We will still have people blaming Apple for not supporting > 16 GB RAM on the MBP. Yes, Apple could do it with a larger form factor/greatly reduced battery run time. If you really need that much RAM in a laptop, go get yourself something like an Alienware from Dell (prices start at $2300) which weighs 7.69 pounds and gets around 4 hours on battery.
For the ***Pro*** line, they could include one 15" model in the lineup that isn't aimed at the coffee shop, no?
macxpress said: If you only get 4hrs of battery life out of a more powerful processor than the power is useless in the end.
All the MBPs I owned only got 4 hours battery life, if lucky, even when new. So, I wouldn't call them useless. 8-10 hours of battery life is a game-changer in many ways, and quite desirable. But, it isn't the ONLY metric anyone cares about... along with thinness, lightness, etc.
Still waiting for a 13-inch MB Pro with the 8th gen quad core processor. Don't need the touch bar, can live with two USB-C ports, but gimme those 4 cores
For sure! I'll consider an i5 (don't need an i9) if it has 4 cores. The move from 2 cores to 4 is huge for anyone not doing basic stuff.
Unbelievable that there's no support for more than 16 GB of RAM for those who need ultra high speed access for large datasets.
It comes down to what 'pro' is. If 'pro' means, for entrepreneurs, lawyers, coffee-shop dwellers with money to burn, then 16GB is plenty. When you start talking pro equipment and types of work that require lots of RAM (virtualization, CAD, rendering, etc.) then it isn't.
Apple has decided, it seems (again!) that it's all about pie charts. Since more people need less RAM than more, it's OK to go with less (because who cares about the small pie slice?)
9to5mac today claimed these new processors now support 32GB of “mobile memory”, and they imply that mobile means LPDDR3. They say these Coffee Lake processors “address one common complaint of MacBook Pro owners: that RAM is limited to 16GB.”
So either 9to5 scooped everyone, or they blew it (and 32/64GB max is only supported when using DDR4). Unfortunately, the datasheet which would provide the definitive answer is MIA—the link from the ARK doesn’t have anything on these new H-series parts, only some S- and Y/U-series parts.
anome said: Some people like to believe the 2016 and 2017 MBPs didn't actually happen. Not sure why, I like mine. Maybe "the Guy" he's talking about is Guy Kawasaki, but not sure what he thinks Guy would be able to do about it.
Unfortunately, they did happen. We're waiting until a 2018 in hopes we can then buy one.
wizard69 said: Even in the x86 world Intel hasn't always been in the lead performance wise. AMD has stumbled badly but these days they are far more competitive.
When Apple made the switch to Intel, the G5 processors were faster than Intel's best. The switch wasn't made for performance reasons. And, if Apple hadn't helped/pushed Intel, we'd probably be able to heat entire homes with one of their CPUs and not afford the electric bill.
Or Linux which by the way is very similar to Mac OS. I'm so pissed with Apples Mac Lineup tha tI purchased an HP Envy with the new Ryzen Mobile processor and frankly it is a huge value compared to Apple and even Intel based machines. This machine will likely have one of the Linux distros installed as the primary OS soon, It looks like they wrapped up most of the bugs specific to this machine. Considering how I used the Mac this should work out just as well as a Mac OS based machine and be faster than anythign Apple can deliver at nearly twice the price.
That's the whole issue for me, or I've have left the platform already. Windows has gotten much better, but it's still not as good as macOS (despite the Mac's decline). I'm about | | close right now, though. My son and I are both chomping at the bit to buy new computers right now, and if there weren't a glimmer of hope on the horizon for Apple, we'd be buying PCs next. The problem is, the carrot just keeps moving further and further out.
anome said: Exactly. I mean establishing the Evangelist Network was important to the early stages of the Macintosh, but had little to do with building the product. Maybe he thinks he'd be able to get everyone excited about the new MBPs, but it sounds like he thinks there's a more fundamental problem with them than that.
Yes, back in the day... the problem was that Apple had truly great stuff, but had to overcome insane bias and negative media coverage. Today, it's nearly opposite. Huge brand reputation, fashion status, they can't keep out of the media (with most of it positive)... but ho-hum products and declining quality.
StrangeDays said: Bingo. No thanks...as a pro I like a lightweight yet very capable machine in my satchel to work on when remote. I won’t come close to making out it’s capabilties as a dev machine.
Different kind of pro. If you need more than 16GB, then you'd probably trade a bit of that mobility for some power. My gosh, laptops are now tiny compared to what everyone lugged around just a decade or so ago. No one is arguing the whole line should support 32GB, but there would certainly be a market for a 32GB + machine, even if it suffered a bit of battery life (or even a bunch) and/or weighed an extra half-pound, etc.
Maybe even increase the thickness a bit and add some real ports so they don't have to lug a 2-lb dock along in that satchel???
StrangeDays said: I can’t say about that, but all I know is every single Dell and HP my enterprise clients have given me to use is a POS compared to my MBPs. The current Dell POS has a SSD yet its fans kickoff like hairdryers throughout the day for no reason. Dell simply doesn’t understand thermal design the way Apple does.
True, though Apple could also do a lot better if they lost a bit of their obsession with thin. A bit bigger, and I bet they could make the MBP close to silent (and reliable) even when pushed. That's been my main complaint against MBPs over the years. Pro equipment shouldn't die prematurely when pushed.
StrangeDays said: So what is this guy doing wrong?
It was a great article, and I supported it as far as it went. Yes, the average 'professional' user doesn't need more than 16GB, especially with SSDs. However, he's not using a single RAM-hungry application, but using a bunch of apps that combined need RAM.
If I'm, for example, rendering something on a 4 core machine, that's a max of ~3ish GBs of RAM to each rendering engine (which limits model/scene size and textures, etc.). With 32 or 64, it really opens up the capabilities. There are a ton of professional applications that can use huge gobs of real RAM. But, yes, SSDs have kind of blurred the line in some cases.
We will still have people blaming Apple for not supporting > 16 GB RAM on the MBP. Yes, Apple could do it with a larger form factor/greatly reduced battery run time. If you really need that much RAM in a laptop, go get yourself something like an Alienware from Dell (prices start at $2300) which weighs 7.69 pounds and gets around 4 hours on battery.
A Dell XPS 15 also support 32 GB RAM and has s better battery life than the Macbook Pro. (I have both running in my company)
FINALLY. As a quad-core fanboi I've been watching years of refreshes with zero interest in upgrading.
Maybe this will finally make my quad mini obsolete? Or my 6y/o macbook pro? These things are old enough to be in kindergarten and still post multi-core scores faster than the dual-core junk intel (and/or apple, depending on your perspective) has been foisting on us for the past five years.
Unbelievable that there's no support for more than 16 GB of RAM for those who need ultra high speed access for large datasets.
It comes down to what 'pro' is. If 'pro' means, for entrepreneurs, lawyers, coffee-shop dwellers with money to burn, then 16GB is plenty. When you start talking pro equipment and types of work that require lots of RAM (virtualization, CAD, rendering, etc.) then it isn't.
Says you. Apple says most of their pros are software devs like me. And 16gb on my mobile is completely fine. But don't take my word for it -- this fellow went to the trouble of loading it with all the typical tools we use, including virtualization, and it's...just fine:
...that's real data. If you need a dedicated CAD rendering workstation then a mobile chipset notebook isn't really the proper tool for the job-to-be-done. Try a workstation.
True, though the point was that by the time you add the ports externally, you could have done so internally much, much more efficiently. The only people the new ports serve well for now, are those who don't need them. Some day, when the devices we buy actually plug into USB-C ports, then at least we'll be able to connect a few devices w/o dongles, hubs, etc. But, that isn't the reality right now.
StrangeDays said: Says you. Apple says most of their pros are software devs like me. And 16gb on my mobile is completely fine. But don't take my word for it -- this fellow went to the trouble of loading it with all the typical tools we use, including virtualization, and it's...just fine:
...that's real data. If you need a dedicated CAD rendering workstation then a mobile chipset notebook isn't really the proper tool for the job-to-be-done. Try a workstation.
That's kind of my point. The definition of 'pro' has changed along the way. Pro used to be a quality of the equipment, or mean it was meant for the most extreme of tasks, etc. Now, it means you do something 'professional' with the equipment, which makes it meaningless. A lawyer might be able to do the same task with a Chromebook as a MacBook Pro, so are they both pro now?
And, yes, I realize I'm talking about a relatively small percentage of laptop buyers... you know, the real pros. I'm not often in that category, unless I'm doing a rendering. I'm totally fine with 16GB of RAM and some mild performance loss when I go over it. But, for the true pros who need high-end equipment, that isn't the case. I'm guessing the 17" MacBook Pro of years past wasn't a huge percentage of laptop sales either, but the old Apple realized there was a need for it in the lineup.
Again... and should I type more slowly... space stuff out?
I am not saying the whole lineup should support 32+GB of RAM... I'm saying Apple should make a model that supports it for those who do need it.
The only people the new ports serve well for now, are those who don't need them. Some day, when the devices we buy actually plug into USB-C ports, then at least we'll be able to connect a few devices w/o dongles, hubs, etc. But, that isn't the reality right now.
People who don't need TB3 ports are those best served by them? What does this even mean? The "reality right now" is you can buy devices that plug into USB-C ports, there are a ton available. For older USB devices, you can just get a USB-C to USB-A/B cable for backwards compatibility. Many devices ship with both types of cable right now. Anyone who is a "Pro" is not going to be clinging to slow/old devices, they're going to love the fact they have four 40Gbps multipurpose ports that can handle anything they throw at it and adapt their workflow accordingly. Anyone carrying around a dock like the one previously mentioned just dumbs those ports down to 5Gbps USB 2.0 speeds is not a "Pro" by your definition (most extreme! of tasks!).
As a "pro" I plan to finally ditch all of my legacy Firewire/eSATA/USB 2.0 stuff as soon as I upgrade my MBP this year because I'd rather take advantage of the fastest, most versatile ports ever offered on a Mac to get my "professional" work done faster.
And, yes, I realize I'm talking about a relatively small percentage of laptop buyers... you know, the real pros. I'm not often in that category, unless I'm doing a rendering. I'm totally fine with 16GB of RAM and some mild performance loss when I go over it. But, for the true pros who need high-end equipment, that isn't the case. I'm guessing the 17" MacBook Pro of years past wasn't a huge percentage of laptop sales either, but the old Apple realized there was a need for it in the lineup.
Again... and should I type more slowly... space stuff out?
I am not saying the whole lineup should support 32+GB of RAM... I'm saying Apple should make a model that supports it for those who do need it.
LOL so it's not even really you you're talking about since you don't even do rendering "often". Who then are these people who are unable to get their professional work done due to not having 32GB of RAM in their laptop?
Guess what, I finished some "professional" work in a coffee shop (the horror!) a little while back simultaneously rendering in After Effects, transcoding another clip in Media Encoder, had multiple Photoshop and Illustrator documents open, iTunes running, uploading videos to Vimeo in Safari, and a handful of other background apps all barely breaking a sweat on my 2011 MBP with 16GB of RAM.
But hey since you occasionally render something you're speaking for the real "pros" who can't get work done without 32GB of RAM right?And how silly will this argument be when they release a MBP with a 32GB option in a year or so when there's a chipset available that supports LPDDR4?
fastasleep said: Always with the coffeeshop dwellers!
Nothing against coffeeshop dwellers, it's just that a MacBook or MBA would suit most of them just as well. Apple is now aiming their pro machines at that crowd, rather than the type of users who need more performance.
fastasleep said: People who don't need TB3 ports are those best served by them? What does this even mean? The "reality right now" is you can buy devices that plug into USB-C ports, there are a ton available. For older USB devices, you can just get a USB-C to USB-A/B cable for backwards compatibility. Many devices ship with both types of cable right now. Anyone who is a "Pro" is not going to be clinging to slow/old devices, they're going to love the fact they have four 40Gbps multipurpose ports that can handle anything they throw at it and adapt their workflow accordingly. Anyone carrying around a dock like the one previously mentioned just dumbs those ports down to 5Gbps USB 2.0 speeds is not a "Pro" by your definition (most extreme! of tasks!).
As a "pro" I plan to finally ditch all of my legacy Firewire/eSATA/USB 2.0 stuff as soon as I upgrade my MBP this year because I'd rather take advantage of the fastest, most versatile ports ever offered on a Mac to get my "professional" work done faster.
Sure, once you're replaced your own peripherals with USB-C versions (when available) or adapted your old devices, then you're fine. Do you take all that stuff along to the coffee shop or client site, though? If you're in a server room, or at a client site, or the person you're meeting hands you a thumb-drive, 99% of the time it isn't going to plug into your laptop unless you have your docks and dongles along. Or, maybe you need to give a presentation.
Nothing against TB3 and USB-C, the problem is *only* having TB3/USB-C in a world that is primarily other connection types. This isn't about people hanging on to old tech, it's about living in reality. Sure, I can convert my own environment, to a point. But, as mentioned several times before... I've still not seen a USB-C hub. Why? Because no one needs one yet. They convert their USB-C port to a bunch of other ports... BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEIR PERIPHERALS HAVE!
fastasleep said: LOL so it's not even really you you're talking about since you don't even do rendering "often". Who then are these people who are unable to get their professional work done due to not having 32GB of RAM in their laptop?
Guess what, I finished some "professional" work in a coffee shop (the horror!) a little while back simultaneously rendering in After Effects, transcoding another clip in Media Encoder, had multiple Photoshop and Illustrator documents open, iTunes running, uploading videos to Vimeo in Safari, and a handful of other background apps all barely breaking a sweat on my 2011 MBP with 16GB of RAM.
But hey since you occasionally render something you're speaking for the real "pros" who can't get work done without 32GB of RAM right?And how silly will this argument be when they release a MBP with a 32GB option in a year or so when there's a chipset available that supports LPDDR4?
Yes, because I'm capable of thinking beyond my own situation. But, unlike you, I'm apparently aware of professional applications that eat RAM for breakfast. And, why (on your view) would Apple move to 32GB of RAM in a year when no-one needs it?
Nothing against coffeeshop dwellers, it's just that a MacBook or MBA would suit most of them just as well. Apple is now aiming their pro machines at that crowd, rather than the type of users who need more performance.
So you've determined what every one else needs? You don't really know what those people use their computers for on a regular basis, you're speculating. Maybe they need a 15" screen for some reason. You also don't need to max out your CPUs at all times to be a "pro".
Sure, once you're replaced your own peripherals with USB-C versions (when available) or adapted your old devices, then you're fine. Do you take all that stuff along to the coffee shop or client site, though? If you're in a server room, or at a client site, or the person you're meeting hands you a thumb-drive, 99% of the time it isn't going to plug into your laptop unless you have your docks and dongles along. Or, maybe you need to give a presentation.
Nothing against TB3 and USB-C, the problem is *only* having TB3/USB-C in a world that is primarily other connection types. This isn't about people hanging on to old tech, it's about living in reality. Sure, I can convert my own environment, to a point. But, as mentioned several times before... I've still not seen a USB-C hub. Why? Because no one needs one yet. They convert their USB-C port to a bunch of other ports... BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEIR PERIPHERALS HAVE!
I don't take anything along with me because I don't need to plug a bunch of shit into my Mac while I'm away from my home or office environments. If I did, I'd bring what I need at that time, whatever that might be. Nobody ever hands me a thumb drive, but if that was something I expected, I'd bring a basic adapter or hub or something with me to accommodate for that. As it is, I'd just tell someone to toss me a Dropbox link instead or Airdrop it to me or something. Same if my job was to give presentations, I'd bring a USB-C to HDMI as that'd be the expected connector at this time. You see, a "Professional™" would know how to prepare for these situations while they wait for the industry to surely transition over to USB-C across the board. You know it's coming, whether you like it or not. USB-A sticks are a thing of the past. HDMI projectors may take longer, based on how long stupid VGA and then DVI cords were around for those, but it'll come.
Being a professional does not mean having a port for every slow-ass legacy connector out there, it's knowing how to deal with those accordingly. Progress! Embrace it. If we don't move forward, the tech won't either. Once again, wanna buy some SCSI cables? Need a terminator?
And why do you keep bringing up USB-C hubs if you're talking about a Mac with four USB-C ports and a dearth of USB-C accessories to begin with? The logical gymnastics to make this into an actual problem is incredible. YOU DON'T HAVE THIS PROBLEM. Stop pretending other people do.
Yes, because I'm capable of thinking beyond my own situation. But, unlike you, I'm apparently aware of professional applications that eat RAM for breakfast. And, why (on your view) would Apple move to 32GB of RAM in a year when no-one needs it?
"Unlike you" — after I gave an example of several RAM-sucking apps working in unison pretty effectively in a 16GB environment on a 7 year old Mac. I am upgrading this year to do more in Unreal Engine and Cinema 4D and more complex After Effects and VR and and and I fully expect the 16GB in today's machines to be adequate for what I can expect on a laptop.
And why, in my view would they move to 32GB, is because THEN IT IS PRACTICAL. I never said nobody needs it, I'm saying we can live without it for another year or so until the LPDDR4 is available for MBP-appropriate chipsets. It's not that complicated to see why they're holding off until it makes sense. You sound like my friend who has been complaining about the throttling in the iMac Pro, even though it's the fastest Mac ever built, and he doesn't even *really* need that power for anything he's doing, he's just complaining because Apple touched him in his swimsuit area apparently.
Your extremely niche use case doesn't even apply to you yet that's the hill you want to die on. Meanwhile, "Professionals™" will find a way to just get their work done.
fastasleep said: So you've determined what every one else needs? You don't really know what those people use their computers for on a regular basis, you're speculating. Maybe they need a 15" screen for some reason. You also don't need to max out your CPUs at all times to be a "pro".
No, I've determined that user needs are more broad than Apple's pie-chart of top sellers. I'm saying the old Apple did a better job of covering the range of user-needs, than focusing on the slice of users that moves the most units. I'm pointing out that Apple seems to now have different priorities, that I believe are detrimental to the users and their product lines, which will have negative long-term consequences for Apple as well. I'd like to see them succeed.
And, you don't have to max your CPUs all the time to be a pro, but it would be nice if maxing them didn't break the machine. It's at least arguable that one difference between a pro and non-pro model is that the pro can do pro-level stuff without damage. If someone damages their non-pro equipment doing pro-level work, then at least it could be said, 'you should have bought the pro stuff.'
fastasleep said: I don't take anything along with me because I don't need to plug a bunch of shit into my Mac while I'm away from my home or office environments. If I did, I'd bring what I need at that time, whatever that might be. Nobody ever hands me a thumb drive, but if that was something I expected, I'd bring a basic adapter or hub or something with me to accommodate for that. As it is, I'd just tell someone to toss me a Dropbox link instead or Airdrop it to me or something. Same if my job was to give presentations, I'd bring a USB-C to HDMI as that'd be the expected connector at this time. You see, a "Professional™" would know how to prepare for these situations while they wait for the industry to surely transition over to USB-C across the board. You know it's coming, whether you like it or not. USB-A sticks are a thing of the past. HDMI projectors may take longer, based on how long stupid VGA and then DVI cords were around for those, but it'll come.
Being a professional does not mean having a port for every slow-ass legacy connector out there, it's knowing how to deal with those accordingly. Progress! Embrace it. If we don't move forward, the tech won't either. Once again, wanna buy some SCSI cables? Need a terminator?
And why do you keep bringing up USB-C hubs if you're talking about a Mac with four USB-C ports and a dearth of USB-C accessories to begin with? The logical gymnastics to make this into an actual problem is incredible. YOU DON'T HAVE THIS PROBLEM. Stop pretending other people do.
It isn't that I can't figure out what kinds of adapters and hubs to lug with me... but if I have to lug stuff with me, why not just have it built in? You might very well like having a couple USB-C ports and that's good enough for you. Others might prefer some built in ones. Why is what you need the best setup? Can't Apple make more than one laptop configuration? It seems having a higher-end 15" with more RAM capacity, bigger battery, and since it's a bit bigger, USB-C plus a few extra ports would end a heck of a lot of the complaining. It could even cool itself better with a bit more space so it could accommodate the more high end work.
Then, when USB-C plugs become a common thing, there would be no need for such a model anymore. It just isn't the current reality. (BTW, I worked with SCSI terminators quite a bit, and wasn't complaining at all when *anything* moved on from true legacy to improved interface types.)
And, the reason I keep brining up USB-C hubs, is that the lack of them makes my point. If people were dealing with multiple USB-C devices, then there would be USB-C hubs, not USB-C to <insert other port types here> 'hubs'. Those aren't really USB-C hubs, they are adapters and docks.
Of course, then there are other issues, like the faulty keyboard, too-big trackpad, and TouchBar that Apple needs to fix, but I'm not holding out too much hope on those. We're probably stuck with them.
cgWerks said:Can't Apple make more than one laptop configuration?
Ummm... they do. There is the MacBook, the MacBook Pro, the MacBook Pro with TB, and MacBook Air. Each can be configured with several options. While some only offer a single screen size or amount of RAM, there are different colors, SSD sizes, CPUs, and GPUs.
The processors do not support LPDDR4 memory, sticking with the same LPDDR3 as found in the 2016 and 2017 MacBook Pro limiting RAM to 16GB. As a result, should Apple choose to bring 32GB of RAM to any new MacBook Pro, it would have to use DDR4 RAM, and implement a controller for it with both having large impacts on battery life.
Looks like we'll have to wait for Cannon Lake / Ice Lake to get LPDDR4 support.
We will still have people blaming Apple for not supporting > 16 GB RAM on the MBP. Yes, Apple could do it with a larger form factor/greatly reduced battery run time. If you really need that much RAM in a laptop, go get yourself something like an Alienware from Dell (prices start at $2300) which weighs 7.69 pounds and gets around 4 hours on battery.
The XPS 15 is 4.5 lbs with a Core i9-8950HK, 32 GB DDR4 and a GTX 1050 TI 4 GB. It would also last a lot longer than 4 hours for regular use.
Of course, if it can only run Windows or Linux, and a user needs to run macOS, then it's not really an option anyways.
And, you don't have to max your CPUs all the time to be a pro, but it would be nice if maxing them didn't break the machine. It's at least arguable that one difference between a pro and non-pro model is that the pro can do pro-level stuff without damage. If someone damages their non-pro equipment doing pro-level work, then at least it could be said, 'you should have bought the pro stuff.'
And, the reason I keep brining up USB-C hubs, is that the lack of them makes my point. If people were dealing with multiple USB-C devices, then there would be USB-C hubs, not USB-C to <insert other port types here> 'hubs'. Those aren't really USB-C hubs, they are adapters and docks.
Not sure how the lack of a certain type of hub proves any point. If there were a market for it, it'd be common. Right now I see a ton of these other breakout boxes with card readers, HDMI, USB-A and some with multiple USB-C ports (or similar combinations) presumably because those are the most common use cases for which there's a market. Meanwhile, we're talking about the MacBook Pro, which has four USB-C ports, so not sure why there'd be a huge need for a hub of those same ports. If there were a strong need for that product, then someone would be making 'em.
cgWerks said:Can't Apple make more than one laptop configuration?
Ummm... they do. There is the MacBook, the MacBook Pro, the MacBook Pro with TB, and MacBook Air. Each can be configured with several options. While some only offer a single screen size or amount of RAM, there are different colors, SSD sizes, CPUs, and GPUs.
Yes, I meant a pro variant of the MacBook Pro lineup (instead of all aimed at the most portable of the 'professionals').
And, you don't have to max your CPUs all the time to be a pro, but it would be nice if maxing them didn't break the machine. It's at least arguable that one difference between a pro and non-pro model is that the pro can do pro-level stuff without damage. If someone damages their non-pro equipment doing pro-level work, then at least it could be said, 'you should have bought the pro stuff.'
What exactly are you referring to here?
I've personally reduced the lifespan of 2 MacBook Pros by doing renderings on them. If you run them hard, the heat damages components even if the CPU saves itself (including the GPU, fans, etc.). Of course, the GPUs were flaky to begin with, but I pushed them over the edge. The other one got unstable and began to freeze up.
fastasleep said: Not sure how the lack of a certain type of hub proves any point. If there were a market for it, it'd be common. Right now I see a ton of these other breakout boxes with card readers, HDMI, USB-A and some with multiple USB-C ports (or similar combinations) presumably because those are the most common use cases for which there's a market. Meanwhile, we're talking about the MacBook Pro, which has four USB-C ports, so not sure why there'd be a huge need for a hub of those same ports. If there were a strong need for that product, then someone would be making 'em.
Exactly... almost no one has USB-C devices they need to plugin. They buy a USB-C to <other port type> adapter and plug their stuff in. Re-read your paragraph there, but slowly this time.
Yes, a MacBook Pro is sorta, kinda a USB-C hub with it's 4 ports. But, unless each device were going to max out the bandwidth, I'd rather have one cable to multiple ports. But, as you said, there's no market for it, as most people don't have such devices they want to connect yet (they have USB-A, HDMI, Ethernet, SD, etc).
Also, they aren't legacy if they are what everyone is using.
Comments
All the MBPs I owned only got 4 hours battery life, if lucky, even when new. So, I wouldn't call them useless. 8-10 hours of battery life is a game-changer in many ways, and quite desirable. But, it isn't the ONLY metric anyone cares about... along with thinness, lightness, etc.
For sure! I'll consider an i5 (don't need an i9) if it has 4 cores. The move from 2 cores to 4 is huge for anyone not doing basic stuff.
It comes down to what 'pro' is. If 'pro' means, for entrepreneurs, lawyers, coffee-shop dwellers with money to burn, then 16GB is plenty. When you start talking pro equipment and types of work that require lots of RAM (virtualization, CAD, rendering, etc.) then it isn't.
Apple has decided, it seems (again!) that it's all about pie charts. Since more people need less RAM than more, it's OK to go with less (because who cares about the small pie slice?)
So either 9to5 scooped everyone, or they blew it (and 32/64GB max is only supported when using DDR4). Unfortunately, the datasheet which would provide the definitive answer is MIA—the link from the ARK doesn’t have anything on these new H-series parts, only some S- and Y/U-series parts.
When Apple made the switch to Intel, the G5 processors were faster than Intel's best. The switch wasn't made for performance reasons. And, if Apple hadn't helped/pushed Intel, we'd probably be able to heat entire homes with one of their CPUs and not afford the electric bill.
That's the whole issue for me, or I've have left the platform already. Windows has gotten much better, but it's still not as good as macOS (despite the Mac's decline). I'm about | | close right now, though. My son and I are both chomping at the bit to buy new computers right now, and if there weren't a glimmer of hope on the horizon for Apple, we'd be buying PCs next. The problem is, the carrot just keeps moving further and further out.
Yes, back in the day... the problem was that Apple had truly great stuff, but had to overcome insane bias and negative media coverage.
Today, it's nearly opposite. Huge brand reputation, fashion status, they can't keep out of the media (with most of it positive)... but ho-hum products and declining quality.
Different kind of pro. If you need more than 16GB, then you'd probably trade a bit of that mobility for some power. My gosh, laptops are now tiny compared to what everyone lugged around just a decade or so ago. No one is arguing the whole line should support 32GB, but there would certainly be a market for a 32GB + machine, even if it suffered a bit of battery life (or even a bunch) and/or weighed an extra half-pound, etc.
Maybe even increase the thickness a bit and add some real ports so they don't have to lug a 2-lb dock along in that satchel???
True, though Apple could also do a lot better if they lost a bit of their obsession with thin. A bit bigger, and I bet they could make the MBP close to silent (and reliable) even when pushed. That's been my main complaint against MBPs over the years. Pro equipment shouldn't die prematurely when pushed.
It was a great article, and I supported it as far as it went. Yes, the average 'professional' user doesn't need more than 16GB, especially with SSDs.
However, he's not using a single RAM-hungry application, but using a bunch of apps that combined need RAM.
If I'm, for example, rendering something on a 4 core machine, that's a max of ~3ish GBs of RAM to each rendering engine (which limits model/scene size and textures, etc.). With 32 or 64, it really opens up the capabilities. There are a ton of professional applications that can use huge gobs of real RAM. But, yes, SSDs have kind of blurred the line in some cases.
Maybe this will finally make my quad mini obsolete? Or my 6y/o macbook pro? These things are old enough to be in kindergarten and still post multi-core scores faster than the dual-core junk intel (and/or apple, depending on your perspective) has been foisting on us for the past five years.
https://daringfireball.net/linked/2016/11/07/zdziarski-mbp-ram
...that's real data. If you need a dedicated CAD rendering workstation then a mobile chipset notebook isn't really the proper tool for the job-to-be-done. Try a workstation.
The only people the new ports serve well for now, are those who don't need them. Some day, when the devices we buy actually plug into USB-C ports, then at least we'll be able to connect a few devices w/o dongles, hubs, etc. But, that isn't the reality right now.
That's kind of my point. The definition of 'pro' has changed along the way. Pro used to be a quality of the equipment, or mean it was meant for the most extreme of tasks, etc. Now, it means you do something 'professional' with the equipment, which makes it meaningless. A lawyer might be able to do the same task with a Chromebook as a MacBook Pro, so are they both pro now?
And, yes, I realize I'm talking about a relatively small percentage of laptop buyers... you know, the real pros. I'm not often in that category, unless I'm doing a rendering. I'm totally fine with 16GB of RAM and some mild performance loss when I go over it. But, for the true pros who need high-end equipment, that isn't the case. I'm guessing the 17" MacBook Pro of years past wasn't a huge percentage of laptop sales either, but the old Apple realized there was a need for it in the lineup.
Again... and should I type more slowly... space stuff out?
I am not saying the whole lineup should support 32+GB of RAM... I'm saying Apple should make a model that supports it for those who do need it.
Sure, once you're replaced your own peripherals with USB-C versions (when available) or adapted your old devices, then you're fine. Do you take all that stuff along to the coffee shop or client site, though? If you're in a server room, or at a client site, or the person you're meeting hands you a thumb-drive, 99% of the time it isn't going to plug into your laptop unless you have your docks and dongles along. Or, maybe you need to give a presentation.
Nothing against TB3 and USB-C, the problem is *only* having TB3/USB-C in a world that is primarily other connection types. This isn't about people hanging on to old tech, it's about living in reality. Sure, I can convert my own environment, to a point. But, as mentioned several times before... I've still not seen a USB-C hub. Why? Because no one needs one yet. They convert their USB-C port to a bunch of other ports... BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEIR PERIPHERALS HAVE!
Yes, because I'm capable of thinking beyond my own situation. But, unlike you, I'm apparently aware of professional applications that eat RAM for breakfast. And, why (on your view) would Apple move to 32GB of RAM in a year when no-one needs it?
Being a professional does not mean having a port for every slow-ass legacy connector out there, it's knowing how to deal with those accordingly. Progress! Embrace it. If we don't move forward, the tech won't either. Once again, wanna buy some SCSI cables? Need a terminator?
And why do you keep bringing up USB-C hubs if you're talking about a Mac with four USB-C ports and a dearth of USB-C accessories to begin with? The logical gymnastics to make this into an actual problem is incredible. YOU DON'T HAVE THIS PROBLEM. Stop pretending other people do.
And why, in my view would they move to 32GB, is because THEN IT IS PRACTICAL. I never said nobody needs it, I'm saying we can live without it for another year or so until the LPDDR4 is available for MBP-appropriate chipsets. It's not that complicated to see why they're holding off until it makes sense. You sound like my friend who has been complaining about the throttling in the iMac Pro, even though it's the fastest Mac ever built, and he doesn't even *really* need that power for anything he's doing, he's just complaining because Apple touched him in his swimsuit area apparently.
Your extremely niche use case doesn't even apply to you yet that's the hill you want to die on. Meanwhile, "Professionals™" will find a way to just get their work done.
And, you don't have to max your CPUs all the time to be a pro, but it would be nice if maxing them didn't break the machine. It's at least arguable that one difference between a pro and non-pro model is that the pro can do pro-level stuff without damage. If someone damages their non-pro equipment doing pro-level work, then at least it could be said, 'you should have bought the pro stuff.'
It isn't that I can't figure out what kinds of adapters and hubs to lug with me... but if I have to lug stuff with me, why not just have it built in? You might very well like having a couple USB-C ports and that's good enough for you. Others might prefer some built in ones. Why is what you need the best setup? Can't Apple make more than one laptop configuration? It seems having a higher-end 15" with more RAM capacity, bigger battery, and since it's a bit bigger, USB-C plus a few extra ports would end a heck of a lot of the complaining. It could even cool itself better with a bit more space so it could accommodate the more high end work.
Then, when USB-C plugs become a common thing, there would be no need for such a model anymore. It just isn't the current reality. (BTW, I worked with SCSI terminators quite a bit, and wasn't complaining at all when *anything* moved on from true legacy to improved interface types.)
And, the reason I keep brining up USB-C hubs, is that the lack of them makes my point. If people were dealing with multiple USB-C devices, then there would be USB-C hubs, not USB-C to <insert other port types here> 'hubs'. Those aren't really USB-C hubs, they are adapters and docks.
Of course, then there are other issues, like the faulty keyboard, too-big trackpad, and TouchBar that Apple needs to fix, but I'm not holding out too much hope on those. We're probably stuck with them.
The XPS 15 is 4.5 lbs with a Core i9-8950HK, 32 GB DDR4 and a GTX 1050 TI 4 GB. It would also last a lot longer than 4 hours for regular use.
Of course, if it can only run Windows or Linux, and a user needs to run macOS, then it's not really an option anyways.
What exactly are you referring to here?
Not sure how the lack of a certain type of hub proves any point. If there were a market for it, it'd be common. Right now I see a ton of these other breakout boxes with card readers, HDMI, USB-A and some with multiple USB-C ports (or similar combinations) presumably because those are the most common use cases for which there's a market. Meanwhile, we're talking about the MacBook Pro, which has four USB-C ports, so not sure why there'd be a huge need for a hub of those same ports. If there were a strong need for that product, then someone would be making 'em.
I've personally reduced the lifespan of 2 MacBook Pros by doing renderings on them. If you run them hard, the heat damages components even if the CPU saves itself (including the GPU, fans, etc.). Of course, the GPUs were flaky to begin with, but I pushed them over the edge. The other one got unstable and began to freeze up.
Exactly... almost no one has USB-C devices they need to plugin. They buy a USB-C to <other port type> adapter and plug their stuff in. Re-read your paragraph there, but slowly this time.
Yes, a MacBook Pro is sorta, kinda a USB-C hub with it's 4 ports. But, unless each device were going to max out the bandwidth, I'd rather have one cable to multiple ports. But, as you said, there's no market for it, as most people don't have such devices they want to connect yet (they have USB-A, HDMI, Ethernet, SD, etc).
Also, they aren't legacy if they are what everyone is using.