Waiting for the 2018 MBP

[Queen6]

Yes, they are. But keeping a thread in this forum clean and focused is just a nice thing to do, and nothing discriminatory. If you want to talk about this specific topic, please, go ahead and do so. But it doesn't really belong in this thread, and makes it quite tiresome to read.

As stated don't get into it then, as no one is compelling you to do so. Members are entitled to their opinion nor are they off topic simply because they don't align with your thoughts. Creating these vast circular argument's is futile, your not going to change peoples opinion, nor does Apple need or care about being defended.

Reality is the MBP for 2018 will get a spec bump, at best more CPU cores if the TDP can support it. Any more requires product diversification similar to the iMP, Apple may or may not mostly dependant on the numbers and the level of negativity towards the current MBP...

Q-6

 

[Poki]

Reality is the MBP for 2018 will get a spec bump, at best more CPU cores if the TDP can support it. Any more requires product diversification similar to the iMP, Apple may or may not mostly dependant on the numbers and the level of negativity towards the current MBP...

Q-6

See, that's exactly what I'm saying. And that's what I thought this thread is about. I mean it literally states in the title "2018 MBP" - and this product is most probably a 2017 MBP with new CPUs and GPUs. When talking about different product categories, creating a separate thread would bei so much simpler. That's just my opinion of course. But like I said, when two parties talk about two very different topics, it's no wonder that the discussion leads nowhere.

 

[TheralSadurns]

I do not think so. I learned a lot following this thread...even from people like leman or poki who are at the opposite end of the spectrum from me....just keep the discussion civil and go on. Maybe if I appeared harsh is because english is not my first language....

Nah. Your English is just fine.
People just don't agree with your notion of the MacBook Pro no longer deserving said moniker (Pro). Which just shows the general comsumer mentality. Which in turn seems to show that Apple is right. Appeal to the masses. Not the few remaining professional users with high demands.

 

[Queen6]

See, that's exactly what I'm saying. And that's what I thought this thread is about. I mean it literally states in the title "2018 MBP" - and this product is most probably a 2017 MBP with new CPUs and GPUs. When talking about different product categories, creating a separate thread would bei so much simpler. That's just my opinion of course. But like I said, when two parties talk about two very different topics, it's no wonder that the discussion leads nowhere.

If you continue to respond and provoke (no this particular conversation) what do you expect? Let them have their opinion, better still try to visualise why many are far from pleased with the direction Apple has taken. Might just find it opens to more interesting debate, as opposed to countering every point. Remember many are not "haters" they are frequently long-term Mac users, equally the direction Apple has take in the face of the competition can does work against them.

Fate of the MBP is sealed in my mind, with only the introduction of a new line being a viable solution for many.

Q-6

 

[Poki]

If you continue to respond and provoke (no this particular conversation) what do you expect? Let them have their opinion, better still try to visualise why many are far from pleased with the direction Apple has taken. Might just find it opens to more interesting debate, as opposed to countering every point. Remember many are not "haters" they are frequently long-term Mac users, equally the direction Apple has take in the face of the competition can does work against them.

Fate of the MBP is sealed in my mind, with only the introduction of a new line being a viable solution for many.

Q-6

A discussion about a potential new product line always is interesting. But the discussion was started on the notion that the current MacBook Pro is far too weak (while it's not for many users) and that it should be made far thicker and heavier while reducing battery life. That's not the right way to start this discussion – lots of people love the MacBook Pro the way it currently is, and just yelling that it's awful is not constructive.

Why not start by saying you want an additional product line instead of blaming the current MacBook Pro's "shortcomings" because it's not even in the product category you want? Or, even more simple, why not just start a thread titled "How a potential workstation grade MacBook might look like" or so and discuss this topic in all detail there? Since I think we agree that the next notebook in this very product line will not fit in your description, I just don't think discussing it by wanting to change this notebook to a workstation notebook is the right way to start such a discussion.

 

[leman]

People just don't agree with your notion of the MacBook Pro no longer deserving said moniker (Pro). Which just shows the general comsumer mentality.

If you claim that MacBook Pro doesn't deserve the moniker "Pro" today, then, logically, you should claim that it never deserved the said moniker in the first place. Gaming laptops are workstations were always more powerful and "pro", if you only care about this perspective. Claiming that MacBook Pro is not "pro" anymore just because its thinner, even though it uses exactly the same class hardware as it ever did, is laughable.

 

[Falhófnir]

The resolution is higher, so its not like you can fit anything more on the screen. The only difference between the 15" and 17" MBP was that the later offered Full HD. They discontinued it as soon as they had a 15" panel that surpassed that resolution.

Well, you can set the 15" to show 1920x1200 worth of content, but it's borderline too small to work with. Realistically 1680x1050 is about the limit for comfortable prolonged use. Personally I prefer the absolute sharpness of the integer scaling, but with that you're beginning to sacrifice the effective space available a bit.

A 17" with a 3840x2400 @2x screen would be the perfect portable-in-a-pinch or space saving solution for those who don't want to compromise too much on screen space.

 

[Queen6]

A discussion about a potential new product line always is interesting. But the discussion was started on the notion that the current MacBook Pro is far too weak (while it's not for many users) and that it should be made far thicker and heavier while reducing battery life. That's not the right way to start this discussion – lots of people love the MacBook Pro the way it currently is, and just yelling that it's awful is not constructive.

Why not start by saying you want an additional product line instead of blaming the current MacBook Pro's "shortcomings" because it's not even in the product category you want? Or, even more simple, why not just start a thread titled "How a potential workstation grade MacBook might look like" or so and discuss this topic in all detail there? Since I think we agree that the next notebook in this very product line will not fit in your description, I just don't think discussing it by wanting to change this notebook to a workstation notebook is the right way to start such a discussion.

OK my last words, getting the feeling it's just last word scenario. It's all subjective and very much dependant on usage/workflow so what works for you may not work for another and the shortcoming's are very real for that individual. So no need to counter every post any remote negativity towards the MBP as nor is this remotely constructive, especially when you don't know their usage. I don't think for one minute many want or expect Apple to produce a "Portable Workstation" class notebook, rather a machine shall we say more flexible with greater usability than the current iteration.

Q-6

 

[leman]

A 17" with a 3840x2400 @2x screen would be the perfect portable-in-a-pinch or space saving solution for those who don't want to compromise too much on screen space.

And there we have a start for a realistic idea of a MacBook Super Pro. An Ultra HD 19:10 17" display, size around 37x25x2 cm, weight around 2.5kg, a Xeon CPU with user-upgradeable ECC DDR4 RAM, 70-80W Vega GPU, 99.9Wh battery, the T2 chip with dual SSD setup (startign at 512GB), 6 TB3 ports and maybe a card reader. Starting price around $3999 or so.

Don't think that Apple would make a machine like this, but if they wanted, I'd bet we'd see something along these lines.

 

[Queen6]

And there we have a start for a realistic idea of a MacBook Super Pro. An Ultra HD 19:10 17" display, size around 37x25x2 cm, weight around 2.5kg, a Xeon CPU with user-upgradeable ECC DDR4 RAM, 70-80W Vega GPU, 99.9Wh battery, the T2 chip with dual SSD setup (startign at 512GB), 6 TB3 ports and maybe a card reader. Starting price around $3999 or so.

Don't think that Apple would make a machine like this, but if they wanted, I'd bet we'd see something along these lines.

If only

Q-6

 

[Falhófnir]

And there we have a start for a realistic idea of a MacBook Super Pro. An Ultra HD 19:10 17" display, size around 37x25x2 cm, weight around 2.5kg, a Xeon CPU with user-upgradeable ECC DDR4 RAM, 70-80W Vega GPU, 99.9Wh battery, the T2 chip with dual SSD setup (startign at 512GB), 6 TB3 ports and maybe a card reader. Starting price around $3999 or so.

Don't think that Apple would make a machine like this, but if they wanted, I'd bet we'd see something along these lines.

Unfortunately you're probably right (unless they decide they want a showcase portable that they're not too worried about making a return on) but seeing it specced out like that makes it all the more tantalising!

 

[Poki]

OK my last words, getting the feeling it's just last word scenario. It's all subjective and very much dependant on usage/workflow so what works for you may not work for another and the shortcoming's are very real for that individual. So no need to counter every post any remote negativity towards the MBP as nor is this remotely constructive, especially when you don't know their usage. I don't think for one minute many want or expect Apple to produce a "Portable Workstation" class notebook, rather a machine shall we say more flexible with greater usability than the current iteration.

Q-6

That's the thing though - the current MacBook Pro is one of the most flexible notebooks out there. Powerful enough to replace a desktop for a lot of use cases, while still portable enough to be a true mobile computer. It's one of the most expandable notebooks out there with it's four full-speed Thunderbolt 3 ports, and it offers one of the fastest WiFi modules in any computer. Usability? Well, it does have a great screen, an amazing trackpad, and it's small and light to boot - it doesn't get much more usable than this.

The MacBook Pro is Apple's best selling computer, so it seems like Apple is doing something right. I'm not saying it fits everyone - no notebook does. But then don't expect Apple to replace a great selling product that fits a huge number of workflows with a niche product. They might eventually add a more powerful notebook line, but it won't be a MacBook Pro successor. So please, just keep the discussions separate, there's no point in arguing one product when we're clearly talking about two very different product lines.

 

[TheralSadurns]

And there we have a start for a realistic idea of a MacBook Super Pro. An Ultra HD 19:10 17" display, size around 37x25x2 cm, weight around 2.5kg, a Xeon CPU with user-upgradeable ECC DDR4 RAM, 70-80W Vega GPU, 99.9Wh battery, the T2 chip with dual SSD setup (startign at 512GB), 6 TB3 ports and maybe a card reader. Starting price around $3999 or so.

Don't think that Apple would make a machine like this, but if they wanted, I'd bet we'd see something along these lines.

Which is basically what I have been saying multiple times already in this thread. Well... with the addition of:
HDMI (for board rooms etc where you don't supply your own cable and HAVE to use HDMI)
MagSafe or rather since I totally see the convenience of a standard USB-C charger... a USB-C cable that has MagSafe functionality.

Btw... does anyone care that... technically... I'm sitting at work and... well... have to work

 

[ugru]

An Ultra HD 19:10 17" display, size around 37x25x2 cm, weight around 2.5kg, a Xeon CPU with user-upgradeable ECC DDR4 RAM, 70-80W Vega GPU, 99.9Wh battery, the T2 chip with dual SSD setup (startign at 512GB), 6 TB3 ports and maybe a card reader. Starting price around $3999 or so.

I would buy one in an heartbeat....but it has to rely on a custom power supply instead of USB-C, because it can not supply more than 100W...so new magsafe needed.

 

[Loge]

I don't agree that the MBP has always been this way. It has drifted in a new direction over time. In 2009 for instance you could get 8GB of RAM and in 2012 you could get 16GB of RAM, reasonable maxima for their day. Now in 2018 we're stuck on 16GB and not much prospect of better until mid-2019 or even later. If it requires a new sub-category to redress the balance then so be it, but it's not out of place to discuss in this thread - after all noone here has any actual knowledge of the 2018 MBP.

 

[Queen6]

Which is basically what I have been saying multiple times already in this thread. Well... with the addition of:
HDMI (for board rooms etc where you don't supply your own cable and HAVE to use HDMI)
MagSafe or rather since I totally see the convenience of a standard USB-C charger... a USB-C cable that has MagSafe functionality.

Btw... does anyone care that... technically... I'm sitting at work and... well... have to work

Don't often agree with Leman, however with the inclusion of HDMI & SD Card slot an instant buy, and more on the lines of what I would like Apple to produce, equally not at the expense of the current MBP, more as a separate product akin to the iMP.

Now it's getting interesting as said if only...

Q-6
[doublepost=1519044884][/doublepost]

I would buy one in an heartbeat....but it has to rely on a custom power supply instead of USB-C, because it can not supply more than 100W...so new magsafe needed.

I'd be happy with a conventional bullet connector with that spec

Q-6

 

[Poki]

I don't agree that the MBP has always been this way. It has drifted in a new direction over time. In 2009 for instance you could get 8GB of RAM and in 2012 you could get 16GB of RAM, reasonable maxima for their day. Now in 2018 we're stuck on 16GB and not much prospect of better until mid-2019 or even later.

Apple used the most power saving RAM back then just as they do now. The only difference is that Intel, back then, supported a comparatively large amount of DDR3L RAM, while there is nu support for more than 16 GB LPDDR3 RAM. And although LPDDR4 is already in mass production, Intel seems a little slow to adopt that standard.

 

[Falhófnir]

Apple used the most power saving RAM back then just as they do now. The only difference is that Intel, back then, supported a comparatively large amount of DDR3L RAM, while there is nu support for more than 16 GB LPDDR3 RAM. And although LPDDR4 is already in mass production, Intel seems a little slow to adopt that standard.

I would still maintain battery life is a small drawback that is being used as a convenient cover for the real reason that no 32gb option is offered - that being return on investment. To offer a 32gb option of an existing machine, would likely require completely re-engineering it internally, retooling the production lines to make it and at the end of the day all that for a single (consumer facing) change. Otherwise it will be using the same i7 chips, the same GPUs, the same everything, except 32GB ram. The cost of doing all this for what would likely be a niche configuration is, I would think, the most likely explanation. The 'oh yeah, this particular model only has 6h battery life vs 10 for the others' is a relatively minor complication that most people who need 32gb of RAM would probably understand anyway.

 

[Poki]

I would still maintain battery life is a small drawback that is being used as a convenient cover for the real reason that no 32gb option is offered - that being return on investment. To offer a 32gb option of an existing machine, would likely require completely re-engineering it internally, retooling the production lines to make it and at the end of the day all that for a single (consumer facing) change. Otherwise it will be using the same i7 chips, the same GPUs, the same everything, except 32GB ram. The cost of doing all this for what would likely be a niche configuration is, I would think, the most likely explanation. The 'oh yeah, this particular model only has 6h battery life vs 10 for the others' is a relatively minor complication that most people who need 32gb of RAM would probably understand anyway.

You're certainly right there. Making two production lines doesn't make economic sense here, so back in 2016, Apple had the choice of either going all LPDDR3 or all DDR4. They obviously chose the former option. Which might not be a bad one, since most consumers wouldn't spend the additional money on the 32GB RAM upgrade anyway – so this choice makes more customers happy than the other one.

Still, couldn't Intel just support LPDDR4 finally? That would solve all RAM problems instantly.

 

[MBX]

The iMac Pro Vega highend GPU is at 16GB HBM. Does anyone think we get 6GB on mobile Vega for new MBP?

 

[SnoFlo]

Since MBP's charger is 90W, I find it puzzling why this is even being discussed. The bottom line is that external batteries are very much viable for a MBP and completely within the limits imposed by flight regulations. So yes, external batteries are a simple and affordable answer to the lack of user-replaceable battery on the MBP, not to mention that they are also more flexible, can be charged separately from the laptop and do not require you to power down the machine to be replaced.

Glad you're happy with the non-user replaceable battery.

 

[DusanM]

I think that's pretty harsh. Have you actually worked with a notebook using GT3e graphics? It's certainly more than capable for everything but running current demanding games. It's not like any iGPU would be able to play all these games anyway. AMDs iGPUs are better, but nor nearly by as much as AMD claims, since they're always only comparing themselves to an UHD 620.

https://www.notebookcheck.com/Intel-Iris-Plus-Graphics-650.189856.0.html



This literally would be worst case. GH does have a TDP of 100W, which would reduce battery life quite a lot compared to the current 80W combined CPU + GPU TDP. Also this would mean using an outdated quad-core CPU when six-core ones should be available any moment now, and gaining nothing since with the 55W left over you could just use a dedicated GPU with similar performance, especially now where the new GPU architectures from NVidia and AMD are almost ready for prime time.

I disagree, with the space saved they can add more battery to make up for the higher TDP. And your statement about better CPU and GPU around the corner is nice and dandy but there's always better tech coming in a few months. Apple wont just always wait. I think for a spring/summer refresh the GH with a bigger battery is a nice small upgrade. And maybe in the fall or next year upgrading to the CPU/GPU you are referencing to seems more probable. Also gpu architectures are likely to get delayed so I doubt apple will wait...

 

[Poki]

I disagree, with the space saved they can add more battery to make up for the higher TDP. And your statement about better CPU and GPU around the corner is nice and dandy but there's always better tech coming in a few months. Apple wont just always wait. I think for a spring/summer refresh the GH with a bigger battery is a nice small upgrade. And maybe in the fall or next year upgrading to the CPU/GPU you are referencing to seems more probable. Also gpu architectures are likely to get delayed so I doubt apple will wait...

The space saved is absolutely minimal, you couldn't fit any notable amount of battery in there just because you save a few square millimeters of space on the mainboard. Also, I'm talking about the 8th gen H-series CPUs here, which should launch this spring. Since Apple probably will wait for the 28W CPUs anyway, chances are that the new H-series CPUs launch at the same time.

But even if these wouldn't launch – a combination of a 15W quad-core Kaby Lake R CPU and a GTX 1060 Max-Q would still have a far lower TDP while providing similar amounts of power – Vega mobile should also match the performance while saving tons of power.

 

[afir93]

Glad you're happy with the non-user replaceable battery.

There is truth to what he says though. Making the overall device (and as a consequence, also the battery) smaller and much more light and portable gives users more of a choice when it comes to battery life: if you're content with the (still pretty good) battery life that the current MBP lineup offers, you're good to go, you have a great lightwight device that you can easily carry everywhere. And if you're not content with it, you can get an additional battery pack that you can carry with you for situations where the built-in battery doesn't quite hit the mark, at the cost of an additional bit of weight.

If Apple would make the entire laptop larger and heavier to allow for a larger battery that only few people might take full advantage of, users wouldn't have that choice. You'd be forced into always carrying the heavier and bulkier device, you wouldn't have the thin and light device that's easier to carry that we have now, even if you're perfectly fine with the battery life that it currently offers (which many people are).

Yes an external battery pack is an additional purchase, and yes it can bring some additional hassle (having to always charge it in addition to the MBP, and with some of them having to carry around an additional charging cable, although there are some great battery packs which have a Lightning- or USB-C-port for charging).

But as leman said, for people who really need more battery life than the current MBPs offer, they are a great and versatile solution which is often overlooked in the whole debate. They offer more battery life for people who need it while not forcing everyone else into having a bulkier laptop like making the battery larger would do. And as long as they are below the 100Wh TSA limit there usually shouldn't be any issues with bringing them on a plane (some airlines might have their own policies but I wouldn't know of any general ban of them).

 

[turbineseaplane]

If Apple would make the entire laptop larger and heavier to allow for a larger battery that only few people might take full advantage of, users wouldn't have that choice.

Sounds like a good additional laptop to offer and, as was said earlier in here by @Queen6, be a great use again of the name:

"PowerBook"

With "power" being a nod to the battery life, ports and features and, hell, who knows, maybe even specifically offering swappable batteries again so a really pro remote user could have extras on hand.
[doublepost=1519066189][/doublepost]Imagine if they designed the laptop so the entire bottom was the detachable battery and you could literally decide on your own what thickness/battery life ratio was ideal for your needs throughout the life of your machine and your different projects/jobs/travel situations.