Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 440 posts

Re: Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

#71

Post by s_kilk »

mgkimsal wrote: post #28

Had one for about 10 days, returned it for a variety of factors, but overall, it was a nice machine. But for my workload, I think I'll move to a 2015 if I can get the config I want - should be ~ $1000 cheaper for about 95% of the benefit (some weight, some speed, retina screen, etc). $3700 ($3500 + tax) ended up feeling just a bit too much for the speed/value. Apparently, though, if I wait a bit longer, we might see…

> we might see a 32g model next year?

Wasn't this year supposed to be when 32GB landed?

Re: Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

#72

Post by latortuga »

detaro wrote: post #5

The URL should be changed to http://www.consumerreports.org/laptops/macbook-pros-fail-to-... , since this only reports on that.

Honestly, the reporting in TFA is insightful, pointing out that Apple got complaints about battery life and instead of addressing them, chose to paper over it. Seems very relevant and, to borrow a phrase, wiggles its eyebrows suggestively toward a troubling trend.

Re: Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

#73

Post by rch »

bpicolo wrote: post #39
sprite wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The new 15 inch max specced is $4,299 + tax in the US.

Ah you're right, I had clicked the top end 13 on accident. That's just nuts. The upgrades are a real scam =/

They've really done their homework though. Price sensitive buyers get to feel frugal for skipping upgrades, while others get to enjoy a premium good. For me it makes sense to max out the options, but just barely.

Re: Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

#74

Post by rayiner »

Saw a 15" in the store the other day. It's the future, just not this particular iteration. The form factor is awesome--my 15" rMBP is like a boat in comparison. Make carrying a 15" as a daily driver much more practical (and the extra screen space is a big step up from 13-14" for getting work done).

The battery life will get fixed in successive iterations, I think. There is a ton more space in there for bigger batteries: https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/cBFfrfQPrPBFgV1s. Compare to how packed the old 15" is: https://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/Jxqp6l2cEQn4olWQ.h....

Re: Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

#75

Post by alberth »

71.8 watt-hour: 2013 13" MacBook Pro [1]

49.2 watt-hour: 2016 13" MacBook Pro Touch [2]

Why are so many people surprised that the battery life went down from ~10 hours down to ~7 hours?

When the physical battery size is only ~70% of the previous model, it's no surprise the new MacBook Pro only gets ~7 hours of battery life.

[1] https://support.apple.com/kb/sp691?locale=en_US

[2] http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs/

Re: Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

#76

Post by jghn »

jsjohnst wrote: post #36
otalp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the fact that they made the keys on the pro much more clicker than the MacBook. The butterfly keys on them seemed unusable for serious typing, though I've only used them in stores, so perhaps it takes getting used to.

The keyboard on the 12" MacBook does take getting used too. Took me about a week, but loved it once I got used to it. My only "complaint" is how noisy it is. When I'm typing fast in a meeting, it's quite noticeable to others.

Agreed on all counts. There are two other things I dislike about typing on my 2016 12" rMB: 1) if I have to make transient use of arrow keys I always mess it up and 2) over long periods of time my hands start hurting from always being pushed up against the sharp edges whereas on my 15" rMBP there are a few inches on each side of my hands.

For the most part though I love that rMB. I wouldn't want to code on it several hours a day but for my general home computing and relatively light coding it is fantastic.

Re: Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

#77

Post by Fnoord »

slantyyz wrote: post #69
mgkimsal wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://mashable.com/2016/11/01/macbook-pro-2017-32-gb/ https://9to5mac.com/2016/10/31/2017-macbook-pro-rumors/ http://www.macrumors.com/2016/10/31/macbooks-2017-price-cuts... "updates" say that "cannonlake" just won't be out, and there's no plans from apple on this, but this was the rumor mill a month ago. I not necessarily ruling any of this out, and we'll see in 6 months.

They can make 32GB with current chipsets but chose not to for battery life. Given the outcry, they can put less efficient RAM in a newer model. The people asking for 32GB aren't newbies and presumably are willing to pay the price in battery life in exchange for the extra RAM. If I were in the market for a new Macbook Pro (I'm not), I'd be willing to make the sacrifice in battery life for the extra RAM, because I woul…

> They can make 32GB with current chipsets but chose not to for battery life.

This is false dichotomy. There are alternatives, parallel decisions.

They could've decided to not sacrifice weight or size for battery power. This'd have made the MBP Pro, not Air like it is now. You used to buy a MBP for several years, so it'd need good battery power. The new MBPs are all less good with battery power, than the 2015 version. They're also so-called "future proof" with USB-C only yet you're gonna need adapters. Furthermore, you can't swap the SSD or the RAM so you're gonna need the amount you plan to use years forward (e.g. 2021). The USB-C move is contradicting to all the other moves. It doesn't add up, and people don't fall for it. That's why there's so much uproar on it.

My theory is that Apple wants the MBP to be more like the iPhone/iPod/iPad: disposable hardware you replace every year or so, for professionals who earn a lot of money in the creative industry. Not programmers, not power users, not people who make an investment for several years.

@ rayiner, hygiene.

Re: Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

#78

Post by rayiner »

alberth wrote: post #75

71.8 watt-hour: 2013 13" MacBook Pro [1] 49.2 watt-hour: 2016 13" MacBook Pro Touch [2] Why are so many people surprised that the battery life went down from ~10 hours down to ~7 hours? When the physical battery size is only ~70% of the previous model, it's no surprise the new MacBook Pro only gets ~7 hours of battery life. [1] https://support.apple.com/kb/sp691?locale=en_US [2] http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs…

The really disconcerting thing here is that this is the first macbook in 10 years to be a major regression on key points. Since the first Intel macbook, Apple has focused on core competencies: good touchpad, good screen, good battery life. Every generation got consistently better on those dimensions. PC vendors will do stuff like ship a great touchpad one generation and a shit one the next, but you could generally count on each successive Apple laptop to meet or beat its predecessor on those core metrics.

Re: Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

#79

Post by toyg »

s_kilk wrote: post #71
mgkimsal wrote: post #28

Had one for about 10 days, returned it for a variety of factors, but overall, it was a nice machine. But for my workload, I think I'll move to a 2015 if I can get the config I want - should be ~ $1000 cheaper for about 95% of the benefit (some weight, some speed, retina screen, etc). $3700 ($3500 + tax) ended up feeling just a bit too much for the speed/value. Apparently, though, if I wait a bit longer, we might see…

> we might see a 32g model next year? Wasn't this year supposed to be when 32GB landed?

And it would have landed, if Apple had not decided to arbitrarily shrink their batteries, hence requiring low-power options for their components (in this case, RAM) that are not available yet.

Re: Newest MacBook Pro is the first MacBook not recommended by Consumer Reports

#80

Post by Keyframe »

I went to a store in order to try one out. I wanted what was in 15" model in a 13" form, but ok - I went out to at least check out the 15" model. Even though I knew it was too big for my needs. What really surprised me was how bad the keyboard was on new models. What's up with that? It feels like a cheap plastic mockup of a keyboard. That turned me off completely. I hope they get their act together within a year and push out new models which are better. I'd buy a 13" version if it had what 15" has inside, but it doesn't. Other laptops look like crap too. Razer (14) is either unavailable in Europe or reading about it and looking at videos makes it look like not suitable for anything - bad battery life and crappy vents (makes for screaming noise and heat down the road). Shame, what would otherwise be a great laptop. Microsoft's Book thing is also semi-unavailable, can't buy it (asked Microsoft, they've said it's not really supported (retail) in Europe - wtf?), with Dell I had nothing but bad experiences so it's a no-go from the start... situation is kind of dire.
Post reply on HN