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

361–370 of 440 posts

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

#361

Post by solaceb »

eropple wrote: post #331
macintux wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember overhearing a Best Buy employee describe the FireWire port on the back of an iMac as a Sony proprietary camera connector. Not sure why I didn't correct him. Apple rarely goes proprietary with their ports. The original 30-pin iPod port. Lightning. ADB in the mists of time. All of which were I believe better than what was available.

Lightning was better-ish, but we also knew USB-C was on the horizon. I don't think that one is defensible.

If my memory serves, lightning was introduced in late 2012 with the iPhone 5. I'm not sure we can really say that lightning was "on the horizon" that long ago. I would say lightning was "on the horizon" in late 2014, when in early 2015 we saw USB-C come to notable devices such as the Chromebook Pixel and 12" MacBook.

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

#362

Post by slantyyz »

Bud wrote: post #352
slantyyz wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> 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. That might be the case post iPhone 5 (maybe someone can verify this), but it wasn't the case before that. The last available update of iOS for every model pretty much made the iPhone 4S and earlier…

Wrong; iOS 10 support does extend back to the iPhone 4S. Just Google it for 10 seconds and you will see that. Further, this proves my argument, not yours. Even if you were right and the iPhone 5 was the earliest model now supported, that device is more than FOUR YEARS OLD. There are zero Android phones from 2012 which can run the latest Android version. In fact, I'm not sure that there are even any 2014 devices that…

>> Wrong; iOS 10 support does extend back to the iPhone 4S. Just Google it for 10 seconds and you will see that.

You misunderstood my point. The last available operating system update on any 4S or earlier tends to be unusable because of performance issues. That's because each successive update adds bloat. I have a clean iPad 1, iPhone 3G, iPhone 4 and iPhone 4S - all with the last available OS updates. They're barely usable as phones unless you have a lot of patience.

>> Further, this proves my argument, not yours. Even if you were right and the iPhone 5 was the earliest model now supported, that device is more than FOUR YEARS OLD. There are zero Android phones from 2012 which can run the latest Android version. In fact, I'm not sure that there are even any 2014 devices that can fully update right now.

Once again, you misunderstood my point. My mention of the iPhone 5 is as a placeholder for when the iPhone CPUs hit a maturity point in terms of performance where they would probably still be usable on the final version of the operating system that it will support.

>> Apple wins here, and it's not close.

Nobody's referring to this as contest, but ok, you can have that point if you want.

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

#363

Post by jstsch »

phil21 wrote: post #239
Bud wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't expect an off-brand USB-C adapter to be able to fully support DisplayPort. USB-C does not natively contain DisplayPort. Also, don't daisy-chain adapters when you don't have to. Use a USB-C to HDMI adapter. Such as this one: http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MJ1K2AM/A/usb-c-digital-av...

This is poor advice. I have that exact adapter, and it fails to work with >50% of the HDMI devices (monitors, TVs, projectors) in our office. This is kind of the point. I have to carry this, plus an offbrand HDMI adapter to hope to have greater than 50% chances of it working. As far as I'm aware there is no reliable USB-C -> HDMI adapter on the market that works with the MBP 2016. If there is another someone knows ab…

The Club 3D USB-C to HDMI 2.0 is perfect. I use it at the office to drive a LG 65" 4K screen at 60HZ for presentations from my MBP 2016: http://amzn.to/2hkM3hK

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

#364

Post by mbreese »

eropple wrote: post #331
macintux wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember overhearing a Best Buy employee describe the FireWire port on the back of an iMac as a Sony proprietary camera connector. Not sure why I didn't correct him. Apple rarely goes proprietary with their ports. The original 30-pin iPod port. Lightning. ADB in the mists of time. All of which were I believe better than what was available.

Lightning was better-ish, but we also knew USB-C was on the horizon. I don't think that one is defensible.

USB-C was on the horizon, but it was still years away when Lightning came out. I really think that Lightning forced the USB-IF's hand a bit and made sure that USB-C was a reality. Without a working example of how a reversible connection worked in the field, the USB-IF might still be waiting to push out USB-C.

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

#365

Post by TheCoelacanth »

toyg wrote: post #276
Bud wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> this generation of Intel CPUs usable in a laptop Dell XPS says hi. I don't care if it doesn't have much battery life - give me the choice, dammit. If I wanted ultraportability and umpteen hours on battery, I would have bought an Air. > the slightly smaller battery was not "arbitrary" I must have missed the day a tank threatened to blow up Cupertino unless they reduced the battery size. Again, nobody asked them to h…

The XPS 15 has pretty solid battery life if you get one with the larger battery size and the FHD screen instead of the UHD screen.

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

#366

Post by pasbesoin »

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…

Your description reminds me of the '90's Apple that had so many fricking Mac models that ordinary mortals didn't know what to buy. I remember fielding those questions more than once, and only barely having an answer because I frequently browsed the hobbyist and trade press at that time.

200\* Apple became one of a few models choices, each designed to (for something of a premium) deliver a consummate experience within its niche.

Apple buyers -- both professionals and premium-paying consumers -- want something that "just works", and works well.

For Apple to foist the Emotibar on them, before solving these other problems... Back-asswards.

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

#367

Post by Dylan16807 »

Bud wrote: post #353
FireBeyond wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Razer Blade weighs 4.6lb, and the XPS 4.4. Not "eight to ten pounds".

The Razer Blade Pro also has a laughable battery life: 2 hrs 45 min for WEB SURFING. That's hilarious. What that means is, probably less than an hour of battery life if you are actually gaming, which is the raison d'etre of this laptop. Laughable. What would people say if Apple made a high-end professional machine with half an hour of battery life? We'd never hear the end of it. Perfectly acceptable in the PC world,…

If the ram's power use is the main problem, then that disproportionately affects low-power uses. There's no reason to think gaming would have a similarly crippled battery life.

Any idea how long the MBP lasts if you peg the GPU?

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

#368

Post by collyw »

eropple wrote: post #321
slantyyz wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that reducing thickness is a selling point/feature for a lot of people on Apple products, but the compromises made in exchange for thinness cause problems for people who don't value thinness over other things. Having said that, it's important to note that CR did not give the Macbook Pro a Recommended badge (think of it as the equivalent to "Editor's Choice"), it doesn't mean they're telling people not…

> The problem is that reducing thickness is a selling point/feature for a lot of people on Apple products Is this actually true? Like...is there a material population of customers who really care about this? Not joking. I know zero people who care about that, at least for laptops. (I don't use an iPhone, so I don't pay attention to that side of things.)

I used to think this, then acquired a Macbook Air from work. Its is actually quite nice when traveling with only hand luggage to squeeze the laptop into a relatively full bag, yet you still have a big screen and keyboard. Not sure I would pay a lot more for that if I was paying myself, but it is nice to have.

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

#369

Post by jzl »

eropple wrote: post #321
slantyyz wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that reducing thickness is a selling point/feature for a lot of people on Apple products, but the compromises made in exchange for thinness cause problems for people who don't value thinness over other things. Having said that, it's important to note that CR did not give the Macbook Pro a Recommended badge (think of it as the equivalent to "Editor's Choice"), it doesn't mean they're telling people not…

> The problem is that reducing thickness is a selling point/feature for a lot of people on Apple products Is this actually true? Like...is there a material population of customers who really care about this? Not joking. I know zero people who care about that, at least for laptops. (I don't use an iPhone, so I don't pay attention to that side of things.)

I don't think people care about thickness specifically, but about weight. And weight is (for the most part) correlated to thickness.

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

#370

Post by slantyyz »

rayiner wrote: post #287
en4bz wrote: post #220

For those looking for alternatives here's a short video [1] that looks at some Windows based competitors in the same class. List below. Dell XPS 15 - http://amzn.to/2hZjqpT Asus UX501 - http://amzn.to/2hLG9VW MSI GS63 - http://amzn.to/2ik00Zf Gigabyte Aero14 - http://amzn.to/2ijMxk6 Razer Blade - http://amzn.to/2hvyGHj [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLsDn59fxdQ

None of which, ironically, can match the new MBP in battery life.

I think it might have more to do with OSX than it does with the hardware itself. OSX is really really good at managing power consumption. Windows, not so much.

Things would get very interesting if MS could figure out this battery thing.

Post reply on HN