Apple refreshes MacBook Pro with six-core processors, 32GB of RAM

1246712

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 236
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 3,774member
    seankill said:
    Where’s the “no one needs 32GB of RAM” crowd? 
    Clearly Apple thinks the customers need it........... 

    The market demanded it, Apple listened. 

    Edit:  
    Nevermind, they are already downplaying the fact they were wrong. 

    Unfortunately for you, gloating only works when you don't make stuff up to do it.

    No one said that "no one needs 32GB of RAM"

    What lot's of people said was "How do you know if if it doesn't work for you if you haven't tried it?"

    And I think the case still stands that most people like to think they need 32GB, but they actually don't.

    Solinetmagelamboaudi4williamlondondewmeericthehalfbeebackstablkruppAlex1Nwatto_cobra
  • Reply 62 of 236
    Those monster windows “laptops” with 17” plus screens, an inch thick, plastered with ports and extra keys. Mostly marketed for “Gaming” capabilities, I think are truly ridiculous.  I’ve only seen posers with them, always plugged in, doing simple web and office duties.
    The power users (generating live graphics, mixing audio etc) bring iMacs (now pros) to my one day event gigs. 
    JWSCchiabackstabwilliamlondonsennenAlex1Nwatto_cobrabrucemc
  • Reply 63 of 236
    seankillseankill Posts: 360member
    DuhSesame said:
    seankill said:
    DuhSesame said:
    seankill said:
    DuhSesame said:
    seankill said:
    DuhSesame said:
    seankill said:
    Where’s the “no one needs 32GB of RAM” crowd? 
    Clearly Apple thinks the customers need it........... 

    The market demanded it, Apple listened. 
    Or is because Intel is too slow so it doesn’t worth to wait another year.  DDR4 sounds more like a compromise.

    Or is it because Apple wouldn’t design a custom controller (which they do constantly and do a wonderful job at it) and make the computer a little thicker, boosting the whr rating of the battery? 
    Or just put the DDR4 in there with a little bigger battery. Sure it’s a compromise, that’s engineering. 
    Sure, it’s Intel’s screw up but it can easily be designed out. 


    Designing that chip will be much difficult than what keyboard commando suggests.
    Because Apple never designs custom chips.... They are more than capable. Regardless, clearly Apple felt it was needed (would they have done it without the critical crowd? Who knows), just take the loss and move on. It’s called progress! 

    The argument of “no one needs 32GB” is null anyway. I got my MacBook in 2012, I only needed 8GB (or so I thought, running simulations for classes easily took advantage of the 16GB) but I knew the RAM was soldered so I got 16GB. It’s called future proofing. I now use 16GB on a regular basis just doing general tasks, not “Pro” grade work. I have a desktop for that now. 
    They’re more than capable if they build their own processors.  You simply can’t bypass Intel’s design (if possible), otherwise that will be reverse engineering and lawsuits up your butt.

    I’m not saying 16GiB is better than 32GiB, but if you can’t then you just can’t.  You could say they start to build a 32GiB machine in the first place, but no one knows for sure how tech will go wo years after.
    Even so. 
    According to the website, the new one has a 83 watt hour battery in it. If I am not mistaking the older models had 76 whr batteries. Could they just have made it a tiny bit thicker with the 83 whr battery to begin with? You bet. 
    Of course, blaming on them on why they didn’t start this the first place.  But then let’s move on.

    The thickness haven’t change by the way.
    Remember when the battery size change took place, in the 2015 to 2016 transition. The thicknesses changed from the 2015 to 2016 models. The compromise between RAM and battery life was required because of the thinness. It’s simple volume. They went from a 99 whr to 76ish whr battery to get the machine thinner. 

    edited July 12 aylk
  • Reply 64 of 236
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 226member
    Rayz2016 said:
    seankill said:
    Where’s the “no one needs 32GB of RAM” crowd? 
    Clearly Apple thinks the customers need it........... 

    The market demanded it, Apple listened. 

    Edit:  
    Nevermind, they are already downplaying the fact they were wrong. 

    Unfortunately for you, gloating only works when you don't make stuff up to do it.

    No one said that "no one needs 32GB of RAM"

    What lot's of people said was "How do you know if if it doesn't work for you if you haven't tried it?"

    And I think the case still stands that most people like to think they need 32GB, but they actually don't.

    It’s better in performance, nonetheless.  We can questioning them why not do that in the first place, but then it’s not important anymore.
    williamlondon
  • Reply 65 of 236

    chabig said:
    Damn you Apple. Why did you put in 32GB? What will all the pretend haters who claim they run multiple VMs whine about now?
    It’s 2018 now. Everyone knows a machine can’t be “Pro” unless it ships with 64GB.
    What fools you all are. 128GB is the new PRO standard. Don't mind the 2 hours of battery life!
    EXCUSE me.

    256GB is the actual Pro standard. And don't tell me you're a professional unless you have any processors less than 18 cores and have at least 7 VM instances running 24/7.
    Alex1Nwatto_cobramuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 66 of 236
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 3,774member
    DuhSesame said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    seankill said:
    Where’s the “no one needs 32GB of RAM” crowd? 
    Clearly Apple thinks the customers need it........... 

    The market demanded it, Apple listened. 

    Edit:  
    Nevermind, they are already downplaying the fact they were wrong. 

    Unfortunately for you, gloating only works when you don't make stuff up to do it.

    No one said that "no one needs 32GB of RAM"

    What lot's of people said was "How do you know if if it doesn't work for you if you haven't tried it?"

    And I think the case still stands that most people like to think they need 32GB, but they actually don't.

    It’s better in performance, nonetheless.  We can questioning them why not do that in the first place, but then it’s not important anymore.

    Until 2 weeks from now when everyone starts whining on how they can't live without 64GB of RAM.

    lamboaudi4chiamike1Alex1Nwatto_cobra
  • Reply 67 of 236
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 226member
    Rayz2016 said:
    DuhSesame said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    seankill said:
    Where’s the “no one needs 32GB of RAM” crowd? 
    Clearly Apple thinks the customers need it........... 

    The market demanded it, Apple listened. 

    Edit:  
    Nevermind, they are already downplaying the fact they were wrong. 

    Unfortunately for you, gloating only works when you don't make stuff up to do it.

    No one said that "no one needs 32GB of RAM"

    What lot's of people said was "How do you know if if it doesn't work for you if you haven't tried it?"

    And I think the case still stands that most people like to think they need 32GB, but they actually don't.

    It’s better in performance, nonetheless.  We can questioning them why not do that in the first place, but then it’s not important anymore.

    Until 2 weeks from now when everyone starts whining on how they can't live without 64GB of RAM.



    chabig said:
    Damn you Apple. Why did you put in 32GB? What will all the pretend haters who claim they run multiple VMs whine about now?
    It’s 2018 now. Everyone knows a machine can’t be “Pro” unless it ships with 64GB.
    What fools you all are. 128GB is the new PRO standard. Don't mind the 2 hours of battery life!
    EXCUSE me.

    256GB is the actual Pro standard. And don't tell me you're a professional unless you have any processors less than 18 cores and have at least 7 VM instances running 24/7.
    No, EXCUSE ME.  if you find yourself running out of RAM, then you’ll always need more RAM.  There is no such a thing as “Pro” standard memory.
    edited July 12 repressthis
  • Reply 68 of 236
    seankillseankill Posts: 360member
    DuhSesame said:
    seankill said:

    seankill said:
    DuhSesame said:
    seankill said:
    Where’s the “no one needs 32GB of RAM” crowd? 
    Clearly Apple thinks the customers need it........... 

    The market demanded it, Apple listened. 
    Or is because Intel is too slow so it doesn’t worth to wait another year.  DDR4 sounds more like a compromise.

    Or is it because Apple wouldn’t design a custom controller (which they do constantly and do a wonderful job at it) and make the computer a little thicker, boosting the whr rating of the battery? 
    Or just put the DDR4 in there with a little bigger battery. Sure it’s a compromise, that’s engineering. 
    Sure, it’s Intel’s screw up but it can easily be designed out. 



    You're right - engineering is always a compromise.

    Apples compromise was to limit the RAM to 16GB and not have to put up with the additional battery drain or expense of designing a custom controller when a new Intel processor would soon support 32GB anyway. Who's to say which compromise is better?
    The only reason it was a comprise was due to the fact Apple lowered the battery over 20% in the pursuit of thinness. How about go slightly thicker and not comprise on a working machine?


    Sigh.

    have you listen everything that I said?

    But then, if you just wanna blaming on thiness for blaming on thiness, go ahead.
    Not sure that’s a discussion point. 
  • Reply 69 of 236
    SoliSoli Posts: 7,651member
    AnandTech is listing the battery being increased from 76 Whrs for the 2017 model to 83.6 Whrs for 2018 model, with both listing 10 hours of battery life.
    Alex1Nwatto_cobra
  • Reply 70 of 236
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 2,845administrator
    Soli said:
    AnandTech is listing the battery being increased from 76 Whrs for the 2017 model to 83.6 Whrs for 2018 model, with both listing 10 hours of battery life.
    Yeah, that's here too. We're asking some pointed questions about how and where.

    FTA: "The battery on the 13-inch model has increased to 58.0 watt-hours, with the 15-inch growing to 83.6 watt-hours likely to accommodate the more power-hungry DDR4 RAM -- but Apple has not changed the estimates for battery life as of yet."
    edited July 12 drgarethmottramwilliamlondonAlex1Nwatto_cobra
  • Reply 71 of 236
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 3,774member
    Soli said:
    AnandTech is listing the battery being increased from 76 Whrs for the 2017 model to 83.6 Whrs for 2018 model, with both listing 10 hours of battery life.

    Well that's good news!

    Alex1N
  • Reply 72 of 236
    SoliSoli Posts: 7,651member
    Soli said:
    AnandTech is listing the battery being increased from 76 Whrs for the 2017 model to 83.6 Whrs for 2018 model, with both listing 10 hours of battery life.
    Yeah, that's here too. We're asking some pointed questions about how and where.

    FTA: "The battery on the 13-inch model has increased to 58.0 watt-hours, with the 15-inch growing to 83.6 watt-hours likely to accommodate the more power-hungry DDR4 RAM -- but Apple has not changed the estimates for battery life as of yet."
    Once Intel drops their processors that accept LPDDR4 I wonder if Apple will keep that larger battery size or go with another case redesign. I'd personally like to get more battery life.
    Alex1Nwatto_cobrarepressthis
  • Reply 73 of 236
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 226member
    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    AnandTech is listing the battery being increased from 76 Whrs for the 2017 model to 83.6 Whrs for 2018 model, with both listing 10 hours of battery life.
    Yeah, that's here too. We're asking some pointed questions about how and where.

    FTA: "The battery on the 13-inch model has increased to 58.0 watt-hours, with the 15-inch growing to 83.6 watt-hours likely to accommodate the more power-hungry DDR4 RAM -- but Apple has not changed the estimates for battery life as of yet."
    Once Intel drops their processors that accept LPDDR4 I wonder if Apple will keep that larger battery size or go with another case redesign. I'd personally like to get more battery life.
    I may assume the board is larger because more DDR4 chip is on, therefore actually smaller battery size overall, but since they left much empty space in the past two generation, it’s still better.
  • Reply 74 of 236
    lkrupp said:
    rhinotuff said:
    Awesome!  Now bring on the Mac Mini refresh!
    It’s coming but you won’t like it.
    You're right, they may step it back to single core or Celeron processor!  I'd be happy with a current generation quad core and 16GB of RAM for a decent price...
    Alex1N
  • Reply 75 of 236
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 30,517member
    DuhSesame said:
    melgross said:
    seankill said:
    Where’s the “no one needs 32GB of RAM” crowd? 
    Clearly Apple thinks the customers need it........... 

    The market demanded it, Apple listened. 

    Edit:  
    Nevermind, they are already downplaying the fact they were wrong. 
    Its not that. Maybe 5% of people “need” 32GB RAM. Another 15%, or so “think” they need it, and the rest don’t.

    we all (should) know that Apple was waiting for the delayed 8th gen chips for 32GB support. I don’t agree with Apple on one thing. That’s that all of their laptops have to be notebooks. They could have one top tier machine that’s thicker, and heavier, but doesn’t rely on Intel getting out a chip that allows these extras in a lightweight machine. There is a market for such machines, because we see plenty of them sold in the Windows world.

    but Apple has gone more and more towards the middle. These extreme machines don’t sell in enough numbers for Apple to do what windows OEMs do, which is to sell machines that, while they have good numbers, are in the single, or at the most, low double digits when compared to the rest of the line. We see how they removed the SD slot, even though 20% of users used them. 20% is a lot, not a little. The slot takes up little room, and can’t have cost Apple more than about $5. But they took it out anyway. It’s because pro photographers, who are the users of those slots, have moved to newer SD cards, which the older slots in the Macbook Pro didn’t support. Of course usage went down!
    It always was.  There are those mobile workstation and gaming laptops even back when Jobs is alive, which often results twice or three times thicker.  Putting a DDR4 inside something under 16mm isn’t a challenge, nor having more than 70Wh of battery (they did not fulfill the batteries anyway), blaming just the thickness is missing the purpose.
    I get what Apple is doing, and, basically, I agree with it. But for every rule, or concept, there are exceptions. While windows OEMs are willing to accommodate those exceptions, Apple has increasingly not been.
    Alex1N
  • Reply 76 of 236
    Who asked for a quieter keyboard?
    williamlondon
  • Reply 77 of 236
    SoliSoli Posts: 7,651member
    Who asked for a quieter keyboard?
    I can't say that I asked, but I've wanted Apple to make it quieter.
    stompyAlex1Nbrucemc
  • Reply 78 of 236
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 18,704member
    Damn you Apple. Why did you put in 32GB? What will all the pretend haters who claim they run multiple VMs whine about now?
    The price? 

    They'll find something....
    Wait for it. 
    Alex1Nmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 79 of 236
    arcanineguyarcanineguy Posts: 6unconfirmed, member
    They did not update the non-touch bar 13 models... Kind of ridiculous to keep selling intel 7th gen and 8th gen models side-by-side. Well at least its saving me the urge to spend $1300. Better luck next year.
    I think Touch ID (T-1 chip) is essential with so many cameras everywhere to capture you typing in your password, plus the T-2 chip which takes security to a whole new level.
    Doesn't change the fact that they could have put 8th gen intel chips (and at the very least the new keyboards, BT5.0, Truetone, "hey-siri") into the base 13-inch model.  A $1800 price of entry for a "current-gen" laptop is a bit much, even for apple. 
  • Reply 80 of 236
    harry wildharry wild Posts: 508member
    The most advance notebook memory is LPDDR6 that just got release in April 2018!  It around 12X faster then LPDDR5!
    Alex1Nwatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.