Waiting for the 2018 MBP

[JMacHack]

Other than doing 32 GB of RAM the same way HP, Dell and Lenovo workstation notebooks do (by sacrificing some battery life and using DDR4), the really interesting upgrades don't exist yet. If I were Apple, I WOULD sacrifice the bit of battery life and offer the extra RAM on the 15" (only). I'd also leave a couple of legacy ports around (1 or 2 standard USB, the SD reader and perhaps HDMI) in addition to the USB 3.1 ports...

The thing is that we have no idea how much the battery life would be affected by the DDR4. I'm sure Apple tested models with DDR4 (going back to when they switched the MBP to LPDDR), and found the battery life to be completely unsatisfactory. This is what I'm most concerned about, is that we have no clue whether DDR4 would impact the battery life slightly, or majorly.

Ports, I haven't really had a problem with them, but there are plenty of people who have. The very least Apple could've done is "generously" include a USB-C to USB-A adapter (like they do with the iPhone and the 3.5 Jack) Not including an SD card reader when SD cards are the de facto standard for cameras seems really obtuse though (but they're also pushing the iPhone as a camera replacement, so maybe that's the logic).

 

[MBX]

The graphene battery is a pipe dream for now- I'm an electric car enthusiast, and those are in the same category as hydrogen fuel cells - nobody's going to get meaningful quantities of them out there for several years (and Apple quantities are a few years behind quantities others consider meaningful). Apple's not going to put a special battery in a notebook until they can get enough for the iPhone! Fisker's delivery dates and preliminary specs are fluid enough to make Tesla look rock-solid. The new Fisker will either ship years late, or with conventional batteries (or, most likely, both).

Probably true. But something needs to happen in the battery sector. Innovations happen everywhere else but batteries.

We need some breakthrough.

 

[c0ppo]

The price cut I agree but I think they should price cut the Touch Bar not introduce a new model. The Touch Bar is very useful in a lot of apps.

MBP is overpriced. But I would gladly pay even more just to have TB removed

For the 32gb of ram argument, I have to ask everyone here how they use so much ram? I usually go over 13gb with many Adobe Suite files open, and Finer, Safari, Mail, and two Terminal windows, but never have I even crossed the 14gb mark.

Developer here. Fire up a few VM's just for testing purposes, and you will feel the real need for extra ram

 

[benface]

The price cut I agree but I think they should price cut the Touch Bar not introduce a new model. The Touch Bar is very useful in a lot of apps.

Agreed. Adding a new non-Touch Bar model would probably mark the end of the Touch Bar, as I don't see developers working to support it if Apple themselves admit that it's a failure.

 

[danwells]

The two ways I know of of using a ton of RAM (and I'm not a developer, but I'm sure "a lot of VMs" works, too) are any of the integrated photo management/cataloging applications with a large catalog or video editing. Either Lightroom or Capture One would just love to chew through more than 16 GB - a friend has seen Lightroom page out even on a 32 GB iMac, although that is with a huge catalog of 700,000 images. Final Cut and Premiere are both more than capable of using that much, too.

Still image editing without cataloging or previews is no longer a huge memory hog (or, rather, RAM sizes have increased enough faster than image sizes that it's gotten a lot harder to run Photoshop out of memory). Even a gigabyte image file (stitched - the largest Phase One backs produce about a half gigabyte PSD, and those are rare - most cameras are closer to 100 MB, 200 at the most) only uses about 10 GB of RAM in Photoshop.

I'd imagine the battery loss from 32 GB of DDR4 to be somewhere in the range of an hour or two of low-power use (less difference when burning through charge in Premiere) - the competing workstations tend to be about 3 hours less (hard to find a comparable test, so this is a very rough estimate), but they differ in much more than just the battery - they often have have somewhat smaller batteries and more discrete components, plus Windows is less efficient than MacOS. At least to me, that cost is worth paying on the 15", but probably not on the 13".

 

[groove-agent]

You don't think the MBPs are expensive enough?

I like the idea of the eGPU actually, esp one's like the Razer Core that are a docking solution. This means you can upgrade the GPU as time progresses.

After they got a lot of criticism for their lack of attention for pro/prosumer users they responded with their vision for a pro computer, the iMac Pro (and Mac Pro next year I think) with:
- high end CPU,
- high end GPU,
- loads of RAM,
- All the ports (USB A, SD, Ethernet, TB3).

If they believed in Laptops they would have created a laptop with the same high end hardware, instead they did nothing except a minuscule spec bump for the laptops, no terraced battery, no 32gb of ram, price increase.

So it is clear to me, their vision for laptops is the eGPU...

[doublepost=1498331940][/doublepost]I think they should make the touch bar available for the highest-end MBP only rather than most of the models. Forcing people to pay for such a gimmicky feature on an already overpriced laptop is just crazy. I'd rather do without it and have physical escape and function keys for less money.

Who's with me?

Hopefully we'll see:
- Coffee Lake
- 32 GB of DDR4 RAM
- Battery improvements
- Touch Bar improvements

Possible release dates:
- March 2018
- WWDC 2018

[doublepost=1498332666][/doublepost]Yeah, I just can't get behind the new MBPs. They're too expensive for what you get.

I'm hoping for 32GB, and dual SSDs. These SSD laptops are hurting for disk space and Apple is overcharging for SSD upgrades. My main gripe is the price for what you get. Less of everything (ports etc) for twice as much money in addition for all the external gear you need to compensate for the lack of everything else. Sucks.

 

[danwells]

Unfortunately, getting to 2 TB of SSD is very expensive no matter how you do it. Nobody but Apple seems to offer a single "disk" factory solution (unless it's on some gaming laptop - I don't even TRY to keep track of those, and they sometimes get ahold of limited-volume parts that HP, Dell, Lenovo, etc. don't dare use because of reliability and supply problems).

Dell's dual 1 TB solution has one of the two drives in a 2.5" SATA bay (less than half the speed of PCIe - but you could fit a 2 TB or even 4 TB SSD in there for more total storage, although Dell doesn't offer one as a factory option), HP's is dual PCIe, but is incompatible with the larger battery, and Lenovo not only has only 1 TB PCIe plus a SATA bay (they don't even offer SATA SSDs as an option, but it's easy enough to install one yourself), they are also using a nearly 6 lb chassis! All three options are comparable in price to Apple's 2 TB upgrade.

As far as SSD capacity and speed goes, Apple is way ahead of all other "thin and light" workstations. They're somewhat ahead on battery life, a little behind on screens (and arguably GPUs, but not by a lot), WAY behind on RAM, and probably behind on ports - it's possible to argue that Apple is being forward-looking, but the others all have TB3 in addition to legacy ports...

Other than the RAM, Apple's right in the running on everything. There are some choices where one or another of the competitors offers something else (more storage but some of it's SATA, or a 4K screen with less gamut), but Apple's choices all make sense. They also don't support some odd configurations that their competitors offer (a 15" dual core, or a 15" with only 8 GB of RAM, or a 1920x1080 screen on an expensive machine), but I'd guess that very few expensive 15" models are sold with these cost cuts. If you're going to buy an expensive machine like a MacBook Pro (or a Lenovo P51, Dell Precision 5520 or HP ZBook Studio), you'll probably want a decent configuration.

 

[argentum47]

The price cut I agree but I think they should price cut the Touch Bar not introduce a new model. The Touch Bar is very useful in a lot of apps.

Yes, for a certain proportion of the user base, the Touch Bar can be more useful than not having one. That would (or could) include those working in music, photography, video, etc. who can benefit from interactive sliders.

Now if you're not a part of that small proportion:

1. Touch Bar adds $400 to the already premium price (on the 15")
2. Touch Bar removes physical ESC and F keys (developer apps and many cross-platform apps rely on them)
3. Touch Bar increases hardware and software failure rate of the MBP
4. Touch Bar consumes power, meaning unnecessary shortening of the battery life

These were the obvious objective shortcomings. On the subjective (or individual specific) side:

5. Touch Bar is not ergonomic
6. Touch Bar gets in the way when typing numbers

So if you're not a part of that small proportion, it is a huge compromise in exchange for what is an eye candy at best. Given that, why would it be a bad move by Apple to offer a TB-less version as an option on the 15"? Why do they offer an option (albeit gimped compared to the TB version) on the 13" then?

I'm not saying they should be eradicated from the lineup. There should also be a choice for the 15". By choice, I mean not the 2015 (which was a very minor spec bump from 2014) version at $1,999.

 

[Dave245]

Yes, for a certain proportion of the user base, the Touch Bar can be more useful than not having one. That would (or could) include those working in music, photography, video, etc. who can benefit from interactive sliders.

Now if you're not a part of that small proportion:

1. Touch Bar adds $400 to the already premium price (on the 15")
2. Touch Bar removes physical ESC and F keys (developer apps and many cross-platform apps rely on them)
3. Touch Bar increases hardware and software failure rate of the MBP
4. Touch Bar consumes power, meaning unnecessary shortening of the battery life

These were the obvious objective shortcomings. On the subjective (or individual specific) side:

5. Touch Bar is not ergonomic
6. Touch Bar gets in the way when typing numbers

So if you're not a part of that small proportion, it is a huge compromise in exchange for what is an eye candy at best. Given that, why would it be a bad move by Apple to offer a TB-less version as an option on the 15"? Why do they offer an option (albeit gimped compared to the TB version) on the 13" then?

I'm not saying they should be eradicated from the lineup. There should also be a choice for the 15". By choice, I mean not the 2015 (which was a very minor spec bump from 2014) version at $1,999.

I have to admit that I don't own a Touch Bar MacBook Pro I can only go on what a friend has told me and he loves the Touch Bar which he says has helped him reduce editing times in Final Cut. Other people I know who own one also say the same thing but for different reasons, I have tried out the MacBook Pro with Touch Bar and it seems like a great machine. I think if it helps those Pro users who work in music, editing, photography and so on then it's doing it's job with regards to the Pro name.

If your not part of that small portion of people who do that you could get the 13" none Touch Bar model which Apple announced to (at the moment) sit alongside the MacBook Air but it think will eventually replace and become the new MacBook Air when prices drop, I think that is the reason why Apple offer the 13" none Touch Bar rather than also offering a 15" Touch Bar model.

 

[Matt Leaf]

will jump ship and order a 2017 in the next month or so. 32 gb is not a deal breaker for me. honestly though, i don't like the new macbook pros. don't care for the trackpad, the keyboard, the touchbar, and the limited ports. but still, i need a new macbook pro. so its time to bite the bullet. maybe i will grow to love it over time, but i think for once i will actually buy base spec rather than upgraded just to save some coin. you have to factor in apple care and a few dongles as well.

 

[Queen6]

Not likely, just look at how much Apple charges for upgrading the components. It would be on the other side of 1,000 for such a thing

That's simply because Apple takes advantage of it's position at every point by holding a monopoly. If you need the increase performance and or storage Apple simply abuses it's position by boosting it's already exorbitant margins on the enforced in-house upgrades. Personally the price of Mac's does not intimidate, equally I don't care for being treated in such a manner...

Q-6

 

[danwells]

The Apple Tax on upgrades is mostly old news (on Macs, anyway - many iOS storage upgrades are still hugely overpriced)... Perhaps to avoid worse backlash than they're getting over the soldering, most of the soldered in place upgrades have actually been reasonably priced - the storage, graphics and processor upgrades on the 2016 and 2017 MBP are all right in line with similar upgrades on PC workstations, and occasionally slightly cheaper. The 2 TB storage upgrade is hugely expensive, but ALL 2 TB PCIe SSD upgrades are equally expensive, whether one drive or two.

Given the trend towards right in line pricing, I'd put 32 GB at either $300 or $400 when it arrives (assuming RAM doesn't change radically in price) - it's $350 on the HP workstations. This IS more than buying the memory and installing it yourself, but it's not outrageous.

 

[macnmac]

17 went back and now i am on team 2018... or maybe even 19 lol

 

[Aquamite]

Awww... a "coming of age" waiting.

 

[macnmac]

Awww... a "coming of age" waiting.

wot?

 

[MedRed]

I've been on a steady state of regression with Apple notebooks. I started with a 15" PowerBook, upgraded to a 17" PowerBook, and then things got wonky.

I bought a 1st gen 17" MacBook Pro right as the 2nd gen launched because I got an amazing price on one.

I was eagerly anticipating buying a 3rd gen 17" MacBook Pro, but I finally had to come to grips with the fact that there wasn't going to be one. I wasn't willing to give up the screen real estate, matte screen, replaceable battery, ports, and the ability to upgrade the 2nd gen 17". I bought the last, new fully loaded 17" 2nd gen MacBook Pro I could find I promptly dropped a 960 GB SSD (Now a 1TB SSD) and 16 gigs of faster than stock RAM into it. This notebook has served me well, but I was super excited for an early Christmas present to myself of a nice, new 4th gen. I was dismayed at the touch bar gimmick, use of old hardware, no 32 gig RAM option, and I refused to be forced into a fistful of dongles.

My 17" has had 2 GPU failures. I'm afraid it is only a matter of time before it goes again, and with this laptop staring vintage in the face, I don't want to risk being forced into buying a 4th gen. I just found the last, new/refurbished fully loaded 2015 3rd gen I could find. It will still be a big upgrade over my 2nd gen hardware wise, but I'm tired of needing to go backwards every time I want a new PC because the latest ones have their priorities in the wrong place. If a timely Kabylake update comes out that supports 32 gigs of RAM, I'll consider moving to a modern platform. I'm really loathe to the idea of all the dongles necessary to integrate the latest notebooks with my existing environment.

 

[Queen6]

Not caring, when Apple produce something that makes sense i'll look at it, until then there's plenty of other hardware & software solutions out there. Apple want's my business it needs to offer an edge that I can lever and transpire into revenue, not the nonsense of recent...

Q-6

 

[c0ppo]

Moved on to Lenovo. TB is the thing I really can't get over. Still have a mac desktop, but that's about it.

 

[Ma2k5]

The thing is that we have no idea how much the battery life would be affected by the DDR4. I'm sure Apple tested models with DDR4 (going back to when they switched the MBP to LPDDR), and found the battery life to be completely unsatisfactory. This is what I'm most concerned about, is that we have no clue whether DDR4 would impact the battery life slightly, or majorly.

Ports, I haven't really had a problem with them, but there are plenty of people who have. The very least Apple could've done is "generously" include a USB-C to USB-A adapter (like they do with the iPhone and the 3.5 Jack) Not including an SD card reader when SD cards are the de facto standard for cameras seems really obtuse though (but they're also pushing the iPhone as a camera replacement, so maybe that's the logic).

What I will say is, for a lot of professionals, battery life is probably a non-existent factor, due to them usually being docked on desks and always plugged in. Heck, for a lot of them, the P3 screen won't be a factor either because it's hooked up to external monitors.

So in a way, I think Apple adding 32gb option, would just increase sales - and probably won't get much in the way of complaints as those who need 32gb, probably understand the battery hit - and probably won't be using it on battery for any meaningful period.

 

[ilian92]

What I will say is, for a lot of professionals, battery life is probably a non-existent factor, due to them usually being docked on desks and always plugged in. Heck, for a lot of them, the P3 screen won't be a factor either because it's hooked up to external monitors.

So in a way, I think Apple adding 32gb option, would just increase sales - and probably won't get much in the way of complaints as those who need 32gb, probably understand the battery hit - and probably won't be using it on battery for any meaningful period.

But what you're saying is basically docked usage 100% of the time, doesn't this make a desktop a better/cheaper/more suitable choice?

 

[The Mercurian]

What I will say is, for a lot of professionals, battery life is probably a non-existent factor, due to them usually being docked on desks and always plugged in. Heck, for a lot of them, the P3 screen won't be a factor either because it's hooked up to external monitors.

So in a way, I think Apple adding 32gb option, would just increase sales - and probably won't get much in the way of complaints as those who need 32gb, probably understand the battery hit - and probably won't be using it on battery for any meaningful period.

But what you're saying is basically docked usage 100% of the time, doesn't this make a desktop a better/cheaper/more suitable choice?

So -> "usually being docked" != "docked usage 100% of the time".
You're welcome.

Allow consumers the choice of RAM vs battery as other manufacturers do.

 

[Ma2k5]

But what you're saying is basically docked usage 100% of the time, doesn't this make a desktop a better/cheaper/more suitable choice?

You may work on a hot desk office so you are always having to move around. You may also need to travel (e.g. visit clients as most consultants need to do) or take your laptop home to continue your work (or if you decide to work from home). A lot of flexibility is lost on desktops.

In my company, everyone, including us (the developer team), have laptops. There are no desktops in my company at all.

 

[ilian92]

So -> "usually being docked" != "docked usage 100% of the time".
You're welcome.

Allow consumers the choice of RAM vs battery as other manufacturers do.

Jesus, fine, I'll call Tim Cook and arrange it right now.

You may work on a hot desk office so you are always having to move around. You may also need to travel (e.g. visit clients as most consultants need to do) or take your laptop home to continue your work (or if you decide to work from home). A lot of flexibility is lost on desktops.

In my company, everyone, including us (the developer team), have laptops. There are no desktops in my company at all.

I can definitely see the use case, was only asking as you said "always plugged in" and using external monitors, which isn't portable anyway. Of course you can take your work around the office or with you etc., was just wondering if this is only a small percent of the total time working if a desktop isn't more suitable + the current Macbook for on the go. The logic being if you're on the go less than 10% of the time the loss of power might be tolerable.

Anyway guys, am not defending Apple or saying "don't make 32GB laptops". I'm a fan of laptops too but a laptop is a world of compromise. Right now that compromise for Apple is extreme power, for other manufacturers it's sometimes looks, size or battery life. Then again you might prefer to work on Mac which makes it an unfortunate situation, but seeing what Apple's vision for their laptops has become, it looks like this will continue for the near future at least.

 

[MedRed]

Jesus, fine, I'll call Tim Cook and arrange it right now.



I can definitely see the use case, was only asking as you said "always plugged in" and using external monitors, which isn't portable anyway. Of course you can take your work around the office or with you etc., was just wondering if this is only a small percent of the total time working if a desktop isn't more suitable + the current Macbook for on the go. The logic being if you're on the go less than 10% of the time the loss of power might be tolerable.

Anyway guys, am not defending Apple or saying "don't make 32GB laptops". I'm a fan of laptops too but a laptop is a world of compromise. Right now that compromise for Apple is extreme power, for other manufacturers it's sometimes looks, size or battery life. Then again you might prefer to work on Mac which makes it an unfortunate situation, but seeing what Apple's vision for their laptops has become, it looks like this will continue for the near future at least.

My 17" MacBook Pro is portable, powerful, allowed me to upgrade memory and storage, replace the battery, and had all the ports in the world. Apple laptops are becoming more and more compromised. They remove more and more features and stay behind on available tech. But hey, they are thinner (at the expense of battery life) and have a touch bar! I don't mind the Apple Tax as long as the hardware is current and the feature set is robust. The dongle situation is out of control.

 

[TheralSadurns]

But what you're saying is basically docked usage 100% of the time, doesn't this make a desktop a better/cheaper/more suitable choice?

For me? No.

At home my MBP is docked hooked up to a display and several peripherals. Sometimes I move it to the living room to work there.
Then I grab it... and take it to work at my workplace. Don't wanna juggle two computers. Having an exact duplicate of files and apps is just not my thing. At work... I dock it.

Then like 2-4x a month on average... sometimes a lot more often, I have to take said computer to present at potential customers of ours. Demonstrating a large product database software that likes to eat RAM for breakfast (as it is meant to run on servers... but you cannot bring these to product demonstrations).

So at the end of the day... I need a really powerful computer... with lots of RAM... that is portable. While at the same time... not needing a 10hr battery.