I recall seeing a rumor/leak about when we would see full case redesigns. Perhaps it was even Kuo who spoke about it. Does anyone have that link? Also, I wonder if the 16" is considered a case redesign. I would say no.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MBP 2020 13” 10th Gen - “Meh”
- Thread starter ljmjag
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I recall seeing a rumor/leak about when we would see full case redesigns. Perhaps it was even Kuo who spoke about it. Does anyone have that link? Also, I wonder if the 16" is considered a case redesign. I would say no.
Exactly, a stop gap at the very best. As for innovation Apple has long disregarded the Mac being predominantly a phone & services company now, offering little more than half assesd implementation's to ensure product segregation and forced sales...
Q-6
At first I was disappointed that the bezels weren’t reduced, then I actually got a 2020 13” MBP in my hands. Honestly, any smaller and I’d be leaving fingerprints on that display when opening and closing, the bezels aren’t bad whatsoever. Battery life has been quite good for me too, it depends on how many programs you are running, for example Chrome will drain quickly versus Safari which is MacOS optimized.
I would be happy to need to regularly clean the screen of a 14/14.5” MBP
I'm not saying Google is purposely making their browser cause Macs to run hot and slow down but they are competitors so take that for what you will. Firefox works great and the people working on it have no financial interest in Apple's success or failure.
I'd say this one is actually more Apple's fault than Google's.
Google are using a 100% open source codec (VP9) for video playback (and that's where most of the chrome battery life issues come from), that the processor inside any Mac since 2016 can decode in hardware. But Apple do not expose that ability of the processor to the OS because they are on the h.265 committee and get licensing fees for h.265 use.
Chrome is not at fault here, Apple is. There's absolutely no reason Apple could not do hardware decode for both codecs on macOS.
From what I've seen people saying Chrome uses more resources for just general web browsing not specific to video. I'm not saying what you're saying is incorrect but perhaps it's only part of the problem. Either way I don't see a reason to use a browser that takes up so much system resources. I don't see what Chrome can do that Safari or Firefox can't.
To each his own and if someone wants to use Chrome at the expense of battery life, system resources and privacy that's their choice. Perhaps they came from Windows so that's what they're familiar with. I used to use Chrome on Windows and iPhone just because it was what everyone else used but when I got back on macOS I looked for and found an alternative.
It's not the codec. Chrome still uses OpenGL for GPU acceleration. OpenGL on Mac is horribly outdated and very inefficient compared to Metal.
Google is "intentionally" sitting on a pull request to merge preliminary Metal support into ANGLE, the graphics engine that Chrome and chromium run on.
In regular use, Chrome makes use of the GPU a lot more than Safari does. It's not just CPU usage. This ends up drawing a lot more power. It's as if you are playing a video game while you are browsing using Chrome.
So it's both Apple's and Google's faults.
1. It's Apple's fault because they refuse to support open-source standards like OpenGL and Vulkan. Instead, they want to push their own Metal API.
2. It's Google's fault because they refuse to properly support Metal on the Mac even knowing OpenGL is horrible.
TL;DR: just use Firefox if you need a Safari alternative. This issue affects all chromium-based browsers on Mac, and that also includes Brave as well as Vivaldi.