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.

Comments

I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[93 Escort Wagon]

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.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Hognoxious]

It's spelled Schiller. Freudian slip?

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[93 Escort Wagon]

Haha probably!

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Anonymous Coward]

That is nonsense. From Apple's perspective this IS primarily a PR problem at the moment because it is highly unlikely that CR's testing is so advanced and extensive that they would be able to detect issues that Apple internally could not.
Especially things like extremely varying battery life ranging from 4.5 hour to 19.5 hours.

And obviously if they do find reason to think that CR is on to something, a VP will have direct access to all of the companies resources to drive further investigation forward.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[93 Escort Wagon]

That is nonsense. From Apple's perspective this IS primarily a PR problem at the moment because it is highly unlikely that CR's testing is so advanced and extensive that they would be able to detect issues that Apple internally could not.
Especially things like extremely varying battery life ranging from 4.5 hour to 19.5 hours.

I think you are missing the point, if you think this is about "advanced and extensive" testing.

I don't expect the Consumer Reports' crew to be experts on this sort of thing. I expect they will run things more along the lines of how a typical non-technical Mac user will run things, because CR's team probably isn't that much more knowledgeable about Macs than the typical end user. And many end users - even before CR said anything - had already been reporting these same problems... so it seems darn obvious there is an issue, whatever Apple's "advanced and extensive" internal testing may (or may not) indicate.

That's kind of the point of Consumer Reports... to test things the way typical real-world people do.

And, frankly, we don't know if there was some subset of Apple's internal tests which did indicate this sort of issue, but the company decided weren't critical enough to cause them to hold production. The iPhone 4 antenna issues showed it can - and does - happen. Heck, how did Samsung release an exploding phone, if all these companies' "advanced and extensive" internal testing is infallible?

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[TheFakeTimCook]

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.

I think that is jumping to conclusions.

Phil is definitely "on" this, even reaching-out to individual Users who have Responded to his Tweet on CR, asking them to send him certain specific Logs to help Apple diagnose this problem.

The difference is, Uncle Phil is doing this on a one-on-one, direct basis, rather than issuing some "Press Release" explaining why MBP Users are just "charging it wrong", or something.

I honestly think that, while it is true that Schiller wears a Marketing hat, he is high-enough up in the Organization that if he wants to take this on as a "Personal Project", nobody inside Apple is going to question his sincerity; and if you look at his bio, he has enough "tech" chops to understand and appreciate the possible software (and likely some of the hardware) causes for all this.

Behind the scenes, I am also sure he has someone(s) on the Mac Dev. Team working over Christmas on this, even if he is engaging in a little direct communication with individuals, CR, and possibly the media in general.

Re: I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Guspaz]

Because the amount of testing that a company can do internally pales in comparison to what customers will do when you put millions of units in their hands. Internal testing can't cover the same scale as the mass market.

Re: I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[fluffernutter]

But the company, especially one that charges premium prices like Apple, can and should control the number of 'failures' that occur. They have a lot of control over the quality of the parts that are put in, and they are supposed to be the one you go to if you don't want problems.

Re: I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Guspaz]

Yes, but this sounds more like a software issue than a hardware issue, I think it's unlikely that battery lifetimes being so inconsistent on a single unit would be from a hardware issue: if it was, you'd expect to see consistently poor battery life.

My guess is there's some glitch in the power management that's causing the notebook to get stuck in a high-power state.

Re: I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[mcswell]

You can read the linked-linked article at Consumer Reports (by "linked-linked", I mean the CR article that is referred to in the earlier /. report, linked to in this article):
  http://www.consumerreports.org.... For testing, they used the stock Safari browser (battery life increased when they used a third party browser).

I wonder if it could have been simultaneously downloading software updates?

Once you read the article I reference, you'll know how the Mac was set up.

Re: I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[rtb61]

Downloaded apps are usually the problem. People forget that something as simple as running two calender programs can cause real problem, especially if the access the same repository. One set a setting, the other detects the change and resets it and the first sets it again and etc. etc. and this happening as fast as the system allows and going on and on. The common trend to accessing the same shared data storage, actual files, can cause real problems with programs never ever designed to run together, fighting for control over the data. So a simply read write monitor should pick up problems, checking for the same data being read, changed, change read and data reset, to be read and changed again. Look out for calenders, clocks, weather program, location and mapping et al.

Re: I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Guspaz]

Apple has had a reputation in the past (and by that I mean they maintained that reputation for many years) for posting relatively accurate battery life figures. It's only very recently that this has been an issue. Apple is claiming 10 hours, and CR was seeing anywhere from 4.5 hours to 19.5 hours. The 19.5 hour figure is probably more interesting than the 4.5 hour figure: what happened there? That's almost double the estimates.

Re: I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Guspaz]

The article you linked to also seems to say that they didn't encounter any battery life issues at all when running Chrome, so that tends to indicate a bug in Safari rather than a problem with the laptop itself.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[gl4ss]

4.5h sounds about right if the computer is doing something.

19.5 hours sounds about right if it somehow got disconnected from the net and all the pieces pinging the internet stopped to run magically, keeping the load low and also the performance setting was set to low.

and look at the wording "OPERATE". that doesn't mean doing anything... and if it's the day that it wants to download updates over wifi sure as f it's not going to have 10h+.

problem with apple testing their own hw is of course that they can make it run a "normal use scenario" that is not normal at all if you have anything installed or if any preinstalled stuff from store wants to update itself.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[mysidia]

That is nonsense. From Apple's perspective this IS primarily a PR problem at the moment

Apple wants to cast FUD on CR's testing process, until Apple is able to get a handle on the issue, which is obviously real,
and obviously something Apple has missed, but CR's testing may not have yielded enough facts so far for Apple to figure it out.

Or Apple may know very well but can be biding their time for PR purposes.

Why else would Apple publicize them working with CR before they have some concrete information?

Re: I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[mysidia]

The 19.5 hour figure is probably more interesting than the 4.5 hour figure: what happened there? That's almost double the estimates.

19.5 Hours sounds like what you'd expect from a laptop held powered on but in Sleep state, to me....

Re: I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Corbets]

... in the first few weeks that it was used. Who knows - that may have been the same failure number every month of operation, in which case, the picture looks a lot worse.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Uberbah]

Jobs' solution to "antenna-gate" as you call it, was to announce to the world that the phone was fine, people were just holding it incorrectly

Keep fucking that chicken, chicken-fuckers. FIVE Samsung devices on the first page alone.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[tlhIngan]

And, frankly, we don't know if there was some subset of Apple's internal tests which did indicate this sort of issue, but the company decided weren't critical enough to cause them to hold production. The iPhone 4 antenna issues showed it can - and does - happen. Heck, how did Samsung release an exploding phone, if all these companies' "advanced and extensive" internal testing is infallible?

Well, Samsung had a design flaw that the law of large numbers meant turning a rare event into a probable one.

CR works by going to the store and buying a random unit off the shelf, like a consumer would. And I'm pretty sure they probably buy more than one to ensure consistency.

CR's testing is largely scientific - repeated tests doing the same thing to a test standard, but again, they do what typical consumers would test.

The only real question is did CR do something to potentially invalidate the test or maybe their app runs completely oddly. The best test would be external - besides a bit of set up it runs automatically without requiring anything more than a user or apparatus pushing buttons. If they're using a test script, perhaps the script is doing something that is screwing up the test results.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[swb]

I'm kind of mystified by the abuse of CR testing here. There's kind of a meme that CR can't test anything besides blenders, AFAICT it originated back in the day when they started testing stereos and audiophiles got bent that their testing wasn't judging whether exotic equipment produced the exotic sounds or wasn't using the requisite 00 gauge welding cable to connect the speakers.

They're not disassembling the batteries and running the cell material through a mass spectrometer or conducting elaborate electrical tests of the batteries themselves; they don't need to.

What they do need to do is design reasonable structured tests of laptop usage and keep track of the battery's lifespan during these tests and compare it to the manufacturer's claims. That's well within CR's ability and it's perfectly valid. Either the computer battery does what the manufacturer claims it will do or it doesn't.

What CR is likely complaining about is that Apple modeled their battery life on some average use pattern that's not very realistic or very easy to deviate from in ways that seriously affect battery life.

What Apple should have done was modeled their battery life based on more intensive use cases. But of course then you can't make the laptop even thinner and the battery even smaller and then make long life battery claims. IMHO Apple is a victim of their own thinness obsession and is fudging the numbers to make it look positive.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Wrath0fb0b]

Heck, how did Samsung release an exploding phone, if all these companies' "advanced and extensive" internal testing is infallible?

Actually, given that many hundreds of consumer devices hit the market each year and there are a handful of really bad failures like antenna-gate and the exploding Note, I'd say they're running around 3-sigma. To me, that seems just about in-line with expectations that we'd see 99.7% or so reliability of the testing mechanisms.

Building a testing regimen that moves it to 99.99 or 99.999% of products released without a defect would likely double the testing costs and add weeks (or months) to the release schedule. At some point you have to stop and accept some risk that, out of a few hundred releases, some will have an undiscovered flaw. Better to correct the flaw and institute testing around that area than to be paralyzed by fear of failure.

Re: I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Cmdln Daco]

When Apple starts pre-installing Chrome, it will cease to be a bug in the product Apple sells. Until then, it is a bug in Apple's product, which can not be resolved until the customer upgrades the browser to Chrome.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Theaetetus]

I don't expect the Consumer Reports' crew to be experts on this sort of thing. I expect they will run things more along the lines of how a typical non-technical Mac user will run things, because CR's team probably isn't that much more knowledgeable about Macs than the typical end user... That's kind of the point of Consumer Reports... to test things the way typical real-world people do.

Allegedly, what CR did was to set up a script that would constantly reload a half dozen pages in Safari, and they got the wildly varying battery life. When they re-ran the test in Chrome, it was solid and in line with Apple's marketing info. Was Safari not using the cache properly? Was Safari properly refreshing the cache and Chrome was relying on it? Something else? Either way, it's clear it's not a hardware problem, which makes CR's refusal to rate the Macbook questionable. Their justification is that they rate hardware with the default software on it, but that implies that if you give them a stripped down version, you may get significantly better ratings than one with free software, and that raises credibility issues overall.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[plover]

Given the description of the test includes repeatedly downloading the same pages on an "internal" hosted server, they're at least attempting to control for variables like automatic updates, random network scans as a result of malware attacks, or variations in advertisements delivered. An "external" test risks exposing the machine to too many random power draining events.

Or do you mean "external" as in an external simulated mouse and keyboard instead of an "internal" script? CR has always been scrupulously careful in their testing methodology. Since it would be almost impossible to fairly compare a shell script with a batch file, it seems highly unlikely they would trust a test script.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[nnull]

Jobs' solution to "antenna-gate" as you call it, was to announce to the world that the phone was fine, people were just holding it incorrectly

No, the best part is that every manufacturer saw that Jobs can get away with it, so can we. Ever since then, we've been having phones with degrading services requiring carriers to build more towers. But that's ok, because the carriers decided we could charge A LOT more for services because we have to build more towers, so now everyone is happy! Until the next BS to come up.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[fbobraga]

It puts a question on all CR's results (even the one very positive to Apple's...), right?

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[Uberbah]

ahh, deflect blame

It's not deflection to point out how full of shit you Hatebois are when you race for the fainting couches if Apple is involved but DGAF if it's anyone else.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[david_thornley]

This is antenna-gate all over again.

You mean an overblown and easily fixed problem?

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[david_thornley]

Actually, Jobs' solution to "antenna-gate" was to give all the iPhone 4 customers a free case that would cover up the antenna junction. I got mine. In the meantime, I tested my 4 and found I had to lick my finger and put it on the short space between antennas to have any noticeable effect. It was a stupid design decision in the first place, but the problems were avoidable, not serious for every 4, and Apple provided a fix that worked.

Re:I'be been a Mac user for 13+ years

[swb]

There may be some subset of buyers who buy that car based merely on performance, but there will likely be a larger subset of buyers looking for a high performance daily driver with use criteria beyond mere performance.

The latter category of people also overlap with the likely readership of Consumer Reports, while the former will be reading Car and Driver or some other performance related magazine where power and speed are the evaluation criteria.

Working on the report instead of the battery

[lucm]

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.

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[Anonymous Coward]

And consumer reports will have a few more bucks in the bank account.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[PolygamousRanchKid]

In other news, Apple has secretly hired a team of "Test Conformance" executives and engineers from Volkswagen, to ensure that the battery lasts longer, when it detects that it is being tested.

Back in my younger days, vendors would add obscure flags to the C compiler, to ensure that it produced code optimized for benchmark tests.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[Anonymous Coward]

If "extra processing" causes a decrease in battery life (it does!) that's not a software glitch, it's exposing the bogus inflated battery life figures. Intel power management doesn't give battery manufacturers a free ride to more grandiose claims, but that is what they have been doing.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[Anonymous Coward]

they test the devices as bought. who writes the code for safari? the same company that makes the macbook. so you're saying that they should ignore how it works because there might be a problem with software the manufacturer wrote for the hardware being tested? i can't understand your logic. i really cannot for the life of me understand how people rationalize things.

fitting captcha>>>fanatics

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[ddtmm]

This is not new news. People have been complaining of bad battery life well before Consumer Reports: http://www.macrumors.com/2016/.... The bottom line is it shouldn't have such drastically different test results with the same repeated tests. Whether it's the batteriesSafari or otherwise, it should be at least consistant. http://www.macrumors.com/2016/...

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[reanjr]

CR is far more trustworthy than Apple. There is little reason to trust Apple on this. CR has been doing this shit for decades on myriad models. To suggest Apple knows better is to suggest Apple game the system.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[thegarbz]

Apple is doing the right thing, by trying to get to the bottom of this in a systematic, controlled, intelligent manner.

By sending in the marketing team instead of engineers?

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

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.

And you know this, how?

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Even if the cause of the results were some really oddball bug like that; why would that matter?

If I'm a user of one of these devices and between 8% and 19% of page loads trigger atypical load on odd numbered days my battery life will also be unpredictable and short; which would make me an unhappy customer with a problematic device.

It's only a testing flaw if it's one of the nasty Heisenbugs that are actually caused by the fact that you are testing(eg. if safari's freaky rendering issue occurs only under certain circumstances where it is being script-driven in a particular way; but never otherwise). Otherwise, it may be a really cryptic issue that the tester doesn't know enough to actually diagnose; but if their tests are sufficiently representative of real-world loads; it's a cryptic issue that users risk running into as well, so the test is providing exactly the information it is supposed to. The point of this sort of testing is to attempt to simulate real world use and see how it goes; not to elucidate the deep mysteries of the product. That sort of testing does require avoiding test procedures that cause wildly unrealistic things to happen; but requires no particularly deep understanding of the system being tested, since you need only to do a slightly more automated and quantified version of what the end user is expected to do.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[lucm]

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.

And you know this, how?

Didn't you read that part in the summary where it says "Apple's VP of Marketing has since addressed the report"?

They did not send a crack team of engineer to review the devices or to assess the issue, they had their marketing guy say that the results don't match their in-house tests.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

How can you be so sure that there isn't some sort of yet-undiscovered flaw with the testing methodology that was being used? How can you be so sure that it is a problem with the batteries?

It could very well be a problem with the testing methodology, and not the batteries. In such a case, there isn't even anything Apple could do to "fix the battery issues", as these issues to "fix" wouldn't even exist to begin with!

The article says that the testing involved Safari repeatedly loading certain web pages. How are you so sure that this type of testing doesn't, for example, sporadically cause Safari to do extra processing, perhaps due to a bug in Safari? If something like that is happening, and it isn't consistent, then it could very well be a purely software problem being mistaken for a hardware problem. Anyone who has done any real world software development will know very well how unpredictable and random some bugs can be.

The most sensible thing to do in a situation like this is look at the testing methodology first. Apple is doing the right thing, by trying to get to the bottom of this in a systematic, controlled, intelligent manner. What you're proposing is the opposite of that: it's all about random, uncontrolled, amateurish guessing.

The above post is spot-on.

And the fact that CR found that the problem seemed to go away by using Chrome instead of Safari, points rather directly to an issue with the Touch Bar version of Safari, or some Framework used thereunder, that is leaving one or more Processes spinning at 100% CPU for hours-on-end, rather than some weakness in the MBP's batteries.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

If "extra processing" causes a decrease in battery life (it does!) that's not a software glitch, it's exposing the bogus inflated battery life figures. Intel power management doesn't give battery manufacturers a free ride to more grandiose claims, but that is what they have been doing.

Ya know, there's a reason why everyone's battery tests are conducted in "real-world" simulations, rather than by simply staring-up some sort of "battery-stress-test" software that would peg the CPU/GPU/Hard Drive/Display Brightness until the machine stopped running: And that reason is, it doesn't inform the potential buyer about what they would expect to achieve in the REAL WORLD.

So, if (as I suspect) this is a fault of the often-launched-for-hours-at-a-time Safari Browser (or some Framework thereunder), not just doing "some extra processing", but rather leaving one or more Processes running full-tilt on one or more CPU Cores and even possibly the dGPU for that same hours-at-a-time, it is quite natural to expect that the battery life would be quite affected in any laptop.

I was also reading a poster on MacRumors that owns both a 2015 and 2016 MBP, and he claims he is getting virtually identical run-times on the two systems, doing the same things. And that the results are in-line with Apple's published figures. And I am fairly certain that that is as least as scientific a test as what CR conducted.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

Well I use Firefox on a brand new Macbook pro and my battery sucks. So, no that's not it.

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

This is not new news. People have been complaining of bad battery life well before Consumer Reports: http://www.macrumors.com/2016/.... The bottom line is it shouldn't have such drastically different test results with the same repeated tests. Whether it's the batteriesSafari or otherwise, it should be at least consistant. http://www.macrumors.com/2016/...

But one VERY possible reason it wouldn't be was if Safari exhibited an intermittent bug, where SOMETIMES, one or more Runaway Processes run at 100% CPU and/or GPU for as long as it is Launched (and maybe even after it is Quit).

Why do people keep ignoring the 800 lb Gorilla; that being, that the problem seemed to "Follow" Safari. Safari = Wildly Differing Battery-Life; Chrome = Battery Life per Apple's Published spec.

DUH!!!

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Even if the unpredictability ends up being a software issue that can be ironed out, so that repeated runs of the same workload at least produce the same results; it's hard to imagine the overall story on battery life is going to be a happy one. The 13in model was cut from 74.9WHr to 49.2; and the 15in from 99.5 to 76.

Apparently they've improved the efficiency of the screen; but more or less all of the efficiency improvement in the move from Broadwell to Skylake CPUs has been in the low power modes; and how quickly the CPUs can move in and out of them; but draw when under load is pretty much the same. In the models with a discrete GPU that might kick in, the difference between idling and load will be even more dramatic.

The new ones might well sleep more soundly than their predecessors; but Apple hacked off 25-30% of the battery capacity without being able to do much about consumption under load. That is going to make them more sensitive to what you are using them for than previously, even assuming perfect avoidance of unnecessary load, spurious wakeups, etc.

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

CR is far more trustworthy than Apple. There is little reason to trust Apple on this. CR has been doing this shit for decades on myriad models. To suggest Apple knows better is to suggest Apple game the system.

Let's leave "trustworthiness" out of this speculation, shall we?

CR has posted some numbers which vary wildly in both directions from Apple's published figures.

Apple is asking politely if they can see if they can understand how CR got these results.

Nothing to see here. Sounds like it is an issue with the newly-released Touch Bar version of Safari. Which is actually quite good news.

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[Shane_Optima]

That's all well and good, but either way it's still Apple's fault. Not that their fans will care.

If it's a Safari bug (as your previous post said), how the hell is that a "flaw in the testing methodology"? Not only is it Apple's fault if Safari is killing the battery, it's actually doubly Apple's fault because this wouldn't be nearly as big of an issue if their "Pro" product actually had a large, user-changeable battery.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[epyT-R]

No, but what it does do is give an absolute worst case scenario that intelligent, knowledgeable people (the ones buying 'pro' models of products) can use to intuit what they might expect for their own usage. It's just as valid a metric as 'typical LCD use case.' They measure different things for different people.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[mysidia]

A bug in Safari is not a testing methodology error; It's a problem with the product, since Safari is part of MacOS.

Also, a true test of battery life should consider Other things we may do with our computers beside web browsing,
which may in fact be a bit more processor intensive.

Things like watching a bunch of 4K Netflix movies or streaming other H.264 encoded files, or playing some DVDs.

Things like composing documents, or using image editing or CAD software to create building layouts/engineering designs.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[mysidia]

If I get the new MBP, then I would be running the new version of Safari, naturally, so my MBP would not be providing the advertised battery life If I have this issue!!

It doesn't really matter if the underlying reason is Hardware or Software problem, As long as there exists a problem, then the Unit does not provide the battery life promised, and CR's test results would still be valid, if they show the issue.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

No, but what it does do is give an absolute worst case scenario that intelligent, knowledgeable people (the ones buying 'pro' models of products) can use to intuit what they might expect for their own usage. It's just as valid a metric as 'typical LCD use case.' They measure different things for different people.

But show me a single laptop OEM that tests that way....

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

If I get the new MBP, then I would be running the new version of Safari, naturally, so my MBP would not be providing the advertised battery life If I have this issue!!

It doesn't really matter if the underlying reason is Hardware or Software problem, As long as there exists a problem, then the Unit does not provide the battery life promised, and CR's test results would still be valid, if they show the issue.

Yes, it matters. A LOT. You're an idiot if you don't understand why; but here goes...

If it is a software issue, then that should be fairly straightforward to diagnose and fix, and the fix can be instantly rolled-out to all existing users, and included in the software build of all machines being built from this time forward. Problem solved! And meanwhile, the "workaround" could be as simple as using Chrome instead of Safari until the fix is available. Most reasonable people would understand. But I'm sure you would act like using another Browser for a couple of weeks would be a crime against humanity...

Conversely, if it is a Hardware issue, the fix may be difficult, could temporarily halt production while updated hardware is designed, qualified, sent though agency approvals, etc, and would most likely result in a recall of all units already sold.

BIG DIFFERENCE!

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[Uberbah]

They did not send a crack team of engineer to review the devices or to assess the issue, they had their marketing guy say that the results don't match their in-house tests.

Aside from Hatorade and apparent shock that a spokesman for a company would make a company announcement, what gives you the idea that engineers aren't looking over the CR tests?

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[Uberbah]

By sending in the marketing team instead of engineers?

Another person shocked that the PR department of a company would make a PR announcement, rather than Dilbert on the engineering team.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[Uberbah]

And meanwhile, the "workaround" could be as simple as using Chrome instead of Safari until the fix is available. Most reasonable people would understand.

Yes, but Apple is involved, so reason flies out the window. If this were a bug with Chrome on Chromebooks, nobody's hair would be on fire if they had to use Firefox for a few weeks while Google figured out what the problem is and released a fix. But since it's Apple, it's time to burn the witch.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[epyT-R]

Why? Whether they do or not is irrelevant. They want to show their products in the best light. The best light is not always realistic. Better to have multiple tests with differing conditions.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

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.

And you know this, how?

Didn't you read that part in the summary where it says "Apple's VP of Marketing has since addressed the report"?

They did not send a crack team of engineer to review the devices or to assess the issue, they had their marketing guy say that the results don't match their in-house tests.

You're an idiot.

Phil Schiller has been involved in many aspects of Apple during his loooooong tenure with the company.

It is obvious to anyone who has watched his career at Apple that he is, first and foremost, and outside of any title he may hold, an Apple User and an Apple Enthusiast, who takes both the product and the whole "experience" quite seriously.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[nnull]

Sounds similar to what Sony did a few years back with their Vaios. The laptops had serious issues with wifi connectivity and Sony would send people from Japan to investigate the situation. You would think they would be sending people to repair the problem and resolve the situation once and for all. Nope. You'd get a nice email about how you're at fault for everything. Meanwhile, people continued to have issues with the wifi connectivity.

Did they ever fix the issue or offer a resolution? Nope. The whole thing ended up being a PR stunt.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

Well I use Firefox on a brand new Macbook pro and my battery sucks. So, no that's not it.

Nicely non-informative post.

Would you care to elaborate?

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

Why? Whether they do or not is irrelevant. They want to show their products in the best light. The best light is not always realistic. Better to have multiple tests with differing conditions.

You are an idiot. You do not converse; you jabber.

Communication terminated.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

And meanwhile, the "workaround" could be as simple as using Chrome instead of Safari until the fix is available. Most reasonable people would understand.

Yes, but Apple is involved, so reason flies out the window. If this were a bug with Chrome on Chromebooks, nobody's hair would be on fire if they had to use Firefox for a few weeks while Google figured out what the problem is and released a fix. But since it's Apple, it's time to burn the witch.

Exactly.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

1 month old macbook pro with touchstrip, battery life down to 1.5 to 2 hours doing regular development tasks. Originally when I got the macbook it was more like 5 hours, was never close to 10. After maybe 50 charges battery life is down to 1 hour. The proposition above was that the culprit was Safari, but the same thing is happening with Firefox then because I never use Safari.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

1 month old macbook pro with touchstrip, battery life down to 1.5 to 2 hours doing regular development tasks. Originally when I got the macbook it was more like 5 hours, was never close to 10. After maybe 50 charges battery life is down to 1 hour. The proposition above was that the culprit was Safari, but the same thing is happening with Firefox then because I never use Safari.

And if you read my original post carefully, I said "Safari, or a Framework thereunder".

Maybe FF is using some (or all) of the same Frameworks that Safari uses, and thus triggers the same bug.

Let me ask you: What are your fans doing during all this? What does the "Energy" Tab of Activity Monitor say is suckin' down the juice.

Law of conservation of energy says that power is going somewhere, shouldn't be that hard to figure out where.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

Well I ran 'top' and there is no heavy CPU utilization. Certainly not by any browser.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

You know, I was thinking about this last night, and it's kind of bullshit that they use smoke and mirrors to get the battery lifetime they advertise. It should not be 10 hours of battery time assuming you are running cooperative software that plays nicely and can be optimized. It should be 10 hours battery life period. Certainly it should have at least 60% of that optimized.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

Well I ran 'top' and there is no heavy CPU utilization. Certainly not by any browser.

So, you think the battery just isn't being charged, then?

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

And I repeat:

Either the battery isn't being charged sufficiently, or is being drained inordinately.

Nothing else is possible, other than a defective battery.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

You know, I was thinking about this last night, and it's kind of bullshit that they use smoke and mirrors to get the battery lifetime they advertise. It should not be 10 hours of battery time assuming you are running cooperative software that plays nicely and can be optimized. It should be 10 hours battery life period. Certainly it should have at least 60% of that optimized.

Install this freeware, and let me know what it says.

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are you deflecting the issue towards ATI and Samsung? Hell, your first sentence already puts words in the GP's mouth and tries to derail the GP's point. The discussion is whether or not a person should trust Consumer Reports over Apple.

First off, to address your deflection, Samsung is a shitty company known to dishonestly ape others in order to push their marginally safe products into as many stores as possible. Using that as a standard for comparison is not doing Apple any favors. Please think a bit when you are shilling.

For the actual discussion at hand, even if CR does not have the robust testing methodology, it's naturally has more trust by being a third-party. They have a decade-long track record that anyone can review and compare with existing products. And most of those reviews have the benefit of long-term hindsight to lend further credence to the reviews at CR. Apple, by having the VP of marketing address this issue, didn't do anything to help instill any confidence. If it was a VP of engineering, it would at least have given a semblance of credibility. They instead chose to use a mouthpiece hired to spin PR to improve sales.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

I thought Apples were supposed to 'just work' ? If that was really the case, none of this would matter. I bought an Apple and I do not want to deal with this.

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

Well, I will wait for them to fix it and then I expect them to cover it. Right now it's not that worth it to me to spend time on it.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

I thought Apples were supposed to 'just work' ? If that was really the case, none of this would matter. I bought an Apple and I do not want to deal with this.

So, go buy a Dell and see how much time you spend Troubleshooting...

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

Well, I will wait for them to fix it and then I expect them to cover it. Right now it's not that worth it to me to spend time on it.

You're no Developer if you can't tolerate a little debugging.

Poser.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

If I am buying less than the most expensive laptop on the market I expect to troubleshoot here and there. Not only do I have the 'most premium' device but I have shelled out for Applecare. I have paid good money for not having to worry about it. It's still a nice laptop. I like it more than I expected to. Just a little disappointed with the battery life that's all.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

I thought Apples were supposed to 'just work' ? If that was really the case, none of this would matter. I bought an Apple and I do not want to deal with this.

Oh, and I find it quite telling that every single person on multiple Forums that has claimed to actually have an MBP with astonishingly bad battery life has just "stomped off" like you have when I asked them details about how fast the fans were running (indicating lots of current-draw), or what the Energy Tab in Activity Monitor said (you said you ran "Top". That isn't what I asked for; and then said "certainly not the browser" about the CPU usage it reported"). And when I suggested you might install Coconut Battery (free) to see what the charge/discharge rates actually were, you replied with the meme "I though Apples were supposed to 'Just Work'...

Bullshit.

Sorry, but you are lying through your teeth.

If I had a brand new $3000 laptop and it was getting ONE HOUR of battery life, I'd be on the phone with Phil Schiller personally.

But you "can't be bothered". Riiiight.

Liar.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

I'm a developer who is currently under a huge crunch to get stuff done. I don't have time to spend to download stuff and research stuff, in fact I'm surprised I am still talking to you. I'm not comfortable with installing free third party tools I usually buy $400 thinkpads and I am accustomed to dealing with poor battery life. I just plug in and deal with it until Apple figures it out.

I was just saying that I was surprised that it will happen with an Apple. Apples are not community supported devices, so no, I do not feel responsible in any way to investigate this.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

If I am buying less than the most expensive laptop on the market I expect to troubleshoot here and there. Not only do I have the 'most premium' device but I have shelled out for Applecare. I have paid good money for not having to worry about it. It's still a nice laptop. I like it more than I expected to. Just a little disappointed with the battery life that's all.

So do the simple tests I suggested and we can all benefit.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

I'm a developer who is currently under a huge crunch to get stuff done. I don't have time to spend to download stuff and research stuff, in fact I'm surprised I am still talking to you. I'm not comfortable with installing free third party tools I usually buy $400 thinkpads and I am accustomed to dealing with poor battery life. I just plug in and deal with it until Apple figures it out. I was just saying that I was surprised that it will happen with an Apple. Apples are not community supported devices, so no, I do not feel responsible in any way to investigate this.

You say you are under a time-crunch (which, as a Dev. myself, I certainly understand), yet you have taken the time to respond to post-after-post.

And I share your reluctance to install and use third-party tools (although Coconut Battery is pretty benign, because all it does is expose some System variables, and has been around for quite awhile; so it is likely quite safe); but when I suggest Running something like Apple's Activity Monitor (built-in), and looking at the "Energy" tab, you won't do it. Why? Instead, you run "top", which isn't nearly as sophisticated. I believe that the "Energy" Tab in Activity Monitor also shows GPU usage, which "top" is oblivious-to. THINK!

It's got nothing to do with "responsibility". But if I were in your place, I'd be sure to poke around a little, just for my own edification, if nothing else.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[lucm]

Phil Schiller has been involved in many aspects of Apple during his loooooong tenure with the company. It is obvious to anyone who has watched his career at Apple that he is, first and foremost, and outside of any title he may hold, an Apple User and an Apple Enthusiast, who takes both the product and the whole "experience" quite seriously.

honestly, "TheFakeTimCook", do you jerk off to pictures of Apple executives? I've seen fanbois before you're up there with macs4all.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[lucm]

Sounds similar to what Sony did a few years back with their Vaios. The laptops had serious issues with wifi connectivity and Sony would send people from Japan to investigate the situation. You would think they would be sending people to repair the problem and resolve the situation once and for all. Nope. You'd get a nice email about how you're at fault for everything. Meanwhile, people continued to have issues with the wifi connectivity.

Did they ever fix the issue or offer a resolution? Nope. The whole thing ended up being a PR stunt.

Maybe Apple should sue them for stealing their "you're doing it wrong" approach.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

Phil Schiller has been involved in many aspects of Apple during his loooooong tenure with the company. It is obvious to anyone who has watched his career at Apple that he is, first and foremost, and outside of any title he may hold, an Apple User and an Apple Enthusiast, who takes both the product and the whole "experience" quite seriously.

honestly, "TheFakeTimCook", do you jerk off to pictures of Apple executives? I've seen fanbois before you're up there with macs4all.

LOL, not at all!

But as an Apple owner and User since 1976 (who unfortunately is a Windows Dev by trade right now), I have watched Phil Schiller (and others) onstage for many years, and either he is an Academy Award-level Actor, or his enthusiasm I have observed over the years is genuine. I choose to believe my gut that it is the latter.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[lucm]

I have watched Phil Schiller (and others) onstage for many years, and either he is an Academy Award-level Actor, or his enthusiasm I have observed over the years is genuine. I choose to believe my gut that it is the latter.

Whoopi Goldberg is an Academy Award-level actress (yes she actually won one) so that's not much of a reference. And nobody is saying he hasn't drank the Kool-Aid, the point is that instead of seriously looking at their battery problem (which has surfaced many times in the news) Apple is sending a marketing "enthusiast" to convince people that the incompetents in this matter are Consumer Reports, not Apple.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[epyT-R]

No, you just lack reading comprehension skills.

Re: Working on the report instead of the battery

[Uberbah]

Why are you deflecting the issue towards ATI and Samsung?

Why be willfully obtuse? Parent asserted that CR is "far" more trustworthy than Apple, and I'm asking him (or her) why that is.

Please think a bit when you are shilling.

If you think that saying 'citation needed' is shilling, you need to cut waaay back on the Hatorade.

Samsung is a shitty company known to dishonestly ape others in order to push their marginally safe products into as many stores as possible.

Yet you don't see Slashdotters continually beating Samsung horses that have been dead for six and a half years.

Using that as a standard for comparison is not doing Apple any favors.

It's not for Apple's benefit, it's to show how full of shit Apple Hatebois are.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[Uberbah]

Are you a grown-ass adult that just used the word "Hatorade"? The hell's wrong with you?

Says a grown-assed adult who has child-like tempter tantrums at the mention of a single company.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[Uberbah]

Not at all shocked. It doesn't shock any of us that Apple will come out and give PR lip service without having a clue of the problem.

Not shocked to see chugging of Hatorade when it comes to Apple.

Maybe Apple is PRing it wrong?

Keep fucking that chicken, chicken-fucker.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

I have watched Phil Schiller (and others) onstage for many years, and either he is an Academy Award-level Actor, or his enthusiasm I have observed over the years is genuine. I choose to believe my gut that it is the latter.

Whoopi Goldberg is an Academy Award-level actress (yes she actually won one) so that's not much of a reference. And nobody is saying he hasn't drank the Kool-Aid, the point is that instead of seriously looking at their battery problem (which has surfaced many times in the news) Apple is sending a marketing "enthusiast" to convince people that the incompetents in this matter are Consumer Reports, not Apple.

You're an idiot.

Who do you think Phil Schiller actually has working on this? Marketing, or Engineering?

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[david_thornley]

No, the same thing is not happening with Firefox. What you're reporting is much different from what CR reported. You probably have a defective MBP, and you need to get that taken care of while it's still under warranty.

Manufacturing defects show up in most things, now and then. Sounds like you won the hard-luck lottery there.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[david_thornley]

I was just saying that I was surprised that it will happen with an Apple.

All consumer products, and most commercial products, have occasional defects. You got a defective computer. That sucks, but it says nothing about the quality of the line as a whole. I assume you have not yet asked Apple about this, but after crunch time you really need to, and see what they do.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

The thing is, they can't fix my laptop in shop where I am so then I'm waiting for three weeks without a laptop.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

If I call Apple and tell them I want my battery replaced because it's not lasting 9 hours they're going to replace it until it does? Really? Anyway I have Applecare so I have three years.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[lucm]

I have watched Phil Schiller (and others) onstage for many years, and either he is an Academy Award-level Actor, or his enthusiasm I have observed over the years is genuine. I choose to believe my gut that it is the latter.

Whoopi Goldberg is an Academy Award-level actress (yes she actually won one) so that's not much of a reference. And nobody is saying he hasn't drank the Kool-Aid, the point is that instead of seriously looking at their battery problem (which has surfaced many times in the news) Apple is sending a marketing "enthusiast" to convince people that the incompetents in this matter are Consumer Reports, not Apple.

You're an idiot.

Who do you think Phil Schiller actually has working on this? Marketing, or Engineering?

Neither.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[TheFakeTimCook]

Who do you think Phil Schiller actually has working on this? Marketing, or Engineering?

Neither.

And now you're an obdurate idiot.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[lucm]

Who do you think Phil Schiller actually has working on this? Marketing, or Engineering?

Neither.

And now you're an obdurate idiot.

I merely answered your question. I don't think Phil whatever or anyone else at Apple is doing anything to solve the battery problem, and I also don't believe that they're doing anything special with marketing anymore, as the legions of fanbois like you are now on the case. As for who's the idiot in this matter, I disagree with you.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[david_thornley]

Yup. That's unfortunate. It doesn't affect the fact that your problems are with an individual defect in your laptop than any issue that affects lots of people (unless, of course, it does - wasn't there a case some years back where Apple used a lot of bad capacitors?).

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[david_thornley]

If the laptop lasts no more than 2 hours without doing anything really strange, there's a defect somewhere. It might be the battery, or it might not. I'm sure Apple would consider that a defect worth fixing. If it was lasting eight hours instead of nine, they'd probably not be concerned.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

I'll see if I can find the time to test the laptop. I guess I could let it sit overnight and have a script echoing a timestamp to a log file to detect when it actually dies. I was just noticing the other day that I was going from unplugged when a show started to 20% by the end of the show. I'm not sure if it is still happening or what. If it is a temporary condition then it might take a lot of experimentation and leaving overnight to nail down the issue and recreate it.

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

So I was unable to test the laptop how I wanted to, because there is no way to keep it 'awake' while on battery if not using it. This morning I used it on battery and it lasted 3.5 hours, which is not as bad as I thought but obviously a great deal less then ten. So are you saying Apple will replace my battery?

Re:Working on the report instead of the battery

[fluffernutter]

I found out that my VPN client was actually requiring the performance GPU. I stopped my VPN client, but that only gave me a boost from 3.5 to 4 hours. I've done it a few times now and it is almost always 4 hours of battery life with very little variation.

CPU Power scaling

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

That's not how it works

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't work with CR. Your product is purchased without your foreknowledge, and they judge it. The end.

Re:That's not how it works

[mysidia]

Correct..... and if CR sends Apple too much information such as Logs from test devices, then in some sense their test units become "Invalidated" ----- for all CR would know, Apple quietly pushes out a CR-Only software update which tweaks something to increase battery life or Cap the average system load based on what programs are running..

Up to

[bagofbeans]

Apple says the devices should operate for up to 10 hours between charges

up to 10 hours includes lasting only 10 minutes.

Re:Up to

[cerberusss]

Apple says the devices should operate for up to 10 hours between charges

up to 10 hours includes lasting only 10 minutes.

That's true but historically, Apple has been quite honest about how long the battery will last. Up to the point where you'd have a decent chance of doing better.

However with the current "Late 2016" generation, there's people with 15" MacBook Pros who report not getting even half of that. So it's really a break from the past.

Re:Up to

[jgullstr]

battery life ranged from 19.5 hours...

Which is why this needs to be fixed.

Re:Up to

[TheFakeTimCook]

Apple says the devices should operate for up to 10 hours between charges

up to 10 hours includes lasting only 10 minutes.

That's true but historically, Apple has been quite honest about how long the battery will last. Up to the point where you'd have a decent chance of doing better.

However with the current "Late 2016" generation, there's people with 15" MacBook Pros who report not getting even half of that. So it's really a break from the past.

And in every single anecdote I have read online regarding this, the poster proclaims "I was only using Safari..."

Problem's with Safari, or an underlying Framework, folks. The problem is not in the MBP itself.

Re:Up to

[antdude]

And zero minute! :P

Re:Up to

[david_thornley]

Sure, and if you could just download the Chrome navigation program and get around that, it would be less of a problem. Or if you could have your software fixed without going back to the dealer. It's obviously Apple's problem, but it appears to be a Safari bug, meaning that there's perfectly good workarounds and that Apple can fix it without much ado.

Working with

[Hognoxious]

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?

Re:Working with

[TheFakeTimCook]

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?

How about "Working With" meaning exactly that.

Re:Working with

[TheFakeTimCook]

Does this mean bribing them to write more favourable reviews, or threatening them with lawsuits if they don't? It means Apple is trying to determine the best way to spin this into a story about how CR's test doesn't represent reality. They've got their top spindoctors working around the clock to construct a narrative that'll appeal to Apple fans.

Or maybe, just maybe, they have their top Engineers working on it around-the-clock to determine the cause of these clearly anomalous test results.

Damn. People are completely over-the-top cynical.

Do all companies 'work with' CR after a bad review

[schwit1]

CR could be setting a bad precedent.

Re:Pipe down, Firefox haters. They tested with Saf

[Anonymous Coward]

Read the goddamn article! This has absolutely nothing to do with Firefox!

"For the battery test, we download a series of 10 web pages sequentially, starting with the battery fully charged, and ending when the laptop shuts down," the Consumer Reports post reads. "The web pages are stored on a server in our lab, and transmitted over a Wi-Fi network set up specifically for this purpose. We conduct our battery tests using the computer's default browser -- Safari, in the case of the MacBook Pro laptops."

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.

SubjectsSuck

[aardvarkjoe]

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?

Missing The Big Picture

[RoscoeChicken]

Apple's entire line of laptops is now disposable, and Consumer Reports is worried about the battery life.

Battery life is not the real issue

[dcavanaugh]

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.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[known_coward_69]

this is what people did in the 80's. repaired expensive electronics.

except apple is making money from the repairs too. cheaper to spend $500 to repair a laptop than buy a new $2000 laptop

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[Solandri]

This problem (after a few years, battery life being half what it was when new) has pretty much been solved with larger battery capacities and lower power components. Lithium-ion batteries do degrade this way based on the number of charge/discharge cycles. But the depth of discharge matters more. A battery which will only last 300+ cycles when charged to 100% and discharged until dead, can last 1200+ cycles when charged to 75% and discharged to just 25% before being recharged. The relationship is non-linear - reducing the cycle depth by half results in about triple the battery longevity. So it isn't just a matter of shallower discharges using the battery less. In other words, the worst thing you can do to the battery is to charge it all the way to 100% and discharge it all the way to 0%.

Most newer batteries integrate this into their design. When they report 100%, the battery is actually at 80% or 90%. When they report 0%, the battery is actually at 10% or 20%. The Li-ion battery packs in EVs are a good example - they're limited between 20%-80% charge, or 15%-85% charge. Many laptops also add software which further limits the charge - stopping the recharge process when the battery reads 80% or 90% (which probably corresponds to 65% - 80% of the battery's real capacity). Couple this with the user making sure s/he never discharges the device completely, and you've eliminated the deep charge/discharge cycles which degrade the battery the most.

In the old days, laptops used a lot of power and batteries were bulky. So manufacturers had to use 100% of the battery's capacity just to eek out 2-3 hour battery lives. This is what led to many of those batteries dying after a few years. Nowadays, battery energy density has improved, and mobile electronics use a lot less power. So manufacturers can put in a small or medium-sized battery in a laptop and still get 5-8 hours using only 60%-80% of the battery's capacity. So they've taken advantage of this to replace the swappable battery with an integrated battery and cut down on weight and size. The charging circuitry limits it so it can't actually charge to 100% or discharge to 0%, thus allowing these integrated batteries to be used for well over 1000 cycles - usually more than enough to last the lifetime of the device.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[tofu2go]

My 2012 Macbook Air has a non-user replaceable battery. When the battery was no longer holding adequate charge, I took it to an Apple store and they replaced it for me. I forget what the cost was, a little over a hundred I believe. Expensive, but reasonable if I can get a few years out of it.

Bottom line: The battery IS replaceable. You just need to take it to Apple to do it.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[dcavanaugh]

Even if people are dumb enough to buy laptops with irreplaceable batteries/memory/storage (as marketing research suggests they are), competitors will be quick to point out why that's not such a hot idea. Three years from now, AppleCare will be running out on these machines (assuming everyone is smart enough to buy extended warranty coverage). At that point, customers will be howling about how their investment decision worked out. I can get 3 years out of a mid-grade Windows or Linux machine and spend a lot less. Or I can go with a top-of-the-line machine and get 4-5 years. If Apple wants to sell disposable hardware, they need to price it as such.

I wouldn't be too surprised to see a state (maybe California) require a consumer warning label about computers with no serviceable parts inside. If it breaks out of warranty, repair is impossible. Most customers don't realize they are buying a disposable computer. Let's see what market research says when the warning labels start to appear.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[dcavanaugh]

Although I agree with everything you say, people might eventually accept USB-C and maybe even the touch bar. I can easily do without both, so I won't be buying either one.

For quite some time, manufacturers have been trying to figure out what they need to add in order to get customers to accept the next price increase - or to slow down commoditization and price warfare. There is only so far they can go with size and weight before the entire market consists of small/thin/flimsy devices with fewer ports than they had before. Time will tell if consumers are smart enough to avoid planned obsolescence.

I suspect Apple is going to learn some expensive lessons before they rediscover the value of durability and product lifespan. A computer that nobody buys has an effective thickness of 0mm and a retail price of $0, with a profit margin of 0% and $0 projected revenue.

Re: Battery life is not the real issue

[fluffernutter]

The batteries in the new macbooks are soldered in. I'm not even sure how I would open the case.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[fluffernutter]

I have to say, the touch bar is quite a pain. I was fine hitting ESC to exit things and now ESC doesn't work in some cases. You look down, and you now see that there is a button in the middle of the strip for 'Cancel'. But by then the workflow is so interrupted, it's terrible. Also, the keys I used *repeatedly* such as ctrl-F12 in my editor has now become Fn-Ctrl-F12. This is a big deal if you're hitting it every 10 seconds.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[dcavanaugh]

You are correct about managing battery charge level, power drain, depth of discharge, etc. But it's not easy to get 4 solid years of service out of ANY battery in a portable electronic device. Does it happen? Sure. Reliable? Depends on who you ask. 1000 cycles is about 3 years of everyday use, maybe 4 years of Monday-Friday use. Managed batteries work reasonably well on phones. Then again, phones take a beating; the average user can be expected to lose or break their phone before the battery dies. Most laptops are not subject to that much physical abuse. I'm OK with a phone that lasts 3-4 years, but I expect more out of a well-maintained laptop.

Apple seems to think that battery lifetime is good enough to limit the number of in-warranty replacements, while not so good as to extend the useful life of the product beyond 4 years. They may be right, but I'm not so sure a 4-year disposable laptop is worth what they ask for it.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[Osgeld]

I wish apple made midrange towers again, really that's what my macbooks are, a ultra thin sleek laptop tethered to a wall of dongles and devices and chargers, cause otherwise its a ipad with enough battery to piss me off

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[Shane_Optima]

Because their 00s resurgence was based on fanboyism combined with luck combined with a few solid ideas and a willingness to preempt the competition with an inferior and overpriced product (the iPhone 1, and before that most of their iPods.)

Apple culture isn't dominated by market research; that clearly is not the case. No, it's obvious they are largely dominated by magical thinking regarding the status quo at this point. They think that branding is absolutely everything and their brand is defined thusly: choice is universally bad (even when the user isn't forced to choose), thinness is king and planned disposability isn't an issue at all--it just gives people more of an excuse to upgrade to the shiny new thing.

There's some truth in that cynicism, but it seems clear enough if they introduced a new line of products that was actually geared towards "Pros", it would sell like hotcakes and quell a lot of the anti-Apple grumbling, particularly among their richer customers (and ex-customers.)

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[TheFakeTimCook]

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.

Sorry to burst your fantasy-bubble; but my 2012 MacBook Pro gets indistiguishably-differernt battery life from when it was new. If it is "down" at all, it is only by a few minutes, and nothing I could ever put a finger-on, given varying workload.

As far as soldered SSD, I'm more with you on that one. But I will bet you will find that less than 1% of MBP owners suffer a catastrophic SSD-failure before they are ready to replace their machines anyway. I believe that this is essentially what Apple is using.

Also, the iFixit teardown uncovered a "connector to nowhere", that appears to be a way for at least Apple techs to access the SSD of an otherwise dead MBP directly, for data-recovery purposes.

As far as the batteries go, they are glued-down as usual; but are reasonably replaceable, considering you might have to do it once before the laptop is due for replacement.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[TheFakeTimCook]

My 2012 Macbook Air has a non-user replaceable battery. When the battery was no longer holding adequate charge, I took it to an Apple store and they replaced it for me. I forget what the cost was, a little over a hundred I believe. Expensive, but reasonable if I can get a few years out of it.

Bottom line: The battery IS replaceable. You just need to take it to Apple to do it.

Or simply get out your $30 Harbor Freight heat-gun and DIY...

But honestly, by the time you make sure you aren't getting some bootleg battery offa Amazon, go to Harbor Freight for the Heat Gun, get any other tools you might not have, then wrestle your way to the battery and get it out, that $100 or so to an Apple Tech seems pretty reasonable, indeed...

Re: Battery life is not the real issue

[dcavanaugh]

The only way Apple can replace the glued batteries in a Retina MPB is to replace the upper case and keyboard too. What was once a $100 battery change is now a $200 battery change because they have to replace extra parts.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[angel'o'sphere]

Most of my laptops have batteries older than 4 years and the runtime is just fine.
My 2011 17" still runs close to 2h, and I doubt it was once over 2.5h
My ages old PowerBook Pro or how it was called (the 2" thick / 11" screen model) once got its battery replaced. The only drawback of it is: it only runs 10.4 and has no support for WPA 2 WiFi keys. But it is on ethernet most of the time anyway :D

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[angel'o'sphere]

I'm pretty sure you can change in the systems settings that the "stripe" shows the normal F-keys and ESC key all the time.
Then you don't need to hit fn- and ESC is always on the left.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[thegarbz]

But it's not easy to get 4 solid years of service out of ANY battery in a portable electronic device. Does it happen? Sure. Reliable? Depends on who you ask. 1000 cycles is about 3 years of everyday use, maybe 4 years of Monday-Friday use.

So it's not easy, except if you have a laptop that you don't charge and discharge every day like ..... every laptop? So based on your logic any business machine should last more than 4 years. Hell most personal ones will last more than 4 years since many of them are used on power. Portable devices are rarely charged every day.

And a 5 year disposable laptop will please >90% of customers so really the odd opinion doesn't matter. This is a battle that was lost long ago, and people bought the devices happily even when they had half the battery life.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[hankwang]

Although the general point is probably correct that min/max charge levels affect Li-ion lifespan, I would be careful with using batteryuniversity as a source of information. It's really a weblog of a small manufacturer of battery chargers that presents a couple of small-scale test results as if they represent the absolute truth for all brands and types of Li-ion batteties.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[dgatwood]

Apple culture isn't anti-choice. It is anti-complexity. Users should be given only choices that are highly useful, choices should make sense to the average user, and interfaces should make common things easy and uncommon things possible. Unfortunately, Apple started rapidly losing its culture in 2007, and the iPhone culture that replaced it is all about dumbing down the UI indiscriminately with no concern about whether uncommon things remain possible. I blame Scott Forstall for everything that is wrong with Apple today, from the unchecked paranoia that impedes proper testing to the iPhonification of the Mac UI.

Re: Battery life is not the real issue

[dgatwood]

The word "glue" is something of a misnomer. It has a self-stick backing like gaff tape. It can be readily peeled off.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[gnasher719]

So it's not easy, except if you have a laptop that you don't charge and discharge every day like ..... every laptop?

Many laptops are actually used as desktop computers most of the time, plugged into their charger, occasionally taken into a meeting or used on the train. In that scenario the battery will last forever. If it's used as a pure desktop computer, it doesn't even matter whether the battery is absolutely shot.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[fluffernutter]

You can, but you have to add every app that you want to do it for. There is no way to just show the function keys for everything all the time.

Re: Battery life is not the real issue

[doomday]

It is a commonly discussed fallacy where people think they represent the market. You may buy twice as many when the overall market declines.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[david_thornley]

As a first approximation, nobody cares whether the batteries, memory, or SSD are user-replaceable. What almost every consumer cares about is what the product will do for them. I'm sure Apple can replace the battery (it would cost me about $80 for my iPhone, but after more than three years of fairly heavy use I still don't see the need), and consumers aren't going to care that much about having to get a minor repair every three or four years. Most figure that their computer will eventually be disposed of. I know there's people reading this who have decades-old computers running, but most people don't.

Most parts of a laptop are not user-serviceable. Why would there be a warning sticker just because the memory is not user-replaceable and not one where the mobo, optical drive, graphics hardware, screen, and keyboard aren't? I can replace all of these on my desktop, although I'd rather not have to replace the motherboard.

Re:Battery life is not the real issue

[angel'o'sphere]

Oh, that really sucks! It is even worth than I thought then.

I mean I buy a laptop to _not_ carry around an external keyboard :-/

What I don't get is: if they really think such a thing is cool, why not add it on top of the F-key instead of replacing them ...

Re: Battery life is not the real issue

[dgatwood]

Okay, maybe "readily" is too strong a word. It can be peeled off with a wide spudger and a lot of force.

Mine is doing well

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Now they are wrong? What about before?

[lucm]

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?

Re:Now they are wrong? What about before?

[lucm]

Why are you trying to put a politically-driven spin on this?

I posted 3 sentences, none of which include anything remotely political. I understand that cognitive dissonance can lead to flawed logic but really pal you're either a lame troll or you're getting into tinfoil hat territory real fast.

Re:Now they are wrong? What about before?

[TheFakeTimCook]

Safari hasn't remained constant over the years. In fact, it sees a lot of change. If it is a software problem affecting Safari, for example, then it could have been introduced with recent versions of Safari.

You mean like the Custom, Touch-Bar-Aware version of Safari released specifically for this product?

Last mac has me sad

[Anonymous Coward]

Looking at alternatives for the first time in 16 years.

Apple doesn't want to be a computer company anymore.

The battery life hasn't been...

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Do all companies 'work with' CR after a bad rev

[Solandri]

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

[Joe_Dragon]

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?

Safari issue, not the battery

[wiredog]

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.

coded language

[p51d007]

Wonder how much money Apple will throw at Consumer Reports, to change their opinion ;)

Wait!

[geekprime]

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.

My bet is a Safari bug, or one in its extensions

[angel'o'sphere]

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.

Result

[fennec]

After review Apple decided to remove Consumer Reports from the Internet.

Re:Make it bigger with more room for a bigger batt

[nnull]

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.

Re: Becareful Consumer Reports!

[Shirley Marquez]

Unlikely. Consumer Reports has surely received many buyout offers over the years from magazine conglomerates and declined them all. The organization behind it, Consumers Union, appears to be financially healthy so there is no pressing need for them to accept a buyout, and editorial independence is one of their core values.

Re:Becareful Consumer Reports!

[fbobraga]

Why this post is modded "troll"!? Why not "insightful" or "interesting"?

Re:Becareful Consumer Reports!

[Coren22]

Because many people, in their blind love of Apple, feel that anyone pointing out their mistakes is somehow a troll. Personally, I would mod it Funny if i had points, as it appeared to be an attempt at a joke. If it was a logged in user, I would use one of the I mods, as they give Karma where Funny does not.