Waiting for the 2018 MBP

[The Reasonable One]

If your demands require that you own such a machine, then your income would give you the opportunity to upgrade to a newer MacBook Pro regularly. Thats another thing I'm noticing from a lot of users here. You want to 'future proof' your machine based on bang for buck. Yet, we are predicting this will work based on how developers are building an application you want to run 5 or 6 years from now.

You say, if you have a machine that can accommodate 32 GBs of RAM today, it will set you up to run those 3D modeling apps you will be running 5 or 6 years from. But suppose that same 3D modeling app 5 years from now might actually require 64 GBs of RAM? Your 32 GB config will still be obselete.

Right now, I am running Adobe Photoshop CS6 on my 8 GB 2015 and I see devs demoing the latest versions of Adobe CC on what looks like like 2012 to 2015 MacBook Pros.

Again, my point was not to say, there doesn't need to be a be a 32 GB machine, but at the same time, Apple seems to know their future enough not be producing such machines right now. I'm sure the developers of those same 3D apps are working within the same envelope. Also, a notebook will never be able to replace what a desktop computer can do, thats why the iMac Pro and future modular Mac Pro exists.

The problem I'm sensing from this thread is, many want to be that metrosexual hipster at Star Bucks pushing pixels.
[doublepost=1527000736][/doublepost]
Again, your point falls of the rails because you want 32 GBs of RAM just because and the low end points: future proofing and bang for buck. Its the metrosexual hipster at star bucks mentality thats getting the best of you.

You believe having a machine with 32 GBs of RAM will make you look and feel professional.

You are mostly right imo. While I definitely agree that 32 may be overkill right now I’ve hit the 16 gb wih just photoshop open and a bunch of tabs or at least come really close. I’m usually at 9 GB just doing mostly nothing. All my point is is that macOS is great at memory management but it is very RAM hungry if you let it be. I haven’t taken operating systems yet but there must be a performance benefit of this or they wouldn’t use that much. Also I commend you for sticking with 8GB of RAM for so long but I know that before Apple randomly decided to give me a free upgrade to 16 GB of ram I was pushing the max of 8GB all the time and a foolish younger me downloaded those Ram clearer apps from the App Store to try and gain some free memory. Of course they were useless programs but my point is that I was driven to trying them against my better judgement so I’m sure 32 GB could soon be needed. I had 4 gb in 09 then 8 in 2012 which became 16 in 2015 ( thank god ). RAM Needs keep moving up. And yes I’m currently using a 4GB MacBook Air but it’s painful and I fear 16GB will be the 8 GB 2 years from now. And yah if I was working I could afford it but he money I’m getting from my internship I’m investing in my future so I want my computer to last. Gpu power doesn’t bother me as I have an eGPU from when I bought then returned my 2016 but Ram is not replaceable so I want be best I can get. If apple doesn’t offer it then phooey I’ll still choose a 2018 mbp. Not a dealbreaker for my personally but would rather have more than less even if I have to pay for it.

TL;DR you’re right. It’s not necessary but it could be beneficial in regular tasks eventually so I want it.
[doublepost=1527149365][/doublepost]

I didn't say a 4.5 pound laptop was prohibitively heavy. But after going from my mid-2010 13" MB to the current 13" there is just no way I would ever go back. I mean, are you kidding me? I think most consumers feel the same way. Again, most of us just don't need the processing power on the go that a minority of you seem to need. It's just that what is a minority opinion looks like a majority on this thread.

A top of the line MBP 15" can do a heck of a lot, and for those rare instances that it can't, that's what a desktop is for. The notebook is primarily for portable, on-the-go use. If you can't afford both a notebook and a desktop, that's another issue.

Basically, judging by the complaints in this thread, it looks like the very high-power users want to ruin Apple notebooks for the rest of us. Most of us don't want bigger, heavier, fatter, clunkier notebooks, even if they are more powerful. Maybe Apple should build such a notebook for you guys, but it should not intrude on the current MBP form factor, which works great for the rest of us. Despite the fact that the new MBPs have gotten so much bad press because of the keyboard, sales for Apple notebooks have gone up, not down: "But with notebook sales climbing, Apple is expected to increase its own market share to 10.4% next year, enough to retain its #4 slot and edge a little closer to third-placed Dell, at 15.2% in 2017 and forecast to hit 15.6% this year." Now I don't see a breakdown along MB, MBA, and MBP lines, so it may very well be that the new MB/Ps are a huge flop and the increase in market share is due entirely to the Air, but that is hard to believe.

And, in any case, with Intel 8th gen U-series chips now on the market, quad core should soon be the new standard for MBPs. Shouldn't that in itself address much of the performance complaints while keeping the slim form factor of an Ultrabook?

"I would rather have a great keyboard."

That's a matter of preference. I love the new keyboard, and Apple already started fixing the failure rate with the 2017 version. Numbers that I previously posted back up that claim.

Apparently, Apple is doing something right. It is number 4 on the Fortune 500 list:

View attachment 762573




I'd like to see ProMotion on the MBPs as well. In fact, I hope it becomes the new Apple standard. But maybe they should skip OLED and go straight to MicroLED which has all of the benefits of OLED but none of the big drawbacks.



1. The 12" MB should be the Air. The current 13" MBP base model, which is the one I have and am absolutely loving, should be the MB. The Pro moniker should be reserved for anything above that. The problem with the 12" becoming the new Air is of course the current Air and it being the only Apple notebook that retains the old-style keyboard that a lot of people like. But really "Air" does not make sense for that model anymore when we have the 12" MBs and new MBPs that are so slim and light.

2. I personally have nothing against Apple introducing a 32GB RAM upgrade, but there are certain reasons why they don't do it and why some people argue they don't need to. You can read about it here:

https://www.zdnet.com/article/do-you-need-32gb-of-ram/

and here

https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-macbook-pros-dont-need-32gb-of-ram/

3. I'm not sure whether this statement ("in the past that hasn't come with the same performance trade offs that we are seeing now") is true.





The Razer is a gaming laptop that uses H-series Intel processors. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think all MBPs run on U-series chips? What killed the 13" Razer for me is the aspect ratio. Too wide, not enough vertical space for scrolling.

Of course there ar trade offs for the ram. I just think that the design should have been slightly thicker as the old design wasn’t super heavy and accommodated the option. Yah they can’t do it in this form factor but some people want it so I wish it was the case. Not a dealbreaker though so I can live without it. Just wish I had it kind of like I wish I had a GTX 1080 Ti in my notebook like I have in my desktop but it’s not feasible given the size constraints. I’m just basically wishing that physics didn’t have to be so mean basically.
[doublepost=1527149579][/doublepost]

So, what feature changes other than your typical RAM and processor upgrades will Apple be making? You think they might go back to a smaller touch pad?

I really hope they go small touchpad. I can’t stand the big one unless they get better palm rejection.
[doublepost=1527149845][/doublepost]

I have read that the support is pretty bad. Could you provide some more info on what was bad for you?
[doublepost=1527017241][/doublepost]

Minor add but I would include DP 1.4 as a possible add to the TB3 specs, more of a background upgrade

Oh god don’t get me started on Razer support.

They are evil. Plain and simple.

You have to email them to request a refund. So I did on my Razer core eGPU after I found out i wasn’t keeping my 2026 mbp as that was he only reason I bought one. Razer bounces me through 15 emails saying “are you sure you want to return it” and then when I was still talking to them about returning the eGPU they said sorry your return window has expired. Please come again. (Essentially). I sent them a note saying f u and he like and never heard a response. So now I own an eGPU. Lucky me macOS no includes support for it and I have a spare 1070 from my gaming desktop after I upgraded.
[doublepost=1527150364][/doublepost]

I guess I don’t think it is irrational to worry about the keyboard. Sorry that so many feel that way. I guess no one just wants to be the unlucky %, and it seems like even though the % is so Low, everyone knows someone with that problem, in my limited Friend circle, which is an issue for me.

It’s not so much an overall reliability issue I Guess, if it were no one would be here and we would choose a competitor product, we all just want what we pay for in a way and what we’ve come to trust Apple for in so many ways.

I thought we were able to express an opinion, which I did because I saw more people “just” discovering that they weren’t alone today, but apparently not. We’re all just waiting for the MBP and hoping for the best, no? Doesn’t mean we’re discrediting it for what it is, just that we hope that we don’t have to worry about the basics.

Dude I’m with you. Two of my 2026 models malfunctioned in the keyboard. Returned with this in mind for both. But I’m forced to buy the 2018 no matter what as it’s the best option so I’m in your situation. And I’ve been personally burned twice. So I hope this year is different. As long as it’s been improved since 2017 I’ll be happy I guess cuz I don’t expect a better keyboard this year. And everyone saying I’m an isolated case that may be true, but being burned twice definitely makes you wary and I think all of you should be too.

 

[c0ppo]

@The Reasonable One

Those 2026 models you keep talking about... Has Apple switched to their own CPU and GPU? How's the performance? Software support?

 

[PeterJP]

You are mostly right imo. While I definitely agree that 32 may be overkill right now I’ve hit the 16 gb wih just photoshop open and a bunch of tabs or at least come really close. I’m usually at 9 GB just doing mostly nothing. All my point is is that macOS is great at memory management but it is very RAM hungry if you let it be. I haven’t taken operating systems yet but there must be a performance benefit of this or they wouldn’t use that much. Also I commend you for sticking with 8GB of RAM for so long but I know that before Apple randomly decided to give me a free upgrade to 16 GB of ram I was pushing the max of 8GB all the time

I don't understand this at all. I've used plenty of virtual machines (even running win10!) and Lightroom and so on on my late 2013 8/256 13" mbp without any memory issues whatsoever. And my camera is 24MP and I work in raw frequently.

When macOS claims to be using 9gb, that doesn't necessarily mean it' actively using all that memory with no way that it can free any up. There's caching both in the OS as well as in the Adobe apps. While I'm willing to accept that photoshop may be more memory hungry than lightroom, what you describe should be perfectly feasible on 8gb and should remain feasible in 16gb for the next 5 years. Unless you're using a PhaseOne 100mp back? In that case, I would understand.

 

[CodeJoy]

You are mostly right imo. While I definitely agree that 32 may be overkill right now I’ve hit the 16 gb wih just photoshop open and a bunch of tabs or at least come really close. I’m usually at 9 GB just doing mostly nothing. All my point is is that macOS is great at memory management but it is very RAM hungry if you let it be. I haven’t taken operating systems yet but there must be a performance benefit of this or they wouldn’t use that much.

This is a common fallacy, but with modern computers you just can't get anything meaningful from comparing memory like that. If there is RAM available, the OS will use as much as it can for caching, just because it can. In addition, macOS has a very modern memory management system since Mavericks, for example using memory compression for parts of memory that it expects not to be used frequently. All of this means that using "used memory" (which includes the caching for example) is not going to be a meaningful metric. Neither will system specs be immediately comparable between operating systems. 16G of RAM may very well get you further on one system than on another.

The real metric you should be interested in is how much work you can do while still running the computer at full speed. And when you hit the memory limit, how much the slowdown actually is.

Now there are of course workloads that have a working set that is larger than 16G, and then you probably need more no matter what you do. But I would suggest that for most it's harder than you might expect to reach the point where you see a very significant slowdown due to lack of RAM.

 

[cool11]

Once again I read 'supportive' opinions, of how well can the mac os cope, even with limitations on hardware...

 

[MrGunnyPT]

I don't understand this at all. I've used plenty of virtual machines (even running win10!) and Lightroom and so on on my late 2013 8/256 13" mbp without any memory issues whatsoever. And my camera is 24MP and I work in raw frequently.

When macOS claims to be using 9gb, that doesn't necessarily mean it' actively using all that memory with no way that it can free any up. There's caching both in the OS as well as in the Adobe apps. While I'm willing to accept that photoshop may be more memory hungry than lightroom, what you describe should be perfectly feasible on 8gb and should remain feasible in 16gb for the next 5 years. Unless you're using a PhaseOne 100mp back? In that case, I would understand.

Have you used Paralels with W10? I'm torn between 8GB and 16GB. I'll be jumping between MacOS and the Paralels VM

 

[CodeJoy]

Once again I read 'supportive' opinions, of how well can the mac os cope, even with limitations on hardware...

That's all your own interpretation. All I see is fallacies pointed out, and better metrics suggested.

 

[PeterJP]

Once again I read 'supportive' opinions, of how well can the mac os cope, even with limitations on hardware...

It has nothing to do with opinions. I'm comparing his workload with mine. His is not as heavy as mine and I can cope with 8gb. Just an objective observation.

If you ask me if we need a 32gb macbook pro, then the answer is yes. I am all in favour of another level of differentiation between the current macbook lines. Preferably in 17", too. But none of that has any relationship with my comparison above.

Have you used Paralels with W10? I'm torn between 8GB and 16GB. I'll be jumping between MacOS and the Paralels VM

No, I don't use Parallels, sorry. It should be at most just as heavy as a full VM, possibly slightly less so. But mind you: I used my Win10 VM only to test the look-n-feel of a website in IE & Edge. 4gb is plenty then. If you'll be running something more substantial, 16gb is better.

 

[maflynn]

Have you used Paralels with W10? I'm torn between 8GB and 16GB. I'll be jumping between MacOS and the Paralels VM

If you're using VMs, regardless of the VM manager, I'd opt for 16GB.

 

[MrGunnyPT]

If you're using VMs, regardless of the VM manager, I'd opt for 16GB.

Hopefully 256GB will be base storage this year.

 

[maflynn]

Hopefully 256GB will be base storage this year.

It is for the 15", but it is surprising that its the base option for the 13" model. With that said, I have a surfacebook with 128GB and thanks to cloud storage, I'm able to live within the confines, but I'm not using the laptop other then remote access and surfing.

 

[CodeJoy]

Hopefully 256GB will be base storage this year.

This I don't quite get. Why does it bother people that there is a 128G option? They should lower the prices for all storage options, but how is it a problem that options are available that you don't use?

 

[MrGunnyPT]

This I don't quite get. Why does it bother people that there is a 128G option? They should lower the prices for all storage options, but how is it a problem that options are available that you don't use?

128GB should just be for the entry device such as the Air not 1600$ machines.

 

[Loge]

Have you used Paralels with W10? I'm torn between 8GB and 16GB. I'll be jumping between MacOS and the Paralels VM

I think 16GB definitely if you want to run parallels.

I use Parallels with Win10 (mainly to run Visual Studio 2017). I give the VM 8GB, works fine, haven't tried it with less; but it really depends what you are intending to do with Windows.

 

[MrGunnyPT]

I think 16GB definitely if you want to run parallels.

I use Parallels with Win10 (mainly to run Visual Studio 2017). I give the VM 8GB, works fine, haven't tried it with less; but it really depends what you are intending to do with Windows.

Could you by any chance give it a go just to see how it performs?

 

[windows12]

Could you by any chance give it a go just to see how it performs?

I have a 2015 13" with 8gb of RAM and I always run Windows 8.1 on parallels with 4gb of ram dedicated to the vm, usually I also have Skype, mail, excel, word and Safari with around 5 tabs open + a special software I need to work running on the vm. Never had an issue with ram, everything runs smoothly. Although activity monitor shows that i'm using around 7.3 gb so I guess this is the limit.

 

[socialwill]

If you're using VMs, regardless of the VM manager, I'd opt for 16GB.

This and a quad core CPU. While the memory is a bigger deal, having the quad CPU just gives both systems the room they would need to work.
[doublepost=1527173278][/doublepost]

It is for the 15", but it is surprising that its the base option for the 13" model. With that said, I have a surfacebook with 128GB and thanks to cloud storage, I'm able to live within the confines, but I'm not using the laptop other then remote access and surfing.

A Surface Book just used for surfing Do you use the tablet detached? We have a few SB in house, but they don't get detached. I think people liked the idea but it has not been used. Really we have them because they have the GPU that is needed.

 

[maflynn]

This and a quad core CPU. While the memory is a bigger deal, having the quad CPU just gives both systems the room they would need to work.
[doublepost=1527173278][/doublepost]

A Surface Book just used for surfing Do you use the tablet detached? We have a few SB in house, but they don't get detached. I think people liked the idea but it has not been used. Really we have them because they have the GPU that is needed.

Its for work as well, so I'll that for remote access. I don't use it often detached, but I have on occasion.

 

[MrGunnyPT]

Let’s hope Apple doesn’t disappoint on the 13”.

Quad Core and 256GB on the Touch Bar model would be great..

Even thou I think the Touch Bar should be available on all “Pro” machines

 

[The Reasonable One]

I need suggestions as to what I should do regarding my MacBook.

I am a college student, and have a 2012 MBP. These last few months have been torture with it, since it was being really unresponsive at times. I finished the semester and did a factory reset, and now it's working better. But it doesn't charge half the time. I went to apple on Sunday with the intent to buy a new one, but they told me to wait at least until WWDC. I have an internship for the summer that involves me doing a lot of photoshop and designing stuff, and I do need a reliable system to get the work done. I have an iPad Pro, and a 2008 or 2009 iMac that works decently. Between the 3, I can get work done, it's just not the ideal set up.

I do plan on waiting until WWDC, but if Apple doesn't announce anything, I am not entirely sure I can wait until September/October. If Apple does release it in June, with the same day ordering, should I buy it then? Or should I wait for education pricing with the headphone deal? I am kind of hoping for a headphone deal where I can get EarPods instead of beats.

Also... I know this is the MacBook Pro thread... but I was reading that theres a possibility of a 13 inch MacBook with the touch bar being announced? Would that be a better option? I've had MacBook Pros for the last 12 years, so not sure if it makes sense to 'downgrade', even though anything would be better than the MacBook I'm using now.

@The Reasonable One

Those 2026 models you keep talking about... Has Apple switched to their own CPU and GPU? How's the performance? Software support?

lol did I really type 2026? I meant 2028
[doublepost=1527181550][/doublepost]

I don't understand this at all. I've used plenty of virtual machines (even running win10!) and Lightroom and so on on my late 2013 8/256 13" mbp without any memory issues whatsoever. And my camera is 24MP and I work in raw frequently.

When macOS claims to be using 9gb, that doesn't necessarily mean it' actively using all that memory with no way that it can free any up. There's caching both in the OS as well as in the Adobe apps. While I'm willing to accept that photoshop may be more memory hungry than lightroom, what you describe should be perfectly feasible on 8gb and should remain feasible in 16gb for the next 5 years. Unless you're using a PhaseOne 100mp back? In that case, I would understand.

Of course it won’t ruin performance to not have it since all the ram is not actively used but I’m sure letting he OS have more is better. I mean running photoshop works fine in 8GB with a bunch of tabs but I’m sure if macOS didn’t want the resources it wouldn’t take them. Not saying it’s a linear relationship between ram and performance but I feel that if the operating system is taking that much ram then it clearly wants it. I mean like 3 GB is just for the system on my computer. But on the 4GB model I’m currently using its far less than 3 GB for system. Macos seems to scale for how much ram is there
[doublepost=1527181833][/doublepost]

This is a common fallacy, but with modern computers you just can't get anything meaningful from comparing memory like that. If there is RAM available, the OS will use as much as it can for caching, just because it can. In addition, macOS has a very modern memory management system since Mavericks, for example using memory compression for parts of memory that it expects not to be used frequently. All of this means that using "used memory" (which includes the caching for example) is not going to be a meaningful metric. Neither will system specs be immediately comparable between operating systems. 16G of RAM may very well get you further on one system than on another.

The real metric you should be interested in is how much work you can do while still running the computer at full speed. And when you hit the memory limit, how much the slowdown actually is.

Now there are of course workloads that have a working set that is larger than 16G, and then you probably need more no matter what you do. But I would suggest that for most it's harder than you might expect to reach the point where you see a very significant slowdown due to lack of RAM.

Agreed but I’ve hit the point where performance hits. At least once or twice and gotten spinning pinweel. Also it might have been my cpu hanging but the ram was also maxed at the time so idk. It was a 2012 rMBP so it’s old and may have been in death cycles but I’ve definitely had this experience. First on 8GB then later on 16GB less frequently but still happened.

Honestly not sure what the issue was or he app used but I know maya seems to need RAM. my 2012 struggled with photoshop sometimes and with maya. Could have been dying components I’m not sure. It’s dead now so I can’t test

 

[CodeJoy]

Agreed but I’ve hit the point where performance hits. At least once or twice and gotten spinning pinweel. Also it might have been my cpu hanging but the ram was also maxed at the time so idk. It was a 2012 rMBP so it’s old and may have been in death cycles but I’ve definitely had this experience. First on 8GB then later on 16GB less frequently but still happened.

Honestly not sure what the issue was or he app used but I know maya seems to need RAM. my 2012 struggled with photoshop sometimes and with maya. Could have been dying components I’m not sure. It’s dead now so I can’t test

Right, you very well may have hit that limit. And it would be reasonable to expect this to happen with increasing frequency over (say) a 5-year lifetime of a MBP. I mean, ideally Apple would offer 16G user upgradeable to 32 or 64 and we wouldn't even need to have this conversation. But they don't, and so we're left to consider our options. It could also be, with current RAM prices, that software developers need to be a bit more clever about memory management, and RAM requirements may not increase quite as much for a while as we're used to. But who knows...

 

[simonmet]

Holy crap, I just saw Razer has a new 15.6” Blade laptop. I was saying a year ago that if they made a 15-16” version of the Blade and cut the fat ugly bezels it could be a MacBook Pro killer. This is the closest I’ve ever seen to a real MBP competitor. It looks to me like a spiritural successor to the 2012-2015 MacBook Pros. It doesn’t hurt that it’s almost a copy of that design as well.

I love OS X but a good deal of my work is in Windows and I much prefer gaming on Windows. I still like and much prefer OS X for many things like UNIX, power efficiency, cool Mac-only apps etc, but I have to say if I was buying a high-end portable laptop right now the Razer looks to have trumped Apple, and I’m glad they did.

Now let’s watch this space. 6-core MacBook Pros will have to come soon at the very least!

https://www.razer.com/gaming-laptops/razer-blade

 

[MrGunnyPT]

Holy crap, I just saw Razer has a new 15.6” Blade laptop. I was saying a year ago that if they made a 15-16” version of the Blade and cut the fat ugly bezels it could be a MacBook Pro killer. This is the closest I’ve ever seen to a real MBP competitor. It looks to me like a spiritural successor to the 2012-2015 MacBook Pros. It doesn’t hurt that it’s almost a copy of that design as well.

I love OS X but a good deal of my work is in Windows and I much prefer gaming on Windows. I still like and much prefer OS X for many things like UNIX, power efficiency, cool Mac-only apps etc, but I have to say if I was buying a high-end portable laptop right now the Razer looks to have trumped Apple, and I’m glad they did.

Now let’s watch this space. 6-core MacBook Pros will have to come soon at the very least!

https://www.razer.com/gaming-laptops/razer-blade

I had the Blade Stealth and having to deal with their support, turned to be the worse 3 months of RMA In my life... But outside of that and the cheap materials they use on the laptop it's not a bad choice

 

[fastasleep]

https://appleinsider.com/articles/1...ent-delays-suggest-new-models-inbound-at-wwdc

 

[meme1255]

https://appleinsider.com/articles/1...ent-delays-suggest-new-models-inbound-at-wwdc

I hope they are right. This machine simply does not suffice