...this is precisely what I would expect to happen when Apple gave you exactly what you asked for. You asked for faster processors, you asked for more memory. Apple delivered.
You say they should make the case bigger; well, fair enough, but what you don't know is how much bigger they will have to make the case, how much larger they will need to make the fans to move the air round the case, and how much extra this will cost in terms of battery drain to make a difference. You also don't know how many of Apple's customers would reject a laptop that wasn't as svelte as the one they're used to... You say then Apple should make a laptop just for us 'professionals' with a profusion of SCSI ports, a case as large as a tank and a keyboard with travel that goes to the centre of the earth.
Well, I live in the UK...
I asked for that? Sorry, friend, but I did not. I asked for an internal SD card slot and a good keyboard, and Apple instead delivered a performance bump. So no, I didn't ask for what Apple delivered.
Does everyone there in the UK speak in extremes like "large as a tank" and "goes to the centre of the earth"? No one is asking for that. Indeed, I've already said my 2015 15" MBP thickness is about ideal. It's a very thin machine, yet you can fit a good keyboard in there with a good amount of key travel. Hardly anyone complained about the key travel on that model, versus the complaints that are still ongoing about the butterfly keyboard. And if Apple did suddenly start make Professional MacBook Pros that were as thick as the 2015 model but put a host of ports, slots and thermal goodness in such a machine, I assure you, Apple enthusiasts would not turn up their noses, especially when the MacBook exists for people who are willing to have the absolute thinnest and leanest machine possible. Saying it another way, people who dislike something thicker than a piece of paper are the target buyers for the MacBook.
Again, the MacBook strips away nearly everything to make a portable thin and light. The MacBook Pro has sadly been morphed into that mold even though there was no reason for it (since the MacBook already exists for that). And the Air has been allowed to languish. The MBP needs to be a tank in terms of ports and power but still fairly thin and light (again, like the 2015 models). The Air can then be updated and be a bridge between the MacBook and MBP. By having 3 up-to-date product lines like that, assuming the pricing is right, you really can please most Mac users. Don't think so? Apple once did. Seriously. Apple once came out with new Macs that very few Mac users were upset about. These days, we Mac users have become very divided over the thinness and its tradeoffs. (And over bad thermal paste or excessive thermal paste.) And again, that is precisely why Apple should use its 3 notebook product lines to create models that fit the needs of most Mac users. Sorry, but they are not doing that now. If they were, my needs would be met and I would not even be typing this. And don't think I am the lone soul on this planet who loves Macs and feels this way. I assure you I am not alone in wanting more from the MBP, especially with regard to key travel and an internal SD card slot.
I could have told you that, even before Mr. Lee's findings. A lot of people who embrace butterfly keyboards and impossibly thin designs don't give much consideration to thermal throttling. But it is a reality. Another sad fact is that it has been shown that Apple uses vastly inferior thermal paste between GPU and CPU chips and their heatsinks. It would only cost them pennies more to use a half-way decent thermal paste. So in addition to the fact that the thermal cooling in super thin designs like the 2016 and later MBP is inadequate to prevent throttling, thermal paste used does not transfer heat as well is it could. Here's a SnazzyLabs Video that might help convince some of you.
I've long called for the thinning of the MBP to end. The thickness of the 2015 MBP is quite thin yet not too thin. It allows for a good sized battery and for better cooling. And while I think Apple should continue to strive for thinness, that doesn't mean it has to be the MBP. Supreme thinness and lightness is what the MacBook is for. Butterfly keyboards too. But the MBP needs to be "Pro" all around in terms of cooling, thermal performance, battery size, ports-a-plenty, an internal SD card slot, and thick enough to accommodate a great keyboard with sufficient key travel that (a) will satisfy pretty much all users and (b) won't be harmed by specs of dust under the keys. Indeed, on my 2015 MBP 15" I can remove the keys.
These important considerations need to be made more serious by Apple engineers in future designs. Take everything you want away on the MacBook, but put the beefy stuff in the MacBook Pro. Make the MacBook Air a hybrid of the two, and then you have 3 product lines that can please every Mac notebook buyer. Seriously. It's not that hard. It's just a matter of Apple rethinking its design decisions.
I'm not trying to single you out here, but comments like these are appearing everywhere. Everyone is apparently a CEO now and know exactly what's good for Apple.
In terms of the thermal paste, it's likely not as simple as swapping suppliers to get a higher quality paste. If it only cost Apple a few cents more per MacBook, don't you think they would have done it already? There are likely other factors in play. Maybe supplier can't make that much paste in a short amount of time...maybe the high quality paste won't dry fast enough before a product can be shipped. Who knows, could any number of reasons. Maybe suppliers know that Apple is a big company and therefore charges substantially more only for them.
I'd love a thicker laptop and I think 99% of the customers wouldn't mind a thicker laptop. But if you're the CEO and start overriding the design decisions, there could be many consequences that follow up with that action. Maybe Jony's team leave because they can no longer "sign their name" under these products, then the stock price takes a huge dump, board becomes angry, and you as the CEO gets fired. I could easily write several pages on the many possibilities that might happen.
Everyone is apparently a CEO now and know exactly what's good for Apple.
We disgruntled Mac fans only ask Apple to taste a tiny spoonful of its own THINK DIFFERENT medicine. In other words, think different as compared with right now (and since late 2016). :-)
One must also give thought to the fact that if Apple did not care about our opinions, why then offer us numerous feedback forms? Indeed, I often send them feedback, regardless of whether I think it will do any good or not. "Ask and ye shall receive" implies "Don't ask and don't receive." Let us therefore be optimists about giving them feedback. Give it a try! I'd also encourage the tech media to stay objective and not always sing Apple's praises. There's a lot of Cupertino-is-always-right here on AppleInsider but there are articles and videos that balance that a bit, and I appreciate that balance. The Yuryev brothers tell a straight story in their videos most of the time (e.g., "the Touch Bar is a gimmick").
Next, we all know Steve Jobs is no longer micromanaging Johnny Ive and the engineering team. Tim Cook does not do that. Some people say, "Apple has lost its way." Even if Apple is a bit lost, perhaps a little help from us, people who pay money to them to keep them in business, can encourage them to think outside that box of "paper-thinness for every Mac." Not every Mac needs to be paper thin, and certainly not their top end "Pro" notebook.
I've been an AAPL shareholder since 1999, never having sold a single share. I have a vested interest in seeing Apple do well. But the fact remains that iOS drives AAPL, not Macs. With that said, Apple isn't doing well in my book when the only Mac notebook that appeals to me is the MacBook Air, and that only because of its good keyboard, SD card slot, USB-A ports, and MagSafe. Add a retina display and beefy GPU to that mix, and then the MBP matters less and my complaints then largely become moot because the Air will become a more viable buying option. In other words, Apple should make the most of its 3 notebook product lines. To offer suggestions in that regard isn't stepping into the shoes of CEO. It's merely constructive feedback.
There is always room for improvement at Apple. Always.
I started to question Dave2D approach when he tested multiple laptops. Sure it does thermal throttle but hell. Macs are optimized for Mac applications. This is simply stupid from him. Try to benchtest Final cut Pro from a PC. Even though this is impossible, I'm sure it would perform badly.
This video shows FCPX comparisons. 2018 performed slower than 2017 while rendering in Final Cut
Has FCPX been optimized for the new machines yet? These laptops haven’t even been out a week and already the hystronics are over the top. Seems like this guy is just looking for traffic to his YouTube site.
Histrionics. But i do agree that, being this is the model with the new i9, that there will probably be a FCPX update in the near future. I have notice similar updates with new CPU/GPU over the past 18 years of using FCP/Express.
This doesn't surprise me too much. Doesn't the iMac Pro even do this?
It does surprise me a bit, though, that it would be slower than the 2017. Aren't both CPUs similar in terms of thermals? The same chassis should have similar thermal handling capabilities... though MBPs have never handled heat all that well in my experience. And, at least in the past, the problems went beyond the CPU throttling down, but resulted in damage to other components.
Like I said before, nope. Same 14nm and two extra cores, you’d only expect it to be hotter.
But it’s not only the MacBook Pro that throttles, most of the laptops do back in the 4th generation.
Thermal throttling is quite an acceptable practice, the issue here is that the new higher-end 2018 Macbook Pro throttles so much that it performs worse than lower-end cheaper 2017 models, now THAT is a big prblem.
I started to question Dave2D approach when he tested multiple laptops. Sure it does thermal throttle but hell. Macs are optimized for Mac applications. This is simply stupid from him. Try to benchtest Final cut Pro from a PC. Even though this is impossible, I'm sure it would perform badly.
From what I see it, the problem is not that MacBook Pro performs worse than some Windows notebook with some Adobe application. The real problem here is that the new higher-end 2018 MacBook Pro performs worse than some old lower-end 2017 Macbook Pro with the same application, despite it's from Adobe or Apple or Microsoft. When you run the same application on two devices, I expect the newer higher-end model should perform better than some older lower-end cheaper model of the exactly same product line from the exactly same manufacturer. Really, it's a problem for Apple if the 2018 i9-based Macbook Pro performs worse than the 2017 i7-based Macbook Pro in any one application.
Rayz2016 said: [...] One thing you definitely don't know is as much about cooling components as Apple does.
With due respect to Apple's engineers, I'm not sure I would hold up designing cooling systems as an Apple forté. Thermal constraints have held back improvements to the Mac Pro cylinder for five years and counting. The cooling in the iMac was incapable of supporting faster hardware and required a complete redesign for the iMac Pro. Last night I aborted a Pro Tools cataloguing operation because my MacBook Pro was getting so hot I was afraid letting it continue would cause damage.
I don't pretend to know anything about designing cooling systems myself, and I'm sure the challenges are daunting, so I'm not accusing Apple of a fault. I'm just saying if I was compiling a list of things Apple does really well, cooling might not be near the top.
If it's a Jony Ive design, then I'm sure it will end up thermal throttling long before some other companies' design. Jony Ive's quest for thinness will always hamper cooling. I'm being sarcastic but I'm willing to bet I'm right. I've also heard of Apple being cheap and careless when it comes to the application of thermal paste. So sad. Apple has the power to do things right but seems to be getting lazy and that's just so unfair to loyal Apple product users. If I'm wrong, then I truly apologize but it just seems that's how things are at Apple. There's no point in Apple using high-performance components if they can't fully take advantage of them.
Apparently this YouTubeer also saw massive throttling with the Dell XPS. But yet it’s so much easier to bring out the tired Apple is obsessed with thinness trope.
By the way, Apple’s not going to completely redesign a chassis mid design cycle because an Intel chip runs hot. Apple could have refused to offer this upgrade but then people would’ve been bitching about that.
Okay so on one side we have Apple with thousands of engineers, billions of dollars of R&D money, and every testing facility that said money can buy all focussed on making the best product possible. On the other side we have some guy with clearly imperfect testing regimes, and questionable assumptions that said that Apple messed up and he is the only one who knows why. Um...yeah.
By the way, Apple’s not going to completely redesign a chassis mid design cycle because an Intel chip runs hot. Apple could have refused to offer this upgrade but then people would’ve been bitching about that.
That's what I think too. Apple has a fixed design cycle with the MBP where they only do a new chassis every 4 years, and the Intel/AMD competition that resulted in 6 cores caught them by surprise mid-cycle.
With their own processors, softwares and design, they’re much less likely to hit any thermal barriers like Intel. Not to mention we have to wait 3 years for their 10nm, doesn’t change their architecture and now even AMD catches up.
You realize the iPhone and iPad regularly have heat issues, right? Apple will just use it as an excuse to make the MacBook Pro even thinner.
Our 15-inch i9 arrives today or tomorrow. We did thermal throttling tests on the 2017 MacBook Pro, and we're going to do an assortment of them on the i9 very soon.
By the way, Apple’s not going to completely redesign a chassis mid design cycle because an Intel chip runs hot. Apple could have refused to offer this upgrade but then people would’ve been bitching about that.
That's what I think too. Apple has a fixed design cycle with the MBP where they only do a new chassis every 4 years, and the Intel/AMD competition that resulted in 6 cores caught them by surprise mid-cycle.
It’s amazing to me how many think Apple can just re-design things on a whim.
rogifan_new said: Apparently this YouTubeer also saw massive throttling with the Dell XPS. But yet it’s so much easier to bring out the tired Apple is obsessed with thinness trope.
By the way, Apple’s not going to completely redesign a chassis mid design cycle because an Intel chip runs hot. Apple could have refused to offer this upgrade but then people would’ve been bitching about that.
If Apple isn't going to redesign then don't offer CPU's that underperform! You really think Apple offers options based on what people bitch about? Hilarious!!!
People have bitched that they don't need 2 day battery life and to give them fatter Macbooks that can use 32GB DDR4, but Apple persists on thin designs with CPU's that can only handle 16GB DDR3L because of battery life.
Apple doesn't kowtow to what people "bitch about". If this is true about the i9, it's really sad that Apple would release a high-end/high-cost product that fails to perform. And, if true, either they didn't test it well (inexcusable) or they knew it and released it anyways (unthinkable).
Also, Dell vs Apple -- According to (practically everyone here, including you) isn't Apple supposed to be setting a higher standard than Dell? Doesn't everyone hold Apple to higher standards? So now you say, what's good for Dell is good for Apple?
rogifan_new said: Apparently this YouTubeer also saw massive throttling with the Dell XPS. But yet it’s so much easier to bring out the tired Apple is obsessed with thinness trope.
By the way, Apple’s not going to completely redesign a chassis mid design cycle because an Intel chip runs hot. Apple could have refused to offer this upgrade but then people would’ve been bitching about that.
If Apple isn't going to redesign then don't offer CPU's that underperform! You really think Apple offers options based on what people bitch about? Hilarious!!!
People have bitched that they don't need 2 day battery life and to give them fatter Macbooks that can use 32GB DDR4, but Apple persists on thin designs with CPU's that can only handle 16GB DDR3L because of battery life.
Apple doesn't kowtow to what people "bitch about". If this is true about the i9, it's really sad that Apple would release a high-end/high-cost product that fails to perform. And, if true, either they didn't test it well (inexcusable) or they knew it and released it anyways (unthinkable).
Also, Dell vs Apple -- According to (practically everyone here, including you) isn't Apple supposed to be setting a higher standard than Dell? Doesn't everyone hold Apple to higher standards? So now you say, what's good for Dell is good for Apple?
You're aware that the 15-inch MBP now uses DDR4, right?
All I get from this guy's comparison is that Adobe is lazy with their software.
Yet putting the exact same 2018 Macbook Pro in the freezer to cool it, and run the same test, drops render times from 39 minutes to 27 minutes. Doesn't sound like a software problem to me.
deminsd said: Yet putting the exact same 2018 Macbook Pro in the freezer to cool it, and run the same test, drops render times from 39 minutes to 27 minutes. Doesn't sound like a software problem to me.
Adobe requires AMD users to work inside of a freezer? Great programming.
rogifan_new said: Apparently this YouTubeer also saw massive throttling with the Dell XPS. But yet it’s so much easier to bring out the tired Apple is obsessed with thinness trope.
By the way, Apple’s not going to completely redesign a chassis mid design cycle because an Intel chip runs hot. Apple could have refused to offer this upgrade but then people would’ve been bitching about that.
If Apple isn't going to redesign then don't offer CPU's that underperform! You really think Apple offers options based on what people bitch about? Hilarious!!!
People have bitched that they don't need 2 day battery life and to give them fatter Macbooks that can use 32GB DDR4, but Apple persists on thin designs with CPU's that can only handle 16GB DDR3L because of battery life.
Apple doesn't kowtow to what people "bitch about". If this is true about the i9, it's really sad that Apple would release a high-end/high-cost product that fails to perform. And, if true, either they didn't test it well (inexcusable) or they knew it and released it anyways (unthinkable).
Also, Dell vs Apple -- According to (practically everyone here, including you) isn't Apple supposed to be setting a higher standard than Dell? Doesn't everyone hold Apple to higher standards? So now you say, what's good for Dell is good for Apple?
You're aware that the 15-inch MBP now uses DDR4, right?
Of course I do. You really think this is because of people bitching about it wanting it, though? They could have offered faster Macbooks with DDR4 and 32GB RAM in previous generations, but chose not to because it would decrease battery life. A choice they made over public want.
Comments
Does everyone there in the UK speak in extremes like "large as a tank" and "goes to the centre of the earth"? No one is asking for that. Indeed, I've already said my 2015 15" MBP thickness is about ideal. It's a very thin machine, yet you can fit a good keyboard in there with a good amount of key travel. Hardly anyone complained about the key travel on that model, versus the complaints that are still ongoing about the butterfly keyboard. And if Apple did suddenly start make Professional MacBook Pros that were as thick as the 2015 model but put a host of ports, slots and thermal goodness in such a machine, I assure you, Apple enthusiasts would not turn up their noses, especially when the MacBook exists for people who are willing to have the absolute thinnest and leanest machine possible. Saying it another way, people who dislike something thicker than a piece of paper are the target buyers for the MacBook.
Again, the MacBook strips away nearly everything to make a portable thin and light. The MacBook Pro has sadly been morphed into that mold even though there was no reason for it (since the MacBook already exists for that). And the Air has been allowed to languish. The MBP needs to be a tank in terms of ports and power but still fairly thin and light (again, like the 2015 models). The Air can then be updated and be a bridge between the MacBook and MBP. By having 3 up-to-date product lines like that, assuming the pricing is right, you really can please most Mac users. Don't think so? Apple once did. Seriously. Apple once came out with new Macs that very few Mac users were upset about. These days, we Mac users have become very divided over the thinness and its tradeoffs. (And over bad thermal paste or excessive thermal paste.) And again, that is precisely why Apple should use its 3 notebook product lines to create models that fit the needs of most Mac users. Sorry, but they are not doing that now. If they were, my needs would be met and I would not even be typing this. And don't think I am the lone soul on this planet who loves Macs and feels this way. I assure you I am not alone in wanting more from the MBP, especially with regard to key travel and an internal SD card slot.
One must also give thought to the fact that if Apple did not care about our opinions, why then offer us numerous feedback forms? Indeed, I often send them feedback, regardless of whether I think it will do any good or not. "Ask and ye shall receive" implies "Don't ask and don't receive." Let us therefore be optimists about giving them feedback. Give it a try! I'd also encourage the tech media to stay objective and not always sing Apple's praises. There's a lot of Cupertino-is-always-right here on AppleInsider but there are articles and videos that balance that a bit, and I appreciate that balance. The Yuryev brothers tell a straight story in their videos most of the time (e.g., "the Touch Bar is a gimmick").
Next, we all know Steve Jobs is no longer micromanaging Johnny Ive and the engineering team. Tim Cook does not do that. Some people say, "Apple has lost its way." Even if Apple is a bit lost, perhaps a little help from us, people who pay money to them to keep them in business, can encourage them to think outside that box of "paper-thinness for every Mac." Not every Mac needs to be paper thin, and certainly not their top end "Pro" notebook.
I've been an AAPL shareholder since 1999, never having sold a single share. I have a vested interest in seeing Apple do well. But the fact remains that iOS drives AAPL, not Macs. With that said, Apple isn't doing well in my book when the only Mac notebook that appeals to me is the MacBook Air, and that only because of its good keyboard, SD card slot, USB-A ports, and MagSafe. Add a retina display and beefy GPU to that mix, and then the MBP matters less and my complaints then largely become moot because the Air will become a more viable buying option. In other words, Apple should make the most of its 3 notebook product lines. To offer suggestions in that regard isn't stepping into the shoes of CEO. It's merely constructive feedback.
There is always room for improvement at Apple. Always.
Histrionics.
But i do agree that, being this is the model with the new i9, that there will probably be a FCPX update in the near future. I have notice similar updates with new CPU/GPU over the past 18 years of using FCP/Express.
I don't pretend to know anything about designing cooling systems myself, and I'm sure the challenges are daunting, so I'm not accusing Apple of a fault. I'm just saying if I was compiling a list of things Apple does really well, cooling might not be near the top.
By the way, Apple’s not going to completely redesign a chassis mid design cycle because an Intel chip runs hot. Apple could have refused to offer this upgrade but then people would’ve been bitching about that.
On the other side we have some guy with clearly imperfect testing regimes, and questionable assumptions that said that Apple messed up and he is the only one who knows why.
Um...yeah.
People have bitched that they don't need 2 day battery life and to give them fatter Macbooks that can use 32GB DDR4, but Apple persists on thin designs with CPU's that can only handle 16GB DDR3L because of battery life.
Apple doesn't kowtow to what people "bitch about". If this is true about the i9, it's really sad that Apple would release a high-end/high-cost product that fails to perform. And, if true, either they didn't test it well (inexcusable) or they knew it and released it anyways (unthinkable).
Also, Dell vs Apple -- According to (practically everyone here, including you) isn't Apple supposed to be setting a higher standard than Dell? Doesn't everyone hold Apple to higher standards? So now you say, what's good for Dell is good for Apple?
I hope this is a faulty unit or some weird firmware problem. It's too early to draw absolute conclusions.