Why I think removing the "time remaining" indicator was a bad idea on apples part.

[thesaint024]

I honestly don't care either way if it's there or not.. I can see where some will be upset that it's been removed and I see where some will theorize / speculate as to why it was removed and the timing of it...

If Apple didn't want it there then why was it even included? Apple could have removed it before the new machines even shipped..

They clearly underestimated how the volatility would lead to misinformation. Again, an afterthought when they are releasing a completely redesigned MBP with all the other complications/issues going on. They had more faith in MBP buyers usage of the metric? A little information is clearly more dangerous than no information in the wrong hands.

 

[jerryk]

Anyway, to me, the time remaining is like the "miles left" on your car before it runs out of gas. Of course, it is not accurate, but if you continue driving at the same speed, it is somewhat accurate. If you are using your computer, and it says there are 2 hours remaining, and you do not change what you are doing, there should BE two hours remaining. Of course it is rare that we use the same amount of power constantly, so there is some variation.

The problem is the variation in power consumption based on tasks in a computer is huge, nonlinear, and changes without users realize it.

For example, assume you are browsing the web and the system says there are 2 hours remaining. In next ten minutes you navigate to a few pages, fill in a form, and read some post. And when you check the system says 1 hour of power remaining. And the system is likely accurate.

This is because the pages you visited in the last few minutes had javascript that was watching keypresses to provide help or completion on entries on a form, and opened network connections as you moved from field to field to validating entries against a database. The pages might also have displayed a bit of 2 or 3 videos in the corner. These started up the GPU to process the newly streamed content, which required the radio to brought out of idle state.

But humans like linearity and assume they were "doing the same thing as before" so that last ten minutes should have no more impact on battery life than the previous ten minutes.

 

[AdonisSMU]

I think Apple should've kept it no matter how inaccurate and issued a fix to the accuracy. Right now it just looks like they tried to cover up the issue even if they really did fix the issue behind the scenes.

 

[thesaint024]

I think Apple should've kept it no matter how inaccurate and issued a fix the accuracy. Right not it just looks like they tried to cover up the issue even if they really did fix the issue behind the scenes.

I agree. Would've killed this conspiracy thread before it began. But people would than bitch about it because they'd interpret it differently. I.e. The erroneous 3 hours remaining would very slowly climb back up as they do less intensive tasks. No win situation. No easy way to smooth out a power volatile computer. But given the choices, I am thrilled it's gone.

 

[dilutedq]

The purpose of the announcement is to try to create the impression that the "battery life problems" with the 2016 MBP consist solely of users being idiots and not knowing how the battery life meter works. And I've seen people here advocating that view. But that makes no sense! If that were the case, we'd have seen similar problems with every previous system. We didn't, not even close.

The new machine appears to be failing to meet Apple's claimed performance. This announcement is a distraction from the actual problem.

You are making more out of this than what it is.

Especially now that people seem to think the battery issues are now resolved.

 

[neil1980]

To be honest I miss it already.

Yes its not accurate if you keep swapping what tasks you're doing (how could it possibly be intuit situation?) but if your battery is low and you're doing one thing its great for knowing that you have say 15 mins to get something done... now you have to try and work out how long 7% will last exactly and come up with a number thats even more approximate than it used to give

 

[thesaint024]

To be honest I miss it already.

Yes its not accurate if you keep swapping what tasks you're doing (how could it possibly be intuit situation?) but if your battery is low and you're doing one thing its great for knowing that you have say 15 mins to get something done... now you have to try and work out how long 7% will last exactly and come up with a number thats even more approximate than it used to give

Yeah, it's too bad. I wouldn't mind having it around since I actually know how to read it. Maybe there is/will be some way for "power users" to get it back through some back door method. I just don't want regular joe having it because of the mass hysteria it causes. That being said, I stopped using it for the most part because of the swings. It was just another indicator to use while testing the battery life.

 

[Noerdy]

Yeah, it's too bad. I wouldn't mind having it around since I actually know how to read it. Maybe there is/will be some way for "power users" to get it back through some back door method. I just don't want regular joe having it because of the mass hysteria it causes. That being said, I stopped using it for the most part because of the swings. It was just another indicator to use while testing the battery life.

Its still there in activity monitor, so I guess that blows a hole in the sinister plot thing. Glad apple still kept it, I hope they dont remove it from activity monitor though, THAT would make me really really really mad.

 

[EndlessBuffoonery]

So you are saying because it is misleading it should be removed? Go back to my miles remaining analogy, are you suggesting that car companies should remove the miles remaining from cars just because it is not 100% accurate?

If it is very inaccurate then yes, they should remove it.
[doublepost=1481842816][/doublepost]

I think Apple should've kept it no matter how inaccurate and issued a fix the accuracy. Right not it just looks like they tried to cover up the issue even if they really did fix the issue behind the scenes.

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever read. They should keep it even if it's inaccurate? That's literally the last thing you should do. There's nothing more irresponsible a company can do than provide information/metrics that they know to be wrong.

 

[KirekkusuPT]

his (to me and many others) is just apple admitting that the new MacBook pros do not have all day battery life.

Although this is what it looks like Apple is doing, the truth is that macOS 10.12.2 improoved battery life. I am getting 1-1h30 of extra battery life doing the same stuff. Other users are getting even better results (depends on workflow of course).

I think you will be happy with your purchase. I am, so far. Also a student, and I am all day on the University. I feel no need in bringing a charger with me. I'll even buy a sleeve case so I dont have to carry the huge backpack I have.

 

[therealseebs]

You are making more out of this than what it is.

I don't think so. The timing is pretty suspicious, with it coming right as Apple has a popular model that's been getting a lot of reports of getting much lower actual battery life than Apple's marketing estimates.

Especially now that people seem to think the battery issues are now resolved.

I've seen nothing to suggest that they're any more resolved now than they were when the first few people said "yeah, I got way shorter battery life the first day or so, but then it improved".

This was a feature people liked, and used. It got taken away for a reason that makes no sense, at a time when people had been complaining about a similar but fundamentally different thing. That looks bad to me.

 

[ipponrg]

To the OP, FWIW, I have never enabled the time remaining feature of the battery on any of my home/work MBPs due to time discrepancies as other users have indicated. That's how much value it adds to my workflow. I only care about the percentage. Less than 20% = find an outlet soon

 

[Noerdy]

To the OP, FWIW, I have never enabled the time remaining feature of the battery on any of my home/work MBPs due to time discrepancies as other users have indicated. That's how much value it adds to my workflow. I only care about the percentage. Less than 20% = find an outlet soon

Thanks. This thread has helped me restore a lot of confidence in apple.

 

[thesaint024]

I don't think so. The timing is pretty suspicious, with it coming right as Apple has a popular model that's been getting a lot of reports of getting much lower actual battery life than Apple's marketing estimates.



I've seen nothing to suggest that they're any more resolved now than they were when the first few people said "yeah, I got way shorter battery life the first day or so, but then it improved".

This was a feature people liked, and used. It got taken away for a reason that makes no sense, at a time when people had been complaining about a similar but fundamentally different thing. That looks bad to me.

I thought you and everyone you know already returned their crappy MBP 16's? Why are you still commenting on battery life and how much it sucks? All of the reasons people stated like "it's wrong" make no sense to you and sound suspicious? I'm pretty sure Tim Cook killed Kennedy too.

 

[dilutedq]

I don't think so. The timing is pretty suspicious, with it coming right as Apple has a popular model that's been getting a lot of reports of getting much lower actual battery life than Apple's marketing estimates.



I've seen nothing to suggest that they're any more resolved now than they were when the first few people said "yeah, I got way shorter battery life the first day or so, but then it improved".

This was a feature people liked, and used. It got taken away for a reason that makes no sense, at a time when people had been complaining about a similar but fundamentally different thing. That looks bad to me.

"a lot of reports" that happens with every release and you have no way of quantifying "a lot of reports". You are just saying that because of noise on the forums but that doesn't mean there is in fact an issue.

 

[therealseebs]

"a lot of reports" that happens with every release and you have no way of quantifying "a lot of reports". You are just saying that because of noise on the forums but that doesn't mean there is in fact an issue.

I have seen occasional complaints previously. On the 2016s, I've seen lots. I don't think it's just a coincidence. Maybe it is, but I don't see you presenting any concrete evidence.

What's your explanation for why the battery life estimate which has been fine for the entire lifespan of MacOS X suddenly needed to go right now in a hurry? Because removing a feature is usually a Big Deal for an operating system, and basically never done outside of a significant OS revision.

 

[dilutedq]

I have seen occasional complaints previously. On the 2016s, I've seen lots. I don't think it's just a coincidence. Maybe it is, but I don't see you presenting any concrete evidence.

What's your explanation for why the battery life estimate which has been fine for the entire lifespan of MacOS X suddenly needed to go right now in a hurry? Because removing a feature is usually a Big Deal for an operating system, and basically never done outside of a significant OS revision.

You are the one making a claim. It's on YOU to show evidence to support your claim. You have nothing to provide there is a difference between the occasional and the "lots" other than it's how you feel.

To your second point they explained why and it's obvious why. It wasn't before and isn't now an accurate representation of your battery life. There is no logical link. Removing that doesn't remove the ability to see the same stat in Activity monitor or other applications. It doesn't change your battery life. So your assertion that it is linked and proves that it's a problem is flawed and ignorant.

 

[Ethosik]

I do not think people realize how ad-heavy the web has become. I could sit on a website I made that has no ads and get 10 hours on my 2013 rMBP. I could sit on the Stardew Valley Wiki website that is filled with ads and get only 2 hours of battery life, and my fans go crazy too.

The "browsing" argument is not good in this day. What websites? Any ads? Heavy javascript?
[doublepost=1482258360][/doublepost]

Exactly. It's a bit disappointing that they are not so powerful, but we cannot blame apple for calling it pro.

They are certainly more powerful than a Surface "Pro"

 

[democracyrules]

I think Apple should've kept it no matter how inaccurate and issued a fix to the accuracy. Right now it just looks like they tried to cover up the issue even if they really did fix the issue behind the scenes.

Agree with the above comment. Any cover-up activities are red flag for something that is not right, is happening.

 

[clangers23]

It's a very defensive move by Apple that doesn't prevent the conclusion that many users are seeing much lower battery run times because Apple shrank the size of the battery so drastically. A 25%-34% battery size reduction is not going to be offset by a new generation of hardware or software optimisation.

The time remaining indicator is a useful 'estimate' of the proportion of battery remaining, nothing more. The bottom line is this wouldn't be a problem if users weren't noticing significantly reduced battery times with their own eyes. As a species we're not bad at time perception so instinctively notice when something is repeatedly lasting less than before.

 

[No. 44]

These new MBP's utilize CPU's and other hardware that speed up and slow down. The indicators are volatile as are the computers themselves. What good does it do to give someone who doesn't understand these things a time indicator. If anything, it's a disservice if they actually go by it and find that they run out of battery sooner. Yes, the indicator is wrong both ways.

Past MBP's did not have this issue to this degree. They weren't "efficiency", multi-speed chips like these. Therefore the algorithm worked more accurately. [...]

You may be right, but if this is in fact the case, Apple is taking away a feature which works fine for everyone who doesn't have a 2016 model. Why should the owners of the earlier models be forced to do without it?

 

[Ethosik]

You may be right, but if this is in fact the case, Apple is taking away a feature which works fine for everyone who doesn't have a 2016 model. Why should the owners of the earlier models be forced to do without it?

I thought it was still in the Activity Monitor?

 

[thesaint024]

You may be right, but if this is in fact the case, Apple is taking away a feature which works fine for everyone who doesn't have a 2016 model. Why should the owners of the earlier models be forced to do without it?

Good point. Didn't even think about the others. I was just in "not outrageous for 16" mode. Was a little sensitive to people overreacting about a conspiracy.

 

[ihatetoregister]

Your iPhone doesn't have time remaining. Apple is just trying to unify the experience.

I swear you guys are the worst.

 

[therealseebs]

You are the one making a claim. It's on YOU to show evidence to support your claim. You have nothing to provide there is a difference between the occasional and the "lots" other than it's how you feel.

If you're committed enough to ignoring the difference in the quantity of complaints that you'd need "evidence", I am pretty sure that we could present a signed listing of the complaints, notarized by God, and you still wouldn't believe it, so why should I bother?

To your second point they explained why and it's obvious why. It wasn't before and isn't now an accurate representation of your battery life. There is no logical link.

I've been using it for a decade, and it's been quite good at predicting battery life under normal circumstances, and has worked as well as every other battery life estimate. Which is to say, it will obviously fail if you change workloads a lot, but that's fine. It still works.

But the key thing here is: "It wasn't before". So why didn't they take it out at any time during the previous decade? Why did that suddenly become a problem that required correction now, when it wasn't a problem at all in the past?

For years, Apple's fans (me among them) said "of course it's not perfect, it's an estimate, but if you know how estimates work, it's very useful". Now they take it out, and suddenly it was always awful and was never good, and they absolutely made things better by taking it out now. But they shouldn't have removed it ten years ago, or any time between then and now.