[010a]

Everyone talks about the downsides of the new MacBooks. No one talks about about how they reduced the size of the internal battery by 30%, effectively added a second screen, improved overall performance, and still kept the same battery life.

[JustSomeNobody]

Wait, all anyone has talked about is how they have done all that... with the exception of the "same" battery life.

A lot of people feel it ... isn't the same.

[mgkimsal]

or... arguably kept the 'same' battery life as previous devices, but added more battery draining 'stuff'.

I had one, and returned it, partially for battery life. I'm doing a lot of development (intellij/phpstorm/virtualbox/etc). The battery life wasn't bad - at heavy use, I could get perhaps 6 hours of 'real' usage, but... It was $3700, which was a bit much for my blood given the battery shortcomings (and a few other reasons). But mostly price/performance relative to my workload. For $1200/less I got an approximately similar 2015 model with more battery, and a slightly heavier weight.

[tracker1]

I'd trade in a few ounces to get back user serviceable memory and hd/ssd upgrades.

[mgkimsal]

agreed. the thinness was/is 'nice', but... would prefer hd swapping and memory mods.

if price went down based on thickness, maybe it would be more welcomed...

[devwastaken]

*I was incorrect and noted normal macbooks, not MBP. Normal macbooks are terrible in price to performance, MBP is better, ignoring all the other things about it.

[010a]

When I say MacBooks... I mean the MacBook Pros. As in, what this article is talking about. Apple never reduced the size of the MB battery by 30%. Or added a second screen. Or kept performance they same (they improved performance gen-over-gen with the MB). Use your head. Apply some context.

[devwastaken]

That is correct in this case, ignoring the other issues with buying an Apple device.

[colept]

> effectively added a second screen

Powering a main screen versus a screen 1/15th of the size hardly qualifies as "effectively... a second screen"

> improved overall performance

Is it possible newer components are more optimized to draw less power for the same or more performance?

[FireBeyond]

Let's not call the touchbar a "second screen". Yes, it is. But it's just that - a touch bar/ status bar.

Most commentary around 5th vs 6th generation is that it's pretty much identical.

[rangibaby]

Apple gets bashed every time they release something, remember everyone making fun of the iPad, or even the iPhone?

> reduced the size of the internal battery by 30%

I'll talk about that. Keep the battery the same damn size and give us more battery life.

> effectively added a second screen

Plenty of people have been talking about the touch bar.

> improved overall performance

If it didn't do that the world would have a new source of non-coal energy, Mac fans screaming at the top of their lungs!

What Apple lacks is the moment is coherency. The iPhone comes with a headset and charging cable that won't work with a Mac. When I plugged my earphones+remote into an iMac and the remote worked, that was magical. This is just silly.

The Mac Pro was resurrected and promptly abandoned. iMacs are MIA. Apple stuff doesn't work with other Apple stuff. More "it just works" please.

[darkkindness]

GP is raising attention to the fact that battery life hasn't decreased, not that people aren't paying attention to the other features. Sure, people talk about the smaller battery, screen, and performance increases. But it's an achievement that these were added without absolutely gutting the MacBooks' battery life.

[FireBeyond]

What? Battery life has decreased considerably. People and tests show exactly that. I don't think there's any testing that shows that battery life is the same as in the 2015 model.

Even this article:

> It’s also in line with people reporting that under high load the new MBP lasts a shorter amount of time than the earlier models.