[kscherer]

2016 13” MacBook Pro (Non Touch Bar) first impressions:

In the box:

1 USB-C charge brick (about the size of the old 60w box), 1 USB-C charge cable, and one fancy MacBook Pro. The charging solution should save folks some dollars, since the cable and brick are now separate. The cable is what usually fails, and the MagSafe solution was all one piece.

Power:

The computer switched itself on the moment I opened the lid. Both floor models did the same thing: No need to push the power button. Open the lid, on it came. I thought this was just part of the “getting started” setup, but no. Shut it down, close the lid, open the lid and on it comes. Not sure if I like that, yet.

Screen:

It’s a Retina display. It looks great, awesome color, very thin (like the 12” MacBook). No glowing logo, just dark gray. The display metal and hinge are now one-piece, just like the MacBook, which may or may not prove to be more reliable. Time will tell. It sure looks a lot better!

Keyboard:

Feels exactly like the 12” MacBook (also, same layout). Travel might be a bit longer, but if it is, it’s to the tune of a tenth of a millimeter, so not much, if at all. While I do like the feel of the keyboard, I feel like I type slower on it, and also make more mistakes. I don’t blame the keyboard for this as much as I blame being used to the old keyboard. The same thing happened with the switch from the old 15” Aluminum keyboard to the Unibody keyboard. Just taking time to get used to it and getting over old habits.

Trackpad:

…is huge! About 50% of the entire palm-rest space is dedicated to it. It looks ungainly, actually, but all that space! Force Touch feels like Force Touch. By default, the action is too light, so the first thing I do is set the action to maximum so it has the most button-like feel.

Speakers:

Much louder than previous models, but no base. Very flat. The iPad Pro 9.7 blows this thing away in terms of sound quality and range.

Ports:

Has the port arrangement the 12” MacBook should have. 2 TB3 on the left, one multi-format audio jack on the right. Both ports charge, but the computer’s charge cable does not seem to support data, so we can’t use it for target mode. I think that is a tremendous oversight on Apple’s part. However, it could also be that we have no idea what we’re doing, yet, since it’s our first exposure to TB3. I’ll get back on this once we figure it out. (For comparison, the 12" MacBook supports target over USB, so we know what to do with that.)

Construction:

Very thin, light, well-built machine. Space Gray is absolutely awesome as a color, but I wish they had a gold offering. The gold MacBook is by far my favorite color scheme. There are 6 pentalobe screws on the bottom (we will open it up at some point, but the time is not yet). Like all Unibody models, slippery as hell.

Performance:

Not had time for anything interesting, but the drive is very fast. Feels like using the 15” Retina’s over the past year. Things snap open almost as quick as I can click the icons.

—

We think this will the most popular 13" model. Looking back at our sales numbers and thinking things over and we came to a pretty remarkable conclusion. The old model 13" MacBook Pro Retina in 256GB configuration was $1499 and was our best selling laptop. So, that model effectively got replace with this new thing at exactly the same price point. The new computer's processor is slightly faster (even though it has a lower clock speed), has the same RAM and storage, is much thinner and lighter, has a vastly superior screen and trackpad, more flexible I/O (consistent, non-proprietary industry standard), looks better, feels better, sounds (sort of) better, and is the same price. Plus, Space gray!

Of all the new models, this one was the one I bitched about the most when they were first announced. However, now that the specs have settled into my brain, I've had it in my hands and tinkered with it, I know this is the one I would buy! It's another $300 to get the Touch Bar, and I'm not sure that will be worth it. This little turkey, however, is a worthy replacement, and I like it!

Edit: Made a minor change to clarify this review is regarding the Non Touch Bar model

[chucker]

This seems to be about the non-Touch Bar model, FWIW.

Originally Posted by kscherer the cable and brick are now separate

Nice!

Originally Posted by kscherer The computer switched itself on the moment I opened the lid. Both floor models did the same thing: No need to push the power button. Open the lid, on it came. I thought this was just part of the “getting started” setup, but no. Shut it down, close the lid, open the lid and on it comes. Not sure if I like that, yet.

You can configure this: (as well as whether you want the startup chime back)

sudo nvram AutoBoot=%00

Originally Posted by kscherer No glowing logo, just dark gray.

*sobs*

Originally Posted by kscherer Much louder than previous models, but no base. Very flat. The iPad Pro 9.7 blows this thing away in terms of sound quality and range.

That's unfortunate. I'm rather happy with this 2013 rMBPs speakers; they're quire an improvement over the Mac laptops I had before that, and can't say I find it not loud enough. I hope sound quality hasn't deteriorated from that?

Originally Posted by kscherer It's another $300 to get the Touch Bar, and I'm not sure that will be worth it.

Well, it also buys you more performance (albeit it at probably worse battery life, even though Apple doesn't seem to want to acknowledge that), and twice as many ports (though two of them don't run at full speed).

Wonder if the battery life can match the crazy MBA hours?

[chucker]

BTW, the current line-up is a confusing mess, as exemplified, ironically, by the Compare page. What's with all the different MBP variants on there?

[kscherer]

Originally Posted by chucker This seems to be about the non-Touch Bar model, FWIW.

Yep. Updated that, thanks.

FYI: Internally, the model we just got in is referred to by Apple as the 13" MacBook Pro (just as the model it is "replacing" [the legacy 2012 13" MacBook Pro] was). For anyone who cares, the lineup nomenclature looks like this:

13" MacBook Pro with Retina display (2015)
13" MacBook Pro (2016) - replaces the 13" MacBook Pro (2012)
13" MacBook Pro with Touch Bar (2016)

Technically speaking, my title is accurate.

Originally Posted by chucker Nice!

Cats, dogs, doors, vacuums, chickens, rabbits, poor design. The reasons we sell replacement bricks are too numerous to count. Basically, it's been $79 for a nicked or burnt cable! And we'll continue to sell bajillions of them. However, the new USB-C thing will save a ton of money ($29 for a new cable), and 3rd-party stuff will pull prices down even further, although beware!

By the way, the USB-C charge cables are a fair bit thicker than the MagSafe cables, and there is a lot more shielding on the connector ends. I wish Apple had gone this route a long time ago!

Originally Posted by chucker You can configure this: (as well as whether you want the startup chime back) sudo nvram AutoBoot=%00

Good to know. We'll post that on our Facebook page. Should see a spike in service department traffic!

Originally Posted by chucker *sobs*

Yeah, talk about an advertising strategy! Oh, well.

Originally Posted by chucker That's unfortunate. I'm rather happy with this 2013 rMBPs speakers; they're quire an improvement over the Mac laptops I had before that, and can't say I find it not loud enough. I hope sound quality hasn't deteriorated from that?

I haven't messed with equalizer settings in iTunes, so perhaps the bass can be beefed up a bit. Out of the box, not that great. Louder, just flat as hell (at least at the bottom end).

Originally Posted by chucker Well, it also buys you more performance (albeit it at probably worse battery life, even though Apple doesn't seem to want to acknowledge that), and twice as many ports (though two of them don't run at full speed).

True, but most folks have no need. The big differentiator will be the Touch Bar. Kind of like the price jump from base 13" to base 15". If you don't need the guts, it's $700 for the screen. In the case of 13" Pro's, it's $500 from base to Touch Bar. That's a lot! The fool thing better be one hell of a tool, 'cause if it's just a toy …

Originally Posted by chucker Wonder if the battery life can match the crazy MBA hours?

We don't do any kind of battery testing. I'll leave that to the nerd-o-blogs.

Originally Posted by chucker BTW, the current line-up is a confusing mess, as exemplified, ironically, by the Compare page. What's with all the different MBP variants on there?

Yes, it is. You should try stocking it all. Three 15" models (two in two color options), four 13" models (three in two color options). Starting to look like the iPad mess. Oh, well. It will sort itself out. I hope.

By the way, did I mention Space Gray is teh awesome!

[kscherer]

More test updates:

Since I play Minecraft (and always struggle with graphics problems, which necessitates setting the video settings close to bottom) one of the first things I do whenever we get a new system in is install Minecraft and mess around for a bit. Here is what I learned:

I set everything to maximum (except 3D mode, which is dumb without 3D glasses) and entered Creative Mode. I played Creative because you can get up in the air and move at best speed, which forces the game to render the world at its maximum rate. For the first five minutes, the 13" MacBook Pro ran without fans and the world rendered as fast as I could travel. When looking around, there was some slight stuttering as the system drew the world around me. After about five minutes, the fans kicked on, but they were quieter than any laptop fan I have heard run while under load.

I had to respond to a customer, so I stepped away for a few minutes. When I came back, the game struggled to keep pace (there was a great deal of stuttering). Within a couple minutes, however, it went back to smooth play. I don't know what to attribute the problem to, so I'm going with the old Minecraft fallback: Java sucks! Of note: I did not mess with Java's settings, so it is likely stuck using the default 1GB of RAM, and as fast as I was moving around the world likely grew so large so fast that the system ran out of memory and started flaking out (this is common with Minecraft, even on super-fast systems). Upgrading Java's RAM settings would likely fix the issue.

While digging some blocks I noticed a bit of "server" lag as they failed to render out of place and into inventory, but this problem also went away. I think this may have revolved around my shooting into the game and moving around so quickly before the world even had a chance to render. Even on a fast machine, you need to give the game a few minutes to build the world and render the nearby chunks. I didn't bother with any of that.

Overall, the graphics performance was in an entirely different league than my 2011 MB Pro (as it should be, since so is the 12" MacBook) and performed much smoother than the 2015 13" MacBook Pro with Retina Display, although I would not call it earth shattering. The 13" MacBook Pro performed almost as well (almost) as the big-ass 27" iMac with its 4GB 395x and quad i7, which is by far the smoothest system I have used. A combination of fast RAM and super-fast SSD, and vastly improved GPU are the reasons it feels so much smoother than the 2015 13" (the processors are roughly equivalent). I think Minecraft hits a "needed performance" wall somewhere between the 2016 13" and that big 27, which is why the Pro feels almost perfect, but the 27 actually feels too fast. Yes, I know that sounds weird, but the 27 is so damn quick it's hard to follow along, as it renders beyond real-time.

Granted, MC is not the best tool for a graphics test, but it still places high demands on all of the computer's systems. I test each new computer in the same way using the same game. The 2016 13" MacBook Pro is lights-out faster than the computer it is replacing (the 2012 MacBook Pro) and is noticeably faster than the model below it (the 2015 13" MacBook Pro with Retina Display).

I have 2 complaints as of right now.

1) I had to hunt down an adapter so I could plug in a mouse (a problem that will go away as the industry adopts USB-C—which it is already doing). Also, we have reasonably priced USB-C to Ethernet/USB 3 hubs on the way.
2) Price. I'm trying to find a reason to justify it, but I can't if I'm honest with myself. The 13" MacBook Pro with Retina Display should have dropped into that $1099 slot, and the 2016 13" MacBook Pro should be $1299, with the Touch Bar model starting at $1499.

[Frank777]

Originally Posted by kscherer Keyboard: Feels exactly like the 12” MacBook (also, same layout). Travel might be a bit longer, but if it is, it’s to the tune of a tenth of a millimeter, so not much, if at all. While I do like the feel of the keyboard, I feel like I type slower on it, and also make more mistakes. I don’t blame the keyboard for this as much as I blame being used to the old keyboard. The same thing happened with the switch from the old 15” Aluminum keyboard to the Unibody keyboard. Just taking time to get used to it and getting over old habits.

Hmmm. If the keyboard's essentially the same, and the keyboard has been the most objectionable part of the MacBook, do you think this will cause more people to buy the MacBook now?

[Frank777]

Been looking at this machine today as an upgrade.

I think I can get used to the keyboard. It's overpriced, (and I really miss the days when Apple's new machines covered the price spectrum well enough that they didn't need to keep the old ones around.) But it's new, the price will probably drop later.

But two ports on the same side and none on the other just seems really odd to me. Why not one on each side, Apple?

[Eugene]

Because it's not that easy. Adding the traces costs more money and little things like the distance from the chip can effect signaling.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Eugene Because it's not that easy. Adding the traces costs more money and little things like the distance from the chip can effect signaling.

IIRC, Thunderbolt is more sensitive than most protocols to that kind of stuff... I'll gripe about Apple's (IMNSHO) various idiocies all day long, but I find it hard to get too worked up over this one (although I will say that adding one straight USB-C port on the right side would've been a nice consolation prize).

[Brave Ulysses]

Yesterday was my first true test of the battery on my 13" touchbar model. I had two airplane legs to get across the country. A total of close to 7 hours in the air. The battery was fully charged upon takeoff and I used the laptop within the allowed times (on after 10k feet and off before descending below 10k feet) with a few breaks in between.

I used the airplane wifi and just safari. Nothing else although mail was open as well. Screen brightness was 60% or less. The computer did not last 6 hours of usage. It got below 5% with over an hour to go on the 2nd leg and I put it to sleep and back in my bag. It was dead and off upon arriving home so the last 5% was used up while asleep.

The battery life on these is incredibly off mark from apple's claims.

[Frank777]

I wonder if Apple kept its engineers working on the stacked battery technology that was originally supposed to be deployed?

An upgrade for the machine probably isn't coming till May or so, but it's clear something has to be done.

[kscherer]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses The battery life on these is incredibly off mark from apple's claims.

I'll take your word for it. We've had about 10 go through the store and no complaints about battery life, yet. However, take that with a grain of salt. Most of our customers buy laptops that never leave the desk (they should be getting desktops, but have been lured by "mobile" for some silly reason).

[alcimedes]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses I used the airplane wifi and just safari. Nothing else although mail was open as well. Screen brightness was 60% or less. The computer did not last 6 hours of usage. It got below 5% with over an hour to go on the 2nd leg and I put it to sleep and back in my bag. It was dead and off upon arriving home so the last 5% was used up while asleep. The battery life on these is incredibly off mark from apple's claims.

not sure if you're going to have a chance to test your laptop again, but consumer reports found that the battery life was remarkably consistent, and the listed times when using Chrome instead of Safari.

[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by kscherer I'll take your word for it. We've had about 10 go through the store and no complaints about battery life, yet. However, take that with a grain of salt. Most of our customers buy laptops that never leave the desk (they should be getting desktops, but have been lured by "mobile" for some silly reason).

I think that's it. I use mine 95% of the time at a desk with a Thunderbolt Display. I use it on battery at night after work. I have seen the percentages at the end of the night and have been able to assume it's not great but this was the first time I had to rely on the battery life being what it is suppose to be and it came up very short under the lightest of use.

[kscherer]

I'm curious to see if it's hardware or software (meaning a leak somewhere that is within OS X). In other words, will Apple be able to patch the problem with software, or is there a serious hardware issue involved?

Don't know, though. 4 hours short seems like the hardware is too big for the battery's britches.

[Brave Ulysses]

Originally Posted by alcimedes not sure if you're going to have a chance to test your laptop again, but consumer reports found that the battery life was remarkably consistent, and the listed times when using Chrome instead of Safari.

I'm not a fan of Chrome but I'll give it a shot.


I had the previous generation 13" MBP before this and even after 1+ year of use it consistently achieved 7.5-8.5 hours under truly normal conditions. I'm pretty surprised that the new MBP is performing so poorly.

I still haven't used the Touch Bar either. :-\

[alcimedes]

Pretty sure based on the Consumer Reports testing the issue is specifically with Safari. Chrome is typically an energy hog, so for it to outperform Safari makes me think it's software.

To have the battery life change by 4+ hours depending on which web browser you're using indicates some serious CPU usage issues with Safari. (and when using Safari, Consumer Reports sometimes got the advertised battery life, sometimes came up short by over 50% of the stated run time.)

It seems indicative of Apple's lack of attention to detail. You'd think they'd have used their own browser on their own hardware while not plugged into a wall prior to shipping, right? How would they not have seen this in their own testing?

Their solution though? Remove the battery life indicator from the menu bar. Yeah. Great work there Apple.

[kscherer]

It was that or admit that Safari has fallen behind, and they cannot afford to do that.

[chucker]

FWIW, ars technica got 933 minutes (a little over 15.5 hours) on the 15-inch model. That's way above Apple's own claim. (It comes crashing down to less than half — 449 minutes — once you require the dGPU, and way further down in WebGL at 169 minutes.)

We'll never know what happened with Consumer Reports's testing machine because not much scientific rigor was applied. We don't know what Activity Monitor said wrt/ energy-heavy tasks. We don't know if any rogue background task like Spotlight, photo analysis or what have you was excessively drawing CPU. We don't know if Activity Monitor's own battery life estimates matched, however closely, the results, or why. We don't know if the battery is a lemon. Or if the curve of remaining battery percentage was even remotely linear. We don't, because apparently nobody could be assed to look at that information.

Instead, we know that tech sites are eating the story up for clickbait. Yay.

What we do know is this:

• It has about a quarter less battery capacity than before.
• Overwhelmingly, people have been attributing far higher energy draw to Chrome than to Safari, which is contradicted by CR. This suggests there may be a bug in Safari, or their measurements may be off.
• The variability and unpredictability of energy draw has been increasing. That's good in the sense that technologies like Speed Shift take advantage of actual needs at the given moment, but it's bad in that it's increasingly hard to explain battery life to the user. Hence stuff like WebGL killing battery life.

Given this, it's plausible, if unlikely, that CR both experienced a session in which all things were right and simple, and Safari could reach 19.5 hours of battery life, as well as another in which all hell broke lose, three background tasks just had to do their indexing and wrangling and big data and bigger data, and Safari ran JS code on some malware-infested ad from Sakovia, and could only reach 4.5 hours of battery life.

Could be.

On ars technica's test, all 2016 MBP models easily exceed Apple's 10-hour claim, but I also see reports to the contrary. So my hope is that it's either a battery problem affecting such a scale that a mass recall will take place, or, much easier yet, it's simply a bug that'll eventually get fixed. Perhaps in Safari, perhaps in a Sierra-era background process, perhaps even in, hey, the Touch Bar.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by kscherer Most of our customers buy laptops that never leave the desk (they should be getting desktops, but have been lured by "mobile" for some silly reason).

When you got a lot of computers in the office, having them use low-power components saves money.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by chucker [*]It has about a quarter less battery capacity than before.

Despite looking like there was room for more capacity. Though who knows with the Note 7 debacle and the volatility of LiPo batteries in tight spaces.

99.5whr became 76whr
74.9whr became 54.5whr

I don't mind them shrinking the battery, but runtime shouldn't really go down noticeably compared to its predecessor, and it did.

[Frank777]

Michael Hyatt piles on to the mountain of discontent with the new MacBook Pro.

Looking at this debacle, I wonder if Apple had chosen to introduce wireless charging instead of the Touch Bar, would they have escaped most of the wrath that has (rightfully) rained down on them?

[alcimedes]

That review pretty much sums up my impressions perfectly. Not impressed with this machine at all.