Underwhelmed by the new MBP 16"

[maflynn]

Simple question, what kind of innovative technology the competitors are offering in 2019? (aside from OLEDs, which leads to questionable reliability).
I think the 16 inch macbook pro is fantastic, it improved basically all aspects of the 15 without increasing the price tag.

Touch screens
faster screens, 144hz, 120hz
OLED displays
4k Displays
Extremely powerful GPUs
Upgradeable ram/storage/battery
better keyboards - the Lenovo keyboard is water resistent. There's a YT out there that shows someone pouring multiple pitchers of liquid on a running laptop and it doesn't bat an eyelash.
Facial recognition.
convertable laptops
Full dual screen configurations

 

[FreakinEurekan]

...on the windows side, you can 140Mhz, 240Mhz displays, OLED, touchscreen, 4k, full 10bit panels. Yet, if you look at reviews of other laptops, quite often they're compared to the MBP's screen.

Not to mention, the trade-offs you pay for those screens. Reviewers being "Impressed" with 3-hour battery life, whereas the MacBook Pro can get 11 hours. Often, higher frame rates are coupled with lower resolution. You have to look at the entire system, not just one part.

 

[maflynn]

Not to mention, the trade-offs you pay for those screens. Reviewers being "Impressed" with 3-hour battery life, whereas the MacBook Pro can get 11 hours. Often, higher frame rates are coupled with lower resolution. You have to look at the entire system, not just one part.

Agreed, but the other member was asking about innovation in other machines,

I have a bright 4k display with more ports, a better keyboard (Thinkpad), replaceable/upgradeable ram, storage and battery, and that battery lasts me all day - granted it won't last as long as MBPs but it does what I need it too. All for less then what apple is charging.

 

[kp98077]

My thoughts exactly. I feel like too many come to this forum just to be Debbie downers. The new MBP is a great looking machine.

No kidding so little positive, yet, everyone has been waiting for ever, then, no one is happy! LOL!!!!!!!!!

 

[leman]

But the HP Elitebook and Lenovo Yoga offer higher nit if you're wanting to be nit picky.

On a high-DPI display

However, the % over sRGB is a valid indicator of color profile coverage. With Adobe RGB having the greatest, thus far...

There is no doubt that Adobe RGB is the widest color space that is currently available for normal user. But then again it is not a superset of DCI-P3 as there are colours in P3 that Adobe RGB cannot represent. It is just a different color space choice.

But, it's worth noting as a feature that hasn't changed from previous retina displays.

Because there is no reason to change it.

Yes, here are a lot of notebooks that offer greater than 60 Hz just from one site's page.
Ultraportables with 120/144/240 Hz

And all of them are 1080p

 

[aevan]

Apple retained the same design and same screen technology as the previous years. LED P3 500nits 226 ppi, these are impressive specs for a 2015 computer but sound hollow for a 2019 pro model. I'll hold onto to my current MBP until Apple releases a laptop with an OLED display or at the very least one with XDR.

On the bright side you don't have to spend $300 extra for a decent GPU.

”At the very least XDR”?? It will be years and years before XDR type of screen will be possible in such a thin package and without active cooling. Perhaps with MicroLED. Until then, OLED is probably not the best solution for a laptop of this type. Also, 226 ppi is quite good, a great balance between performance and battery requirements and high resolution. I’m sure the screen itself is great, you‘re paying too much attention to specs and numbers. Also, 500 nits is, actually, quite good for a laptop - most are around 300. For example, the recently announced Surface Laptop has only 380 Nits.

 

[CHA05 R31GN5]

On a high-DPI display



There is no doubt that Adobe RGB is the widest color space that is currently available for normal user. But then again it is not a superset of DCI-P3 as there are colours in P3 that Adobe RGB cannot represent. It is just a different color space choice.



Because there is no reason to change it.



And all of them are 1080p

4K 120Hz Laptops

 

[Ifti]

I'm more interested to see how the cooling system performs. If there's less thermal throttling and the CPU can stay at higher clock speed for longer, then I'm tempted.....

 

[Strangedream]

Waiting for the 2021 MBP.

Now that didn't take long, did it? I think OP might still be hanging on to their PowerBook G4.

Hanging on to 2016 15" MBP, but I'm not gonna lie I do miss my late 2011 17" MBP.
[automerge]1573744814[/automerge]

I think people need to consider the battery size limit of 100Wh and what all that needs to power. More pixels, OLED, etc eat that up. If you want great battery life with great performance there are going to be puts and takes when you can't increase the battery size.

Maybe when the Axx chips are offered, which should help power draw, they can implement a more power hungry screen.

I don't believe OLED consumes that much more power than LED LCD. Look at the latest iPhone line-up.

 

[bigjnyc]

I'm not the target market for this laptop since I have a 12" macbook that I use probably like 2 or 3 times a month.... But my first thought when I saw this new 16" mbp was "$2500 and still a 720p front camera!!" and that is super silly I know lol.... I am sure the target audience for this computer couldn't care less about a front camera, and care more about whats under the hood. I just thought it was a bit odd.

 

[leman]

4K 120Hz Laptops

Thank you for the link! I knew the Razor Blade, and it's display is not very impressive in terms of color or brightness. The 4K 120Hz panel is not mentioned in the official specs for the ASUS GX701, so I can't comment on it. The ASUS workstation looks very impressive, and I am wondering how much it is going to cost I am also wondering about the battery life, there are no official reviews out.

At any rate, I think that this list makes it very clear that high-dpi, high-refresh-rate displays are simply not yet ready to be used in a general purpose notebook.
[automerge]1573747784[/automerge]

"$2500 and still a 720p front camera!!"

As I wrote before, its because of the thin screen, and better cameras are just too large to fit. Most laptops out there have a 720p camera. The only notable difference are the 2-in-1 which have thicker display assembly and therefore can fit a larger camera.

I know it's surprising, but that is just the tech limitation we have now... maybe they will come up with ultra-thin cameras soon, who knows.

 

[ThisBougieLife]

Old:
View attachment 877001
"New":
View attachment 877002

How can the resolutions all be the same? There’s no “true retina” resolution at half the native resolution? I.e. the 15” has 1440x900 and the 16” would have 1536x960?

I know it's surprising, but that is just the tech limitation we have now... maybe they will come up with ultra-thin cameras soon, who knows.

They’ve had 7+ years to come up with one and it hasn’t happened. I’m not expecting a better webcam any time soon...a camera bump in the lid is probably the only option and I don’t see that happening.

 

[JohnnyGo]

I'm more interested to see how the cooling system performs. If there's less thermal throttling and the CPU can stay at higher clock speed for longer, then I'm tempted.....

From all I read or heard there is a significant increase in thermal envelope (10-15%), something like 12 watts, which should equate to an equal (if not greater) increase in sustained throughput.

Keep in mind the new GPUs will be much cooler given the 7nm process they’re built.

 

[redheeler]

I'll concede that if you look at a single improvement, i.e., the display. I agree with you (and the OP). The only thing Apple did is provide a larger screen, meanwhile on the windows side, you can 140Mhz, 240Mhz displays, OLED, touchscreen, 4k, full 10bit panels. Yet, if you look at reviews of other laptops, quite often they're compared to the MBP's screen. If you're the measuring tool that others are compared too, then your doing something right.

If you look at the new MBP holistically and being a mid-cycle release, its an impressive machine, with the details I and others mentioned.

I was an early adopter of both the 2014 5K iMac and 2012 Retina MacBook Pro, because those displays were what I expected from Apple. They were truly ahead of the competition, and served as a standard to which everything else released for several years afterward would be compared to.

Apple continues to benefit from that earned reputation, and I'd argue it still applies to the 5K iMac, but the Retina MacBook Pro no longer lives up to it. It's 2019, and we're being given the same PPI as that original Retina from 2012.

Yes, this particular release is relatively minor, but it was a perfect opportunity to increase the PPI, which is also a relatively minor action compared to engineering a new 120 Hz or HDR display.

Looking at it holistically, the PPI increase really should've happened back in 2016, meaning Apple is three years late and counting. There are reasons for this conclusion which I've explained here before.

 

[Falhófnir]

I was an early adopter of both the 2014 5K iMac and 2012 Retina MacBook Pro, because those displays were what I expected from Apple. They were truly ahead of the competition, and served as a standard to which everything else released for several years afterward would be compared to.

Apple continues to benefit from that earned reputation, and I'd argue it still applies to the 5K iMac, but the Retina MacBook Pro no longer lives up to it. It's 2019, and we're being given the same PPI as that original Retina from 2012.

Yes, this particular release is relatively minor, but it was a perfect opportunity to increase the PPI, which is also a relatively minor action compared to engineering a new 120 Hz or HDR display.

Looking at it holistically, the PPI increase really should've happened back in 2016, meaning Apple is three years late and counting. There are reasons for this conclusion which I've explained here before.

Feel like major display changes outside of slightly larger are reserved for the 'full redesign' which usually would have happened in 2020 (don't think this is it) - most likely the rumoured mini LED display which is supposedly now happening in 2021 is meant for this machine, so that's where I'd expect to see all the big display improvements. I'm guessing that one actually could well come with a higher price tag, though!

 

[redheeler]

How can the resolutions all be the same? There’s no “true retina” resolution at half the native resolution? I.e. the 15” has 1440x900 and the 16” would have 1536x960?

That list is of scaled resolutions. 1536x960 would be native, not scaled.

Feel like major display changes outside of slightly larger are reserved for the 'full redesign' which usually would have happened in 2020 (don't think this is it) - most likely the rumoured mini LED display which is supposedly now happening in 2021 is meant for this machine, so that's where I'd expect to see all the big display improvements. I'm guessing that one actually could well come with a higher price tag, though!

A small PPI increase to give us 3840x2400 is reminiscent of when the old 17" MacBook Pro was bumped from 1680x1050 to 1920x1200, a change which didn't require a redesign. This isn't the same as a full change of display tech, or even having to engineer a new 120 Hz or HDR LCD panel.

 

[ThisBougieLife]

That list is of scaled resolutions. 1536x960 would be native, not scaled.

Okay, thanks. I've just been concerned since they changed the default resolution to a scaled resolution that they might push out the native resolution. I never use anything other than 1440x900 on my 15" because it looks far crisper than any scaled resolution.

 

[Falhófnir]

That list is of scaled resolutions. 1536x960 would be native, not scaled.

A small PPI increase to give us 3840x2400 is reminiscent of when the old 17" MacBook Pro was bumped from 1680x1050 to 1920x1200, a change which didn't require a redesign. This isn't the same as a full change of display tech, or even having to engineer a new 120 Hz or HDR LCD panel.

It's not so much about needing a redesign to do it as holding something back for a future update (and quite possibly also to help hit the unchanged price point considering how much extra you are already getting for your money)

 

[Thysanoptera]

Keep in mind the new GPUs will be much cooler given the 7nm process they’re built.

Shrinking process is double edged sword. You make the silicon more power efficient but at the same time the surface area of the chip gets smaller. Heat transfer is proportional to that surface area and temperature gradient, if the area gets smaller - you need to increase temperature gradient to transfer same amount of heat. Can't do much about ambient temperature so the end result may very well be that the new GPU is hotter at the same TDP.

 

[PROFESS0R]

Hey! I have a PowerBook G4... it is a great computer. Don't be dissing the PowerBook G4.

Waiting for the 2021 MBP.

Now that didn't take long, did it? I think OP might still be hanging on to their PowerBook G4.

 

[Thysanoptera]

Hey! I have a PowerBook G4... it is a great computer. Don't be dissing the PowerBook G4.

I have one too, running MorphOS on it. Boots to desktop from cold start in 10 seconds.

 

[greenmeanie]

Sometimes I think the people that are underwhelmed just can't afford it and want a excuse not to buy it.
I am happy they are going back to a scissor KB and have a escape key. All we need now is to lose the whole touchbar.

 

[nutmac]

Apple retained the same design and same screen technology as the previous years. LED P3 500nits 226 ppi, these are impressive specs for a 2015 computer but sound hollow for a 2019 pro model. I'll hold onto to my current MBP until Apple releases a laptop with an OLED display or at the very least one with XDR.

On the bright side you don't have to spend $300 extra for a decent GPU.

Apple certainly could've gone "Mac Pro" and make $4999 MacBook Pro with XDR display with 2x retina resolution, Xeon mobile processor, more ports, the works.

Then we'd all complain about the price.

P.S. OLED sucks for non gaming computer. The amount of static elements on the screen will permanently damage the screen.

 

[redheeler]

It's not so much about needing a redesign to do it as holding something back for a future update (and quite possibly also to help hit the unchanged price point considering how much extra you are already getting for your money)

An increase in PPI is not something that needs to be saved for the future, as they are already doing that with other potential display advancements (OLED/mLED, 120 Hz, HDR) that would legitimately be difficult and expensive to engineer.

 

[bierdybard]

You know what?

Pros spoke loud and clear. They want power, usability, and reliability. Not gimmicks and fads.

The design WORKS. Apple is incrementally improving it, which is really what's been happening since the introduction of the aluminum unibody chassis. Some increments are bigger than others, but there's really nothing revolutionary here, nor imho should there be.

I don't blame Apple for being a bit conservative right now. They went out on a limb with 4th gen and ended up getting bit. This generation is a VERY welcome mea culpa, which manages to address the most vocal complaints/requests without compromising the form and design. This is exactly what Apple needed to do to start earning some trust back from long-time users.

Besides, it really suits Apple. Since the return of Jobs, Apple's modus operandi has been to let other "innovative" companies dip their toes in new areas/technologies and rush inferior products to market while they test and refine and then introduce the best version by a country mile. No reason to think they would do any differently here. OLED screens in laptops are still relatively new. Apple won't put one in a laptop until they can find/create one that meets their high standards. You'll remember they did the same thing with the iPhone; OLEDs in phones were practically ubiquitous by the time the iPhone X came out, and almost as ubiquitous were the complaints of failures/color/brightness/etc. Apple researched, iterated, improved, and released a phone with an OLED screen that blew away anything else on the market at the time, from a quality perspective.

I am extraordinarly pleased by this release. I've been holding back from upgrading for 2 years. My trusty 6-year-old MacBook Pro has held up remarkably well, but I'm happy to pull the trigger now, because I don't feel like I am compromising anything.