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

191–200 of 440 posts

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

#191

Post by blowski »

tbagman wrote: post #180
pash wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The ports are all Thunderbolt 3 ports, which I believe by definition means they are USB 3.1 ports as well. But some devices out in the world have USB-C ports that are not Thunderbolt 3 compatible. No longer can you tell what sort of devices will work with a port by its physical shape. For instance, I have a Windows desktop machine with a single USB-C port on the back, but it's not a Thunderbolt 3 port. So while I c…

> If you can plug it in, it will work Unfortunately, this hasn't been my experience. As an example, I have a display-port-based Apple cinema display, and I bought this adapter to try to connect it to a new macbook pro 15": http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MMEL2AM/A/thunderbolt-3-usb-c-to-thunderbolt-2-adapter The physical size of the connectors are compatible, of course; you can plug the monitor into the thunderbolt…

I had a similar experience. Two identical looking cables but one was mini display port, the other Thunderbolt. An old Mac Pro could be used as an external display with one cable but not the other.

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

#192

Post by taylodl »

drakenot wrote: post #100
jnbiche wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that Apple would ship a version of Safari that so deeply affected the battery of their newest MBP is concerning, and perhaps illustrative of why many MBP afficionados are so upset about the situation.

I've been having Safari issues since I updated to Sierra. Every once in awhile Safari will peg my CPU at ~250% and brings my computer to a standstill. I took a screenshot of the activity monitor while this was going on[0]. Note that this wasn't the "Safari Web Content" process, which I typically see where there is a rogue tab doing something crazy. This was simply the Safari process itself. The only extension I have…

I haven't upgrade to Sierra but have started having Safari issues after the last El Capitan update. Same you're having - peg out the CPU and bring the computer to a standstill. Once I even had to power off the machine to get things back under control. I've never had to do this before in my 11 years of running MacBooks. I'm getting really concerned with Apple's overall quality. Their competitive advantage has always been they control the entire computing experience from the software to the hardware and they're starting to blow it. I hope they make adjustments before this gets out of hand.

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

#193

Post by Bud »

dingo_bat wrote: post #97
mmjaa wrote: post #19

I've had mine for a week now, and have been able to use it alongside my late-2014 rMBP, which has been a solid workhorse. I'm starting to notice very subtle preferences for the 2017 model creeping in - after an hour of typing, for example, going back to the old keyboard feels really, really inefficient and antiquated, and my typing rate is lower than on the new rMBP. I also really enjoy the Touchbar - it hasn't been…

What's the 'r' in 'rMBP'?

The "r" will very likely be dropped going forward, since the last remaining non-Retina MBP is now no longer produced.

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

#194

Post by Bud »

otalp wrote: post #181
skizm wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does the Dell XPS 15in or the Razer Blade laptops have 32gb of ram if Intel doesn't support that much? Do they use different chips in their laptops?

Because the chips aren't optimised for that much RAM they sacrifice a lot of battery life. Apple could theoretically ship these MacBook Pros with 32 gigs, but their battery life would probably be halved.

More like quartered, from what I've read, i.e., reduced by 3/4.

Those gaming laptops which use full-power desktop RAM also weigh 8-10 lb and they STILL have terrible battery life. They are effectively unusable without being plugged in.

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

#195

Post by Bud »

toyg wrote: post #79
s_kilk wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

No, it wouldn't. And no, the slightly smaller battery was not "arbitrary". And thirdly, no, it's not that LPDDR isn't available; it's that this generation of Intel CPUs usable in a laptop don't support the current generation of LPDDR yet.

In other words, it's Intel's fault, not Apple's, as posted above.

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

#196

Post by elchief »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #95
sprite wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

WOW. I could spec out a laptop (pick a vendor) with a 500SSD, i7, 32GB RAM and still be under 2K. I don't want to say their hardware is overpriced. . .but they're stuff is WAY over priced. http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-ZBook-Studio-G3-15-6-Core-i7-2-7G... $1,350.00 - HP ZBook Studio G3 - 15.6" - Core i7 2.7GHz (6th Gen) - 32GB RAM - 512GB SSD (M6V80AV) It's a dealer refurb, but still. . .

my previous computer was an HP Elitebook with SSD and 32g ram, and it was a piece of crap compared to my 2015 MBP. Hot, loud, super heavy, no battery life, inelegant.

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

#197

Post by Bud »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #95
sprite wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

WOW. I could spec out a laptop (pick a vendor) with a 500SSD, i7, 32GB RAM and still be under 2K. I don't want to say their hardware is overpriced. . .but they're stuff is WAY over priced. http://www.ebay.com/itm/HP-ZBook-Studio-G3-15-6-Core-i7-2-7G... $1,350.00 - HP ZBook Studio G3 - 15.6" - Core i7 2.7GHz (6th Gen) - 32GB RAM - 512GB SSD (M6V80AV) It's a dealer refurb, but still. . .

You aren't doing your homework here. Top spec on a MBP is not only a 2 TB SSD, four times what you are citing here; it's also a MUCH faster SSD than you can get on that HP at any price. The HP would get trounced in every benchmark available. It also has a markedly inferior display.

Apples and oranges.

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

#199

Post by digi_owl »

spilk wrote: post #135

Honestly to me the worst thing about the new MacBook Pro isn't that there are no legacy ports on it or that the battery may be smaller, it's that the new all-things-for-all-people ports it has are confusing. The ports are all Thunderbolt 3 ports, which I believe by definition means they are USB 3.1 ports as well. But some devices out in the world have USB-C ports that are not Thunderbolt 3 compatible. No longer can y…

I think it is more a case that ports are USB-C, as Thunderbolt 3 can be used via their alternate mode (thanks to Intel).

Thing is that displayport over thunderbolt used half the bandwidth of thunderbolt to carry displayport signals (raw, not coded on top of thunderbolt). This similarly to how you can use USB-C alternate mode to carry displayport. Thus using thunderbolt over USB-C alternate to carry displayport is superfluous to the extreme.

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

#200

Post by Bud »

Fnoord wrote: post #77
slantyyz wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Absolutely no evidence for your "theory", which is the same old "planned obsolescence" canard we hear over and over about Apple. Always without evidence, and it always looks silly 3-4 years down the road when, lo and behold, all the machines in question are still working very nicely.

Also, once the market catches up to USB-C, which will take 12-18 months, you'll no longer need those adapters.

Lastly, it's just silly and inaccurate to call the iPhone "disposable", when in fact it leads the industry in terms of how long the product lasts, how long the OS is supported for older hardware, etc. By a wide margin.

Post reply on HN