Sounds like I have to skip this year's MBP as well. Better to look for other manufacturers' products. If they drop Intel CPU in 2020, we will probably not be able to install Windows and Linux natively in addition to Mac OS.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Waiting for the 2018 MBP
- Thread starter benface
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sounds like I have to skip this year's MBP as well. Better to look for other manufacturers' products. If they drop Intel CPU in 2020, we will probably not be able to install Windows and Linux natively in addition to Mac OS.
I don't know from which alternate reality you are taking this information, but its not really how it was. Apple's two line of products were 1) consumer — cheaper, less powerful, more mainstream components and 2) prosumer — expensive, better components. At some point the consumer-level MacBook Air has replaced the (plastic consumer-level) MacBook 13". Then we got the new 12" MacBook which is about to replace the MacBook Air.
As to the MacBook Pro — it was always slimmer and lighter than its category average, since that was always its design goal. It didn't stop it from having very good CPUs (and an okdish, but mid-range at best GPU). So Apples obsession with thin and light is kind of old news — the've been doing it for decades. The MacBook Pro was never more powerful (in relative terms) than now. Its still fastest consumer-level CPUs and a decent mid-range GPU. I really don't understand where this "prioritizing form over function" suddenly comes from. Just because its thinner? Sorry, that is just silly. Judge a laptop by its specs and capabilities, not by how thin it is.
P.S. Here is the original press release from the first ever MacBook Pro introduction in 2006: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2006/01/10Apple-Introduces-MacBook-Pro/
Count how many times the word "thin" is used
[doublepost=1524580224][/doublepost]
The choice is more or less the same as last year or the year before it or the three years before it. As some folks were discussing in one of these threads, the competition is catching up. Not long time ago, Apple was the only maker of premium laptops, everyone else just went as cheap as possible. Now, Dell, Microsoft and the others are getting more confident in the premium segment as well. Still, the tradeoffs between the XPS and the MacBook Pro are the same as for the last few years — the first has slightly faster GPU and is cheaper, the second is lighter and has longer battery runtime.
All true yet if it’s a Pro machine at a $3,000 ish price point with Touch Bar. It’s gotta have
- 120hz Pro motion Display like the iPad Pros and HDR for watching movies
- a 6 Core Intel 8750H
- I won’t even ask for DDR4 it’s been 2 years it’s not gonna happen.
- some type of dedicated AMD GPU
- Haptic TouchBar
I’ll give Apple a lot of leeway even dealing with DDR3 RAM at 1600mhz when DDR4 2666mhz is available.
It’s a matter of Value now when a 15” MBP is Not Pro when for $2,000 not $3,000 I can have an
MSI GS65 with a Intel 6 Core 8750H 144hz Display GTX 1070 8GB GDDR5 VRAM 16GB DDR4. And stylish all black metal chassis.
Or a Asus Zephyrus M with similar specs and GSYNC Display.
Many people would opt for Higher Performance. And less battery life IMO.
I agree! and as Apple uses integrated graphics most of the time, a decent gpu would not hurt battery life.
The GS65 has a 82 watt/hour and the Macbook pro 15 has a 72 watt/hour battery so you can do battery/light and powerful.
Apple should release a laptop with all of those above and use their magic (like reduce the 120hz to 60hz/use integrated graphics/whatever) to mantain battery life.
In this day and age we CAN have it all. No need for wimpy processors/or GPU's.
Furthermore, apple has the best engineers in the world, the most money. Surely it can create an heat dissipation solution at least has good as anyone...
Come on Apple!
How about the above with no TB and a little cheaper because of it?
And why wouldn’t Apple now move to DDR4? I’m just curious as to why they wouldn’t do it.
Beating a dead horse here... but ... still RAM. MBPs always maxxed out at what the CPU enabled... and used NON-LP RAM w/o any issues. HERE the form over function shows. They DON'T reach that limit any longer (64GB) because they insist on LPDDR3 RAM. Also because they shrunk the battery. This IS a case of form over function. Hands down!I don't know from which alternate reality you are taking this information, but its not really how it was. Apple's two line of products were 1) consumer — cheaper, less powerful, more mainstream components and 2) prosumer — expensive, better components. At some point the consumer-level MacBook Air has replaced the (plastic consumer-level) MacBook 13". Then we got the new 12" MacBook which is about to replace the MacBook Air.
As to the MacBook Pro — it was always slimmer and lighter than its category average, since that was always its design goal. It didn't stop it from having very good CPUs (and an okdish, but mid-range at best GPU). So Apples obsession with thin and light is kind of old news — the've been doing it for decades. The MacBook Pro was never more powerful (in relative terms) than now. Its still fastest consumer-level CPUs and a decent mid-range GPU. I really don't understand where this "prioritizing form over function" suddenly comes from. Just because its thinner? Sorry, that is just silly. Judge a laptop by its specs and capabilities, not by how thin it is.
P.S. Here is the original press release from the first ever MacBook Pro introduction in 2006: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2006/01/10Apple-Introduces-MacBook-Pro/
Count how many times the word "thin" is used
[doublepost=1524580224][/doublepost]
The choice is more or less the same as last year or the year before it or the three years before it. As some folks were discussing in one of these threads, the competition is catching up. Not long time ago, Apple was the only maker of premium laptops, everyone else just went as cheap as possible. Now, Dell, Microsoft and the others are getting more confident in the premium segment as well. Still, the tradeoffs between the XPS and the MacBook Pro are the same as for the last few years — the first has slightly faster GPU and is cheaper, the second is lighter and has longer battery runtime.
But then again... about the CPUs and GPUs I didn't complain... and no one else here really either. Except that Apple is sometimes slower adopting them... but... okay...
Battery life... period. Of course, notebooks like Gigagyte Aero X are putting in 97wh batteries and staying at the 4 lb mark to get ~7-8 hr battery Life. Apple has decided they'd rather go lighter and thinner (and theoretically with better battery life), and thus DDR3. I think they should do both, as do many on this forum - giving us options... but they don't, and historically haven't. So, are unlikely to do so now. I'd love to be proven wrong, and would buy an Aero-specced device that ran Mac OS right this second.
I don't think its that people are opposed to the idea specifically, just that its currently unrealistic for 76-100w of power being able to be transmitted (especially unfeasible to do it in a safe way).
Maybe one day we'll get there, but its several years a way easily.
I could see this happening for the iPad Pro 2018 and then the mythical ARM MacBook, which will both likely have low power requirements.
As you say, this will likely be a while off for a MBP whether it be ARM or Intel powered.
I don't know from which alternate reality you are taking this information, but its not really how it was. Apple's two line of products were 1) consumer — cheaper, less powerful, more mainstream components and 2) prosumer — expensive, better components. At some point the consumer-level MacBook Air has replaced the (plastic consumer-level) MacBook 13". Then we got the new 12" MacBook which is about to replace the MacBook Air.
As to the MacBook Pro — it was always slimmer and lighter than its category average, since that was always its design goal. It didn't stop it from having very good CPUs (and an okdish, but mid-range at best GPU). So Apples obsession with thin and light is kind of old news — the've been doing it for decades. The MacBook Pro was never more powerful (in relative terms) than now. Its still fastest consumer-level CPUs and a decent mid-range GPU. I really don't understand where this "prioritizing form over function" suddenly comes from. Just because its thinner? Sorry, that is just silly. Judge a laptop by its specs and capabilities, not by how thin it is.
P.S. Here is the original press release from the first ever MacBook Pro introduction in 2006: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2006/01/10Apple-Introduces-MacBook-Pro/
Count how many times the word "thin" is used
[doublepost=1524580224][/doublepost]
The choice is more or less the same as last year or the year before it or the three years before it. As some folks were discussing in one of these threads, the competition is catching up. Not long time ago, Apple was the only maker of premium laptops, everyone else just went as cheap as possible. Now, Dell, Microsoft and the others are getting more confident in the premium segment as well. Still, the tradeoffs between the XPS and the MacBook Pro are the same as for the last few years — the first has slightly faster GPU and is cheaper, the second is lighter and has longer battery runtime.
Great post. When will people take the blinkers off and realise the current machine is typical of all the laptops previously. The tech has just improved allowing it to go slimmer.
I understand the argument of don’t go slimmer and offer more power, but that is not what Apple does. If you don’t realise this then you will always be disappointed with what is released.
I am afraid you are making it sound simpler than it is. Apple has been using low-voltage DDR3 since at least 2012 in an effort to increase overall mixed battery life. Also, the technology has shifted a bit. With current amounts of RAM, idle power usage is not a factor that can be ignored — it can make up almost 50% of laptops idle power draw. Note that Apple is not alone in this — other manufacturers also use LPDDR3.
Furthermore, I don't really understand why its form over function. LPDDR3 is an advanced premium RAM thats more expensive for Apple to source and use compared DDR4. They even go out of their way to use a variant that offers competitive performance to DDR4 (although there is no doubt that DDR4, especially in the newer variants, is faster). The only lacking function as I can see it is the possibility of fitting 32GB. And given that this is a rather marginal spec that is only interesting for a small group of users... well, my point should be clear.
I can't find it anymore, but I have posted a graph at some point where I extrapolated battery lifetimes of 2015 and 2017 laptops based on power draw measurements taken by notebook check. They show that expected battery life is practically identical for all ratios of heavy to light usage. I don't have any doubt that battery capacity is very carefully designed to match the previous generation. So again I don't understand why it is form over function — they tried to preserve the function while improving on the form. Sure, for some users the battery life went down. For some, it went up. Overall, its a more portable laptop with the same hardware and the same battery life.
Furthermore, I did some more calculations (again, based on power draws of components I could find) and if I remember correctly, if Apple had kept the 99Wh battery and used DDR4, the expected battery life would have been same or slightly lower. Since DDR4 in 2016 didn't offer any performance advantage, and the only benefit would have been the possibility of using a 32GB config, I'd say that Apple went with a choice that benefited more of its customer base. From the performance perspective, its hardly less functional then alternatives, from the portability perspective its certainly more functional — those 250 gramm doesn't sound like a lot, but the reduced footprint makes a very large practical difference. For instance, I can now use backpacks and messenger bags half the size I needed for my old 15" retina... since the new laptop fits into a bag designed for thin 13" and 12" models.
Other manufacturers use it for ultrabook types (xps13).
For more powerful machines (xps 15 / precision 5520/7x20) DDR4 is used. And its battery life is fine.
The obsession to make it thin has meant the 16gb limit.
It may be fine for many tasks. Just not a good option for more demanding work.
As you said... it wouldn't really have changed battery life. Exactly.
Plus... I don't give a DAMN about IDLE battery consumption. Idk about you or others here... but I get my computer to NOT sit idly... but to get work done. While I don't shut down my machine... it can simply go to sleep (with RAM active) or if it is a rather extended time deep sleep aka hibernation.
If I knew I wouldn't be using my machine for... Idk... a week (which is not happening... just theoretically) I'd just shut it down...
the machine is not made for more demanding work.......... it is fine for many tasks.
You also don’t give a damn about how computers work. Your machine is always idle to some degree. First off, there’s no way you saturate your RAM every moment when you think you’re getting work done. Just powering unused RAM sucks up power, even the parts not in active use. More importantly though, “idle” battery power is used to power your RAM while your Mac is sleeping — how do you think it remembers what you were doing when it wakes up? So during that time it’s sucking up 50% (or whatever) more power.
Somehow I doubt it. If that would be the case, you'd be getting 60-90 minutes of battery runtime tops, no matter what machine you use. "Idle" does not mean "sitting around at the desk without purpose", its a well-defined technical term. Writing some emails or working in an office suite? Well, your computer spends 95% of that time idle. Researching something on the internet? Still most of the time idle (unless you are on one of those sites that run a cryptocurrency miner in the background). Writing some code? Same here. Working with Photoshop? Even here most of the time the machine spends idle, unless you are chaining long-running demanding effects every time the previous is done. Your computer spends most of the time waiting for you to do something, even if you are doing something constantly. How quick can you type for example? For your computer, the times between keystrokes are like millennia — and any competent modern OS will all but turn off processing units for that time.
A good estimate for this is the CPU load indicator (e.g. activity monitor). For example, as I am writing this, my activity monitor shows the CPU at 95-97% idle. Which means that about that portion of time the CPU spends basically switched off.
[doublepost=1524646472][/doublepost]
Still, their battery life is worse then the 15" MBP, even despite bigger battery. And that is the 16GB version. I still haven't seen any tests for the 32GB version, but extrapolating from power draw measurements, you can easily shave an additional hour of usable time from that.
Again, the choice was either to keep the old form factor and please the very small group of users who have a real case for 32GB, or to limit the RAM to 16GB and improve the mobility (while retaining all other performance characteristics). I have no doubt that the second options benefits more users, which I think is also reflected in the sales performance of Apple laptops in the last two years.
Originally DDR4 was not supported by the Skylake Mobile Chipset or some Apple excuse.
Then came Kaby Lake And no DDR4 because there’s no Low Power Version Of DDR4
Now it’s 2018 and I’m buying a new 6 Core MBP And I look into Mobile DDR4 RAM and it uses less power than DDR3
Also this is debunked by the Dell XPS 13 Using DDR4 Having a smaller battery and getting 10+ hours of battery life.
So there’s No scientific performance reason for Apple to keep using DDR3
But there is a financial one.
And I give up Apple clearly doesn’t want to use DDR4 because of Price. RAM is Very expensive and Apple bought like 100 Million Dollars worth of DDR3 in bulk price So Until they use up all that old DDR3 RAM and buy DDR4 in Bulk they will keep using DDR3 which sucks for us.
That is one of selling points of DDR4 and it is widely known. I don't understand what it has to do with the discussion at hand though. MacBook Pro doesn't use DDR3.
Dell XPS 13 is using LPDDR3, not DDR4. It also uses a 15W CPU...
True. That is why they are using LPDDR3, which is much more energy-efficient than DDR3 and also more energy-efficient than DDR4 in some scenarios.
LPDDR3 is much more expensive than DDR4. What you are saying is utter nonsense. Using DDR4 would save them a lot of money.
P.S. See this summary https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/5dimal/lpddr3_vs_ddr4_power_usage/ for a discussion. And please educate yourself instead of repeating two year old misconceptions. This has been long discussed, explained and straightened out.
Last edited:
For a little bit of a change of subject or back to guessing when a new Pro will grace us with its presence, BestBuy has been having some big sales over the past month. I know there have been discounts before, but seeing $300-400 off usually only happens closer to a new device. Granted these sales are short lived, not going on for weeks, but I think moving old inventory is key right now.
We won't find out until they unveil the new model.
Jony Ive "heard our complaints".
Which may mean literally everything, from making it thinner to colouring it white.