Hacker News Reader

Comment by erebrus | Hacker News Reader

For me this is a big part of the problem. Most "pros' that complain of lack of more power also are ok with shorter battery life because they work mostly plugged. Apparently, for them it's unconceivable that some "pros" do most of their work unplugged and for that battery life and size/weight are a major issue (and compared to other OSs the usability of the macOS is still a huge advantage over any other laptop).

View on HN

At some point Apple had three line of MacBooks (Pro, regular and Air). That seemed to make perfect sense. People who want light, long battery life go for Air, people who want processing power go for Pro.

The strange thing is that Apple killed processing power in favour of more Air like features. That doesn't seem to make much sense in a 15" laptop.

Except for those who were frustrated with the limitations of the Air (no retina, weak processors, etc.). Still, I agree about the 15". It does risk being in no man's land.

I have an embarrassingly old air and I've been waiting for these slim pros to upgrade and rely less on my desktop. I was always only thinking of the 13", but the 15" is so small that I'm almost pondering going for it instead. All I'm worried about is whether or not the extra 500g will make it too heavy for my taste. So it does risk still being too heavy for someone who wants something super small and not powerful enough for those who don't care about portability as much.

But, the thing everyone is overlooking is that the new GPU is 82% more performant than the last model, so it's not like they're reducing the specs. They just haven't increased the specs to the level of some of the other big notebooks.

I personally think that thinning the frame out while also increasing specs and keeping the battery life high was a smarter move than trying to cram in more RAM and keeping the 99.5 watt-hour battery that, with 32GB of RAM and a better GPU would have resulted in a ~5 hour battery life.

However, what I wish Apple would have done, instead of making the new Macbook (the little 12" notebook), was to make the MacBook Pro thin like they have, with the same specs they have added, and then have the only other offering be a larger, more pro notebook (maybe on par with the 2011 level of thickness / weight) with 64GB max RAM and with one of these great GPUs everyone is talking about. They could have done with a ~5 hour battery life on the main battery, keeping the 99.5 battery for airline regulations, with an extra 50+ watt-hour battery that slides into a slot for use when not getting on a plane. This would have given Apple 2 choices, 1) an awesome MacBook Pro for most of us, and 2) an awesome MacBook Super for the power users who don't mind a 5lb notebook.

There is not too much value in an even lighter / smaller notebook than the 13" MacBook Pro, which is why the Macbook 12" hasn't been flying off the shelf. Most people who can't do with an iPad (or iPad Pro) need a full notebook, not a 12" device that is slow.

The problem with the Pro line is while professionals have diverse requirements the line only seems to cater to the groups that travels a lot.

Some people need beefy CPUs, some people need beefy GPUs, some people need lots of memory, some people need lots of connectors to avoid a dongle mess.

And instead of offering at least one model that can be fitted with all of that, either as standard or as option, Apple decided that the only group that matter is those that travel a lot and favour light laptops with long battery life.

Well, I think they did a reasonable job at finding a compromise (referring back to my comment about an 82% increase in GPU performance, etc.).

But, yes, if they were to offer something like what I referred to as a MacBook Super and get rid of all other offerings besides this "Super" and the current Pro, that would satisfy both users.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com