Haha, well at the very least it wasn't helping it.maybe estimating the battery was what was killing the battery.
Haha, well at the very least it wasn't helping it.maybe estimating the battery was what was killing the battery.
Please let me know about actual usage, My battery seems to be one of the good ones but I am scared to update after all I heard about battery being worse in the beta of 10.12.2.not saying there's definitely a fix but since 10.12.2 this evening, coconut battery is indicating the machine is discharging with around 8-12 watts. Not sure if that's still high but in comparison with beta 6, that was discharging around 17+
Did you mean PRAM or SMC reset?Here my experience: first a new installation of 10.12. Everything works fine. Electricity consumption between 6 to 25 watts. Update to 10.12.2 electricity consumption rises to 12 to 30 (more > 15). After studying this forum I have done a pram reset ........ everything is good! Power consumption goes down again to 6 to 25 watts (more < 15). I hope it helps someone... OH! MacBook Pro 15" 2016 i7 2.9 GHz
PRAM!!! option + command + p + rDid you mean PRAM or SMC reset?
yep same. my battery life has been pretty solid for the most part, getting around 6-8 hours most of the time. I also read the claims that the battery life was getting worse on the final beta for 10.12.2, and I'm also very hesitant to update right now, at least until we get more consistent data.Please let me know about actual usage, My battery seems to be one of the good ones but I am scared to update after all I heard about battery being worse in the beta of 10.12.2.
Im seeing the same now, in fact as I write I'm discharging with 2.49w! that's vastly different from Beta 6after today's 10.12.2 update (upgraded from public beta) coconut battery is reporting a lot less watts being used. 13" tb safari is now hovering between 5-8w down from 10-15w and indesign with GPU preview under 10w down from +15w.
Im cautiously optimistic so far... I've been very vocal about how bad it's been and was almost certain to return mine. Since the latest release today, it's seemingly much much better. Touch wood. I don't want to speak too soon but so far, I am getting happier!Seems very unlikely there will be a fix. Apple is saying "This is normal given how much we reduced the size of the battery in these machines."
I unfortunately will have to return mine. I'm at the office working today. I've been on battery for 2:20, and have only 50% remaining. That's horrible. I've been on this thread since page 2 or 3 and have done every "fix".
So basically by removing the time remaining Apple is basically implying that what you guys are experiencing is purely psychological?"Apple tells us that according to all its testing and user data, the batteries in the new MacBook Pros are performing normally—there’s no bug that’s sapping your battery, and your real-world battery life is still going to be influenced strongly by your workload. The only battery life-related fix in 10.12.2 is the removal of the “time remaining” estimate from the operating system. Apple says this is because modern components switch power states so frequently and quickly that it’s hard to correctly estimate remaining battery life based on current activity."
according to arstechnica so doesn't seem like anything at all was done. that's infuriating.
it could be. i'm curious how many people in this topic is actually not looking at the battery generator, but just doing normal work through the day and drain the battery down to like 3%. That's the actual test right?So basically by removing the time remaining Apple is basically implying that what you guys are experiencing is purely psychological?
So basically by removing the time remaining Apple is basically implying that what you guys are experiencing is purely psychological?
Infuriating to me is that they are getting rid of the battery life time estimate (one of the most useful features) in order to cover up the fact that there is indeed a problem with poor battery life on these machines. This sounds like a good way to cover up the evidence and "make the problem go away."
Now in order to prove your laptop is not working according to the claimed spec, you have to physically sit at the Genius Bar for 3-4 hours instead of showing the battery estimate, which per my testing is still perfectly accurate.
What is so unique about the late 2016 MacBook Pro that a feature that worked so well on every other laptop they have released now "is not accurate because modern components switch power states so frequently."
We all know that is total non-sense and a flawed logical argument.
https://9to5mac.files.wordpress.com/2016/12/time-remaining-battery.jpg?quality=82&strip=all&w=1000Infuriating to me is that they are getting rid of the battery life time estimate (one of the most useful features) in order to cover up the fact that there is indeed a problem with poor battery life on these machines. This sounds like a good way to cover up the evidence and "make the problem go away."
Now in order to prove your laptop is not working according to the claimed spec, you have to physically sit at the Genius Bar for 3-4 hours instead of showing the battery estimate, which per my testing is still perfectly accurate.
What is so unique about the late 2016 MacBook Pro that a feature that worked so well on every other laptop they have released now "is not accurate because modern components switch power states so frequently."
We all know that is total non-sense and a flawed logical argument.
No, it's meant to make the average user not flip out when they see it showing 10 hours one time, and then 4 hours a few minutes later because they opened up some other program. You were relying on something that was proving to be wildly inaccurate.Smart people like you will no doubt still have easy access to this information, but "regular" users like me rely on the indicator at the top by the battery icon. This move is meant to keep the average user in the dark. No doubt advanced users will download 3rd party apps or look in other built-in locations for this data. Ignorance is bliss!
No, it's meant to make the average user not flip out when they see it showing 10 hours one time, and then 4 hours a few minutes later because they opened up some other program. You were relying on something that was proving to be wildly inaccurate.
It's not like Activity Monitor is some deeply hidden tool anyways.