It's actually quite easy for a "pro" to reach 16GB's. I'm using Photoshop, Illustrator and Acrobat throughout the day, with Word, Mail and Safari open at all times, and even after opening about 4 Illustrator files with packaging designs in them, and 2 hires (50x30cm at 300dpi) Photoshop files, simply copy-pasting an artwork file makes Activity Monitor show a total of 14GB in use (In use and in cache added up together). And that's when I just started my computer. After a day of working, at the end of the day I'll see an easy 16GB+ of memory use.
Yes, I can understand the limitations of the used Intel chip. And yes, I can understand that regular DDR4 memory will affect the batterylife of a laptop. But in that case make the laptop a few millimeters thicker. I'm having the same dillema here: I need to buy a MacBook Pro because I'm about to start my own business and will absolutely need it, but the 16GB of ram is definitely a very realistic limitation, and a hard limit I'm going to hit on a daily basis. And I'm not even doing thát much heavy work compared to render-artists.
I currently still work at a design agency, on an iMac with 32GB of ram. I don't currently use all of the 32GB's, but topping 16GB isn't really hard to do. I can't even imagine how much more memory our designers are using with all their Illustrator artboards and constant switching between Photoshop and Illustrator.
You need a MBP because you're going to be doing design work at client sites? Or do you need an iMac to get work done at home most cost effectively and an iPad Pro for presentations and sketching at the client site?
"Apple asserts its top-of-the-line laptop is an exercise in balancing performance with energy efficiency."
And that right there is the problem. PRO customers are interested in performance, not energy efficiency. Knock it off with all the 'green' shit already, and give us a PRO notebook that is actually PRO. Both HP and Dell can do it, why the hell can't you Apple? Stop bitching about battery life and build the thing 1/4" thicker to put in a bigger battery. Holy crap, this is not difficult.
@nht ; I need a MacBook Pro because: - I sometimes will need to present my work at clients - I rent myself out to companies who do not always have a computer available (partly due to EU/Dutch law issues starting in 2017) - To be mobile enough to work when I'm sitting in a train on my way to a client … basically the usual things on why people need laptops. I was thinking about an iMac, but it's a beast to keep carrying around
c.m.w. said:Can someone please define what it is to be a professional that is worthy of these missing features? I would like to know if I make the cut so I can start being angry that my perfectly awesome MBP has left me in some way jilted.
Seriously, what are the criteria? So far it seems that the definition is arbitrary and individualized. What defines a professional? I think that's different per profession. Someone who does audio-creation, 3D-rendering, graphic design or web design... they will all have different demands and needs from a computer after all. A web designer might have less need of 32GB of ram compared to a graphic designer or 3D-rendering artist for example. Problem is though, that a laptop usually lasts for about 4-5 years before someone buys a new one. And if a lot of professionals are already running close to the 16GB-limit with the software and documents they're using, imagine how much of a limit it will become after 4-5 years worth of software-upgrades.
It's actually quite easy for a "pro" to reach 16GB's. I'm using Photoshop, Illustrator and Acrobat throughout the day, with Word, Mail and Safari open at all times, and even after opening about 4 Illustrator files with packaging designs in them, and 2 hires (50x30cm at 300dpi) Photoshop files, simply copy-pasting an artwork file makes Activity Monitor show a total of 14GB in use (In use and in cache added up together). And that's when I just started my computer. After a day of working, at the end of the day I'll see an easy 16GB+ of memory use.
Yes, I can understand the limitations of the used Intel chip. And yes, I can understand that regular DDR4 memory will affect the batterylife of a laptop. But in that case make the laptop a few millimeters thicker. I'm having the same dillema here: I need to buy a MacBook Pro because I'm about to start my own business and will absolutely need it, but the 16GB of ram is definitely a very realistic limitation, and a hard limit I'm going to hit on a daily basis. And I'm not even doing thát much heavy work compared to render-artists.
I currently still work at a design agency, on an iMac with 32GB of ram. I don't currently use all of the 32GB's, but topping 16GB isn't really hard to do. I can't even imagine how much more memory our designers are using with all their Illustrator artboards and constant switching between Photoshop and Illustrator.
Everyone wants fo sacrifice thinness on behalf of more RAM but what they don't understand is that the heat is a bigger issue than the lack of RAM or low battery life. We need thin machines for heat dissipation. Heat destroys your computer, no joke, experience is speaking, don't even try it... Desktop components require desktop grade cooling system. This is why you cannot use desktop RAM in a notebook.
On the other hand, sorry but you cannot start a graphic arts business on a notebook, whatever the RAM is. Consider an iMac 27 inch with 64 GB. And don't quit your job until getting that machine.
How is thinnes helping heat dispersion? Bigger towers mean more airflow, so wouldn't that work in a similar manner with laptops? Thicker laptop means more room for airflow and bigger/stronger fans right?
Actually, you can definitely start a graphic design business on a laptop. Hence the "pro" in MacBook Pro. A lot of graphic design studios in Holland are actually using MacBook Pros instead of iMacs for their designers because of the mobility it offers. They need to go to clients, to photographers, and so on. If you're an artworker who works with hires files a lot and with a much stricter deadline, an iMac or Mac Pro would be a much better choice. But saying that you can't start a business on a notebook is just plain wrong.
(and I do have a 4 year old iMac that I intend to keep around till my MacBook Pro arrives ánd is working correctly)
... when Intel introduces MacBook compatible Kaby Lake CPU's next year. Because thats the RAM limitations of SkyLake are the only reason why Apple maxed out at 16GB. ...
Technically that ist not true. You can put more than 16GB of RAM in a SkyLake equipped computer, it just needs a different set up. It is not possible under the limitation that Apple set for the MPB - being thinner without losing to much battery life. Apple is distracting the views from the correct reasons Apple could not implement more than 16GB - "Thinness is King". A classic Function follows Form situation. I don't know who really needs 32GB but here Apple is forcing Form over Functionality (possibly a functionality very few people need).
Yes. Schiller said as much. They would basically have had to redesign the logic board and make things slightly heavier thicker.
I would have preferred that option (they could have included some of the ports removed from the new model and even not include the Touch bar/ID).
Two very different models for different needs.
I wonder which would have sold more?
So basically what you and BKennedy want, is this:
The 2012 15" MacBook Pro, which is thicker, heavier just to suit your supposed 32GB of RAM needs? Why doesn't Apple just keep using the old designs with newer internals? Then people would be bitching up a storm because Apple never changes anything. Just keeps releasing the same ole thing year after year. They can't innovate!
'Just to suit....'
Nope. And you know that isn't the case but if you can just ignore the rest, that's ok, right?
But that is besides the point. Do you doubt that demand for a slightly thicker/heavier MBP with two USB-C ports plus the so-called 'legacy' ports and non-soldered on RAM/SSD, keyboard with decent travel etc would be higher than for Touch Bar/ID, larger trackpad MBPs.That is the question.
Given the choice, how many would opt for thinner/lighter with compromises over thicker/heavier but without the compromises?
I have yet to see a widespread case to where 32GB is necessary. Its a nice to have not a need to have.
Judging my initial sales of the new MacBook Pro, I'd say people don't really care about the missing ports. This is something that will blow over just like every other time when Apple releases something new. In my opinion this really isn't that big of a deal. It seems to me that the loudest people who are complaining are actually a very small portion of users. Just because you're loud and clear, doesn't mean you're the majority. Again, initial sales of are proving this.
How is thinnes helping heat dispersion? Bigger towers mean more airflow, so wouldn't that work in a similar manner with laptops? Thicker laptop means more room for airflow and bigger/stronger fans right?
Actually, you can definitely start a graphic design business on a laptop. Hence the "pro" in MacBook Pro. A lot of graphic design studios in Holland are actually using MacBook Pros instead of iMacs for their designers because of the mobility it offers. They need to go to clients, to photographers, and so on. If you're an artworker who works with hires files a lot and with a much stricter deadline, an iMac or Mac Pro would be a much better choice. But saying that you can't start a business on a notebook is just plain wrong.
(and I do have a 4 year old iMac that I intend to keep around till my MacBook Pro arrives ánd is working correctly)
Starting a business is a very emotional issue so I don't want to talk about that further. I just wish you good luck.
Regarding airflow, that is the first thing that came to your mind right now and is obviously wrong. Towers are a design of 2000s, today's data centers are built not on towers but on rack mounted server farms. Towers are conceived to stuff junk into, not for heat considerations. Fans are proven to be inefficient to cool down a tower so builders of gaming rigs are tinkering with water cooling in their little science projects. Aluminium is chosen for Macs and they are made thin (except Mac Pro, which is built uniquely on a special architecture they call "thermal core") just because of heat, not because of design snobism of Jony Ive.
And yet not only heat destroys your computer, it causes first processor throttling prior to it. Your computer just slows down because of processor throttling. To get an idea on how heat is such a crucial issue in today's computing, just keep an eye on support pages in ark.intel.com.
Yeah, the ports themselves I don't really see as a problem. It's an inconvenience that will solve itself in the upcoming year(s)... the speed of the ports are such an improvement that I think it'll solve itself.
But it's easier for someone to buy a computer without maxing the ram (as in, buy it with 8-16GB of ram). But the ability to actually put 32GB (yourself, or as a BTO) in it would be a necessity for a good amount of creatives out there. Right now there's a hard limit of total amount of ram you can put in there, which is simply not enough for some.
@macplusplus I know that watercooling is better, but airflow is most definitely good for cooling. All Macs have airflow and fans, and they even mentioned the better airflow with the MacBook Pros that came out last month. I'm not saying that bigger is always better regárding airflow, but it cán help. Positive pressure in computers also result in cooler computers for example, and a stronger fan results in stronger airflow and/or positive pressure. And rackmounted servers have existed well before the 2000's, but a server is a different kind of beast, and are usually kept in separate climate-controlled rooms.
Yeah, the ports themselves I don't really see as a problem. It's an inconvenience that will solve itself in the upcoming year(s)... the speed of the ports are such an improvement that I think it'll solve itself.
But it's easier for someone to buy a computer without maxing the ram (as in, buy it with 8-16GB of ram). But the ability to actually put 32GB (yourself, or as a BTO) in it would be a necessity for a good amount of creatives out there. Right now there's a hard limit of total amount of ram you can put in there, which is simply not enough for some.
@macplusplus I know that watercooling is better, but airflow is most definitely good for cooling. All Macs have airflow and fans, and they even mentioned the better airflow with the MacBook Pros that came out last month. I'm not saying that bigger is always better regárding airflow, but it cán help. Positive pressure in computers also result in cooler computers for example, and a stronger fan results in stronger airflow and/or positive pressure. And rackmounted servers have existed well before the 2000's, but a server is a different kind of beast, and are usually kept in separate climate-controlled rooms.
I wish things were so simple... Apple had such an issue with the heat in their early-2011 15 inch MBP. The lead free solder gave up causing the GPU to loosen. Apple initiated a free logic board replacement. That machine was running at 203 F / 95 C under heavy load, last year's model I own runs at 147 F / 64 C. That is a big progress, and I've experienced first hand what 95 C has done to that otherwise excellent 2011 machine.
And recent 13" MBPs come with two fans instead of one in the earlier models. Apple might stuff more RAM or storage but they chose to put a second fan instead. So, heat has priority over RAM and storage. Bigger enclosure retains more heat, obviously, so we are good with thin MBPs.
Okay, two use cases: professional video editors and professional forum surfers...
Haha. With those "Safari Web Content" process instances taking up 600 to 800 MB of RAM per tab, it adds up quickly. I await the future where the Apple engineers say "Screw it—we'll just make each Safari tab instance its own virtual machine!" They could probably fit one in that RAM allocation.
...well I bought one, and am still hunting for a solution to possible DisplayPort connectivity... The screen is beautiful, and it is lighter, and faster, and the control strip is elegant, if incidental. Weight & battery are less issues for me, vs 17" & 1980x1200+, needing more a portable desktop (aka pro?) The potential for up to 4 displays seemed compelling, yet the inflexibility in monitors (no displayport), future ram and drive options seem nagging. MacOS memory management is remarkable given the limits, yet if I cannot find a reliable DisplayPort solution this may be going back. If I could buy Apple TB Displays then maybe (discontinued), but I don't feel I should have to, and I have no interest in plastic LG displays... Unfortunately when Apple chooses for us, the way they seem to do, there always seems to be something...
I bought a DisplayPort to usbc cord on amazon and it works perfectly.
Here we go again....needless 32GB debate Round 2!!!!
Yup.
Anyone who actually buys this years model of MacBook Pro is going to be disappointed when next years model will likely get 32GB ram and has better battery life.
That said, most people don't need 16GB, let alone 8GB.
Like, right now on my Windows 10 Desktop PC which had 32GB of ram, only 16GB of ram is ever really utilized. I have like 40 tabs open between three web browsers, and 70 tabs open in a text editor. For the sake of not destroying a SSD quickly, more RAM is preferred because it means the page file is rarely used. In fact I have it set to 0MB on my system.
Now what actually uses 16GB? Well first of all only 64bit applications can use it, which means that web browsers (which aren't completely 64-bit aware, nor are they multi-threaded) don't ever make use of more RAM even when it's available. The only application I have that is native 64-bit is Photoshop. Everything else doesn't have much or any advantage to being compiled 64-bit. 64-bit apps wind up a bit faster due to simply not having to go through the WoW32 layer.
A Mac with 32GB or 64GB is overkill and unless you're dealing with Final Cut Pro with 4K videos (including editing videos from an iPhone 6S or 7) you're still not likely to be able to utilize it.
Now, the fact that the RAM is soldered onto the MacBook Pro, means that you should buy the model with the most RAM because you will not be upgrading it. So if you need 32GB, wait for next years model, or don't use a MacBook Pro.
Most people aren't professionals or content creators. So is this machine aimed at professionals or not? Sounds like it's not. So why are they calling it a "pro" then?
As for software not using more than 16GB RAM... There's definitely more software out there that's native 64-bit. But that's not the issue. 32-bit applications had an issue with >4GB RAM. We aren't talking about >4GB any more. We're talking about >16GB now.
Because 'professional' doesn't just mean video editor; it also means doctor, lawyer, programmer… Professional isn't defined by the individual parts; it's actually the sum of the parts.
On the one hand you state the obvious by saying not all pros are video editors but on the other hand you ignore the reason these Macs are are called 'Pro' in the first place! And we both know they weren't specced for doctors, lawyers, writers etc. The Pro, in this context, is a designation for users (Ironically Pro or not) who have spec hungry requirements.
Actually they were specced for a wide range of professionals. Doctors (especially surgeons) need large screens in a light weight frame. Programmers are less mobile, but a lot more mobile than they used to be. It's all very well saying that they should have packed a desktop into a larger chassis, but that only helps one class of professional, and how much it helps them is still up for debate:
The pro is indeed a designation of users, but not one particular type of user. Apple did not build a laptop just for video editors.
And again, people are just picking one aspect of the machine (the memory) without actually considering how the other components work with it.
As I said, it has more to do with spec requirements and if you believe Apple, these machines are aimed at those users.
That said, you lost me completely with your claim that surgeons need big screens in a lightweight frame. That isn't actually correct. Surgeons can make do with any modern screen, even a small one if necessary. I am currently working with three surgeons (general, digestive tract and traumatology). They have desktops connected to the networks of the clinics/hospitals where they work for access to medical records and viewing of image diagnostics etc. In their private consultancies they have desktops too. Of the three, only one has a Mac. An old 13"' MBP.
Then the surgeons you know work differently to the ones I know (neurosurgeons and orthopaedics). They like plenty of storage and large screens. Macs and iPads.
"Apple asserts its top-of-the-line laptop is an exercise in balancing performance with energy efficiency."
And that right there is the problem. PRO customers are interested in performance, not energy efficiency. Knock it off with all the 'green' shit already, and give us a PRO notebook that is actually PRO. Both HP and Dell can do it, why the hell can't you Apple? Stop bitching about battery life and build the thing 1/4" thicker to put in a bigger battery. Holy crap, this is not difficult.
It doesn't really matter what Apple does at this point. Someone's going to complain.
Apple are kind of stuck. If they hadn't released the new shell, they still couldn't have put 32GB of RAM in, so people would still be complaining. Then, when they did release the new shell, even if it had 32GB RAM as an option, they would have copped all the flak about USB-C/TB3 and dongles. So, by releasing the new shell now,
I'm not saying that is what they should have done, but I don't believe your statement is true. The extra power it would have taken to allow 32 GB RAM is most likely NOT more than the amount of reduced battery capacity that resulted from the new design. Apple probably could have made the shell thinner than the 2015 model (but not as thin as the 2016 model) and still had enough battery capacity to handle 32 GB and have the same battery life.
The problem with how Apple is handling this is they are making excuses rather than owning their design decisions. Basically, Phil seems to be struggling with his role as head of marketing. Marketing should be bragging about the positives and why this is a good thing, not about making excuses about battery life when we all know that the primary reason for that even being a concern is because of how thin they made the laptop.
Apple decided they wanted to prioritize the thinness and weight of the new laptop. Ok, cool, tell us why that's important and why the trade-off of lower max RAM was the way to go. Tell us how Apple feels that is more important to the majority of their customers. Own that design decision, don't use it as an excuse for compromises elsewhere in the design. If they blame battery life then they are just blaming themselves because the size of the battery was also their design decision.
If they can't defend the thinness design decision and explain the benefits, then you really have to wonder if it was a valid design requirement to begin with.
Has any professional used a MacBook Pro and run into any issues with 16 GB? I've seen a review where the reviewer opened every Pro app he has (and then some) and didn't run into issues while using them.
If you want to launch multiple large VMs you can run out. But docker containers typically aren't large and VMs for browser testing can be 2-4 GB ram. If you really need 3x8GB VMs you're better off just kicking them off on AWS and ssh'ing in. Especially if your Devops has preloaded AMIs with your deployment configuration ready to go. Then it's just check in your code, push it to the build server and watch as it auto deploys and do your automated testing as you surf Apple Insider.
So, no not really except for 4K editing and higher end users of CC with multiple apps open. If you want premier pro and after effects and resolve open, yeah...128GB RAM sounds pretty good. 32 GB likely tight.
I think this (bolded) point is something that is also not being spoken about. While as noted there are some applications (e.g. video editing) which require a lot of "local" RAM, is the path forward for many not utilizing cloud computing like AWS, Azure, Google's platform, etc? Specifically for the multi-VM case. Cloud computing offers extreme flexibility, no?
Apple designs their products with a clear eye on how use cases and trends are evolving. More and more intensive computing is best served through the cloud. And of course, we are talking about a laptop here, where portability is key.
These devices aren't for everyone - I won't be buying the 2016 MBP as I can't justify the price (especially in CAD$). Hopefully in a few years. But that doesn't stop me from recognizing the benefits of the type of product that Apple produced here (screen, track pad, Touch ID, Touch Pad, thinner and quieter design). I expect many will want one, though pricing may be an issue for a number. I look forward to see how the usefulness of the Touch Bar evolves (or doesn't) over time.
Of special intrigue is that all of the negative reviews were not from actual device usage or from pro end users, nearly all negative reviews weren't based on using the device but rather a perception/rejection of USB-C and only the numeric specifications that suited their pre-written narrative. (E.g. Pretty much all ignored the SSD speed, but focused a lot of time on the 16gb ram limit - when obviously one plays into the other.)
I agree that complaints about the RAM are dubious without actually putting the machine to real world use. Apple is pretty good about optimizing their systems to make maximum use of the resources. But I'd also say that I don't need to have hands-on use to have a pretty good idea what the impacts are of the port selection.
@nht ; I need a MacBook Pro because: - I sometimes will need to present my work at clients - I rent myself out to companies who do not always have a computer available (partly due to EU/Dutch law issues starting in 2017) - To be mobile enough to work when I'm sitting in a train on my way to a client … basically the usual things on why people need laptops. I was thinking about an iMac, but it's a beast to keep carrying around
/shrug
As I said, presenting work to clients can likely be more easily done on a iPad Pro.
For work at a customer site, if you're there for a week or two you only have to lug in the iMac once when you arrive and once when you leave. I dunno about you but a 15" display is a far more limiting factor than 16GB.
Whether you can get any reasonable work done on the iPad on the train depends on what work you need to do on the train.
A laptop is a compromise whether it is memory or screen size or processing power or transportability. If your needs are within the scope of the compromise then a laptop is great. If your needs are for 32GB and more computing power then not as great. 16GB is fine for me so a MBP makes sense even if the iMac provides more power for less price.
Like, right now on my Windows 10 Desktop PC which had 32GB of ram, only 16GB of ram is ever really utilized. I have like 40 tabs open between three web browsers, and 70 tabs open in a text editor. For the sake of not destroying a SSD quickly, more RAM is preferred because it means the page file is rarely used. In fact I have it set to 0MB on my system.
A Mac with 32GB or 64GB is overkill and unless you're dealing with Final Cut Pro with 4K videos (including editing videos from an iPhone 6S or 7) you're still not likely to be able to utilize it.
That is YOUR and only YOUR use case. MY use case is different. Ever heard of Virtual Machines? Well, I regularly run 5 or 6 at the same time. these all work together so no, I can't just run one at a time. Currently I have to lug an HP Elitebook with 32Gb ram with me on my travels. I'd love to be able to ditch this and take just one Laptop with me and even better, an Apple laptop. I have a 27in iMac maxed out with 32Gb of RAM + second Display for my work. At the moment, 29.6Gb of RAM is used by VM's. So it is most certainly not overkill for MY use case.
See, we are all different in what we use our kit for. Blanket statements like yours are just plain wrong.
I'd love to see a MacBook Pro++. Sort of like a portable MacPro for those who want the ultimate portable workstation. With more and more people shooting in 4K (including me), RAM and CPU power start to matter.
I thought OWC offered RAM for the latest iMac that allowed it to go to 64GB?
@nht ; I need a MacBook Pro because: - I sometimes will need to present my work at clients - I rent myself out to companies who do not always have a computer available (partly due to EU/Dutch law issues starting in 2017) - To be mobile enough to work when I'm sitting in a train on my way to a client … basically the usual things on why people need laptops. I was thinking about an iMac, but it's a beast to keep carrying around
/shrug
As I said, presenting work to clients can likely be more easily done on a iPad Pro.
For work at a customer site, if you're there for a week or two you only have to lug in the iMac once when you arrive and once when you leave. I dunno about you but a 15" display is a far more limiting factor than 16GB.
Whether you can get any reasonable work done on the iPad on the train depends on what work you need to do on the train.
A laptop is a compromise whether it is memory or screen size or processing power or transportability. If your needs are within the scope of the compromise then a laptop is great. If your needs are for 32GB and more computing power then not as great. 16GB is fine for me so a MBP makes sense even if the iMac provides more power for less price.
A 15" screen could be limiting of course, but most design studios in Holland tend to have an extra screen available. And if for some reason I réálly need to bring my own monitor, the both of them (MBP and monitor) are still thinner and easier to lug around then a 27" iMac. Plus, money doesn't grow on trees you know: buying a 27" iMac ánd an iPad Pro is a pretty steep investment for someone just starting his/her own business.
If you feel a laptop is a compromise regardless, that's perfectly fine of course. But in some industries and/or countries, it's pretty much the de facto standard.
Comments
And that right there is the problem. PRO customers are interested in performance, not energy efficiency. Knock it off with all the 'green' shit already, and give us a PRO notebook that is actually PRO. Both HP and Dell can do it, why the hell can't you Apple? Stop bitching about battery life and build the thing 1/4" thicker to put in a bigger battery. Holy crap, this is not difficult.
I need a MacBook Pro because:
- I sometimes will need to present my work at clients
- I rent myself out to companies who do not always have a computer available (partly due to EU/Dutch law issues starting in 2017)
- To be mobile enough to work when I'm sitting in a train on my way to a client
… basically the usual things on why people need laptops. I was thinking about an iMac, but it's a beast to keep carrying around
c.m.w. said:Can someone please define what it is to be a professional that is worthy of these missing features? I would like to know if I make the cut so I can start being angry that my perfectly awesome MBP has left me in some way jilted.
Seriously, what are the criteria? So far it seems that the definition is arbitrary and individualized.
What defines a professional? I think that's different per profession. Someone who does audio-creation, 3D-rendering, graphic design or web design... they will all have different demands and needs from a computer after all. A web designer might have less need of 32GB of ram compared to a graphic designer or 3D-rendering artist for example. Problem is though, that a laptop usually lasts for about 4-5 years before someone buys a new one. And if a lot of professionals are already running close to the 16GB-limit with the software and documents they're using, imagine how much of a limit it will become after 4-5 years worth of software-upgrades.
On the other hand, sorry but you cannot start a graphic arts business on a notebook, whatever the RAM is. Consider an iMac 27 inch with 64 GB. And don't quit your job until getting that machine.
Actually, you can definitely start a graphic design business on a laptop. Hence the "pro" in MacBook Pro. A lot of graphic design studios in Holland are actually using MacBook Pros instead of iMacs for their designers because of the mobility it offers. They need to go to clients, to photographers, and so on. If you're an artworker who works with hires files a lot and with a much stricter deadline, an iMac or Mac Pro would be a much better choice. But saying that you can't start a business on a notebook is just plain wrong.
(and I do have a 4 year old iMac that I intend to keep around till my MacBook Pro arrives ánd is working correctly)
Judging my initial sales of the new MacBook Pro, I'd say people don't really care about the missing ports. This is something that will blow over just like every other time when Apple releases something new. In my opinion this really isn't that big of a deal. It seems to me that the loudest people who are complaining are actually a very small portion of users. Just because you're loud and clear, doesn't mean you're the majority. Again, initial sales of are proving this.
Regarding airflow, that is the first thing that came to your mind right now and is obviously wrong. Towers are a design of 2000s, today's data centers are built not on towers but on rack mounted server farms. Towers are conceived to stuff junk into, not for heat considerations. Fans are proven to be inefficient to cool down a tower so builders of gaming rigs are tinkering with water cooling in their little science projects. Aluminium is chosen for Macs and they are made thin (except Mac Pro, which is built uniquely on a special architecture they call "thermal core") just because of heat, not because of design snobism of Jony Ive.
And yet not only heat destroys your computer, it causes first processor throttling prior to it. Your computer just slows down because of processor throttling. To get an idea on how heat is such a crucial issue in today's computing, just keep an eye on support pages in ark.intel.com.
But it's easier for someone to buy a computer without maxing the ram (as in, buy it with 8-16GB of ram). But the ability to actually put 32GB (yourself, or as a BTO) in it would be a necessity for a good amount of creatives out there. Right now there's a hard limit of total amount of ram you can put in there, which is simply not enough for some.
@macplusplus
I know that watercooling is better, but airflow is most definitely good for cooling. All Macs have airflow and fans, and they even mentioned the better airflow with the MacBook Pros that came out last month. I'm not saying that bigger is always better regárding airflow, but it cán help. Positive pressure in computers also result in cooler computers for example, and a stronger fan results in stronger airflow and/or positive pressure. And rackmounted servers have existed well before the 2000's, but a server is a different kind of beast, and are usually kept in separate climate-controlled rooms.
And recent 13" MBPs come with two fans instead of one in the earlier models. Apple might stuff more RAM or storage but they chose to put a second fan instead. So, heat has priority over RAM and storage. Bigger enclosure retains more heat, obviously, so we are good with thin MBPs.
The problem with how Apple is handling this is they are making excuses rather than owning their design decisions. Basically, Phil seems to be struggling with his role as head of marketing. Marketing should be bragging about the positives and why this is a good thing, not about making excuses about battery life when we all know that the primary reason for that even being a concern is because of how thin they made the laptop.
Apple decided they wanted to prioritize the thinness and weight of the new laptop. Ok, cool, tell us why that's important and why the trade-off of lower max RAM was the way to go. Tell us how Apple feels that is more important to the majority of their customers. Own that design decision, don't use it as an excuse for compromises elsewhere in the design. If they blame battery life then they are just blaming themselves because the size of the battery was also their design decision.
If they can't defend the thinness design decision and explain the benefits, then you really have to wonder if it was a valid design requirement to begin with.
Apple designs their products with a clear eye on how use cases and trends are evolving. More and more intensive computing is best served through the cloud. And of course, we are talking about a laptop here, where portability is key.
These devices aren't for everyone - I won't be buying the 2016 MBP as I can't justify the price (especially in CAD$). Hopefully in a few years. But that doesn't stop me from recognizing the benefits of the type of product that Apple produced here (screen, track pad, Touch ID, Touch Pad, thinner and quieter design). I expect many will want one, though pricing may be an issue for a number. I look forward to see how the usefulness of the Touch Bar evolves (or doesn't) over time.
As I said, presenting work to clients can likely be more easily done on a iPad Pro.
For work at a customer site, if you're there for a week or two you only have to lug in the iMac once when you arrive and once when you leave. I dunno about you but a 15" display is a far more limiting factor than 16GB.
Whether you can get any reasonable work done on the iPad on the train depends on what work you need to do on the train.
A laptop is a compromise whether it is memory or screen size or processing power or transportability. If your needs are within the scope of the compromise then a laptop is great. If your needs are for 32GB and more computing power then not as great. 16GB is fine for me so a MBP makes sense even if the iMac provides more power for less price.
If you feel a laptop is a compromise regardless, that's perfectly fine of course. But in some industries and/or countries, it's pretty much the de facto standard.