like "neglect"?

Apple is nowhere near the first company to try this. The concept hasn't caught on, repeatedly. It's a gimmick. By contrast, every vi/vim/nvi user I know is thinking about switching platforms to get away from it because there's no mechanical escape key. Just because you change something doesn't mean you aren't neglecting it. Making changes without taking the time to research why similar designs have failed in the past is also a form of neglect.

Does a Best-In-Breed Trackpad nearly the size of an iPad mini sound like "neglect"?

The trackpad was already so big that it sometimes causes problems when typing. And they made it bigger? What possible purpose could a larger trackpad serve? I mean, if it at least had a screen in there, a larger touch-sensitive surface might make sense, but for a trackpad, this hurts more than it helps. Neglect again.

 

[citysnaps]

It doesnt matter if it had 18 or 19 or 1000, the fact they also had 3 or 4 or 5 during the same tests is the issue. Inconsistent is the key factor here indicating a more serious underlying issue.Its up to Apple to identify and fix the inconsistencies not Consumer Reports. All CR did was report inconsistent results that raised a red flag. Apple knows people use other browsers other than Safari. That shouldve been a basic test. They only tested pre-installed Apple apps.

Got it. You're OK with CR having zero responsibility in understanding how a laptop running their tests, under their protocols, and being monitored under their supervision returning a 1,000 hour battery lifetime. Because apparently that's within your realm of possibility?

And that even with a ridiculously high and impossible number from a computer doing real work and what was asked (web browsing, video playback, etc), you would still blame the laptop even though it was doing everything correctly; properly displaying web pages requested, playing videos properly etc.

Couldn't possibly be their tests, protocols, and supervision at fault, right?

And similarly, if CR tested a Ford F-150 eight cylinder truck that has an EPA mileage rating of 16 to 21 MPG, and instead they were getting 41 MPG (or 100 MPG) in some test runs, it couldn't possibly be their testing methodology?

Astonishing.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

Apple has been treating its Mac hardware like an bastard Stepchild. Time to get 2 new product design teams, one for mobile and one for desktop,

Actually spend money in design r&d on mac's again Apple.

This pursuit of laptops glued together is ridiculous.

They spent like $10 BEEELION on R&D (a record, IIRC) last year.

I guarantee it wasn't all about removing the 3.5 mm jack from the iPhone 7...

And, as I have said previously in this thread, the year-over-year improvements in the MacBook Pro are thus:

Greatly expanded I/O capability. No, I didn't stutter. You can research my other posts in this thread to see why that is undeniably true. One readily-useful and unique expression (of many) demonstrating the 2016 MBP's sheer I/O power is the fact that (AFAIK) it is the only laptop capable of driving TWO 5k External Display (to complement it's Internal 5k Display, or FOUR 4k External Displays (in addition to its Internal 5k Display).

MUCH improved Thermal Management, allowing the CPU to remain "Throttled-Up" essentially continuously if needed. The 2015 MBP, by contrast, was only able to run at around 80% speed for extended compute-intensive tasks. This is quite important to video rendering, transcoding, signal-processing, "Photoshop" and other "number crunching".

SSD Performance that is THREE TIMES FASTER than (I believe) EVERYONE Else.

Touch Bar, which represents a unique, multi-touch, multi-modal graphical input/display interface. One that does not require a stylus, is on the same plane as the keyboard and trackpad, and which does not steal valuable screen real-estate, making "Full-Screen" apps much more seamless to use.

And a best-in-class multitouch TrackPad, which sports a 43% larger active surface than the 2015 version.

So, it isn't at all like the Mac line is being just thrown a minor "Update"-bone here. There's some real, significant improvements, even over its immediate predecessor.
[doublepost=1482729562][/doublepost]

I'm pretty sure you can do that using external docking stations on most recent laptops. For sure, Dell has a docking station that supports up to three 4K monitors. The number of times I've cared about being able to drive multiple monitors without a docking station, I can count on zero fingers. However, the number of times I've used the HDMI port on my MacBook Pro today requires one finger. So yeah, supporting ridiculous numbers of ultra-high-def monitors while eschewing direct support for the sorts of monitor connections that people typically use while traveling definitely qualifies as neglect in my book.

I was incorrect. It's actually FOUR 4k, or TWO 5k, External Displays (in addition to the internal 5k display).

But anyone like me with a MiniDP/TB1 Port (and only one, at that), would have to use an Adapter (like the one I use for my external VGA monitor) to do any of VGA, DVI or HDMI. So I really don't want to hear your whining about losing a piddly HDMI Port, when it gets replaced with FOUR USB-C/TB3/MiniDP (essentially) Ports that can become VGA/DVI/HDMI/Ethernet/4 x USB3.0/USB3.1v2/TB3/TB2/FW800/Etc cheaply and easily.
[doublepost=1482729996][/doublepost]

The reality is: The Mac is a dying platform. Apple only needs it to run Xcode to develop apps for iOS. In the near future, either iOS becomes self-hosting or they will port their development tool chain to Linux to save the costs of keeping macOS alive. Either way, it''s been obvious for quite a while now that the Mac does not have much of a future anymore under Apple's current management.

100,000 new Mac users at IBM alone would tend to disagree.

And it is important to point out that Those Users chose to have Macs. And the IT bean-counters couldn't be happier. Not to mention the Users...
[doublepost=1482730085][/doublepost]

Apple are panicked. I bet the sales on these things are lame, if only because they are so pricey let alone the ludicrously lousy design and spec.

The Quarterly Earnings Call will reveal all.

Bet you'll be surprised.
[doublepost=1482730357][/doublepost]

Adding my data point: I've had my 3.3Ghz touch bar MBP for one week and battery life is consistently terrible. I have yet to get over 5 hours and all I'm using is Safari and Mail app. Hell, I haven't even installed any other programs on it other than Office. I've currently been using Safari and Mail for the last 40 minutes and lost 20% of my battery life.

This is seriously bothering me. I justified not having my beloved MagSafe because my battery could last long enough to need to charge it once per day. Actually considering returning it.

Hmmm. Using Safari.

Have you tried using Chrome instead? I'm really curious.
[doublepost=1482730775][/doublepost]

Let's be honest Shiller doesn't care about Apple customers getting less than advertised battery life or a less than optimal experience. Leadership wants to cover this up ASAP so it doesn't affect sales. A much different mentality than when Steve Jobs was at the helm as he truly wanted Apple customers to have the best experience possible. The "Apple tax" felt more than worth it in those days.

I have watched Phil Schiller since his first appearance at MacWorld (maybe even before). He is, if nothing else, a indefatigable Mac cheerleader, and was really in his element back in the old PowerPC vs. Intel Bake-Off days. Rest assured, he is a Mac-User too, and most certainly cares deeply about the Mac, and its Users.
[doublepost=1482731176][/doublepost]

Though that is my point, why should they be allowed to quote pre-production units that are now what was shipped to me. That is false information is it not? Tests were not performed on the machines shipped.

How many people checked the fine print ? They trusted apples claims when made on stage. And if the rumours are true that apple changed batteries at the last minute, these tests are not valid at all.

Because testing takes TIME, and people want to read about the laptops on Apple's website EVEN BEFORE THE "PRODUCTION" UNITS ARE SHIPPED.
[doublepost=1482731372][/doublepost]

No, it does not. You can do it for music though, just not a phone call.

Currently, the only way to adjust volume on the AirPods during a phone call is directly from the phone it self, which basically contradicts Apple's own AirPod site saying that you can leave your phone in your bag while taking calls, playing music, and controlling volume.
View attachment 679754

Yawn. Easily fixed with a Software Update.

Try to come up with a real issue. I agree that was an oversight; but don't make it more than it is.
[doublepost=1482731455][/doublepost]

Jobs would never have let a gimmick like touchbar out of R&D, let alone Apple Watch and this MacBook (Air) Pro

Funny.

The vast majority of people who have actually tried the Touch Bar immediately love it.

 

[Thor774]

Thanks heavens I got the MBP 2015 model. It has been a wonderful laptop. I was thinking on changing it for the 2016 model but after evaluating I have concluded No Way!
Compared to the 2016 one:

• I can upgrade the internal SSD in the future instead of paying Apple the outrageous amount of money they ask for the 1TB disk at buy time.
• I have tested the touchbar on a friend's MBP and just think it is a fancy gimmick. I never look down at the keyboard when I am using my laptop. With the touchbar you have to look down at the keyboard if you want to use something placed there.
• The function keys on my MBP are used a lot when working in Windows on VMs. Maybe the touchbar can emulate them (have not checked) but you still have to look down at the keyboard to use them.
• Magnetic contact for the power cable: This is something I have always loved from Apple laptops. I have seen several laptops being sent crashing to the floor because someone / something tangles in the power cable. Magsafe is just a so wonderful and elegant solution.
• Much more bang for the money. The increase in price of the 2016 model for essentially: a) Touchbar b) Making the SSD completely impossible to upgrade c) Removing the magnetic Magsafe power attachment. Is really not worth it.

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

It's not the job of Consumer Reports to troubleshoot products. Their job is to use them as a consumer would, and report the results. That's it. There is no due diligence necessary beyond that.

There's an implied due diligence by any technician doing the sort of testing that CR was doing, that, when getting wildly disparate results for tests that are both too high and too low, especially by the amount that they "observed", to double-check and examine their equipment, unit-under-test, and testing methods for a possible explanation of such anomalous results.

Anything else is simply unacceptably bad practices.

 

[jonnysods]

It's not just the battery. I seriously want ports... at the very least an SD card reader and 1 regular USB port. But I know it's my problem to deal with now.

 

[simonmet]

What the heck are you talking about? I've been shooting RAW exclusively on my 6D for four years using SD cards. And my 5D Mark IV also has an SD card slot. I shoot everything on both slots, but the CF card never leaves the camera, because the built-in SD card reader makes it so much easier to import the content into my laptop. The extra three minutes of importing caused by Apple's ancient UHS-I reader is still less time than it would take to dig a standalone UHS-II or CF reader out of my bag.

The SD standard is more than fast enough. In fact, with UHS-II, it's about twice as fast as CompactFlash. The SD standard might have started out as a consumer medium, but going forward, all signs point to SD being the primary medium for external cameras, both at the consumer level and at the pro level.

Even the CFast and XQD standards aren't very much faster than SD (less than a factor of two), which means that those standards will likely die a horrible death shortly after UHS-III gets released.

Also, the SD standard is much more mechanically robust than the CF standard, which should have been dumped twenty years ago over those fragile pins, but I digress.




Not quite. Apple's SD slot was an SD slot that you always had with you and that didn't require you to dig it out from the bottom of your camera bag. Built-in readers are a major improvement over the dark days of having to dig for a reader and plug it into the side of your laptop, carefully finding a solid surface to put your laptop on so that you won't accidentally knock loose the USB connector.

And now, Apple's laptops don't have one. Lame.

Exactly. If I was in charge I would've upgraded to UHS-2 a while ago and certainly kept it going forward.

Sad times.

 

[Johnny907]

I agree with everything you have said, plus point out that, since they themselves admit their low-lifetime figures were not repeatable with Chrome, tells me there is some background process or processes running amok in Safari itself. And if CR wasn't concerned with Clickbait, they would have done more testing that excluded Safari, since it is pretty damned obvious that it is the real culprit.
[doublepost=1482702844][/doublepost]
You're a liar or a fool if you say that and have actually looked at the Spectre's specs. So which is it?
[doublepost=1482704258][/doublepost]
Sez you.

However, it seems like almost all of the people that have actually purchased one would disagree wholeheartedly.

So, who do you think is right?
[doublepost=1482704410][/doublepost]

Right. You bought nearly $5k's worth of laptops, rather than do a few hours of research. I believe that.

NOT!

The 2016 was $1,999, the 2015 was $1,469 (bought off eBay because no way in hell am I paying Apple full price for a nearly two year old laptop)
A) that's closer to 3,500 than 5,000, but sure
B) I bought both with the intent of only keeping the one I liked best and returning the other
C) What business are my finances to you, exactly?

 

[MacsRuleOthersDrool]

1. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2016 using pre-production 2.6GHz quad-core Intel Core i7–based 15-inch MacBook Pro systems with a 256GB SSD and 16GB of RAM; pre-production 2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i5–based 13-inch MacBook Pro systems with a 512GB SSD and 8GB of RAM (wireless web test and iTunes film playback test); pre-production 2.9GHz dual-core Intel Core i5–based 13-inch MacBook Pro systems with a 256GB SSD and 8GB of RAM (standby test); and pre-production 2.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i5–based 13-inch MacBook Pro systems with a 256GB SSD and 8GB of RAM. The wireless web test measures battery life by wirelessly browsing 25 popular websites with display brightness set to 12 clicks from bottom or 75%. The iTunes film playback test measures battery life by playing back HD 1080p content with display brightness set to 12 clicks from bottom or 75%. The standby test measures battery life by allowing a system, connected to a wireless network and signed in to an iCloud account, to enter standby mode with Safari and Mail applications launched and all system settings left at default. Battery life varies by use and configuration. See www.apple.com/uk/batteries for more information.

Which, BTW, is about 2000% more information than ANY other laptop OEM gives regarding their testing methodology.

Don't believe me? Check the Microsoft Site for the Surface Pro and Surface Book, the HP Spectre product Page, the Dell XPS 15 Product Page, and, if you can figure out which Lenovo Laptop to try, look there, too.

In comparison to those manufacturers, Apple publishes a veritable whitepaper regarding their battery-testing methodology.
[doublepost=1482733686][/doublepost]

This new macbook was such a disappointing update. I'm really crossing my fingers that a late 2017/early 2018 model will resolve the following:

- modern cpu chipset (cannonlake/coffee lake) that has hardware video decoding (will happen at some point)
- 16gb ram / 512gb SSD without a crazy upcharge (will never happen)
- reduced pricing - the latest change was really a huge jump compared to the past

I think that custom OLED multitouch panel is the likely price-jump culprit; but if you look at competition like the Surface Book, the XPS 15 and the HP Spectre, you'll find they aren't so cheap, either.
[doublepost=1482734343][/doublepost]

Yup. Apple also has this fixation of 10 hours battery life being the pinnacle of mobile computing & that seems to be their target for their reduction in size and weight of their devices generation after generation. What if we want/need MORE than 10 hours of minimal CPU activity?

And which laptops do you think are designed without at least a rough "run-time" target in mind?

Engineering is always about Compromise. It is always about a Double-Edged Sword.

ALWAYS.

Now, whether those particular Design-choices happen to fit your particular use-case is a much trickier matter; especially when said product will sell to millions of disparate users.

 

[jwm]

I think i am just going to return mt 13inch MacBook Pro as soon as it arrives this week and look for something else..... Maybe the Air.....

Mine arrives later this week too, and I am also having similar considerations. However, it's easy to soak up all the speculative and 'expert' comments and find that your being swayed by what is simply commentary and opinion. Why don't you give it a try first and put your owners perspective as the influence behind your decisions. Let me know how it goes.

 

[Juicy Box]

Yawn. Easily fixed with a Software Update.

Try to come up with a real issue. I agree that was an oversight; but don't make it more than it is.

Yawn @ all your posts.

Btw, my post was in response to someone asking a question.

Your blind loyalty would be embarrassing to the most loyal apologist. I guess I have to give you some credit for admitting that the issue is a problem, and you didn't explain why not being able to adjust the volume during a phone call is a good thing.

At some point you have to stop taking your posts seriously, just about everyone else has.