A lot of people feel it ... isn't the same.
I had one, and returned it, partially for battery life. I'm doing a lot of development (intellij/phpstorm/virtualbox/etc). The battery life wasn't bad - at heavy use, I could get perhaps 6 hours of 'real' usage, but... It was $3700, which was a bit much for my blood given the battery shortcomings (and a few other reasons). But mostly price/performance relative to my workload. For $1200/less I got an approximately similar 2015 model with more battery, and a slightly heavier weight.
if price went down based on thickness, maybe it would be more welcomed...
Powering a main screen versus a screen 1/15th of the size hardly qualifies as "effectively... a second screen"
> improved overall performance
Is it possible newer components are more optimized to draw less power for the same or more performance?
Most commentary around 5th vs 6th generation is that it's pretty much identical.
> reduced the size of the internal battery by 30%
I'll talk about that. Keep the battery the same damn size and give us more battery life.
> effectively added a second screen
Plenty of people have been talking about the touch bar.
> improved overall performance
If it didn't do that the world would have a new source of non-coal energy, Mac fans screaming at the top of their lungs!
What Apple lacks is the moment is coherency. The iPhone comes with a headset and charging cable that won't work with a Mac. When I plugged my earphones+remote into an iMac and the remote worked, that was magical. This is just silly.
The Mac Pro was resurrected and promptly abandoned. iMacs are MIA. Apple stuff doesn't work with other Apple stuff. More "it just works" please.
Even this article:
> It’s also in line with people reporting that under high load the new MBP lasts a shorter amount of time than the earlier models.