8 ms·

I think this article misses the point that it seems many customers are disappointed they can't get more than 16gb and many would be willing to have the trade-of

I think this article misses the point that it seems many customers are disappointed they can't get more than 16gb and many would be willing to have the trade-off of 50% less battery life. How many people work away from power for more than 5 hours at a single stretch?

krapht 10y ago
When I travel with my laptop, I often don't have access to power. Most trips in a car are less than 100 miles. Yet nobody wants to purchase a low range EV. Extended battery life is useful on the occasions you need it.
- jlgaddis 10y ago
  FWIW, a lot of vehicles nowadays have inverters. Both my car and my truck have one, with a standard "plug-in" that you can plug any normal AC device into. I've run my laptop off of my truck's power many times.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
arvinsim 10y ago
I agree. There is a point where thinness and long battery life have diminishing returns.
- chrischen 10y ago
  Not there yet. Smaller battery capacities also charge faster.
  - thinkmassive 10y ago
    Do they charge faster, or just reach capacity sooner?
    - chrischen 10y ago
      Smaller batteries charge faster by reaching full capacity sooner. So if you jam a large battery into a computer, you'll get more battery life, and most components will not be optimized to be as power efficient. This means charging to X % of battery life will take longer than on a smaller battery but more power efficient machine.
      - mthoms 10y ago
        So smaller batteries don't charge quicker(?) You seem to be talking about something completely different (efficiency of components).
      - thinkmassive 10y ago
        Capacity, rate of charge, and efficiency are not mutually exclusive. They aren't even really related, based on what you're talking about, which appears to be limited solely to operating efficiency.
debinguy 10y ago
This exactly. As a developer applications like docker and vagrant are part of my normal activities. The 16GB limit just does not work in this model. FWIW I was waiting on a laptop upgrade, and after seeing the new lineup from Apple I ordered a Linux laptop with 32GB of memory.
- bardworx 10y ago
  I have the new MbP w/ 8GB RAM and ram 3 VMs (2 MS build for IE testing and 1 hetoku build-pack) + IDE consuming close to 1GB of ram and compared it to a mid-2014 MbP with 16GB ram with similar performance. Yes the 8GB was a touch slower but I assume with 16GB, it will outperform similar or upgraded systems.
- corv 10y ago
  A major point of containerization is more efficient resource utilization, memory in particular. How has it come to this?
  - pritambaral 10y ago
    > A major point of containerization is more efficient resource utilization It's actually "more efficient resource utilization per instance". Perhaps, with increased capability comes increased utilization. While before one would run only one or two VMs and try to run all their apps within that, now one can run many containers. ---- That, and shareable memory across host and guests. But I guess that works only if the host and guest run the same kernel. Docker and vagrant on OS X still have to dedicate some RAM to the Linux VM running as docker host, and I don't know how efficient other facets of docker on OS X are; but on Linux, I find containerization's memory usage almost at par with running the apps directly on the host.
    - debinguy 10y ago
      For my situation I work for a large CDN and we have over 15k servers deployed globally and software I write has to run on all of them. This means various OS and kernel versions. This means in a given day I can work on 20+ different containers. The more time I spend spinning up or down containers to save system resources the more angry I get. I also travel a lot for work, so connecting to a cloud based instance from a plane is not possible, plugging into a power outlet in a plane seat is. For me the issue comes down to lack of choice. Previously lack of choice from Apple was not a concern because the choices I would make were inline with what they are offering. This is no longer the case. For those that asked, I am replacing 10 years of using MBP's with a System76 laptop. I don't have it yet so I can't comment but I am excited for the change as have been growing more and more frustrated with Apple.
userbinator 10y ago
And furthermore, Intel CPUs can already power down caches to lower power consumption; there are ways to power down unused RAM too: https://lwn.net/Articles/446493/ https://lwn.net/Articles/446493/
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
bardworx 10y ago
I think it's a catch-22, if the laptop had 32GB ram but 5hr battery life, folks would complain about it because, for example, it wouldn't last on a flight from East/West coast flight or across the pond. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. This whole MbP experience feels rushed; Like a new tech release. You see the possibilities but it just falls short...
- bdcravens 10y ago
  I suspect the iPhone approach of new release then a higher performance "S" release of the same device a year later has taken hold in the MacBook division.
  - bardworx 10y ago
    If what you say materializes, the outrage would be real..i mean the "Pro" monicker should already denote higher performance...
    - bdcravens 10y ago
      It's believed there will be 32gb options next year: http://www.macrumors.com/2016/10/31/macbooks-2017-price-cuts-32gb-ram/ http://www.macrumors.com/2016/10/31/macbooks-2017-price-cuts... As for the "Pro" moniker, the new machines are pretty high performance (especially on the video front). That doesn't preclude Apple making some tradeoff and/or leaving some performance on the table.
- tw04 10y ago
  > it wouldn't last on a flight from East/West coast flight or across the pond. Anyone making that flight on a regular basis is going to have access to a power outlet. Any run-of-the-mill consumer isn't going to be working and will be just fine with a tablet or a book.
  - monksy 10y ago
    At least you're going to figure out which plane+airline tends to have the outlets.
tinodotim 10y ago
First I don't think that the people who want (need) more than 16 gb ram would be okay with 50% less battery, at least not the majority, but, if apple would do that, how should they put that device on the market? As a MacBook Pro+-, the one with 32 gb ram but only 50% battery life? Or just a note on the site that this device only gets up to 5 hrs of battery life? In my eyes, the number of people confused and/or pissed of by that would be far higher, than of those who need 32 gb and would be okay with 50% less battery life.
- Retric 10y ago
  For many people 16GB of ram is just to low to be useful. Forcing them to buy a different machine. 5hour battery life is quite a bit for someone that mostly leaves it plugged in. Worst case just use an external battery if you really cant't find an outlet. Really, it feels like a MacBook not a MacBook Pro. Non power users are going to be happy with 16GB of RAM and get a lot more from extra battery life. PS: And yea, I was one of those people ready to upgrade who kind of scratched their head and decided to skip this release. I was thinking of getting a new Mac Pro, but they did not upgrade that at all even though the current model is over 2 and a half years old.
  - tinodotim 10y ago
    I'm not saying you guys who would go for a 32 gb / 5 hrs battery life version aren't out there and there are probably comparatively quite many on hn. You are, as much as it sucks, probably just not worth the hassle. I just don't see a way to market / communicate it without all that hassle. And something you should never forget. Those 5 hrs are 5 hrs when you buy the device. 1,5 - 2 years later you may end up with 3-3,5 hrs. If those 5 hrs were what you need, you'll already need your first battery replacement. > Non power users are going to be happy with 16GB of RAM That hurts btw. :( Let's agree on "non ram power users", because I would probably consider myself a power user but i'm quite fine with the 16 gb of my MBPr 13 from last year.
    - jpalomaki 10y ago
      It is also 5 hours of video playback or web surfing - not 5 hours of "professional" use.
jlgaddis 10y ago
Personally, I would've went for the model with 32 GB of RAM. I've got a MacBook Pro with 16 GB of RAM sitting here on my desk right now, the same spot it's in 95% of the time. Sitting right next to it is a 3.5 year old ThinkPad with 32 GB of RAM.
fnj 10y ago
Why promulgate the absurd premise that doubling the RAM would cut the battery life in half? As the article is at pains to say, 16 GB of RAM only consumes 1.49 A, while the CPU is 4.61A, and the display is a very big power hog. I am not in a position to prove it, but I suspect that increasing the RAM from 16 to 32 GB would only cut the battery life by 10%; maybe 15% at the outside.
lowbloodsugar 10y ago
Yes. Bottom line I switched to Apple in 2009, but my next laptop wont be an apple. My 2011 MBP has 16GB of RAM FFS. Back to linux for me.

krapht 10y ago

When I travel with my laptop, I often don't have access to power. Most trips in a car are less than 100 miles. Yet nobody wants to purchase a low range EV. Extended battery life is useful on the occasions you need it.

jlgaddis 10y ago
FWIW, a lot of vehicles nowadays have inverters. Both my car and my truck have one, with a standard "plug-in" that you can plug any normal AC device into. I've run my laptop off of my truck's power many times.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

arvinsim 10y ago

I agree. There is a point where thinness and long battery life have diminishing returns.

chrischen 10y ago
Not there yet. Smaller battery capacities also charge faster.
- thinkmassive 10y ago
  Do they charge faster, or just reach capacity sooner?
  - chrischen 10y ago
    Smaller batteries charge faster by reaching full capacity sooner. So if you jam a large battery into a computer, you'll get more battery life, and most components will not be optimized to be as power efficient. This means charging to X % of battery life will take longer than on a smaller battery but more power efficient machine.
    - mthoms 10y ago
      So smaller batteries don't charge quicker(?) You seem to be talking about something completely different (efficiency of components).
    - thinkmassive 10y ago
      Capacity, rate of charge, and efficiency are not mutually exclusive. They aren't even really related, based on what you're talking about, which appears to be limited solely to operating efficiency.

debinguy 10y ago

This exactly. As a developer applications like docker and vagrant are part of my normal activities. The 16GB limit just does not work in this model. FWIW I was waiting on a laptop upgrade, and after seeing the new lineup from Apple I ordered a Linux laptop with 32GB of memory.

bardworx 10y ago
I have the new MbP w/ 8GB RAM and ram 3 VMs (2 MS build for IE testing and 1 hetoku build-pack) + IDE consuming close to 1GB of ram and compared it to a mid-2014 MbP with 16GB ram with similar performance. Yes the 8GB was a touch slower but I assume with 16GB, it will outperform similar or upgraded systems.
corv 10y ago
A major point of containerization is more efficient resource utilization, memory in particular. How has it come to this?
- pritambaral 10y ago
  > A major point of containerization is more efficient resource utilization It's actually "more efficient resource utilization per instance". Perhaps, with increased capability comes increased utilization. While before one would run only one or two VMs and try to run all their apps within that, now one can run many containers. ---- That, and shareable memory across host and guests. But I guess that works only if the host and guest run the same kernel. Docker and vagrant on OS X still have to dedicate some RAM to the Linux VM running as docker host, and I don't know how efficient other facets of docker on OS X are; but on Linux, I find containerization's memory usage almost at par with running the apps directly on the host.
  - debinguy 10y ago
    For my situation I work for a large CDN and we have over 15k servers deployed globally and software I write has to run on all of them. This means various OS and kernel versions. This means in a given day I can work on 20+ different containers. The more time I spend spinning up or down containers to save system resources the more angry I get. I also travel a lot for work, so connecting to a cloud based instance from a plane is not possible, plugging into a power outlet in a plane seat is. For me the issue comes down to lack of choice. Previously lack of choice from Apple was not a concern because the choices I would make were inline with what they are offering. This is no longer the case. For those that asked, I am replacing 10 years of using MBP's with a System76 laptop. I don't have it yet so I can't comment but I am excited for the change as have been growing more and more frustrated with Apple.

userbinator 10y ago

And furthermore, Intel CPUs can already power down caches to lower power consumption; there are ways to power down unused RAM too: https://lwn.net/Articles/446493/ https://lwn.net/Articles/446493/

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

bardworx 10y ago

I think it's a catch-22, if the laptop had 32GB ram but 5hr battery life, folks would complain about it because, for example, it wouldn't last on a flight from East/West coast flight or across the pond. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. This whole MbP experience feels rushed; Like a new tech release. You see the possibilities but it just falls short...

bdcravens 10y ago
I suspect the iPhone approach of new release then a higher performance "S" release of the same device a year later has taken hold in the MacBook division.
- bardworx 10y ago
  If what you say materializes, the outrage would be real..i mean the "Pro" monicker should already denote higher performance...
  - bdcravens 10y ago
    It's believed there will be 32gb options next year: http://www.macrumors.com/2016/10/31/macbooks-2017-price-cuts-32gb-ram/ http://www.macrumors.com/2016/10/31/macbooks-2017-price-cuts... As for the "Pro" moniker, the new machines are pretty high performance (especially on the video front). That doesn't preclude Apple making some tradeoff and/or leaving some performance on the table.
tw04 10y ago
> it wouldn't last on a flight from East/West coast flight or across the pond. Anyone making that flight on a regular basis is going to have access to a power outlet. Any run-of-the-mill consumer isn't going to be working and will be just fine with a tablet or a book.
- monksy 10y ago
  At least you're going to figure out which plane+airline tends to have the outlets.

tinodotim 10y ago

First I don't think that the people who want (need) more than 16 gb ram would be okay with 50% less battery, at least not the majority, but, if apple would do that, how should they put that device on the market? As a MacBook Pro+-, the one with 32 gb ram but only 50% battery life? Or just a note on the site that this device only gets up to 5 hrs of battery life? In my eyes, the number of people confused and/or pissed of by that would be far higher, than of those who need 32 gb and would be okay with 50% less battery life.

Retric 10y ago
For many people 16GB of ram is just to low to be useful. Forcing them to buy a different machine. 5hour battery life is quite a bit for someone that mostly leaves it plugged in. Worst case just use an external battery if you really cant't find an outlet. Really, it feels like a MacBook not a MacBook Pro. Non power users are going to be happy with 16GB of RAM and get a lot more from extra battery life. PS: And yea, I was one of those people ready to upgrade who kind of scratched their head and decided to skip this release. I was thinking of getting a new Mac Pro, but they did not upgrade that at all even though the current model is over 2 and a half years old.
- tinodotim 10y ago
  I'm not saying you guys who would go for a 32 gb / 5 hrs battery life version aren't out there and there are probably comparatively quite many on hn. You are, as much as it sucks, probably just not worth the hassle. I just don't see a way to market / communicate it without all that hassle. And something you should never forget. Those 5 hrs are 5 hrs when you buy the device. 1,5 - 2 years later you may end up with 3-3,5 hrs. If those 5 hrs were what you need, you'll already need your first battery replacement. > Non power users are going to be happy with 16GB of RAM That hurts btw. :( Let's agree on "non ram power users", because I would probably consider myself a power user but i'm quite fine with the 16 gb of my MBPr 13 from last year.
  - jpalomaki 10y ago
    It is also 5 hours of video playback or web surfing - not 5 hours of "professional" use.

jlgaddis 10y ago

Personally, I would've went for the model with 32 GB of RAM. I've got a MacBook Pro with 16 GB of RAM sitting here on my desk right now, the same spot it's in 95% of the time. Sitting right next to it is a 3.5 year old ThinkPad with 32 GB of RAM.

fnj 10y ago

Why promulgate the absurd premise that doubling the RAM would cut the battery life in half? As the article is at pains to say, 16 GB of RAM only consumes 1.49 A, while the CPU is 4.61A, and the display is a very big power hog. I am not in a position to prove it, but I suspect that increasing the RAM from 16 to 32 GB would only cut the battery life by 10%; maybe 15% at the outside.

lowbloodsugar 10y ago

Yes. Bottom line I switched to Apple in 2009, but my next laptop wont be an apple. My 2011 MBP has 16GB of RAM FFS. Back to linux for me.