Apple Working With Consumer Reports on MacBook Pro's Battery Issue (cnet.com)
Last week, Consumer Reports concluded that it won't be recommending Apple's new MacBook Pro models. The American magazine published since 1936 by Consumers Union, a nonprofit organization, cited inconsistent battery issues for not recommending the MacBook Pro for the first time in its history. Apple's VP of Marketing has since addressed the report, saying they are working with the magazine to understand the results. From a report: Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller followed up with a tweet late Friday saying Apple is "working with CR to understand their battery tests. Results do not match our extensive lab tests or field data." Consumer Reports' review says that in-house testing revealed wild fluctuations in battery life for unplugged MacBook Pro computers. In the case of the 13-inch model without a Touch Bar, for example, battery life ranged from 19.5 hours to just 4.5 hours. Apple says the devices should operate for up to 10 hours between charges.
Apple might remove all your products from their store and block their devices from accessing your website!
And, even to me, it's obvious if Phil Shiller is the point person on this, Apple is looking for a PR "solution" to this battery life issue.
This is antenna-gate all over again.
#DeleteChrome
They are trying to prove them wrong, they are not working on fixing the battery issues. Within a few days we will all learn on Slashdot that Consumer Reports was doing it wrong.
lucm, indeed.
We are long overdue for these manufacturers to be called out on their deceptive marketing practices. I remember when battery life was expected to be like 1-3 hours, yet somehow the same manufacturers are claiming things like 10-20 hours. That is true if your CPU is running in a low-power state (Which was not possible back in 'the day'), but battery life today is not much better than it ever was if you're running your processor at full load.
You don't work with CR. Your product is purchased without your foreknowledge, and they judge it. The end.
up to 10 hours includes lasting only 10 minutes.
What a vague phrase - "working with".
Does this mean bribing them to write more favourable reviews, or threatening them with lawsuits if they don't?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
CR could be setting a bad precedent.
Read the goddamn article! This has absolutely nothing to do with Firefox!
I don't get why some people might suggest that Firefox is responsible when the testing was done using Safari.
Don't blame Firefox when Firefox wasn't even involved!
you're the only one here mentioning firefox. arguing with yourself here buddy.
Apple says the devices should operate for up to 10 hours between charges.
So their complaint is that CR sometimes gets more runtime than they should?
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
.. the phrase "Read my lips! No new taxes!".
Apple's entire line of laptops is now disposable, and Consumer Reports is worried about the battery life.
Battery replacement is. After a few years, battery life will be half of whatever it started with. At that point, the MBP and its irreplaceable batteries can never stray very far from the charger. Users might accept that, as many people don't depend on the battery all that much. The ultimate deal breaker is soldered SSD. When that fails (and it will), the computer is junk.
If Apple offered a MacBook Pro with HALF of the current battery life, HALF of the memory, and HALF of the storage capacity, but made the components replaceable, they would sell a lot more of them, even if they were TWICE as thick.
I have a maxed 15" config, and my battery life is really good. I can actually get a full work day (Xcode, Safari, Terminal mostly) on a full charge. Well, as long as I don't load up my Win10 VM in Fusion, then I get maybe a couple hours. Yes, it's THAT drastic.
Consumer Reports has recommended the Macbooks for years. And until now you apparently had no worries about their testing methodology. Isn't that an interesting coincidence?
lucm, indeed.
Looking at alternatives for the first time in 16 years.
Apple doesn't want to be a computer company anymore.
Serious, this sound be pretty obvious what we're seeing here. Apple built a crappy product, and now are trying to lean on a major gear reviewer to do damage control.
But hey, I'll admit I am very anti Apple. I don't like the products, I don't like the company, and I don't really even much care for it's fan boys. But even then we can't ignore that Apple hasn't been acting in good faith at all with this generation of MacBooks. Removing features, stupid decisions in terms of switching out ports for less common types, and increasing the price for the base models to boot. And now we're hearing that something new is wrong with them, probably because of another 'cost saving' measure that's gone wrong. Yet the first thing that Apple has to say is that they thing Consumer Reports did the rests testing wrong. Pardon me if I'm less than impressed with this excuse. But hey... prove us wrong.
Apple says the devices should operate for up to 10 hours between charges
with apologies to Monty Python "as long as you realise that up to clearly includes the number zero"
that bad for me, but lack of RAM just makes my new MacBook useless. It has the same amount of RAM as the summer of 2011 MacBook it replaced. It's sad Apple gave-up over five years ago on improving their laptops.
CR will work with companies regarding details of test conditions and procedures to help them isolate any problems the testing might have turned up (which is probably the case here).
The actual products that are tested though are bought off of store shelves by undercover CR employees posing as regular customers. That way a company can't rig the actual sample of the CR product being tested, unless they're specifically invited by CR to see if the product is defective (which has happened a few times with cars which failed some of CR's minimum safety tests.)
This is one of the reasons I maintain a CR subscription even though the vast majority of their testing is too "average user" to be relevant to me. I think it's incredible valuable to have at least some published reviews based on random samples, instead of manufacturer-provided samples.
Make it bigger with more room for a bigger battery.
This thinness is killing the mac! the mini, mac pro, imac, laptops have all been hit by must look good and be thin. If they want to be thin why not have a 1u mac pro?
Since the problem goes away if you use Chrome. I wonder if the Safari team has brought in people from the iTunes team. God knows iTunes is a crawling horror.
Best Slashdot Co
Slap a few stacks of 100's in CR's hands and see if fixes the report. We know Apple will not be fixing the problem in the Mac. After all, they have one of the world's most expensive legal departments.
- Deny it's an issue until absolutely possible.
- Detract from anyone who might be right and calling attention to the issue. Call them nerds, neckbeards. Imply they're "not holding the phone right."
- Only when the PR storm STILL hasn't faded and sales continue to decline:
- STILL don't admit there's a problem and "work with" whoever did the study/comment to try and attack their clarity. (Say they "did the test wrong.")
And then... MAYBE just then... if they admit any blame?
- PUSH BLAME onto a few scapegoat engineers and never admit it's a result of a manager being an asshole. (The GM method.)
The sad thing is, I probably missed a few more strategies on the top. It's amazing how "Hard" it is for a company to just admit when something doesn't meet their own specifications.
Consumer Reports should have rejected Apple's request. This is a pathetic PR stunt to try and mask that the employees in Apple's own Q&A labs either A.) weren't good enough to find the same issues or B.) Reported the same problems and Apple's executive team decided to make up benchmarks to suit the message they wanted for the keynote. Shows what kind of garbage is running Apple these days. Their ability to take any kind of highly innovative risk has been frozen since Jobs died. The few things they have tried have failed horribly and their competitors at Google and more recently even Microsoft have superseded.... All that Apple has left are brand loyalist. Those loyalist are either too comfortable in the Apple ecosystem to look elsewhere or too out of touch with trends to realize they are no longer the leaders. At this season in it's life, Apple sells on it's image and brand appeal rather than it's innovation, quality and value. That's why they lost me.
Goal is to get the product out on the deadline. Internal tests no matter how extensive would not make a difference what is shipped.
Wonder how much money Apple will throw at Consumer Reports, to change their opinion ;)
I kept holding out for Apple to get their game back with laptops since 2010 but finally pulled the trigger on a Dell Developer Edition today. Can't wait to finally escape.
Side by side... I've used both computers I played a game on the 2015 which lasted longer then the 2016 while all i did was watch videos off Youtube...
one thing i can say for sure is the new one has issues.. i'm about to go return the 2016 one...
as i speak right now me and my gf have been using both computers simultaneously doing the same exact things on the web the 2015 Mac started at 74% and the 2016 started at 49% i have like 6 tabs open one is playing a video and i was watching the news on the 2015 model she's watching a movie, she's on the 2016 model already hit 10% and put it back on the charger while i'm still at 60%
their is a big difference... BIG ONE...
Let me applexplain !
It's all for the consumer, reduced battery life is a boon to users! And no one at apple ever used that sd card slot anyway.
I can not longer simply close my laptop and wake it up buy opening it without having a crash after 4 to 6 weeks. And it gets noticeable slow and causes a a so called kernel task to consume 75% or more CPU.
It is related to the amount (about 100) and age of tabs. Ofc eating CPU will kill the battery. As I'm usually using my laptop connected to the grid, that is not an issue, but the slowing down is an issue and the constant spinning of the fans.
I had a 15" laptop from my company a few month ago, running 10.10, it seemed to have the same issue, but only one core was eating the CPU, so the impact did not feel that bad.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
After review Apple decided to remove Consumer Reports from the Internet.
So, a limo hauls up to CR's offices and out steps Timmy Cook wearing nothing except a sheer negligee and stiletto high-heel shoes and holding a $300 bottle of champagne.
Not going to go well.
Most of how Apple tests is with their own software, hardware, and applications. It's not unusual for a independent test to obtain lower stats than what Apple did. Apple does tests in order to gain a marketing stat that is positive. It's not about real world stats for Apple. It's about marketing advantage over competition. Consumer Reports does not do flaky evaluations and they obviously had more than one test unit that obtained similar results. This proves that either Apple has a common issue with all the new MacBook Pro's. Or Consumer Reports does a test that none of the new MacBook Pro's can perform very well. If this translates into real users experiencing similar poor battery life. Apple has way more issues than Consumer Reports.
Modern web pages are *built* to suck battery ife through every orifice. Streaming, every-changing ads, dynamic content for no good reason, and an insistence that images and even inserts come from multiple remote sites instead of being flat text make modern bwowsers *suck* uncacheable content for "ambiance" components, and chew up local CPU, graphics CPU, and even disk cache storing and re-arranging and displaying irrelevant content. Even Slashdot has fallen somewhat into the trap, despite its users shrieking, by those bulky ads in the middle of the page.
If you want to protect your battery life, use "lynx" as your browser. Set LANG=C to avoid unicode ti avoid stupid emoji irrelevancies, and if the site is useless, notify the publisher that the website is not compliant with ADA guidelines for the vidually impaired or blind people with text-speech sympathizer based computers. Lynx doesn't work with Amazon Prime web shopping? Bwaaahhhh, poor baby. You shouldn't be web shopping while you're at work or on a train with your laptop anyway.
I always figured people that wanted thin would just get the Macbook Air. People buying Macbook Pro's expected to have a powerful laptop and don't care how thin it is.
They did, it was called the Xserve