MBP 14" 16" major disappointment

[BigMac?]

Although the primary post is trolling, there is some truth:

16 GB is way to less.

I got my 16“ with 16 GB on the 27th, in idle after startup 8-10 GB of RAM is used.
So only 6-8 GB remaining.

Per se it’s not bad, it’s just the way the gpu is preserving its memory needs. BUT: then it should be made clear to the customer that 16 GB ist bare minimum.

On my old intel one: 16 GB was way enough.

So I returned the 16GB model and ordered 32 GB.

 

[foobarbaz]

It’s not that a larger Air wouldn’t be a popular segment. Apple just won’t produce one because half of the people who don’t need the Pro, but still buy one, would then buy the cheaper laptop. They force people into a more expensive device by not offering an alternative device with the same screen size. They’ve done this with almost every product line they’ve produced.

Counterpoint: iPhone SE

Yes, having a cheaper 16 inch option would certainly canibalize sales of the expensive ones. But it also adds new customers for whom $2500 is completely out of reach.

But mainly, a bigger Air doesn’t even have to be cheap (nor would I expect it to be). They can still charge a lot of money for a 15 inch that’s as thin as possible instead of as powerful as possible. The M1 is plenty fast and a passively-cooled 15 inch would be a thin monster.

I really hope the redesign will come in two sizes.

 

[TechRunner]

I wandered over to the Apple section in Best Buy yesterday to see the new MBPs. They only had a 14" on display, but I was very impressed with the look, feel and weight of it relative to its power. The speakers are really good, and the screen is amazing. I've had to put off the purchase of mine until after the holidays, but can't wait to get my hands on one then.

To each his/her own...

 

[kahkityoong]

Ever since becoming obsessed with this site waiting for mpb reviews there seems to be so much turd on this forum like this by the OP. Fanboy -> bait -> fanboy -> bait.

Personally I read the initial post as being satire.

 

[TrueBlou]

Meh, I managed to carry around an Alienware Aurora m9700 back in the day, now that was a beast, 9.5lb and measuring 15.7 x 11.8 x 1.9 inches.

If I could carry that, I’m sure I can manage one of these skinny wee things which is actually thinner, and barely heavier than my 2015 15” MBP.

Besides, having spent years complaining that Apple has been favouring form over function, making products too thin and removing ports many of us still need. I’m hardly going to complain when the finally do a I turn and make a proper MacBook Pro again.

I’m also a fan of the G4 inspired design, very industrial and retro, love it. But not everyone will.

If people want thinner and lighter, well, there’s always the MacBook Air, or the 14” and 13” MacBook Pro.

 

[AgentMcGeek]

16 GB is way to less.

I got my 16“ with 16 GB on the 27th, in idle after startup 8-10 GB of RAM is used.
So only 6-8 GB remaining.

Are we getting back into the age old RAM debate again? It's perfectly normal that the OS occupies as much RAM as possible. It will make space for your apps when you need it. Unless you do very heavy pro stuff like audio/video rendering or VMs, 16Gb on an M1 machine isn't "the bear minimum".

 

[Feyl]

I mean, it's not as if they stopped making the MacBook Air for those who want thinner and sleeker.

I hope it'll stay that way. But I doubt that because the rumors are saying otherwise. It's a shame. The Air brand should stand for something, not just a worse laptop.

 

[Melbourne Park]

If one includes the power adapter - which is a significant 140 watt (and allows quick charging) the new 16" is lighter. Looking at Intel notebooks of this approximate capability, like the MSI with 3080 - it (P17) weighs including its power adapter, about 10 lbs. About double the weight of the 16" including it's power adapter. And the higher performance intel notebooks often require two power adapters to function at their best.

 

[Rockadile]

Why does every poster who has an alternative opinion get called a troll on this forum?

Alternative opinion is welcomed, if it made sense.

Apple didn't hide the fact that it wasn't the same tapered look as previous gen during the event. OP is a troll for having great expectations despite it clearly looking more boxy.

 

[Willis]

The previous MacBook Pro 16 was 4.3 lbs and the new one is 4.7. Not a huge difference… only 9% heavier.

And the difference in thickness is even less… .64 in for the previous model and .66 for the new… only 3% thicker.

The new MacBook Pro 16 is actually thinner than the 2015 MacBook Pro 15, so no, they did not go back 15 years lol. The 2006 MacBook Pro was 6.8 lbs and 1.0 in thick, MUCH heavier and thicker than the new models. Kids these days don’t know what a thick and heavy laptop is.

My 2009 17" MBP was a lump. Carried that bad boy around with me everywhere to uni and trips. These new Macs are nothing compared to that

 

[MariozPOC]

My 2009 17" MBP was a lump. Carried that bad boy around with me everywhere to uni and trips. These new Macs are nothing compared to that

I remember very well. I did bring it everywhere with my Brenthaven bag Full 3Kg boy

 

[Ma2k5]

OP - you are not completely wrong, Apple clearly favoured performance this time while 2016 it can be readily argued it was form over function design. But as it is the Pro line perhaps some sacrifice aesthetically is required for the performance they are trying to bring out. And damn did they impress, multiple times the performance on various real world performance and less than half power draw and silent fans, it’s a phenomenal machine for real work. If you want a laptop for Starbucks to browse instagram, wrong product.

 

[GumaRodak]

Customers - you cant beat them…
Laptop thin - complain about thermals and throttling
Laptop thick - complain about how big it is

Never ending story

 

[bf2008]

Apart from this thread being funny, the fact that it got so much attention warrants some data:
MBP 14 width 1.55cm 1.6Kg
MBP 13 width 1.56cm 1.4Kg

So the new MBP 14 is actually thinner! Even though it clearly doesn't look because of the more square shape.
Anyway, I don't really care about thickness (within reason obviously). Weight is a lot more important. In that sense the new MBP 14 is 200g heavier, but it's also got a larger screen.

And personally, I think the MBP 13 look better with their more rounded edges, so it's a bit odd that they "went backwards". I don't really think that they had to make the machine more squary to accomodate the extra ports, etc, i.e. for functionality. I think it was just a marketing decision to show that the new MBPs are more about function than looks. Anyway, I think the new machines still look good enough, I don't care much about that (again, within reason).

 

[patent10021]

I travel between Japan/China/Korea for work and I loathe carrying my 15" MBP. I wish I could use a tiny MBA, but I need the MBP. I'm fit, but carrying around a backpack with hard drives, food, clothes and a MacBook through airports, subways and the city gets really heavy. The new M1 Max is a half a pound more. That's a huge deal when you're mobile. Since the M1 performs faster than Intel, maybe I can make due with an M1 MBA this time around?

 

[eddjedi]

Macrumors 2016: Where are the ports? Where's the performance? The keyboard has no travel! The battery life is rubbish! What the hell is this useless Touch Bar thing? I'm keeping my 2015 MBP.

Macrumors 2021: This thing is too heavy! The keyboard is too deep! I didn't want to sacrifice size or weight for performance, battery life and connectivity. Where's the amazing Touch Bar gone? I'm keeping my 2020 MBP.

 

[Chet-NYC]

I went with great expectations to the shop today to see the new MBPs. What ugly heavy crap.

The most off putting thing is the thickness and weight of these machines. To make them appear thinner they apparently rounded the corners. Otherwise it would have been obvious what huge technological failure these bricks are. They feel as if I just moved back 15 years in computing history. These MBP are not cool anymore.

There are tons of people who want bigger screens but don't need more computing power and don't want to carry such heavy machines.

Cheers

Uh no.

First, the thickness of both the 13" MBP and new 14/16" models is .61 inches. The shape of the case is different.

Second, yes, the 14" MBP is about .4 lbs heavier than the 13". But, I have the 2020 13" and have held both machines at a store. The weight difference is really not noticeable. In fact, because I have an InCase shell on my 13" MBP, it is actually heavier than the 14" MBP without one.

Finally, when I use my Intel MBP, if I get five hours of battery I'm lucky. The device also heats up something fierce if you want to do anything other than browse the web.

I'm looking forward to trading it in and getting the new MBP.

If you're so disappointed, you can still get the 13" M1 MBP or get an Air.

 

[bobcomer]

Why does every poster who has an alternative opinion get called a troll on this forum?

Or be accused of being a paid intel or Microsoft shill..

 

[MauiPa]

I went with great expectations to the shop today to see the new MBPs. What ugly heavy crap.

The most off putting thing is the thickness and weight of these machines. To make them appear thinner they apparently rounded the corners. Otherwise it would have been obvious what huge technological failure these bricks are. They feel as if I just moved back 15 years in computing history. These MBP are not cool anymore.

There are tons of people who want bigger screens but don't need more computing power and don't want to carry such heavy machines.

Cheers

Yet lighter, more powerful than those dell xps bricks. Seriously, check before making stuff up

 

[MauiPa]

Uh no.

First, the thickness of both the 13" MBP and new 14/16" models is .61 inches. The shape of the case is different.

Second, yes, the 14" MBP is about .4 lbs heavier than the 13". But, I have the 2020 13" and have held both machines at a store. The weight difference is really not noticeable. In fact, because I have an InCase shell on my 13" MBP, it is actually heavier than the 14" MBP without one.

Finally, when I use my Intel MBP, if I get five hours of battery I'm lucky. The device also heats up something fierce if you want to do anything other than browse the web.

I'm looking forward to trading it in and getting the new MBP.

If you're so disappointed, you can still get the 13" M1 MBP or get an Air.

Or get the dell XPs, they are even heavier. And more expensive for way less (get it?)

 

[3Rock]

Apple and the rest of us expected these whiners, but Apple will still sell millions of them. ?

 

[darngooddesign]

But it’s not just an optical trick: they also feel thinner and that makes an actual difference when handling them.

It is a trick because they aren't thinner. So if you think that the new ones are thicker than the previous ones, the 16 is barely thicker, that just means you fell for the illusion.

 

[theluggage]

There are tons of people who want bigger screens but don't need more computing power and don't want to carry such heavy machines.

I agree - a 15” M1 Air would be great for a lot of people.

...but that would be a different product, and not really a criticism of the new MBPs. It’s been an issue since about 2012 that “pro” has come to mean “video production“ and there is no larger screen Mac laptop for WP/DTP/spreadsheets (and a lot of web development) that needed screen real estate but not super-powerful CPU and GPU.

In a perfect world, Apple would offer a broader range of machines (they’ve got a long way to go before they get to a Dell/Lenovo/HP-style train wreck of a range, and Jobs’ product matrix was designed to save a failing company, not as a religion...)

 

[Useless Touchbar]

I went to Apple Store to check out these new MacBook Pros and I absolutely loved how solid these things felt. Nevertheless, I don't need all this power and the price is a bit too much for me. I'll get the M2 Air when it's released in March (?) 2022. I suggest you do the same.

 

[soaddk]

“These MBP are not cool anymore.”

I pretty sure the people who use these for work care more about performance and noise levels than how cool they look. ;-)

Also - pretty sure you’re trolling.