Well I think you *are* supposed to, but they decided maybe their failure rate would decline if they didn’t. They may be back!The wings were deceptive. You think you're supposed to wrap it neatly around them, then your cable breaks after a year.
Well I think you *are* supposed to, but they decided maybe their failure rate would decline if they didn’t. They may be back!The wings were deceptive. You think you're supposed to wrap it neatly around them, then your cable breaks after a year.
I don't think the MacBook Pros are in the mobile workstation class or ever marketed that way. I remember the Dell ones that out the around the came with a super large duty power supply and was about twice as thick as a regular Dell. Those were right on the edge of what I would call mobile. Pro is Apple's definition of pro being can this machine perform tasks after and better than what ever tier is below in the hardware portfolio.
No, same meaning. MBP, iMac Pro and Mac Pro are the top performers available in Apple’s laptop, all-in-one and headless form factors.Agree to disagree then
So "Pro" in the MacBook line has a different meaning than in the iMac or Mac-Line?
First your DC-In board needs to be replaced ASAP! You also have metal shavings in the socket. Bring your system into someone who fixes Mac's or checkout IFIXIT.com to find your system to do it your self! It's not that hard.
Lack of care is what I see here! Take a read of this Apple TN https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203207
No, same meaning. MBP, iMac Pro and Mac Pro are the top performers available in Apple’s laptop, all-in-one and headless form factors.
That's exactly what boost speed does _not_ mean. Remember Formula 1 cars with a "turbo boost" that gave them 250 extra horsepowers for about 3 seconds? Just enough to overtake another car.I'm not a pro but I can imagine that if you're a pro and Apple advertises its 4,8 GHz boost speed for when they need it, especially when they mention 3D rendering, it should be usable and stable for a bit more than just two minutes.
One is a quad core processor, and one is a six core processor. Six cores produce 50% more heat. Therefore they have to run a bit slower. If you use 4 vs 6 cores then each of the 4 cores runs a bit faster than one of the 6 cores, but 6 cores still beat the 4 cores easily. If you had a task that uses exactly 4 cores, they would both run at the same speed.That's just physics. Single core runs faster than dual core runs faster than quad core runs faster than six cores - but more cores still beat fewer cores.Do I understand it correctly that if you don't just need a few peak boosts but rather constant raw cpu power, the i7 still outperforms the i9? I don't understand how Apple can call this a fix if they merely just fixed the fluctuation in cpu temp and clock speed and thus their "pro" processor is handling the pro use case worse.
Never tried to install Unix on bare metal (PC or Mac), the reasons being that its installation is weird even on a vbox, and it's more of a server-oriented system. It's stable in that role, but has a relatively primitive GUI desktop, and applications are relatively scant (compared with Linux). I've had few problems installing Linux on Macs after installing rEFInd as a boot loader.I installed FreeBSD on my 2012 retina MBP once. It worked, but it had weird installation issues, and I was afraid to keep it running that.
[doublepost=1532550387][/doublepost]
Nothing was wrong with the MagSafe connection, just the stupid cables. Same with Lightning. I don't get why Apple's cable design is so shoddy.
I like that you can charge Macs from USB-C, but I wish USB-C had a MagSafe-like connection for safety.
Somebody get this man a Zip drive, a SCSI terminator, an ICQ client, an AOL CD ROM with 1000 free hours, and Star Trek with Patrick Stewart.
Yup.. like let's put an emoji bar or let's put throttling or let's remove all the ports.. definitely.. I am happy Dell is not having such thoughts while making their laptops!probably because it's obvious that dell's products are made without much thought.
The PC master race / Android police are just as bad - On the premises that the i9 egregiously outstrips the MacBook Pro's capability to cool it Linus Tech Tips spent $3-4,000 on a i9 MacBook just so they could "entertain" us with a "How fast can we throttle the new i9" unboxing video. The whole reason for the live stream video was to mock what was supposed to be an unfixable problem because Apple "so dumb".Because showing an actual problem with a new product is 'hating' now.
Geez, I thought the Tesla fanboys are the worst.
The PC master race / Android police are just as bad - On the premises that the i9 egregiously outstrips the MacBook Pro's capability to cool it Linus Tech Tips spent $3-4,000 on a i9 MacBook just so they could "entertain" us with a "How fast can we throttle the new i9" unboxing video. The whole reason for the live stream video was to mock what was supposed to be an unfixable problem because Apple "so dumb".
But, oops - it was a software / firmware problem after all. So no clearly no "hating" going on - This was just a live stream video to demonstrate an actual problem.
And now from Dan Lee's video we see that Apples cooling solution is actually better then the Zenbook and XPS 15". All three achieve 3.0GHz average clock speed, but the i9 MacBook Pro is significantly quieter - in a thinner, lighter package. Which no one wants to admit is desirable. Nevermind, that you're desired products benefit from this - lets all just laugh at Apple for continuing to make thinner, lighter, quieter products. It's not hate by the way - like you said you're just pointing out actual problems. Totally not hate.
Am I the only one wondering why Apple does not kick in with a 55W Power Limit from the start or at least after the load looks like a continuous one?MacRumors reader Aea shared pre-patch and post-patch Cinebench benchmarks done with the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Core i9 chip showing the jump in score following the update.
![]()
Lying is one thing, but misleading is also equally bad, not only ethically but also in many cases, legally.
How about you? At 2:29-2-30 he mentions the performance advatage is slight. Then at 2:36 show a graphic with their aveage clock speeds under load. 2.9 vs 3.0. With XPS and Zenbook Pro's extra weight and extra few millimeters - you're telling that they can only do 100 MHz better while being significantly louder?Did you read the article and watch the video?
Believing is actually the opposite of what I'M trying to accomplish, I want answers, facts, real facts not just one part of the story. Actually that's what makes someone like me invaluable, I don't just take the first handfull of test videos and claimed fixed as fact. Sometimes you gotta get dirty and test things out yourself. I'll probably do a video about it real soon in a store somewhere and show you just how bad they perform at simple functions bringing it to it's knees as if it was from 2011. If I help other people along the way to not waste money before they have all the facts laid down and know this is what they need, and know it will perform to their expectations, that's just an added bonus. Arguing with people who cannot see the whole picture will just get me banned so good luck to you too my friend.
And now from Dan Lee's video we see that Apples cooling solution is actually better then the Zenbook and XPS 15". All three achieve 3.0GHz average clock speed, but the i9 MacBook Pro is significantly quieter - in a thinner, lighter package.
How about you? At 2:29-2-30 he mentions the performance advatage is slight. Then at 2:36 show a graphic with their aveage clock speeds under load. 2.9 vs 3.0. With XPS and Zenbook Pro's extra weight and extra few millimeters - you're telling that they can only do 100 MHz better while being significantly louder?
Agree to disagree then
So "Pro" in the MacBook line has a different meaning than in the iMac or Mac-Line?
The VRM is a red herring. You're all locked into it thinking that if they put a better VRM in there that magically the CPU cooler could dissipate more heat.
The limiting factor here has always been the CPU cooler. Apple initially had the peak power limit set to something crazy like 100W. They never should have done that. Had they set a proper peak power limit to begin with you would have never known about any of this.
I'm "belittling" you because I have a basic understanding of the situation and I'm trying to give you some insight, yet you choose to ignore it and attempt to twist my words and accuse me of being an apologist.
If the CPU in a steady state long term load is running at or above base clock and delivering rated TDP it is working as advertised. I believe that to be the case now, so I don't see what your problem is.
Again, I already gave you an example of another manufacturer (Dell) setting a peak power limit in a CPU that was lower than what Apple was using in a comparable CPU. I don't see you crying foul about Dell putting power caps in place. Why is that?
Well I think you *are* supposed to, but they decided maybe their failure rate would decline if they didn’t. They may be back!
No, same meaning. The iMac Pro is marketed as the most powerful iMac of the iMac line that a "Pro" will see benefits from but not as a workstation. The current Mac Pro sits on top of the Mac Mini in the Mac line. It is marketed as being built around workstation graphics but not called a workstation directly.
The chips spec sheet shows there's more gas in it! The VRMs are part of it but the root issue is the case limits the cooling. The rigidness of Apple not addressing the systems cooling is the issue here. No one is expecting a gamers box, just one a bit bigger to offer the needed cooling to get us further up into the turbo space of this chip. Throttling it to be mostly as the base frequency is what most video pro's are complaining about. Why should I spend that kind of cash for such little gain.
nothing?
not charging:
View attachment 772755
not charging:
View attachment 772756
sketchy AF looking:
View attachment 772757
-----
i promise you these aren't setup photos in attempt to make it look worse than it really is.. they're exactly real life conditions and i'm always having to make sure my laptop /cord is in a certain position to get a charge.. also, the magsafe connector is spring loaded and will jam up.. i have to buy a new one about once per year.. judging by my third picture, that time is coming up (although the laptop itself will be replaced soon instead of the power cord).. it will start smoking eventually due to the shorting/flakey connection..
i get it that if these things are always used in calm/clean/controlled environments then you may have better luck with them but bring them into a fast paced environment (or in my case, a fast-paced manufacturing environment) and your idea about how good magSafe is will likely change relatively quick..
if you're worried about tripping on the cord and crashing the machine to the floor, coil up the slack near the connection.. you'll then have to trip on the cord and drag it 8' before it snags the laptop.. bonus tip-- this works with all sorts of other tools/machines/plug-in-stuff too..![]()
Clearly the Mac pictured has been mistreated therefore not an accurate representation if the advantages of MagSafe.nothing?
not charging:
View attachment 772755
not charging:
View attachment 772756
sketchy AF looking:
View attachment 772757
-----
i promise you these aren't setup photos in attempt to make it look worse than it really is.. they're exactly real life conditions and i'm always having to make sure my laptop /cord is in a certain position to get a charge.. also, the magsafe connector is spring loaded and will jam up.. i have to buy a new one about once per year.. judging by my third picture, that time is coming up (although the laptop itself will be replaced soon instead of the power cord).. it will start smoking eventually due to the shorting/flakey connection..
i get it that if these things are always used in calm/clean/controlled environments then you may have better luck with them but bring them into a fast paced environment (or in my case, a fast-paced manufacturing environment) and your idea about how good magSafe is will likely change relatively quick..
if you're worried about tripping on the cord and crashing the machine to the floor, coil up the slack near the connection.. you'll then have to trip on the cord and drag it 8' before it snags the laptop.. bonus tip-- this works with all sorts of other tools/machines/plug-in-stuff too..![]()
How about you? At 2:29-2-30 he mentions the performance advatage is slight. Then at 2:36 show a graphic with their aveage clock speeds under load. 2.9 vs 3.0. With XPS and Zenbook Pro's extra weight and extra few millimeters - you're telling that they can only do 100 MHz better while being significantly louder?
mistreated how?Clearly the Mac pictured has been mistreated therefore not an accurate representation if the advantages of MagSafe.
The chips spec sheet shows there's more gas in it! The VRMs are part of it but the root issue is the case limits the cooling. The rigidness of Apple not addressing the systems cooling is the issue here. No one is expecting a gamers box, just one a bit bigger to offer the needed cooling to get us further up into the turbo space of this chip. Throttling it to be mostly as the base frequency is what most video pro's are complaining about. Why should I spend that kind of cash for such little gain.
[doublepost=1532621155][/doublepost]
That was a bad design by the Apple engineers! I too believed that made sense until my sailer friend explain why it was bad. Since then I loosely coil the cable and use a velcro cable strap leaving it in a uniform circle with all of my cables.
[doublepost=1532621842][/doublepost]
Just like you can be a little pregnant ;-}
Apple blurred the line with the MacBooks! The new MacBook should have been an Air, the current MacBook Pro's the MacBook and the MIA is the missing real MacBook Pro. The iMac series is a bit different as the iMac Pro is more Pro'ish with its CPU's and still carries all of the ports forward. The Headless Mac's Mac Mini & Mac Pro follow with the newer Mac Pro having more ports, but lost the storage bays in favor of one SSD which also was a mistake besides the cooling issues it had.
I fully realize systems leapfrog until the things get worked out over time its just the MacBook Pro got lost here with the Thin is in effort. This is were Apple needs to get back to back filling the high end MacBook Pro without compromising performance the previous generations had in their time points.