I bought the 1 TB SSD. I would have bought the 2 TB, but I needed at least one kidney. These prices feel insulting to me, but I develop iOS apps, so I will continue to buy them.
I wish people would get over the "Pro" designation. It means nothing more than "better" product. This is true for most products from most company. "Commerical" is usually how companies refer to things built for professional use.
People are using this to complain about the lack of power on Apple's devices. I think that's a real complaint, especially for the 16 GB RAM limit, but this "Pro" thing is just semantics. Better to directly address the problem, which is that Apple is no longer making computers for power users.
People would upgrade the SSD with larger capacity, cheaper modules. Apple chose, directly or indirectly, to remove this option. The result is you have no alternative but to buy upgrade modules from them and you must do it at today's (Apple) pricing instead of better pricing a couple of years down the line and getting more capacity into the bargain. You must also purchase the upgrade at purchase time.
It is up to us to decide if this is a tactic to 'coerce' the user into parting with more money at purchase time.
Based on similar tactics with certain iDevices where they shipped them with woefully inadequate 16GB but refused to offer 32GB (the comfort zone for many), and instead jumped up to 64GB as the next option, my opinion is thay this is just another example of Apple bleeding it's user base.
This practice will not stop unless users stop tacitly agreeing to it by buying the machines.
It's just one of the reasons I'm not getting one of these things and will recommend them.to no one.
To all of the blow hards that are bent out of shape because you can't upgrade the SSD give me a break. The only reason you want it removable is so you don't have to pay Apple's price for higher amounts of storage. For 99.9% of users this is a non-issue.
People would upgrade the SSD with larger capacity, cheaper modules. Apple chose, directly or indirectly, to remove this option. The result is you have no alternative but to buy upgrade modules from them and you must do it at today's (Apple) pricing instead of better pricing a couple of years down the line and getting more capacity into the bargain. You must also purchase the upgrade at purchase time.
It is up to us to decide if this is a tactic to 'coerce' the user into parting with more money at purchase time.
Based on similar tactics with certain iDevices where they shipped them with woefully inadequate 16GB but refused to offer 32GB (the comfort zone for many), and instead jumped up to 64GB as the next option, my opinion is thay this is just another example of Apple bleeding it's user base.
This practice will not stop unless users stop tacitly agreeing to it by buying the machines.
It's just one of the reasons I'm not getting one of these things and will recommend them.to no one.
Yeah, you are probably right. Apple is just fucking with it's users.
I have been using Macs professionally for twenty years—and like many, feel the divide between Apple and its professional users has become intolerable. ...
Apple seriously seems to have lost sight of the fact that the Professional Market is the Goose that Lays Golden Eggs. Consumers follow what the Pros do, Pros don't follow what consumers do.
The MBA being their most popular Mac and the Mac Pro being the least popular would say otherwise.
To all of the blow hards that are bent out of shape because you can't upgrade the SSD give me a break. The only reason you want it removable is so you don't have to pay Apple's price for higher amounts of storage. For 99.9% of users this is a non-issue.
Be reasonable and not such an AAPL fan. If you're just being sarcastic or facetious, my apologies. For 90% of users "it" (money) certainly is an issue. And Apple never did offer a 1 TB option for the 2012 MBPr. If 1 TB meets your needs for a while, why pay for 2 TB, when the same 2 TB or even 4 TB will be available for less money in a few years? Invest the funds in AAPL instead, then buy the larger SSD later for less. Except Apple prohibits that now.
I didn't know Pro meant removable storage? I wonder how many times someone has actually changed their storage later on?
This is something I've been likely to do several time with the SATA connector in the 2.5" form factor. However, since moving to the PCIe connector in the MBP I've not done it, but I also moved to having a lot of local storage and syncing via iCloud, so it wasn't as needed in a notebook.
I tend to use my laptops for six years before replacing them. My first-gen MBP is being used by my twelve-year-old for homework. A SSD has a limited lifespan. This is (sort-of) okay with a tablet or a phone, but I'm looking at spending over $3,000 on the new MacBook Pro early next year (to replace my early-2011). I'm highly unlikely to do spend that kind of cash on a machine that Apple is now considering disposable when a part wears out.
come on dude. Apple can replace the SSD if it breaks
Indeed - as long as it's within the three-year AppleCare period, otherwise (assuming the drive *is* permanently fixed) I'm likely facing a costly logic board replacement rather than simply replacing the failed SSD. By this logic, my $3200 (plus sales tax) laptop is good for three years, after which a failure effectively means replacing the thing...
Well that sucks. I'm glad I changed my order from 512GB to 1TB.
Most pros I know of who want a new MacBook Pro don't care if the computer is as thick or thicker than the last version and would rather have a more capable set of connectors and the same long-lasting battery. What's your take? The CPU speed increase is nice.
Is there any data on how many Mac users have upgraded their RAM and hard drive after purchase, especially in years past when it was easier for a typical user to do it on their own? For me, being able to do those upgrades myself was a selling point in the past, but I wonder if I'm in more of an extreme minority than I imagined.
I'm wary of not being able to upgrade RAM and hard drives myself, for two reasons: 1) memory and storage space goes down in price over time, so doing it myself a couple of years after purchase (or when AppleCare was up) is a way of saving money on upgrades, and 2) It's how I've kept older Macs running longer, dating back to my PowerMac G3. Even getting a hard drive replaced at the Apple Store for my work Mid-2012 MacBook Pro last month was only $130 (500GB HDD), which I didn't consider too bad a price, especially considering it's not as easy to do it my self on that machine compared to older Mac machines.
When I hear that the hard drive is fixed to the motherboard, what I hear is that once I'm out of warranty, it will cost far more to repair if the drive dies. Am I wrong in this? I understand that SSDs will last longer than HDDs under most conditions (and SSDs are getting better by the year), but I would be really annoyed to have an SSD fail a few months after AppleCare runs out and find out that the cost to repair it is well above the $150-$200 range.
I tend to use my laptops for six years before replacing them. My first-gen MBP is being used by my twelve-year-old for homework. A SSD has a limited lifespan. This is (sort-of) okay with a tablet or a phone, but I'm looking at spending over $3,000 on the new MacBook Pro early next year (to replace my early-2011). I'm highly unlikely to do spend that kind of cash on a machine that Apple is now considering disposable when a part wears out.
come on dude. Apple can replace the SSD if it breaks
Indeed - as long as it's within the three-year AppleCare period, otherwise (assuming the drive *is* permanently fixed) I'm likely facing a costly logic board replacement rather than simply replacing the failed SSD. By this logic, my $3200 (plus sales tax) laptop is good for three years, after which a failure effectively means replacing the thing...
How many SSDs have you had fail? I've had nary a one, yet I've had countless HDD failures. While I'd prefer a removable SSD card so I can potentially upgrade storage late on, but I don't fear an SSD wearing out before other components on a logic board, like the CPU and GPU, yet I don't hear people wanting them to be socketed in modern notebooks.
I have been trying to decide if I would go with a 2016 model, or a 2015 or wait for the 2017. This would almost certainly rule out the 2016 for me. I keep my MacBooks for about 5 years (my current one is an early 2011) and I have consistently upgraded all of them....I had almost talked myself into a 2016 despite the memory limits since 16GB has proven sufficient MOST of the time but both HD and Memory constraints plus port shortage is really making it hard to go with the 2016...maybe some of that will be redressed in the next iteration but not sure I can wait that long...maybe a 2015 will get me to 2018 or even 2020 for the next big revision...maybe there will be a 'real' Pro version in the interim.
All the talk of pro apps needing more RAM has not really stood up for me (granted I am not an HD Video renderer or editor) but for me Virtual Machines is the ultimate RAM sucker. If I need 2 VMs running (typically Linux and Windows and sometimes multiples of each) and each VM needs 4-8GB and I still want my Mac to operate in a reasonably normal fashion 16GB gets really tight.
I followed a path similar last year with my early-2011 15". I've sold it and bought last year's 15" 2.5 GHz with discrete GPU and 16 GB. It prevents me from buying the new 15" but I can't recommend the same to you. Buy this year's 15" with Touch Bar and discrete GPU and don't look back at the 2015 model anymore. If you've lived with the 2011 model so long, you can withstand the memory and port "limits" (which won't bother you longer than 6 months) even easier with the 2016 model. The NVMExpress in the 2016 model is a breakthrough in SSD tech and don't underestimate it. You can easily tweak Linux and Windows to run in 4GB VM and I'm sure they'll run faster than a 4GB real PC thanks to the additional speed brought by NVMExpress. Just test the 4GB VM in the store by bringing in your VMs on a flash disk...
I didn't know Pro meant removable storage? I wonder how many times someone has actually changed their storage later on?
Yes, for us it most certainly does. 5 Macs here. All but the 2015 iMac have had at least one HD upgrade. All have had memory upgrades. I'm not talking about HD failures, I'm talking about the need to add more capacity.
same here.
30 Macs in the office, all of them have been upgraded from HDD to SSD for both speed & space. Even the circa 2006 20" iMacs have been upgraded to SSD, and are quite capable.
What percentage of MacBook Pro users have ever replaced their hard drive or SSD drive? I'll bet it's 1-2%, if even that.
This is a non-issue. If it means better reliability by removing a known point of failure (albeit rare), and it being the fastest SSD drive speeds anywhere, I'm all for it.
No tears are shed from me. I'm waiting for them to be in the stores so I can see one for myself, and likely purchase one.
I tend to use my laptops for six years before replacing them. My first-gen MBP is being used by my twelve-year-old for homework. A SSD has a limited lifespan. This is (sort-of) okay with a tablet or a phone, but I'm looking at spending over $3,000 on the new MacBook Pro early next year (to replace my early-2011). I'm highly unlikely to do spend that kind of cash on a machine that Apple is now considering disposable when a part wears out.
Modern SSD drives and the algorithms used to minimize the drive "wearing-out" will match, if not exceed mechanical hard drives. Considering the huge performance and reliability factors of SSD drives compared to mechanical ones, it's an easy decision.
Stop bringing up obsolete news. By the time SSD drives wear out, you won't upgrade the laptop. You'll just buy a new one with whatever current technology it has... admit it, because you know that's right.
It wouldn't be so bad if the costs weren't so high to option it up at the beginning.
I bought a 2012 MBA11 8/128 which I recently upgraded to 480 for just over 200 dollars. At the time I think it would have cost 500 more if it were even doable.
I tend to use my laptops for six years before replacing them. My first-gen MBP is being used by my twelve-year-old for homework. A SSD has a limited lifespan. This is (sort-of) okay with a tablet or a phone, but I'm looking at spending over $3,000 on the new MacBook Pro early next year (to replace my early-2011). I'm highly unlikely to do spend that kind of cash on a machine that Apple is now considering disposable when a part wears out.
Modern SSD drives and the algorithms used to minimize the drive "wearing-out" will match, if not exceed mechanical hard drives. Considering the huge performance and reliability factors of SSD drives compared to mechanical ones, it's an easy decision.
Stop bringing up obsolete news. By the time SSD drives wear out, you won't upgrade the laptop. You'll just buy a new one with whatever current technology it has... admit it, because you know that's right.
I'm going to take a screenshot of Disk Utility's physical drive capacity, and then check every year. Maybe it will go down a little, but I doubt it.
Comments
It is up to us to decide if this is a tactic to 'coerce' the user into parting with more money at purchase time.
Based on similar tactics with certain iDevices where they shipped them with woefully inadequate 16GB but refused to offer 32GB (the comfort zone for many), and instead jumped up to 64GB as the next option, my opinion is thay this is just another example of Apple bleeding it's user base.
This practice will not stop unless users stop tacitly agreeing to it by buying the machines.
It's just one of the reasons I'm not getting one of these things and will recommend them.to no one.
Totally.
For 90% of users "it" (money) certainly is an issue. And Apple never did offer a 1 TB option for the 2012 MBPr.
If 1 TB meets your needs for a while, why pay for 2 TB, when the same 2 TB or even 4 TB will be available for less money in a few years? Invest the funds in AAPL instead, then buy the larger SSD later for less.
Except Apple prohibits that now.
time with the SATA connector in the 2.5" form factor. However, since moving to the PCIe connector in the MBP I've not done it, but I also moved to having a lot of local storage and syncing via iCloud, so it wasn't as needed in a notebook.
I'm wary of not being able to upgrade RAM and hard drives myself, for two reasons: 1) memory and storage space goes down in price over time, so doing it myself a couple of years after purchase (or when AppleCare was up) is a way of saving money on upgrades, and 2) It's how I've kept older Macs running longer, dating back to my PowerMac G3. Even getting a hard drive replaced at the Apple Store for my work Mid-2012 MacBook Pro last month was only $130 (500GB HDD), which I didn't consider too bad a price, especially considering it's not as easy to do it my self on that machine compared to older Mac machines.
When I hear that the hard drive is fixed to the motherboard, what I hear is that once I'm out of warranty, it will cost far more to repair if the drive dies. Am I wrong in this? I understand that SSDs will last longer than HDDs under most conditions (and SSDs are getting better by the year), but I would be really annoyed to have an SSD fail a few months after AppleCare runs out and find out that the cost to repair it is well above the $150-$200 range.
same here.
30 Macs in the office, all of them have been upgraded from HDD to SSD for both speed & space.
Even the circa 2006 20" iMacs have been upgraded to SSD, and are quite capable.