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

[castlerock]

Imore does have a point. CR got 3 widely different battery life test results. Won't that suggest that something might be amiss with their battery testing methodology? Instead of ascertaining the reason behind this inconsistency, CR is opting to write it off as the MBP's problem.

Some people here are suggesting that the MBP was rushed. Seems the report by CR was rushed as well to meet a certain deadline and fit a certain narrative as well.

Consumer Reports isn't Apple QC. It isn't their job to determine why they're getting the results they're getting because they aren't Apple engineers. As long as they follow the prescribed testing methodology (and perhaps this should include more than one round of tests on more than one machine, granted), they're doing exactly what they're supposed to be doing: reporting.

Getting (wildly) inconsistent results between tests certainly leads one to speculate that a software or firmware fix might be possible, but I guess the root problem must be identified first. And unfortunately Apple has a pretty bad track record of being up front and acknowledging problems that are evident to their users.

 

[Ethosik]

Guys, just take a look at gaming laptops which you people consider "Pro" for whatever reason. How is the battery life on those? They are certainly THICK THICK THICK and HEAVY HEAVY HEAVY, yet they do not have 15 hours of battery life. Some only have around 3-5 hours.
[doublepost=1482881761][/doublepost]

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]
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...

OMG BUT THOSE ARE SO EXPENSIVE!!!!

Seriously, $7 for THREE passive adapters. What is with this dongle and USB-C hate?

How am I expected to use DVI, VGA, Ethernet, 3+ USB ports on my 2013 YES 2013 Macbook Pro?

 

[PLondon]

Ok, so you don't use the SD Slot (like I said was the case with most Pro photogs); so that argument is right-out, and in fact proves my point.

If you think that this < $3 USB-C -> USB-A Adapter is an "absolute pain", then go home and sit on the couch. You just stick it on the end of your USB-A thingy and LEAVE IT THERE. Problem solved!

I'm with you on the MagSafe thing; but fortunately, Griffin has that covered. Nearly $40, and it has a few issues, but cheaper than a new laptop!!!

https://www.amazon.com/Griffin-BreakSafe-Magnetic-Breakaway-Chromebook/dp/B01CQTK6GU/


While I agree that 32 GB would have been nice, it is contingent upon forces that Apple cannot control (Intel), and so will have to wait until Kaby Lake this coming year.

I don't know what to tell you about the Touch Bar. My semi-pro photographer friend nearly jumped for joy when he saw it in person (and says that it was what really "sold" him on the machine). But I believe he uses Lightroom more than PS.

I sincerely believe that 95% of the battery-life issue is software, and will be quickly sorted out. We will all soon see about that one...

Adapters are an inelegant solution to a problem we didn't need to create in the first place. And sadly it's not as easy as put an adapter on and leave it there as I use more than one computer and the adapter will invariably be lost / forgotten at some point. I totally understand that there are workarounds for pretty much everything but we shouldn't have to work around anything, that's why we buy Mac's or at least that used to be the reason.

With regards to the touchbar, if it works for some people great for them. But when I use Lightroom I keep my eyes on the screen where my image / images are and looking down to use a non tactile LCD bar would drastically slow down my workflow. I and many other photographers have spent years developing ways of not having to take our eyes away from the screen when working on images by using shortcuts etc. The touchbar is completely counterintuitive to a seamless workflow.

Despite the now smaller battery I'm sure you are right and software will probably solve some of the issues.

I've owned every major revision of Apple laptops since the 1997 Powerbook G3 as my work computer and this is the first time an upgraded version seem like a major step back. Luckily I have a fully maxed out 2013 15" that's still going strong and I'll stick with that for as long as I can. If Apple don't get their act together I will have to look at alternatives when it comes time to upgrade. Despite how much I would hate to do so...

Here is hoping all the outrage on the internet makes Apple take stock and make a computer for the working pro. I'm not saying the new MacBook isn't right for anyone, I'm sure for some people it's perfect. But clearly for myself and others it is not suitable.[/QUOTE]

 

[dgdosen]

I agree. I just tested a 2016 Macbook Pro and got 100 hours. I am publishing an article about it because it is not my responsibility to determine if it is a legitimate result or not.

Yep, that is what people think here. It is not CR's responsibility to validate their results. Did you guys go to school? If I do an experiment and I get results like this, I needed to explain WHY. Doing what CR did indicates very poor tests or just did it for the clicks.

What would you guys say if I ran a test on a GTX 1080 at 800x600 resolution and only got 10 FPS? Hey, my tests showed it. It is not my responsibility to find out why it happened. The GTX 1080 must be horrible right?

Or is it possible my test was messed up, causing my CPU to be at 100% which caused the test to be CPU bound?

How can CR explain why the laptops tested oddly if those laptops are a "black box" as far as consumer testing is concerned? They describe their testing methodology and that's all that they should provide. They should also be truthful and nothing has been shown that they haven't been. It's up to Apple to explain why those results may have happened - if they choose to.

Maybe CR is happy this is an issue they're in the middle of, but I don't think a company that's built a reputation of high standards, over decades, performing exactly these kind of tests, is going to change on a whim it to make Apple look bad.

That's pretty convoluted.

It's much more likely that as Apple greatly reduced the size of the battery in this new design, they might be having problems with battery management and real world usage. That's an example of using Occam's Razor. Maybe "your school" should have taught you that.

 

[2IS]

Your battery life is ****, not hard to understand. Heck even Apple removed the estimated runtime in a recent update, so I'm sure they understand the issue quite well.

 

[aknabi]

I would be more alarmed if any platform shift didn't unsettle at least a few people.

Maybe Apple should just focus on making the iPad more pro and drop the Mac (eventually). iOS has always struck me as Apple's opportunity to reboot OS X and get rid of all the legacy baggage.

You do realize that iOS is a subset of OS X... you're not getting rid of all the legacy baggage, you're just choosing a crippling subset and trying to unload it on professionals.

 

[kyykesko]

Yep. I'm sure some people get good battery life, but there's been too many stories of bad battery performance for me to take the risk.

Besides, let's not pretend that would be the only reason not to buy it anyway

It's not really a risk. If you just use it for light browsing and watching iTunes you will probably get a decent battery life. Just don't expect to be able to do anything CPU/GPU consuming while on battery power.

 

[Abazigal]

You do realize that iOS is a subset of OS X... you're not getting rid of all the legacy baggage, you're just choosing a crippling subset and trying to unload it on professionals.

iOS is OS X, with better memory management, better security, better APIs, easier and more intuitive to use etc. it just feels to me like a reboot of OS X. An opportunity for Apple to start over with OS X without having to rewrite everything from scratch. Basically strip out everything they felt was holding OS X back and improve on what needs improving.

What if Apple released a version of iOS optimized for the desktop in the future? I mean, we already have iOS variants for the Apple Watch and Apple TV....

 

[MarsViolet]

iOS is OS X, with better memory management, better security, better APIs, easier and more intuitive to use etc. it just feels to me like a reboot of OS X. An opportunity for Apple to start over with OS X without having to rewrite everything from scratch. Basically strip out everything they felt was holding OS X back and improve on what needs improving.

What if Apple released a version of iOS optimized for the desktop in the future? I mean, we already have iOS variants for the Apple Watch and Apple TV....

I think Apple fully intends to replace macOS with iOS, and there was a time when I thought they might be able to pull it off, but Apple has no idea how to do anything anymore. They're just going to end up ruining iOS, and in the process they're going to kill macOS. And it really bums me out.

 

[Paul Dawkins]

iOS is OS X, with better memory management, better security, better APIs, easier and more intuitive to use etc. it just feels to me like a reboot of OS X. An opportunity for Apple to start over with OS X without having to rewrite everything from scratch. Basically strip out everything they felt was holding OS X back and improve on what needs improving.

What if Apple released a version of iOS optimized for the desktop in the future? I mean, we already have iOS variants for the Apple Watch and Apple TV....

Feels, but it's not.

 

[H2SO4]

iOS is OS X, with better memory management, better security, better APIs, easier and more intuitive to use etc. it just feels to me like a reboot of OS X. An opportunity for Apple to start over with OS X without having to rewrite everything from scratch. Basically strip out everything they felt was holding OS X back and improve on what needs improving.

What if Apple released a version of iOS optimized for the desktop in the future? I mean, we already have iOS variants for the Apple Watch and Apple TV....

You forgot to say massively reduced capabilities.

 

[Abazigal]

You forgot to say massively reduced capabilities.

Nothing's stopping Apple from adding those capabilities to iOS eventually. I think it's easy to forget that OS X has been around for more than 2 decades. iOS is barely 10 years old.

Look at sierra. The most useful feature is probably the ability to unlock my Mac with my Apple Watch. Apple is advertising features like Siri, iCloud Drive enhancements and storage optimisation. Nice to have, but none really change the way I work dramatically.

macOS just feels to me like Apple has taken it as far as it can go, while iOS feels like it still has so much potential and there is so much that Apple can still do with it. The PC is more or less complete, and I feel that moving forward, we can expect even more incremental improvements to the hardware and software. That's why Apple has to invest ever-increasing amount of resources into creating features such as the touchbar, force-touch trackpad, butterfly keyboard mechanism, touch-ID and a thinner, lighter form factor. They may seem like very marginal benefits, but they remain crucial in differentiating the Mac from the PC.

I believe the future of computing lies in iOS and Android, not windows and macOS. Mark my words. The Mac will end up being for legacy and niche uses. The iPad will be the mainstream computer for everyone else.

 

[NT1440]

I think Apple fully intends to replace macOS with iOS, and there was a time when I thought they might be able to pull it off, but Apple has no idea how to do anything anymore. They're just going to end up ruining iOS, and in the process they're going to kill macOS. And it really bums me out.

How many years do they have to explicitly state at every turn that they have no interest in merging iOS and MacOS?

"Hey guys, you have no idea how to pull off the thing I claim you're trying to do, but you claim you've never had any interest in" <- what kind of logic is this?

 

[Paul Dawkins]

Nothing's stopping Apple from adding those capabilities to iOS eventually. I think it's easy to forget that OS X has been around for more than 2 decades. iOS is barely 10 years old.

Look at sierra. The most useful feature is probably the ability to unlock my Mac with my Apple Watch. Apple is advertising features like Siri, iCloud Drive enhancements and storage optimisation. Nice to have, but none really change the way I work dramatically.

macOS just feels to me like Apple has taken it as far as it can go, while iOS feels like it still has so much potential and there is so much that Apple can still do with it. The PC is more or less complete, and I feel that moving forward, we can expect even more incremental improvements to the hardware and software. That's why Apple has to invest ever-increasing amount of resources into creating features such as the touchbar, force-touch trackpad, butterfly keyboard mechanism, touch-ID and a thinner, lighter form factor. They may seem like very marginal benefits, but they remain crucial in differentiating the Mac from the PC.

I believe the future of computing lies in iOS and Android, not windows and macOS. Mark my words. The Mac will end up being for legacy and niche uses. The iPad will be the mainstream computer for everyone else.

Mac in general gets fewer man hours. What do you expect? OS X is a solid OS at this pont that you can rely on. On iOS you can't set a default app and Apple apps have special treatment compared to 3rd party apps. Lot's of nonsense with rubbish excuses to be honest.

To me it's a complete bollocks to let OS X die just to recreate it lobotomised on iOS.

It's horses for courses.

 

[Abazigal]

Mac in general gets fewer man hours. What do you expect? OS X is a solid OS at this pont that you can rely on. On iOS you can't set a default app and Apple apps have special treatment compared to 3rd party apps. Lot's of nonsense with rubbish excuses to be honest.

To me it's a complete bollocks to let OS X die just to recreate it lobotomised on iOS.

It's horses for courses.

It feels to me like a chicken and egg question. Does macOS get fewer new features because Apple denotes fewer man hours to it, or does Apple devote fewer man hours to improving macOS because they feel there is only so much that can be done with it, and any more would just result in diminishing marginal returns?

Look at the recent new features macOS has received. They appear largely lifted from iOS. Apple feels like they are scrapping the bottom of the barrel for new ideas to add. What was the last feature that genuinely felt like it was created specifically for the Mac from the ground up?

I don't think the Mac will die. There will still be tasks that can't be done (or done as well) on an iPad or iPhone, such as editing 5k footage on a MBP hooked up to multiple external displays, or developing apps for iOS. But I do believe the iPad will eventually get powerful enough that the majority of users will feel comfortable using the iPad for their computing needs.

It won't happen tomorrow. It may not happen for years, but I believe we will eventually get there. Tim Cook referred to the iPad Pro as their vision of mobile computing. I don't think it was some idle boast.

 

[Ethosik]

How can CR explain why the laptops tested oddly if those laptops are a "black box" as far as consumer testing is concerned? They describe their testing methodology and that's all that they should provide. They should also be truthful and nothing has been shown that they haven't been. It's up to Apple to explain why those results may have happened - if they choose to.

Maybe CR is happy this is an issue they're in the middle of, but I don't think a company that's built a reputation of high standards, over decades, performing exactly these kind of tests, is going to change on a whim it to make Apple look bad.

That's pretty convoluted.

It's much more likely that as Apple greatly reduced the size of the battery in this new design, they might be having problems with battery management and real world usage. That's an example of using Occam's Razor. Maybe "your school" should have taught you that.

Greatly reducing battery life, then getting 18 hours on a test. Yeah seems legit.

 

[Paul Dawkins]

It feels to me like a chicken and egg question. Does macOS get fewer new features because Apple denotes fewer man hours to it, or does Apple devote fewer man hours to improving macOS because they feel there is only so much that can be done with it, and any more would just result in diminishing marginal returns?

Look at the recent new features macOS has received. They appear largely lifted from iOS. Apple feels like they are scrapping the bottom of the barrel for new ideas to add. What was the last feature that genuinely felt like it was created specifically for the Mac from the ground up?

I don't think the Mac will die. There will still be tasks that can't be done (or done as well) on an iPad or iPhone, such as editing 5k footage on a MBP hooked up to multiple external displays, or developing apps for iOS. But I do believe the iPad will eventually get powerful enough that the majority of users will feel comfortable using the iPad for their computing needs.

It won't happen tomorrow. It may not happen for years, but I believe we will eventually get there. Tim Cook referred to the iPad Pro as their vision of mobile computing. I don't think it was some idle boast.

It feels to you like that because it gets fewer man hours and no one is giving it much thought anymore. That's why. Software needs attention if you want to make something substantial. Features they add now is just for life support purposes.
[doublepost=1482932375][/doublepost]

Greatly reducing battery life, then getting 18 hours on a test. Yeah seems legit.

Unless they have a video showing it i think it's bollocks or human error. You can't get those numbers on any MacBook Pro. Maybe if you turn off brighness and just keep the lid open and force Mac not to sleep, but that would be a stupid test.

 

[Ethosik]

It feels to you like that because it gets fewer man hours and no one is giving it much thought anymore. That's why. Software needs attention if you want to make something substantial. Features they add now is just for life support purposes.
[doublepost=1482932375][/doublepost]
Unless they have a video showing it i think it's bollocks or human error. You can't get those numbers on any MacBook Pro. Maybe if you turn off brighness and just keep the lid open and force Mac not to sleep, but that would be a stupid test.

Sorry, I meant to say capacity! Apple reducing the maximum capacity of their battery, yet CR gets 18 hours of battery life on their tests? Seems like a real good test to me! But yes, I guess to people here CR should just say that is a good number and not find out why. Seriously guys?

 

[MarsViolet]

How many years do they have to explicitly state at every turn that they have no interest in merging iOS and MacOS?

"Hey guys, you have no idea how to pull off the thing I claim you're trying to do, but you claim you've never had any interest in" <- what kind of logic is this?

Show me where I said anything about Apple merging iOS and macOS. I'm saying that Apple is going to kill the macOS completely. It won't happen right away, but the pieces are being put into place, and eventually laptops and desktops will have ARM processors and will run iOS.

 

[Paul Dawkins]

Show me where I said anything about Apple merging iOS and macOS. I'm saying that Apple is going to end support for the macOS.

20 years from now maybe.

 

[MarsViolet]

20 years from now maybe.

Officially maybe in 20 years. Effectively a lot sooner than that. They'll keep stringing Mac users along, refusing to clarify or offer details, of course, but it's already happening. Mac software is being gutted, Mac hardware is being eliminated, and the macOS is slowly being locked down and simplified for people who don't do anything. They're setting the stage for Order 66.

 

[Paul Dawkins]

Officially maybe in 20 years. Effectively a lot sooner than that. They'll keep stringing Mac users along, refusing to clarify or offer details, of course, but it's already happening. Mac software is being gutted, Mac hardware is being eliminated, and the macOS is slowly being locked down and simplified for people who don't do anything. They're setting the stage for Order 66.

People said the same thing when internal combustion engine was replacing the steam engine. Things change there is nothing you can do or should do about it.

 

[citysnaps]

How can CR explain why the laptops tested oddly if those laptops are a "black box" as far as consumer testing is concerned? They describe their testing methodology and that's all that they should provide. They should also be truthful and nothing has been shown that they haven't been. It's up to Apple to explain why those results may have happened - if they choose to.

Maybe CR is happy this is an issue they're in the middle of, but I don't think a company that's built a reputation of high standards, over decades, performing exactly these kind of tests, is going to change on a whim it to make Apple look bad.

That's pretty convoluted.

It's much more likely that as Apple greatly reduced the size of the battery in this new design, they might be having problems with battery management and real world usage. That's an example of using Occam's Razor. Maybe "your school" should have taught you that.

It sounds like you believe CR should never examine their test protocols and procedures, and especially observation/monitoring and supervision, no matter how high (and laughable) a battery life number is returned. Yeah, we got 100 hours, no need to understand how that could possibly happen...

That might be OK for you, CR, and consumers who may not be curious or fussy, but for design engineers who develop products, and who write and conduct acceptance test plans for products manufactured, that would be a joke.

Imagine if CR were reviewing Ford's latest F-150 truck outfitted their optional eight cylinder engine, a truck that might have an EPA mileage rating of 14-22 MPG. CR tests the truck over their closed loop test course using their suite of rigorous real-life test protocols and procedures, and returns 35, 38, and 41 MPG in several test trials - mileage numbers that are impossible to obtain over a closed loop test course.

Apparently you'd be OK with CR reporting those numbers and not investigating further to see if their test protocols, procedures, and monitoring/supervision could be faulty. Not their job to examine their test procedures, just report the number no matter if they are highly suspect and ridiculously impossible.

 

[DJ Dilbert]

Also, are people really expecting to get the advertised battery life? I have never had that happen on ANY of my laptops. Apple or other PC manufacturers. My 2013 rMBP only gets 45 minutes while working in FCP. Yet I can get 10 hours with web browsing on sites that have no ads or no flash/html5.

LMAO, puts HTML5 in the same category as Flash. Clearly has no idea what HTML5 is.

 

[Paul Dawkins]

LMAO, puts HTML5 in the same category as Flash. Clearly has no idea what HTML5 is.

There are very heavy stuff in html5, just because it's html5 doesn't mean it a miracle.